Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mrsocko





Joined: 29 Oct 2006
Posts: 2463
Reputation: 131.2
votes: 8
Location: Southwestern Ontario

PostPosted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 9:40 pm    Post subject: Atheist Academic says DaVinci Code is Crap! Reply with quote

http://www.historyvsthedavincicode.com/

Quote:
The Aims of this Site
History vs The Da Vinci Code aims to examine the historical claims made in Dan Brown's novel and compare them to the historical evidence. Unlike many other online resources about this novel, its intention is not to simply examine some of those claims, but to provide a comprehensive analysis of all of them. Its intention is to look at these topics from a purely historical perspective, without any religious bias or orientation.

Why bother comparing the historical evidence to the claims of a fictional novel? It's FICTION!!
There's no doubt that the novel is fiction. Robert Langdon, Sophie, Teabing and the other characters do not exist and the events and action in the story are purely imaginary. But it's not the story or the characters that have caused confusion and controversy; it's the novel's "historical background" and the claims the author has made about them that has caused concern.[More]

But Dan Brown never claimed the history in the book was really true, did he?
Actually, that's precisely what Dan Brown has claimed. Repeatedly, in fact. It was those claims that helped his initial sales immensely and thus first sparked the controversy about the novel. Unfortunately, a great many readers genuinely believed those categorical claims by Brown, despite the fact no historian or art expert on Earth accepts them. [More]

Are you a Christian?
I'm actually an atheist, though one with an academic background in medieval literature and ancient and medieval history and a knowledge of the history of Christianity. Where this site's analysis touches on religious topics it does so purely in terms of history and attempts to handle current religious concerns, beliefs and controversies with neutrality. I have absolutely zero commitment to any religion - my interest in these subjects is based purely on an historian's dedication to what can be reasonably argued from the available evidence.


Didn't Dan Brown research his novel for over a year using information from experts?
Brown's characters often claim that 'historians', 'scholars' and 'experts' agree with the historical and artistic information they impart. Dan Brown, however, clearly and demonstrably used arguments and claims made by amateurs, conspiracy theorists and New Age writers rather than works by respected and reputable professional historians and academics.

In the 2006 plagarism court case over the novel, Brown revealed that he himself didn't actually even read these books in full. His wife, Blythe Brown, read them and then e-mailed summaries of what she thought were key points to her husband. Brown explained to the court that he worked this way because he has 'a short attention span'. Not surprisingly, the historical 'information' he related in his novel via this strange method of 'research' - which he later confidently claimed is 'all true' - has since been utterly rejected by real historians and scholars..

Isn't it true that 'history is written by the winners?'
Many historical sources are written by the 'winners'. Others are written by the 'losers'. Others still are written by people who are neither. No modern historian takes any source at face value and always takes the perspective, biases, context and objectives of each source into account in their analysis. Archaeology, inscriptions, letters, diaries, household accounts and a host of other sources of information are also used so that, even when the 'winners' do try to manipulate information (which is rare), current professional historians are not forced to rely only on their perspective.

Brown's statement that 'history is written by the winners' is a totally oversimplified cliche, and one he uses to try to excuse the complete lack of evidence for most of his claims.


Good site. If you have questioned your faith because of this crap it is a good read. It restored my faith in Atheists. :wink:
Sheila





Joined: 09 Feb 2008
Posts: 556
Reputation: -6.8
votes: 16
Location: Central Alberta

PostPosted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 11:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi mrsocko, did you even check out the book that was supposed to have been plagarized? It is "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" by Michael Baigent and two other authors. Also his more recent "Jesus Papers" although this was published after Dan Browne's book came out. I read Dan Browne's novel and that was what started me on my search for the truth (I'm glad to have restored your faith in atheists :lol: ). But more importantly I think my search was based on the fact that both my parents are dead, which my Buddhist computer dude says is the time when you start searching. Now I have a Gnostic Bible which has the best of all religions in it. Gnostic meaning "self knowledge" and after working with my herbalist for the last 6 years, it is amazing, the bodies ability to heal itself. The more you know about yourself and your body, the better off you'll be. The only texts in the bible that teaches self knowledge, are the ones from the Dead Sea Scrolls.
FascistLibertarian





Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 1092
Reputation: 30.1Reputation: 30.1Reputation: 30.1
votes: 14
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 5:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

i liked the book the da vinchi code
mrsocko





Joined: 29 Oct 2006
Posts: 2463
Reputation: 131.2
votes: 8
Location: Southwestern Ontario

PostPosted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 5:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Hi mrsocko, did you even check out the book that was supposed to have been plagarized? It is "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" by Michael Baigent and two other authors.


When the "Holy Blood and the Holy Grail" first came out I read it. I also read the sequel. I became suspicious when I kept checking the Religion section and I kept coming across others books that looked like the HBAHG and were written almost exactly the same way. They began with the claim that this new bombshell would destroy the Christian church, just read a little further and all will be revealed. I got tired of reading a little furtuer after 3 books and decided to save my money, because no new revelations were revealed. Baigent in one book even seemed to discount the Jesus married the magadelene theory and attempted to solve the mystery of Renne la Chatres with out the guesswork, conjecture and leaping from one assumption to another to come up with idiotic conclusions. I was searching and found that it was all crap.


I returned to the church fold after I challenged God to reveal himself through Miracles signs and wonders which he preceded to do. But that is another story...
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1

  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Atheist Academic says DaVinci Code is Crap!

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB