Comments on: debunking the code http://lucialai.org/2006/05/18/debunking-the-code/ exercise your mind! Wed, 17 Mar 2010 03:28:39 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Alycia Bilyeu http://lucialai.org/2006/05/18/debunking-the-code/comment-page-1/#comment-194651 Alycia Bilyeu Tue, 29 Dec 2009 13:53:19 +0000 http://lucialai.org/2006/05/18/debunking-the-code/#comment-194651 Only want to say your article is stunning. The lucidity in your post is simply impressive and i can assume you are an expert on this field. Well with your permission allow me to grab your rss feed to keep up to date with succeeding post. Thanks a million and please keep up the solid work. Only want to say your article is stunning. The lucidity in your post is simply impressive and i can assume you are an expert on this field. Well with your permission allow me to grab your rss feed to keep up to date with succeeding post. Thanks a million and please keep up the solid work.

]]> By: lucia http://lucialai.org/2006/05/18/debunking-the-code/comment-page-1/#comment-370 lucia Tue, 23 May 2006 18:25:43 +0000 http://lucialai.org/2006/05/18/debunking-the-code/#comment-370 thanks ennee, for the kind words about my 'interesting' post. well, do you know that this post of mine was picked by global voices online? (http://www.globalvoicesonline.org/2006/05/21/the-movie-da-vinci-code-in-south-east-asia/) it's true those stuffs were all man created so what do we care. wormie, yes there' s no point to protest or crying for a ban. thanks ennee, for the kind words about my ‘interesting’ post. well, do you know that this post of mine was picked by global voices online? (http://www.globalvoicesonline.org/2006/05/21/the-movie-da-vinci-code-in-south-east-asia/)

it’s true those stuffs were all man created so what do we care.

wormie, yes there’ s no point to protest or crying for a ban.

]]> By: wits0 http://lucialai.org/2006/05/18/debunking-the-code/comment-page-1/#comment-362 wits0 Mon, 22 May 2006 10:12:01 +0000 http://lucialai.org/2006/05/18/debunking-the-code/#comment-362 Among the question that is being raised would be the meaning and measure of what is Blasphemy? The dictionary puts it as :Blasphemy: the action or offence of speaking sacrilegiously about God or sacred things; profane talk. But how does that apply to those who can't share any standard God Concept? Or those who don't have or use any God Concept? What's blasphemy to one group cannot be deemed automatically blasphemous to another. With this fact in mind there will be more awareness over the certain disservice of making any new anti-blaphemy law in favor of any one group which is in fact what some ppl are agitating for in advance countries. Don't return to old vomit. Among the question that is being raised would be the meaning and measure of what is Blasphemy?

The dictionary puts it as :Blasphemy: the action or offence of speaking sacrilegiously about God or sacred things; profane talk.

But how does that apply to those who can’t share any standard God Concept? Or those who don’t have or use any God Concept?

What’s blasphemy to one group cannot be deemed automatically blasphemous to another. With this fact in mind there will be more awareness over the certain disservice of making any new anti-blaphemy law in favor of any one group which is in fact what some ppl are agitating for in advance countries. Don’t return to old vomit.

]]> By: Adam http://lucialai.org/2006/05/18/debunking-the-code/comment-page-1/#comment-354 Adam Mon, 22 May 2006 03:19:49 +0000 http://lucialai.org/2006/05/18/debunking-the-code/#comment-354 The book was better than the movie. It's interesting and raises a few questions. Anyway, the Church should be happy.The book and the movie has created a lot of interest in Christianity and if news reports are to be believed, now more people are reading the Gospels. The book was better than the movie. It’s interesting and raises a few questions.
Anyway, the Church should be happy.The book and the movie has created a lot of interest in Christianity and if news reports are to be believed, now more people are reading the Gospels.

]]> By: Wormie http://lucialai.org/2006/05/18/debunking-the-code/comment-page-1/#comment-353 Wormie Mon, 22 May 2006 02:51:19 +0000 http://lucialai.org/2006/05/18/debunking-the-code/#comment-353 It is good to know that the Catholic Church in Penang is engaging the movie instead of protesting in the streets. Here in Singapore, the National Council of Churches of Singapore, a grouping of Protestants Churches is also doing the same thing. This should be the way as l mentioned in <a href="http://thewormiepage.blogspot.com/2006/05/da-vinci-opportunity.html" rel="nofollow">my blog</a>. I think the movie has done more good to the Christian faith than bad. Firstly it shows how followers of great religion should behave in the face of blesphamy. Secondly, because of the controversy, there is a growing awareness among the people to the religion resulting in more 'research' into the religion. I think overall it is a win-win situation. Dan Brown got his money, and Christianity its moral high ground. It is good to know that the Catholic Church in Penang is engaging the movie instead of protesting in the streets. Here in Singapore, the National Council of Churches of Singapore, a grouping of Protestants Churches is also doing the same thing. This should be the way as l mentioned in my blog.

I think the movie has done more good to the Christian faith than bad. Firstly it shows how followers of great religion should behave in the face of blesphamy. Secondly, because of the controversy, there is a growing awareness among the people to the religion resulting in more ‘research’ into the religion. I think overall it is a win-win situation. Dan Brown got his money, and Christianity its moral high ground.

]]> By: Enne http://lucialai.org/2006/05/18/debunking-the-code/comment-page-1/#comment-345 Enne Sun, 21 May 2006 17:52:46 +0000 http://lucialai.org/2006/05/18/debunking-the-code/#comment-345 Lucia, dat was an interesting write. i know dis sounds childish, a close friend read d book n she was very convinced by d facts put up. d thing about smart ppl, they try 2 rationalize everything. faith comes from believing, not seeing. but i'm glad i read dis post as well as d comments. i myself am still halfway thru d book, but now dat this point has been put forth, i am surprised many are not able 2 distinguish between fact n fiction. well, dis really sparked my interest 2 find out more bout d facts. wat a pity d talk's being held at dis time; i will b back in penang for d summer holidays dis year end. well, i just think dat it was a mere man who produce the drawings. and a mere man who wrote dis book. clever nutz these~ Lucia, dat was an interesting write. i know dis sounds childish, a close friend read d book n she was very convinced by d facts put up. d thing about smart ppl, they try 2 rationalize everything. faith comes from believing, not seeing. but i’m glad i read dis post as well as d comments. i myself am still halfway thru d book, but now dat this point has been put forth, i am surprised many are not able 2 distinguish between fact n fiction. well, dis really sparked my interest 2 find out more bout d facts. wat a pity d talk’s being held at dis time; i will b back in penang for d summer holidays dis year end.

well, i just think dat it was a mere man who produce the drawings. and a mere man who wrote dis book. clever nutz these~

]]> By: wits0 http://lucialai.org/2006/05/18/debunking-the-code/comment-page-1/#comment-304 wits0 Fri, 19 May 2006 11:31:04 +0000 http://lucialai.org/2006/05/18/debunking-the-code/#comment-304 The thing about writing about a theme which is invariably presenting another Comspiracy Theory is that it's also about pointing fingers, One points at another with one's and it's only natural and possible to have other peoples' fingers pointed back at oneself. Add to this a period of time when Conspiracy Theory has been overused is like the making of Jaws 2 after the original Jaws - but with diminishing returns and success. "Everyone loves a conspiracy?." Only initially exciting and when it's still fashionable but fashion is also whim driven and naturally transient. Daniel Henninger wrote a nice piece in Oponion Journal here: q/ "Here's my theory of "The Da Vinci Code." Dan Brown was sitting one night at the monthly meeting of his local secret society, listening to a lecture on the 65th gospel, and he got to thinking: "I wonder if there's any limit to what people are willing to believe these days about a conspiracy theory. Let's say I wrote a book that said Jesus was married. To Mary Magdalene. Who was pregnant at the Crucifixion. And she is the Holy Grail. Jesus wanted her to run the church as a global sex society called Heiros Gamos, but Peter elbowed her out of the job. Her daughter was the beginning of the Merovingian dynasty of France. Jesus' family is still alive. There were 80 gospels, not four. Leonardo DiCaprio, I mean da Vinci, knew all this. The 'Mona Lisa' is Leonardo's painting of himself in drag. Da Vinci's secret was kept alive by future members of 'the brotherhood,' including Isaac Newton, Claude Debussy and Victor Hugo. The Catholic Church is covering all this up." Then Dan Brown said softly, "Would anyone buy into a plot so preposterous and fantastic?" Then he started writing. The real accomplishment of "The Da Vinci Code" is that Dan Brown has proven that the theory of conspiracy theories is totally elastic, it has no limits. The genre's future is limitless, with the following obvious plots: Bill Clinton is directly descended from Henry VIII; Hillary is his third cousin. Jack Ruby was Ronald Reagan's half-brother. Dick Cheney has been dead for five years; the vice president is a clone created by Halliburton in 1998. The Laffer Curve is the secret sign of the Carlyle Group. Michael Moore is the founder of the Carlyle Group, which started World War I. The New York Times is secretly run by the Rosicrucians (this is revealed on the first page of Chapter 47 of "The Da Vinci Code" if you look at the 23rd line through a kaleidoscope). Jacques Chirac is descended from Judas. None of this strikes me as the least bit implausible, especially the latter. I'd better get started." u/q http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/dhenninger/?id=110008395 ----- Heheheh, good repartee - regardless of what I believe. The thing about writing about a theme which is invariably presenting another Comspiracy Theory is that it’s also about pointing fingers, One points at another with one’s and it’s only natural and possible to have other peoples’ fingers pointed back at oneself. Add to this a period of time when Conspiracy Theory has been overused is like the making of Jaws 2 after the original Jaws – but with diminishing returns and success.

“Everyone loves a conspiracy?.”

Only initially exciting and when it’s still fashionable but fashion is also whim driven and naturally transient.

Daniel Henninger wrote a nice piece in Oponion Journal here:

q/
“Here’s my theory of “The Da Vinci Code.” Dan Brown was sitting one night at the monthly meeting of his local secret society, listening to a lecture on the 65th gospel, and he got to thinking: “I wonder if there’s any limit to what people are willing to believe these days about a conspiracy theory. Let’s say I wrote a book that said Jesus was married. To Mary Magdalene. Who was pregnant at the Crucifixion. And she is the Holy Grail. Jesus wanted her to run the church as a global sex society called Heiros Gamos, but Peter elbowed her out of the job. Her daughter was the beginning of the Merovingian dynasty of France. Jesus’ family is still alive. There were 80 gospels, not four. Leonardo DiCaprio, I mean da Vinci, knew all this. The ‘Mona Lisa’ is Leonardo’s painting of himself in drag. Da Vinci’s secret was kept alive by future members of ‘the brotherhood,’ including Isaac Newton, Claude Debussy and Victor Hugo. The Catholic Church is covering all this up.”

Then Dan Brown said softly, “Would anyone buy into a plot so preposterous and fantastic?” Then he started writing.

The real accomplishment of “The Da Vinci Code” is that Dan Brown has proven that the theory of conspiracy theories is totally elastic, it has no limits. The genre’s future is limitless, with the following obvious plots:

Bill Clinton is directly descended from Henry VIII; Hillary is his third cousin. Jack Ruby was Ronald Reagan’s half-brother. Dick Cheney has been dead for five years; the vice president is a clone created by Halliburton in 1998. The Laffer Curve is the secret sign of the Carlyle Group. Michael Moore is the founder of the Carlyle Group, which started World War I. The New York Times is secretly run by the Rosicrucians (this is revealed on the first page of Chapter 47 of “The Da Vinci Code” if you look at the 23rd line through a kaleidoscope). Jacques Chirac is descended from Judas.

None of this strikes me as the least bit implausible, especially the latter. I’d better get started.”
u/q

http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/dhenninger/?id=110008395

—–
Heheheh, good repartee – regardless of what I believe.

]]> By: Simple American http://lucialai.org/2006/05/18/debunking-the-code/comment-page-1/#comment-285 Simple American Thu, 18 May 2006 15:11:14 +0000 http://lucialai.org/2006/05/18/debunking-the-code/#comment-285 So many distortions. I'm going to watch the movie. My women folk want to see so we'll go see it. I look at it as a modern fantasy. I know God will punish Dan Brown in his own time. So I leave it to him. lucia: yeah me too will want to watch the movie... purely for entertainment... also to see how good ron howard (the director - one of my fav. director) is. <strong>god punish dan brown? well, that's not for us to say. i wouldn't say that because if i say that it would be like i am crying dan brown is being blasphameous but since i take the book as nothing but fiction/novel i hope god does not punish him. anyway it is between him and god. actually i admire him in a way that he is so creative and imaginative. </strong> So many distortions. I’m going to watch the movie. My women folk want to see so we’ll go see it. I look at it as a modern fantasy. I know God will punish Dan Brown in his own time. So I leave it to him.

lucia: yeah me too will want to watch the movie… purely for entertainment… also to see how good ron howard (the director – one of my fav. director) is.

god punish dan brown? well, that’s not for us to say. i wouldn’t say that because if i say that it would be like i am crying dan brown is being blasphameous but since i take the book as nothing but fiction/novel i hope god does not punish him. anyway it is between him and god. actually i admire him in a way that he is so creative and imaginative. 

]]> By: MorpheusX http://lucialai.org/2006/05/18/debunking-the-code/comment-page-1/#comment-284 MorpheusX Thu, 18 May 2006 15:05:26 +0000 http://lucialai.org/2006/05/18/debunking-the-code/#comment-284 How dare they question the authenticity of God's Son... I will burn all the books....All the believers will go to HELL!!! Die Da Vinci Code!!! Zwang! Zwang! *cuts the book in to half* p.s - Just kidding! but if the book were about some other specific religion i think the scenario above just might happen... Don't ya think so?? <strong>lucia: aiya morpheus, what lah you... always showing of your sword skill. :) </strong> How dare they question the authenticity of God’s Son…

I will burn all the books….All the believers will go to HELL!!!

Die Da Vinci Code!!!

Zwang! Zwang!

*cuts the book in to half*

p.s – Just kidding! but if the book were about some other specific religion i think the scenario above just might happen… Don’t ya think so??

lucia: aiya morpheus, what lah you… always showing of your sword skill.  

]]> By: chez75 http://lucialai.org/2006/05/18/debunking-the-code/comment-page-1/#comment-283 chez75 Thu, 18 May 2006 13:21:52 +0000 http://lucialai.org/2006/05/18/debunking-the-code/#comment-283 oh yeah.. why is there a need to convince other people that the book is wrong? Is there really a need to convince people to think the same way we do? Everyone's entitled to their own conclusion on the book. <strong>lucia: the faith of a religion is at stake. there is a need to convince gullible people that what the movie said of jesus and the church is not right.</strong> oh yeah.. why is there a need to convince other people that the book is wrong? Is there really a need to convince people to think the same way we do?

Everyone’s entitled to their own conclusion on the book.

lucia: the faith of a religion is at stake. there is a need to convince gullible people that what the movie said of jesus and the church is not right.

]]>