welcome to my world...welcome to my world...welcome to my world of....

[violachic]

If you haven't yet jumped on the bandwagon known as The Da Vinci Code, I highly recommend you do so now.


No, really, now.

Just kidding. Later is okay too.


It is a novel by a gentleman named Dan Brown, and it is easily the best book I've read in quite some time. I just finished my third reading of it.

If you haven't noticed, it has caused quite a flap.

It is a masterfully done mystery, incredibly well-written with beautifully developed characters, and quite a lot of stuff you've probably never thought about before (jeeez, I sound like a bad book jacket blurb). It is also very controversial, mostly because it delves into a lot of gray areas concerning the life and humanity of Jesus, and connections between modern Christianity and early pagan religions. It also is accused of being highly critical of the Catholic church. The latter I have no opinion on at the moment, except to say that I can see why some people feel that way.

But the book really got me to thinking. Which, if you know me at all, you realize can be detrimental to my health and well-being. At the very least, it means I talk non-stop about said subject until I get it out of my system.

But the topic at hand tonight (and who knows where the hell it will go after this??) is the idea of something being sacred.

Excuse me, I need a space heater. Its ass cold down here.


Ooh, warmth!

Anyway...

One of the main threads of the novel revolves around an alternative... interpretation, perhaps?... of Jesus' life as we know it. It suggests that he and Mary Magdalene were married, and had a child together. This is not a new theory, I have heard it postulated several times in the past. The legend holds that Mary and the child fled to Gaul, or what is now France, after Jesus' crucifixion in order to save themselves, and that there was a line of ancestry created by the child (a girl child, I believe, in every version of this I have heard) that still exists today. If you are a Kevin Smith fan, you will remember that the movie Dogma presents a similar theory, only instead of Jesus being married, it was that he actually had brothers and sisters. But this lineage created in the south of France is supposedly still alive today in those descended from the Merovingian line- and for Matrix fans, you'll remember that the jerky French guy in the second two movies was called "The Merovingian", whose presence in the movies I believe is open to a plethora of interpretation.

But I digress.

That theory really threatens a lot of people. That, and the existence of what's known as the Gnostic Gospels, and the use of a great deal of pagan imagery in Christianity today, all of which are addressed a great deal in this novel. Now, the author does not presume to present this novel as fact, or history, or even a theory- I believe he presents this novel as simply that: a novel, based on a great deal of legend, supposition, and even documented history. But that is not my point.

Let us take a quick side trip, shall we?

I took this really great World Religions class two years ago. In the very first class, the prof posed a question to us: For years, Mount Sinai (the mountain where Moses purportedly received the Ten Commandments from G-d) was thought to be in one particular spot. It was revered and worshiped, and lots and lots of people made pilgrimages to the site. But then, an archaeologist decided the true Mount Sinai was in a different place. And it threw people. They didn't know which was true, and which was the place to worship, or even if they should worship it anymore. The question she posed was asking about the sacredness (is that a word?) of the site- was it sacred to begin with? Did the idea that maybe you had been pilgrimaging to the wrong site all of a sudden make the first one not sacred? Was nothing sacred?

Is nothing sacred??

Oh, sorry.......

I'm hugely curious about religion and theology. Its one of my top pet interests, especially when it has to do with those of one faith trying to understand or make a bridge with those of another faith. I'm personally really fascinated by many of the theories presented in The Da Vinci Code. But it really makes me think, if any of it is true at all, or if maybe there is a whole other truth out there, does it really diminish what we have now?

I've been doing a lot of mulling over about the humanity of Jesus versus the Divinity of Jesus. I love the movie Jesus Christ Superstar, and this summer I read a really great book recommended to me by dustytm called Lamb: The Gospel According to Biff, Christ's Childhood Pal (not the same Biff I'm friends with, as far as I know), which is both hilariously funny and very profound at the same time. Both of those also offer different perspectives on the life and humanity of Jesus, both of them, I will note for you, offered as simple interpretations, or "what-could-have-happened" kind of things.

'Kay, coming back around the bend...

Question:

If it were somehow historically proven that Jesus had fathered a child, who then produced a lineage that is still alive today, would it lessen your view of his sacredness?

If you found out that Mary wasn't actually a virgin when Jesus was conceived, would it lessen your view of his sacredness?

Would the knowledge of him having brothers and sisters? Would it change anything if we could prove through DNA that Joseph actually was his biological father? Or that he studied abroad for those eighteen years that are missing in the Bible, and truly was inspired by other ancient religions (many scholars propose that Jesus' family came from the Essene branch of the Hebrews, who are noted for their amazing scholarship) or philosophies?

Would any of that change how you viewed what we are taught in Sunday School today? Or would you say yes, I can still accept the basic principle of what I was taught?

At this point, I'm not sure if I'm articulating what I want to say correctly. Its late, and this stupid space heater isn't doing a whole lot of good.

But I also take issue (yes, this is related, at least in my brain) with people who feel their faith is somehow compromised or threatened by the presence of other religions or philosophies. I've heard people say that trying to prove the humanity of Jesus takes away from the power they feel from his message, or somehow diminishes his divinity. But I guess to me, if the message is strong enough to you, it should withstand and even be strengthened by the questioning. This applies to any faith, not just Christianity. Think about it- if you hold in your hand the most beautiful object you've ever seen, yet the objects you are comparing it to are dull and tarnished so their true identity is veiled, is it really such a stunning thing? But if you polish up the rest of what's in the room, and scrutinize them, and really look closely at their own individual beauty and still find that what you hold in your hand is the most beautiful object you've ever seen, then you really have something special.


Okay, I may either edit this tomorrow, or add to it if I can regroup my bearings. But at least its out there now. Whew!

I'm going to bed. Are you coming?

Comments

[pinkfluffyjumpr.livejournal.com]

HOLY POST BATMAN!!! (i read when i wake up....)

[dust-wind-dude.livejournal.com]

wow, that was long.

[sixfeetabove.livejournal.com]

My friend nate asserts that Jesus was simply a lousy (i.e. unskilled)carpenter, so he decided to be the messiah instead.

I suppose the revelation that he was a lousy carpenter would make him seem more human.

[violachic.livejournal.com]

I love hearing what people come up with on the "might-have-been-that-way" front.... each of them are as equally as plausible and implausible as everything else I've heard... If it turns out your friend Nate is right, I probably won't fall over and die of a heart attack from shock.

[bitbucket.livejournal.com]

If it were somehow historically proven that Jesus had fathered a child, who then produced a lineage that is still alive today, would it lessen your view of his sacredness?

Dogma was such a great movie. :)

[violachic.livejournal.com]

I think Kevin Smith is brilliant. Aside from just being such an awesome movie in its own right, Dogma is actually theologically very profound.

[bitbucket.livejournal.com]

Have you ever watched "An Evening With Kevin Smith"?

If not, I highly recommend it. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0346952/

[violachic.livejournal.com]

No, I haven't.... I will have to look it up


See, this is why I love LJ sometimes... broadening one's horizons 'n all...

[bitbucket.livejournal.com]

Oh you MUST watch it! It's nothing more than footage of Kevin Smith during a Q&A session tour he went on, at several universities. It's hilarious!

For example:
student: "Do you believe in god?"
kevin: "Of course, how else would you explain the fact that I have a career?"

[violachic.livejournal.com]

hahaha........ sounds like a holiday "must"

[cinnajess.livejournal.com]

Uh-oh.. thus far, Matt has been the only one I ever talked religion with. I might have a new discussion partner. Whooo-hoo.

I have a religion thing.

I am not religious, not even spiritual. I just tend to get really really fascinated by the WHY of stuff. And religion is one great big why.. so i am.. into it.

I have a copy of The DaVinci Code, but I haven't read it yet - I'm getting there, I swear it! another great book is The Sparrow, and the sequel, Children of God, by Mary Doria Russell. Totally killer.. Jesuit expedition to an alien planet.

Alright, now to answer the questions ranted forth in your post: if something is viewed as sacred - a theology, for example, and it is later disproven, well, you still have the freedom to disbelieve the new facts. Or accept the new facts and shift the focus of your worship. People shouldn't feel threatened by it - as if, what, as if they were wrong all along? Hell, everyone makes mistakes. And if you're dealing with an archaic reference like the Bible, and you're going off a very severe lack of tangible records, then it's surprising that more things aren't disproven every day. Any body can write or uncover or spout off anything. But no one can take away your freedom to choose your beliefs.
So people who get all bent out of shape because Jesus was more corporeal then they can handle, or because Mt. Sinai isn't THE place, well, those things are really kind of window dressing anyway. As long as you can still accept the basic tenements, you're doing well.

yargh. I need to stop now. If this wasn't real coherent, you try spouting religion in the middle of a dirty garage where seven large, smelly men are watching Jerry Springer and hooting and hollering like very stupid apes - and the radio is playing that oh, so charming song about the "T'aint". God help me, I'm surrounded by fools and imbeciles. I need to move back to Chi. NOW.

But yes.. I think we have more in common then I thought..

[violachic.livejournal.com]

I read The Sparrow this summer. The friend who gave it to me to read mentioned that she wasn't going to have a certain friend read it, because it would upset her too much, as she was a very committed Catholic. I didn't find anything that would upset a devout Catholic until the very end- it was kind of a surprise ending!

I love religion/theology debates- bring it on!

[tykers.livejournal.com]

if something is viewed as sacred - a theology, for example, and it is later disproven, well, you still have the freedom to disbelieve the new facts. Or accept the new facts and shift the focus of your worship. People shouldn't feel threatened by it - as if, what, as if they were wrong all along?

Galileo, Copernicus? An interesting thing is that the Catholic Church slowly moved away from the geocentric universe view. It first went to a literal helio-centric universe view, where the Sol System was the center of the universe. Now, I think, the view is just that we're the center of God's attention, or something like that. Which seems sort of silly to me, because of the possiblity that extraterrestial intelligence exists.

What would a modern equivalent be to Galileo? The Church for the most part has stopped mixing science with theology.

I have a copy of The DaVinci Code, but I haven't read it yet - I'm getting there, I swear it! another great book is The Sparrow, and the sequel, Children of God, by Mary Doria Russell. Totally killer.. Jesuit expedition to an alien planet.

Wow, you have me interested. I went to Jesuit schools so I am really curious what this book is about. And I like scifi. Hm. It reminds me of this B5 episode (http://www.midwinter.com/lurk/countries/us/guide/046.html), in which a group of Catholic-like monks take up residence on the station in order to study xeno-religions. It's odd, JMS (the creator of B5) is an athiest, yet he has probably the most authentic representation of religion I've seen in scifi.

if something is viewed as sacred - a theology, for example, and it is later disproven, well, you still have the freedom to disbelieve the new facts. Or accept the new facts and shift the focus of your worship. People shouldn't feel threatened by it - as if, what, as if they were wrong all along?

I'd venture people feel threatened primarily because they're not used to thinking for themselves. They were told what to think and what to believe, not taught how to think and how to believe. So anything that is outside of what they were told threatens them.

[violachic.livejournal.com]

I'd venture people feel threatened primarily because they're not used to thinking for themselves. They were told what to think and what to believe, not taught how to think and how to believe. So anything that is outside of what they were told threatens them.

I think that's a pretty concise way to put it... kind of sums up a lot of it very well.

I'm not nearly as into the sci-fi thing as a lot of my friends, but in the few Babylon 5 episodes I've seen, I've noticed a great deal of dealing with religion/theology/religious symbolism and it intrigues me.

If you are deeply attached to your Catholocism, be careful reading The Sparrow. It does get quite harsh against the instituion at the end. But it is a really well-written, fascinating book.

If you enjoy religious discussion, I would highly recommend that you both join my community, 3faithdialogue

/blatantplug

:-D

[tykers.livejournal.com]

[Error: Irreparable invalid markup ('<ii'm>') in entry. Owner must fix manually. Raw contents below.]

<iI'm not nearly as into the sci-fi thing as a lot of my friends, but in the few Babylon 5 episodes I've seen, I've noticed a great deal of dealing with religion/theology/religious symbolism and it intrigues me.</i>

Babylon 5 is loaded with religious symbolism from the pilot. I'm not saying more than that for fear of giving things away.

<i>If you are deeply attached to your Catholocism, be careful reading The Sparrow. It does get quite harsh against the instituion at the end. But it is a really well-written, fascinating book.</i>

In a way, I am and in another way I'm not. I'm attached to the spiritual side of Catholicism. The theological side I am definitively not. An interesting distinction, for sure.

I've been fairly critical of the institution myself, so I don't think reading <i>The Sparrow</i> will be a problem. The problem will be finding time to do so. ;-)

[violachic.livejournal.com]

In a way, I am and in another way I'm not. I'm attached to the spiritual side of Catholicism. The theological side I am definitively not. An interesting distinction, for sure.


Interesting, yes. But I'm starting to realize its probably not that uncommon. I guess that's kind of the way I'd describe how I feel towards Christianity in general. The desire and the search for the truth, or at least a reasonable facsimile thereof, doesn't have to diminish my spirituality if I don't let it.

Argh. I had another thought and its gone. I'll have to get back to you on that one.....

[cinnajess.livejournal.com]

I so love seeing my own words italicized. How about you?

They were told what to think and what to believe, not taught how to think and how to believe.

Yes. I believe children should not have organized religion rammed down their throats. They should teach it in the schools. I'm serious. Expose the little fuckers to every major relgion and let 'em find their own working hypothesi (yeah, I'm pretty sure I just made that word up).

And yes, yes, by all means, read The Sparrow.

[tykers.livejournal.com]

I so love seeing my own words italicized. How about you?
lol, I never thought about it before!

Yes. I believe children should not have organized religion rammed down their throats. They should teach it in the schools. I'm serious. Expose the little fuckers to every major relgion and let 'em find their own working hypothesi (yeah, I'm pretty sure I just made that word up).

Yes, that would be nice if children were free to choose the religion to follow. I don't know about other religions, but in Catholicism, one of the stipulations of being married (or really, receiving the "Sacrament of Marriage") is that you will raise the children Catholic. If someone is marrying a non-Catholic, getting that is sometimes the only way to get the Church to permit it (although in this case it isn't a Sacrament, iirc).

I definately had it "rammed down my throat" in grade school. My HS, though, was much more academic about the subject of theology. Some of it was comparitive as well.

[cinnajess.livejournal.com]

Well, sure, most of the religions are that way - kind of a freakish 'keep it in the family' sort of thing.

I never had religion of any kind rammed down my throat - thank goodness for that!

Although I do find Judaism really really cool! They question everything, all the time, and it's not just allowed, it's encouraged. I like that.

[tykers.livejournal.com]

Well, sure, most of the religions are that way - kind of a freakish 'keep it in the family' sort of thing.

I am curious if it is a condition of marriage in that religion (sorry, shoulda been more specific)

I never had religion of any kind rammed down my throat - thank goodness for that!
lol, I remember being forced to go to confession, I mean, reconciliation in second grade. I had to think hard for what I could have possibly done wrong. This was so I could receive First Communion.

Although I do find Judaism really really cool! They question everything, all the time, and it's not just allowed, it's encouraged. I like that.
I work with a woman who is Orthodox Jewish, and she's really cool and very sweet. She's supposed to bring Chunnakah (what is the proper spelling?) cookies in for us tomorrow. I never got the impression though that she questioned things. Dunno, maybe she does and it's private and keeps it to herself to be professional at work.

Questioning in Judaism

[violachic.livejournal.com]

Actually, when studying, in yeshiva and in seminary and stuff, it goes that you're never supposed to study alone. You're always supposed to study with others, so that there is more than one perspective on the text at hand. Debate is not only accepted, but encouraged. I like that idea very much. But then again, I'm a born questioner, and I like to debate :-)

[cinnajess.livejournal.com]

The Jewish women don't do as much of the learning of the Talmud as the men do. They do however have theological discussions, often, after shul.

I think the marriage thing is more very 'strongly suggested' in the other religions, as opposed to actually set in stone, like Catholicism. I do know however that in the stricter sects of Judaism, the children aren't considered Jewish unless the mother is.

[tykers.livejournal.com]

>I do know however that in the stricter sects of Judaism, the children aren't considered Jewish unless the mother is.

And in some sects of Islam, it is through the father.

<random thoughts>
Catholicism has no "genetic lienage" of sorts, hence a place for Baptism. I know there are theological reasons for Baptism, and that a rite-of-initiation-of-children isn't strictly Catholic, but since Baptism is such an important part of being Catholic, it sometimes seems like it is meant to take the place of being born into a faith.

Theologically, however, that is what Baptism does. You are "reborn" into the Church in Baptism, ie, it "makes a permanent mark on your soul and forever marks you as Catholic". I'm missing a key point that I can't remember here, it's been years since I've seen a baptism.

I've never been found of the almost science-like way the Catholic Church explains the soul and God. Science build on top of previous science, so that means you need a solid foundation to do research. It also means reproducibility.

Since theology is, by definition, the study of God, you have to agree on certain beliefs in order to construct a framework and system of study. If you don't believe a key tenet, the rest of the theology, the belief system falls apart cause it no longer has foundation.

A good deal of what I see wrong with the Church now is that it's concerned about understanding God as best it can and them telling it's followers, basically, how to work with God. Like an instruction manual.
<random thoughts>

BTW - I'm friending you. I'm really enjoying this conversation.

[cinnajess.livejournal.com]

Since theology is, by definition, the study of God, you have to agree on certain beliefs in order to construct a framework and system of study. If you don't believe a key tenet, the rest of the theology, the belief system falls apart cause it no longer has foundation.

Yep, that would be pretty much the entire reason, in a nutshell, that I am not religious. I require proof of that foundation. Concrete, tangible proof.

A secondary reason would be because I don't need it. I'm comfortable with my theory that life is. The the universe is. I don't need the comforts of ritualism and/or a belief system. I don't need god, or my bishops, rabbis, whatever, to tell me what's right and what's wrong. I do not need to live my life by adhering to a set of rules. I am comfortable with the gray areas, where the lines blur between good and evil.

Sorry, I tend to get a little ranty and foam at the mouth. Careful what you may find in my blog, it can get pretty ugly in there.. Consider yourself refriended, of course, as well.

[randombtchchick.livejournal.com]

First, I loved that book. Of course, at midnight when I was telling myself, "i will only read to the end of this chapter" to have yet another cliffhanger of "got to know what happens next" proportions occur, I wasn't so pleased the next morning. It was so good and it sent me running to the store for his other books.

Now, your questions:

If it were somehow historically proven that Jesus had fathered a child, who then produced a lineage that is still alive today, would it lessen your view of his sacredness?

--No. I was born and raised Catholic so we were taught, of course, that isn’t possible because the Bible doesn’t mention it. But what it overlooks is those 20-some years between him as a small child and him as a prophet. What did he do in all that time? Where was he? Such questions…and I never understood how that could lessen your beliefs in a god—really all it does is diminish Catholics argument for making priests be celibate…but then again, I must point out, that my mother often calls me a “bad catholic” but that’s what comes of years of Catholic school.

If you found out that Mary wasn't actually a virgin when Jesus was conceived, would it lessen your view of his sacredness?

I don’t believe she was a virgin. It’s the whole science vs. religion thing. It’s a nice story and all, but yeah, I don’t think it’s quite true.

Would the knowledge of him having brothers and sisters? Would it change anything if we could prove through DNA that Joseph actually was his biological father? Or that he studied abroad for those eighteen years that are missing in the Bible, and truly was inspired by other ancient religions (many scholars propose that Jesus' family came from the Essene branch of the Hebrews, who are noted for their amazing scholarship) or philosophies?

He must’ve had brothers and sisters. It’s like the line in the movie, Dogma…to accept that Mary was a virgin is a leap of faith, but to believe that she never slept with her own husband or had children is ludicrous. I also have no trouble thinking that he studied abroad. I don’t think that would change anything.

Would any of that change how you viewed what we are taught in Sunday School today? Or would you say yes, I can still accept the basic principle of what I was taught?

Well, I’ve always had trouble with the things I was taught in catholic school. I was a “radical” of sorts. I think, for me at least, that whether Jesus had a life of his own before become a prophet of God doesn’t change what he stood for. I’ve always had difficulties with Religion—choosing God over rules and such though, so who knows?

[violachic.livejournal.com]

But what it overlooks is those 20-some years between him as a small child and him as a prophet. What did he do in all that time? Where was he?


The book Lamb I mentioned earlier in the post talks about this stuff. The author has him traveling all over the Middle East and learning from various other religions and philosophies. Its a book I highly recommend.

[piddyx.livejournal.com]

If you found out that Mary wasn't actually a virgin when Jesus was conceived, would it lessen your view of his sacredness?

-If he was conceived, it puts a wrench in the whole son-of-god / died for our sins thing. Unless you interpret son-of-god to mean faithful follower/worshiper of God.

Would the knowledge of him having brothers and sisters? Would it change anything if we could prove through DNA that Joseph actually was his biological father? Or that he studied abroad for those eighteen years that are missing in the Bible, and truly was inspired by other ancient religions (many scholars propose that Jesus' family came from the Essene branch of the Hebrews, who are noted for their amazing scholarship) or philosophies?

-In the later chapters of the Bible it mentions that Jesus had at least one brother. The apostiles didn't want him to inherit the leadership of the church.

Would any of that change how you viewed what we are taught in Sunday School today? Or would you say yes, I can still accept the basic principle of what I was taught?

-Lets prey that everyone learns enough religious truth to live a virtuious life.

[ferretiger.livejournal.com]

If you liked "DaVinci Code", you should also read "Angels and Demons", his first book with Robert {last name i forget now}. C'est tres bien.

[violachic.livejournal.com]

I've heard its kind of a prequel to The Da Vinci Code... is that true? I've been meaning to look for it. Thanks!

[stejcruetekie.livejournal.com]

This post is the first one I've ever tried adding to my LJ Memories.. cause it's damn good!

I'll get around to actually answering the questions in a decade or two :)

[violachic.livejournal.com]

Wow! I'm flattered! Thanks!

Apparently you're kind of into the incoherent ramblings of a certified madwoman, eh?

[violachic.livejournal.com]

Hahahahahaaaa!!!!!!

I just took a closer look at your user icon!


hahahahaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!

[piddyx.livejournal.com]

May I say, you are a wonderful Christian. It really warms the heart to know you.

[violachic.livejournal.com]

Wow. I'm not really sure what to say to that.....

[piddyx.livejournal.com]

Just keep being a kind and thoughtful person. I just wanted to acknowledge it.

[violachic.livejournal.com]

Thank you. That means a hell of a lot :-)