KRC Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Brown presents a hoax as true and the nation agreed. 303497[/snapback] Damn, this continues to get better and better. The nation agreed that Brown's work is non-fiction? I guess that explains why every book list has it listed as fiction. Brown's website specifically points out it is fiction. It is put in the fiction section of bookstores, except when it is put in a special location and labeled new fiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Because it is fun to see you get your panties in a bunch over fiction. but...but...but...it is not true....but...but...but...he is not telling the truth in his work of fiction. 303350[/snapback] But...but...but...he said his work of fiction was non-fiction! The reviewers prove it! I should have just called myself "Crap Throwing Beausox". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Tate Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 You know, every time a bell rings, a fairy gets its wings, or at least so says another work of scholarship. An angel. Every time a bell rings, an angel gets his wings. At least that's what teacher says. Nice going, Clarence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 So even though the author of this work believes in its truth you, who has not read the work has done a study of the Catholics you know, and conclude that the author is wrong about his own conclusion? 303421[/snapback] First, to the extent your response is comprehensible, you continue a remarkable streak of being wrong: I read the book. Second, the author says it is FICTION! For God's sake man, you're not a well person. Third, regarding Dan Brown's puffery, do you also think that Teller can't talk? Keep ignoring the all the other arguments: it adds to your dwindling "credibility." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 An angel. Every time a bell rings, an angel gets his wings. At least that's what teacher says. Nice going, Clarence. 303516[/snapback] Of course, you're right. If I had cited a source in my bibliography, that would have made my statement an error in an otherwise scholarly work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Damn, this continues to get better and better. The nation agreed that Brown's work is non-fiction? I guess that explains why every book list has it listed as fiction. Brown's website specifically points out it is fiction. It is put in the fiction section of bookstores, except when it is put in a special location and labeled new fiction. 303501[/snapback] Yeah. But if it has a bibliography, it's dangerous non-fiction. 99.9% of readers and all the bookstores are wrong. And, to the extent Brown made mistakes about the date of the Dead Sea Scrolls' discovery... well, there's a point here somewhere that matters... I can't make it out... in a work of fiction, there's a mistake... and so that's very important because... "shoddy scholarship!... anti-Catholic... something... losing focus... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Why one would think Welles and Browns hi-jinks are analogous is beyond comprehension. They are opposites. Both presented hoaxes. Welles admitted his hoax as hoax and the nation agreed; Brown presents a hoax as true and the nation agreed. 303497[/snapback] I admire the enthusiasm and resolve you display by defending your position in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Yeah. But if it has a bibliography, it's dangerous non-fiction. 99.9% of readers and all the bookstores are wrong. And, to the extent Brown made mistakes about the date of the Dead Sea Scrolls' discovery... well, there's a point here somewhere that matters... I can't make it out... in a work of fiction, there's a mistake... and so that's very important because... "shoddy scholarship!... anti-Catholic... something... losing focus... 303528[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beausox Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 It's not portrayed as fiction? What book did you read? As to the rest of your reply, the book doesn't portray Jesus as the deceiver, it portrays elements of the Church as the deceivers. There's a big difference. You didn't answer what your feelings are on all the other inconsistencies of works of fiction, including the Bible. Do you get your panties in a wringer over them too? 302770[/snapback] You mean to say that during the three public years of His life He just forgot to mention one minor factoid of His life, that is, and oh by the way, I have a Son or is it son? But why worry that fact would make no difference! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 I admire the enthusiasm and resolve you display by defending your position in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. 303545[/snapback] Enthusiasm, resolve, and big words. Poor grammar...but with big words, nonetheless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beausox Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Damn, this continues to get better and better. The nation agreed that Brown's work is non-fiction? I guess that explains why every book list has it listed as fiction. Brown's website specifically points out it is fiction. It is put in the fiction section of bookstores, except when it is put in a special location and labeled new fiction. 303501[/snapback] Brown is not unlike Madonna who once had a lustful Jesus come down off the Cross into her embrace. Madonna mocks the Mother of Christ ; Brown attacks Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. Can you imagine mocking lesbianism or homosexuality in the popular press? Can you think of a religion or race you could do something like that to? Again I am only saying what Brown, the author, has said that it is fact and he believes it. Perhaps your argument should be with Brown? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beausox Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 But...but...but...he said his work of fiction was non-fiction! The reviewers prove it! I should have just called myself "Crap Throwing Beausox". 303507[/snapback] No I could never reach your crap-throwing prowess. As crap throwers go you are the best. You see it is all a factor of crap production. You need all lot of raw material to produce it in the right proportion. the aromatic quality must be just right. And, of course, never have had a thought. So please respond in character. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beausox Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 First, to the extent your response is comprehensible, you continue a remarkable streak of being wrong: I read the book. Second, the author says it is FICTION! For God's sake man, you're not a well person. Third, regarding Dan Brown's puffery, do you also think that Teller can't talk? Keep ignoring the all the other arguments: it adds to your dwindling "credibility." 303521[/snapback] The author says he agrees with the theories as presented. Sorry, his words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gross Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 "On the tv special (on the book) Brown confesses that he 'became a believer' in the theories that he weaves throughout The Davinci Code after allegedly trying to disprove them. This lends further credence to unsuspecting readers who aren't equipped to question the facts the world presents to them....Imagine if an author put {such claims that a particular race or gender was inferior} into a character cast as a trained anthropologist { as Langdon is donned historian} and prefaced the entire work with the statement that "All descriptions of cultures. biology' sociology and genetics in this novel are accurate". It is ONLY because Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular is considered ' fair game' that such an outrage" is made into a movie 303400[/snapback] Yeah, and I saw a TV special on Sci-Fi network. It was a documentary about a video camera that was discovered with some disturbing footage of three student filmmakers who had been missing for a year. According to this documentary, the footage was being released to the public under the name The Blair Witch Project. The Official Web Site backs up those claims.... Do you think what he said in the TV special helped sell more books? Do you think it would have affected sales if he just came out and said "I just came up with a bunch of crap and put it together with stuff that looked like facts figuring that the public would buy it hook, line and sinker."? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Perhaps your argument should be with Brown? 303586[/snapback] Nope. Brown states it is fiction. The publisher states it is fiction. The bookstores have it listed as fiction. Book lists have it as fiction. Seems pretty simple to me. It is fiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Tate Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Of course, you're right. If I had cited a source in my bibliography, that would have made my statement an error in an otherwise scholarly work. The longer this argument goes on, the funnier it gets. It's make-believe! The author says it's true! The author says it's make-believe! He says he believes it! It's still made up! If he believes it, then he thinks it isn't make-believe! (start over at the top) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gross Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 The longer this argument goes on, the funnier it gets. It's make-believe! The author says it's true! The author says it's make-believe! He says he believes it! It's still made up! If he believes it, then he thinks it isn't make-believe! (start over at the top) 303615[/snapback] Reminds me of an old poem: One bright day in the middle of the night, two dead boys got up to fight. Back to back they faced each other. Drew their swords and shot each other. A deaf policeman heard the noise, came and shot the two dead boys. If you don't believe this lie is true ask the blind man, he saw it too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arondale Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Can you imagine mocking lesbianism or homosexuality in the popular press? Can you think of a religion or race you could do something like that to? Again I am only saying what Brown, the author, has said that it is fact and he believes it. Perhaps your argument should be with Brown? 303586[/snapback] This argument is ridiculous. Obviously, this book is fiction as has been clearly stated. That is fact and can’t be denied. It is advertised as fiction; it is found in the fiction section of the bookstore; the story and characters are not real. However, those that are so ardently defending the book as fiction seem to be overlooking beausox’s underlying point. While this book is fiction, it is very clear that Brown wrote it with the intent to further advance the theories he believes to be true regarding Catholicism and Christ’s life. Brown has stated that he believes the theories in his book are true; he did extensive (shoddy) research as shown in the bibliography. Brown wrote the book with these theories as a prominent theme, using a fictional story to dress it up and make it more appealing to the masses. If Brown just wrote a book detailing his research and expounding on the many theories, without the fictional writing, obviously it would not sell well. I don’t see why that is so difficult to understand. Brown obviously has an agenda and uses a fictional story to push it through to the readers and he does it very well. But to explain away the seriousness of Brown’s theories and charges, just because the book is “fiction” is missing the point. It is precisely because the book is fiction that Catholics and others are taking it seriously – because it appeals to the average joe and is selling like crazy,yet it is advancing theories as fact that mock and question the foundation of the Catholic faith. Fictional works can be very powerful social commentaries, they can (along with the media) lend credibility to growing causes, they can persuade, anger and enlighten. Just because you find a book in the “fiction” section of your local bookstore doesn’t mean it has no truth to it and can’t influence the reader. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beausox Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Yeah. But if it has a bibliography, it's dangerous non-fiction. 99.9% of readers and all the bookstores are wrong. And, to the extent Brown made mistakes about the date of the Dead Sea Scrolls' discovery... well, there's a point here somewhere that matters... I can't make it out... in a work of fiction, there's a mistake... and so that's very important because... "shoddy scholarship!... anti-Catholic... something... losing focus... 303528[/snapback] One has to be in focus at some point to lose it. The Dead Sea Scrolls date is not only wrong they are completely misrepresented and , in fact, the Scrolls reinforce and prove the existence of the New Testament in the 1st century. If one in a piece of purported fiction alters/ misrepresents/lies about historical documents CRUCIAL to the story line one is a fraud. The anti-Catholicism comes from repressed envy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beausox Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 I admire the enthusiasm and resolve you display by defending your position in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. 303545[/snapback] ........toward which you provide none......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts