Posts
Please see The Top Ten Fallacies in the DaVinci Code ...
It is a work of fiction people! While he claimed to use "real history" ... it was just a literary device. Take a deep breath! The only reason it's "controversial" is because you're assuming there's some factual basis. There isn't. It's a STORY!
The website cited above is concise, and lists the actual facts that are distorted in the book ... it's not just what Christians believe ABOUT the history ... it's the actual, documented, facts that are at issue.
Since I can't call Rick and Scott ... I'll send it your way. :)
back to your regularly scheduled blog ... :)
Had a great walk last night; the sun was shining, and it was beautiful out. I'm enjoying the Ruth study - it was suggested to me to take all the dialogues and compare them. The book is 70% dialogue, and you really learn a lot about the individuals by looking at just what they had to say.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Nothing new under the sun. I'm sure there will be those seeking an escape clause even on the Day of Christ's appearing on the Mount of Olives.
I love the book of Ruth!
The problem is the way some Christians have responded to media hype, by trying to prove a piece of fiction is false. I heard Josh McDowell on the radio say the pyramid at the Louvre has 687 panes of glass, NOT 666 as was stated in the book. Is that any way to challenge a novel that warps history like this book does?
Yes - the real issues are to do with the reliability of the Bible (and by implication, God's ability to protect it).
The history of the Old and New Testament Scriptures is well documented and solid (from non-Christian, non-Jewish sources as well as Christian/Jewish ones)
The number of panes on a window ... not really a big issue for me. :)
Can I trust the book on which I base my life? THAT is a big issue. I'm not interested in arranging all my thinking, decisions and beliefs around a fable.
Trinka
Responding to Carol:
Judgement. What do you mean? They never talked about judgement on "Angels in the Outfield" or "Touched by an Angel".
Cliff, I suppose I'll need a little more information on the context of what you are referring to in terms of judgment in order to effectively respond.
But I will say this, Touched by and Angel and Angels in the Outfield are Hollywood creations. I prefer to get my Gospel from the Bible not Hollywood.
But if you're just being facetious, my response = :D
Oh Carol ...
I should have warned you.
Cliff is my brother. He doesn't REALLY get his doctrine from television shows.
He gets it from the little paper slips in fortune cookies. ;)
Sorry Carol, I forget that sarcasm does not always show up in print. They should create a "sarcasm font" like italics, so if you are being facetious, everyone will know it.
Trinka,
Good thoughts, here. Thanks for the comment on our thread.
Keep it coming!
Glory
Post a Comment