"DaVinci Code" question (nonspoiler I think):

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

Wouldn't a tall albino dude, dressed in a monk's robes, be one of the most CONSPICUOUS POSSIBLE errand boys you could have running around the streets of modern Paris committing your errands of mayhem for you? :shrug:

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. You would think so, wouldn't you, my dear Mayberry Machiavelli!

Not a spoiler for me.....I did read the book!

I can't wait to see the movie!

:hi:

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

2. Didn't read book; movie isn't GREAT but it is a good thriller. Good

acting performances especially by Ian McKellen. Worth seeing.

I mean, sheesh, if they at least had Silas dress like a skateboard punk or something when he was running his "errands"...

[regnaD kciN]

4. A few more from the book's "backstory"...

-- If Jesus was merely a mortal, why would his descendants have anything special, let alone sacred, about them?

-- If the New Testament was only created by Constantine in the fourth century, why would he commission four brand-new Gospels that contradicted each other in so many places? Why not just one official "life of Jesus" with all the ends tied together neatly?

:shrug:

[On the Road]

5. Jesus Might Have Been More Than Mortal

but not part of the trinity. Strange for modern-day Christians to accept, but it was the most widely held view in the early 4th century.

Up until Constantine, most Christian believed in some kind of subordinationism, in which Jesus was more than mortal but not the same as God. There are many, many verses in the New Testament which seem incompatible with the Trinity. Constantine is responsible for changing that. He was furious with doctrinal fights which were dividing the empire politically, and sent his military to forcibly bring all the bishops to Nicea. His overriding interest was for the church to be unified. So he chose one view of Jesus (Athanasius's) and basically forced everyone else to agree with it. Why he chose that one is open to discussion -- Brown is speculating by saying it was to give prominence to the emperor.

In fact, Eusebius (who was a friend and supporter of Constantine) wrote the first draft of the Nicene Creed, which descibed Jesus as "the firstfruits of (God's) creation." Instead, the final draft changed all that and added the odd redeundant statement "God of God, light of light, very God of very God, begotten not made, being of one substance with the Father." That's Constantine's influence, imposing his unpopular viewpoint by hammering on it in several different ways. So Dan Brown was partially correct in his description of Constantine's influence.

Brown was a little further off on the New Testament. It was officially approved at the Council of Rome in 380. No one really thinks that Constantine ordered the four Gospels written. Most of the New Testament had been decided on by consensus anyway long before. Hebrews and Revelation were the chief areas of controvery. (The West supported Revelation and the East supported Hebrews.) Eventually both made it onto the final list as a compromise. Some Christians still read the Gnostic gospels like Philip and Mary Magdelene, but they were mostly in Syria and Egypt and were not too influential.

What did happen with the Gospels is that certain verses were changed to conform to doctrine. A lot of that happened before Constantine. One of the most famous is that in the original version of Matthew, Jesus arises from being baptized by John and a voice from heaven says: "You are my son; today I have begotten you." That depicts Jesus as a human chosen by God. So it had to be changed.

[Blue_Tires]

3. yeah, there were a few more plot holes that i thought of as watching

but no more than the usual summer movie