"Boycott Da Vinci Code film": top Vatican official

belt wrote:
KaterinLHC wrote:

Maybe the horse got zombified ...

Just like Jesus!!! Unless you believe this book!

Oh, Sweet Zombie Jesus, here we go again...

PurEvil wrote:
KaterinLHC wrote:
Podunk wrote:

Didn't we already beat this horse to death the last time some Vatican official denounced the Da Vinci Code?

It's been awhile. Maybe the horse got zombified and needs more kicking.

He looks fine to me...

:|

That's horrific. Where's Jill Valentine when you need her?

duckideva wrote:

I'll follow the Catholic boycott as soon as they start boycotting molesting little boys.

Oh noes! The thread train has jumped the track!

Everyone who has ever studied the history of religion knows that female deities have always played a role in theology, until the Christians, who proceeded to demonize them, or saint them, or steal their holidays. (Easter, anyone?) The book is so popular because it wraps around a hole in cosmology that many people have unconsciously felt...like a missing tooth.

Unless I'm mistaken, I'm pretty sure the old testament god the Christian's inherited wasn't exactly one of these: IMAGE(http://www.pyewackett.net/images/covern/fertility_goddesscard.jpg).

If you're going to blame a religion for not representing female deities, blame the Jews*. Possibly the Zoroastrians, I forget who exactly got the monotheism ball rolling.

* yeah, this thread is so going to R&P and really should've started off there to begin with

(as a side note: while doing a Google Image search for "female goddess" will not get you images of ancient stone idols of fertility deities, it has its other *perks* :-))

JoeBedurndurn wrote:

Unless I'm mistaken, I'm pretty sure the old testament god the Christian's inherited wasn't exactly one of these .

If you're going to blame a religion for not representing female deities, blame the Jews*. Possibly the Zoroastrians, I forget who exactly got the monotheism ball rolling.

* yeah, this thread is so going to R&P and really should've started off there to begin with

The thread was already P&C'd when I posted, just for the record.

I'm not sure what your point is with the Willendorf?

There is a history of the Goddess in Judaism, with archaeological data that suggests that orthodox patriarchy rose as a result of the Christian offshoot. Archaeologists have uncovered Hebrew settlements where the goddesses Asherah and Astarte-Anath were routinely worshiped. Kabbalism was a major influence through the Middle Ages, and is on the rise again, with many converts coming from Christian ranks. And let us not forget God's wife, Shekina, celebrated in the Sephardic Sabbath.

as a side note: while doing a Google Image search for "female goddess" will not get you images of ancient stone idols of fertility deities, it has its other *perks*

Instead it gives you Geoporn! (maybe NSFW)

LobsterMobster wrote:
Paleocon wrote:

Maybe they should start by boycotting the Rick James Bible.

Fixed. (Bitch)

"Lo, and God said unto Rick, 'You shall go and f*ck up Eddie Murphy's couch.'
And Rick said unto the Lord, 'Cocaine's a helluva drug.'"

duckideva wrote:

I'll follow the Catholic boycott as soon as they start boycotting molesting little boys.

Wow, how do you move that arm with that big f*cking chip on your shoulder?

duckideva wrote:

The thread was already P&C'd when I posted, just for the record.

I'm not sure what your point is with the Willendorf?

There is a history of the Goddess in Judaism, with archaeological data that suggests that orthodox patriarchy rose as a result of the Christian offshoot. Archaeologists have uncovered Hebrew settlements where the goddesses Asherah and Astarte-Anath were routinely worshiped. Kabbalism was a major influence through the Middle Ages, and is on the rise again, with many converts coming from Christian ranks. And let us not forget God's wife, Shekina, celebrated in the Sephardic Sabbath.

Where's your info coming from? Here's JewishEncylopedia.com on Asherah, and Ask the Rabbi on Shekina. Neither one seems to agree with your premises. Wikipedia's article on Asherah includes a snippet from the book of Jeremiah condeming some people worshiping Asherah, which supports the idea that it was heretical or an offshoot of mainstream Judeism at the time. Since Jeremiah dates from 600BCE that seems like more proof that the patriarcal deity of Christianity is in line with its earlier Jewish roots.

Since I'm not Jewish and if memory serves, neither are you, how about we turn this question to somebody who might know more than we do. Kat, Drunken, and others, how have we managed to misrepresent your faith today?

Podunk wrote:
duckideva wrote:

I'll follow the Catholic boycott as soon as they start boycotting molesting little boys.

Wow, how do you move that arm with that big f*cking chip on your shoulder?

Easy, I spent twelve years in Catholic school...field hockey, doncha know, hella muscles.

duckideva wrote:

Easy, I spent twelve years in Catholic school...field hockey, doncha know, hella muscles.

Ahhhhh, that explains it, then.

Well, I'm no scholar for my religion but I do know that the origins of Hanukkah predate Jesus and Christianity. The story of Hanukkah is truly about the survival of monotheism as the temple was sacked by Hellenists. Hellenists were Jews that wanted to reject the one God and worship the Greek gods. Thus the temple was sacked and there was only enough oil to light the lamp for one day and it lasted 8 days. Or so my 2 years of Hebrew school told me.

That said, I am one of those people that did have an eye openning experience upon reading Da Vinci Code due to exactly what Deva summarized. I totally support the effort for women to empower themselves in al religions that would limit them to barefooted, kitchen dwelling, future-parishoner-creators.

JoeBedurndurn wrote:

Where's your info coming from? Here's JewishEncylopedia.com on Asherah, and Ask the Rabbi on Shekina. Neither one seems to agree with your premises. Wikipedia's article on Asherah includes a snippet from the book of Jeremiah condeming some people worshiping Asherah, which supports the idea that it was heretical or an offshoot of mainstream Judeism at the time. Since Jeremiah dates from 600BCE that seems like more proof that the patriarcal deity of Christianity is in line with its earlier Jewish roots.

Since I'm not Jewish and if memory serves, neither are you, how about we turn this question to somebody who might know more than we do. Kat, Drunken, and others, how have we managed to misrepresent your faith today?

I am so not a Jewish scholar (and Drunken's not even a Jew), but as far as I know, you're both sort of correct. It's all in the linguistic details. Judaism is big on the linguistics, and Hebrew itself is a more subtle and implicit language than English. From what I remember of my very meagre Hebrew studies, the Torah and Talmud use both masculine and femimine words to describe God: elohim, the Big Mover and Shaker, is masculine, and shekinah, or the Spirit of God, is feminine. (Of course, English doesn't apply gender to words, so this distinction gets lost in the translation.)

What's important to take away is that God is both male and female, or, if you rather, neither male nor female. Gender's a quality we ascribe to God that, honestly, we have no buisness giving. I think we only do it to make the stories easier to tell and God easier to relate to.

After all, how in the world would anyone really know one way or the other if God's male or female? Or, another way to think about it, one that a favorite philosophy prof of mine discussed: if God's is all powerful, then wouldn't having a gender necessarily be a limitation? That is, if God was male, then God couldn't be female, and that is a limit on the omnipotence of God. Unless you assume that God could be male at one time and female at another... See how stupid this is becoming? Better to not even worry about God's gender.

Paleocon, I think this might be something to ask your rabbi buddy about.

PurEvil wrote:

This is the same bullsh*t like "Harry Potter teaches kids witchcraft!".

Hey, but Harry Potter really does teach of witchcraft! Ever since learning the Wingardium Leviosa spell, I haven't had a single problem with impotence!

The book is so popular because it wraps around a hole in cosmology that many people have unconsciously felt...like a missing tooth.

The funny thing is, if by chance you're one of those folks who actively worships a female aspect of the divine, or who integrates a concept of female deity into your cosmology, you can't escape this book. You'd think it was a kind of bible, because people will hunt you down in a supermarket, grab you, pin you up against a display of soup cans, and yell "OMGYOU'VEGOTTAREADTHISYOU'LLLOVEIT!" I don't remember this kind of zeal since the days of things like Mists of Avalon and Xena... fiction works that got Goddess-worshippers extremely excited.

Because I was sick of getting bowled over in the produce aisle, I read the book. It was a fun read, but then I don't have any amazing intellectual standards. It was fun, I gave it back to the zeal-- ah, friend who loaned it to me, and I went on with my life. I think the reason that many Goddess-lovers don't go nuts over this book is because it's kind of repeating a series of well-known historical facts. What's interesting is how the mainstream reacts to things like this... and the Vatican calling for a boycott only lends the book more credibility in the eyes of their opposition.

But I'm being captain obvious.

I agree Dragonfly. I got the same sort of "OMG! Have you read this?" vibe from a lot of people. (Although none of them pinned me to produce, for which I'm grateful. I could be deadly were I armed with an artichoke.) And while a lot of the concepts Dan talked about are common knowledge within a certain segment of the population that studies comparative religions, or the history of theology, and even those who track semantics and grammar, it's not something that people who aren't exposed to Joseph Cambell have run across.

I've been astounded by some of the conversations I've had with very Christian neighbors who never questioned the concept of what happened to all the old gods before this book, and for that alone, I think the book is a good one. It got millions of people to talk about a subject that is, for the most part, not discussed in polite society; religion.

I think the book is a good one. It got millions of people to talk about a subject that is, for the most part, not discussed in polite society; religion.

Isn't that a nice change? While I do understand how sensitive a topic that can be, I wish it were possible to have calm, interesting conversations about spirituality more often. Of course, then I'd never shut up - I'd never get any work done, I'd never have any free time, and I might pass out from hunger.

It could be worth it anyway.

Dragonfly wrote:

....I might pass out from hunger.

Well, see, but eventually the conversation would steer towards Demeter, or Hera...and someone would remember to cook. And hey, if we got to Kali, we might have barbeque. (I keed, I keed.)

This is a great writeup by CNN.com on some of the controversy.

Did you (as in everyone) know that Dan Brown got his start as a early 80's pop singer? In fact, I believe one of his albums was titled Angels and Demons, which was later the title of one of this books.