‘Work of the devil’ – Christians blast Da Vinci Code – JAMAICAOBSERVER.COM — Uh, do any of these people know exactly the meaning of the word FICTION!??!!? Geez. These are the same sorts of people who think that soap operas are real and go up to actresses when they see them and tell them what to do in their life.

WHILE not quite calling for a boycott of the movie, The Da Vinci Code, local church leaders have sided with the international Christian community, saying the book that spawned the screenplay was a product of the devil and the work of an occultist meant to undermine the divinity of Jesus Christ.

“It’s a kind of insidious way of getting after the Christian church,” says Roman Catholic Archbishop of Kingston Reverend Lawrence Burke.
“The forces of secularism would be happy to see the Christian church weakened.”
A woman makes a phone call in front of a Da Vinci Code poster, at the site of the movie’s premiere in Beijing Wednesday. China’s gala showing of the movie was set to be the world’s first, beating the official Cannes premiere by an hour in a move that underscores Hollywood’s efforts to woo Chinese viewers. The movie opened in Jamaican cinemas May 20. (Photo: AP)

The movie opened here yesterday with no fanfare.
Author Dan Brown’s 2003 fiction purports that Renaissance painter Leonardo Da Vinci’s art reveals the truth about Christ.



  1. James says:

    They don’t know what fiction means, they’re fundies! They think everything in the Bible is 100% true. Silly fundies…. silly silly fundies.

  2. Gregory says:

    my favourite line is this: “local church leaders have sided with the international Christian community”

    Who? What now? Most of the Christian world is going “Oh dear god shut up about the dumb movie!”

  3. David says:

    Have you even bother to read the novel. Each Chapter Starts with the word “FACT”. I know that you are not exactly the Christian type, but give me a break. John if you wrote like this you would have been black balled from journalism along time ago. John, I like your articles and I listen to you and your cranky friends every week, but you are wrong on this one.

  4. gquaglia says:

    I guess we should be lucky its Christians and not Muslims, otherwise hundreds would probably be dead already.

  5. Shawn says:

    So tired of the word “Christian” being used to sum up 1 billion Christians in the world. As if they all have the same opinion on anything. Most of the time the media means “evangelical/fundamentalists/conservative” Christians” but they just say “Christian” instead because it makes for better entertainm…err…I mean news.

  6. John says:

    I have not read the book or seen the movie, but I know Dan Brown the author says it’s a work of fiction. If you don’t like it or don’t want to read it, than don’t. People have a right to say or write whatever they damn well please whether you believe it’s right or not.

  7. RTaylor says:

    There’s so much hype over the movie and the book. It seems like every other show on the History or Discover channel is debunking the theories. I can understand why some less educated and read people would get confused. They’re just taking the cues from the leadership of these organizations Aren’t these the same leaders that wanted the Harry Potter novels banned? I’ve heard many historians state that a man of Jesus of Nazareth age, of that time, would be considered very odd if he wasn’t married. What I want explained is that even if he was married and had children, how would that subtract from his divinity. Religion and politics, go figure.

  8. James, age 14 says:

    …hundreds of thousands,you mean.

    I have an idea!! Maybe next they can produce The al-Aqsa Code!!

  9. Floyd says:

    7.: Those Discovery/History/Science Channel shows are pretty interesting, and their debunking is actually based on real science–DNA sample testing, archaeology, etc.

    Oh, wait–fundies don’t believe in science. Nevermind…

    As you (and some of the above shows) point out though, most Jewish men were married at a relatively early age at that time–“be fruitful and multiply” was the Torah/Bible verse. Almost nothing is known about Jesus except from religious books (New Testament and a few Gnostic books) that were probably edited to support a particular religious point of view.

    IIRC there isn’t even a Roman record of his execution, just general mentions of problems with the Zealots, so there’s no real way to double check whether he even existed, never mind whether he was married or not.

  10. Nick says:

    The church is scared they’ll lose business because of this movie. I hope they do.

  11. gquaglia says:

    Another thing to remember is that religion in general does not like free thinkers when it comes to their version of the world. The church wants you to blindly follow their dogma, no matter how strange or improbable. The only difference now is they don’t kill you for blasphmy like they did in the dark ages.

  12. Angel H. Wong says:

    Nothing like some free publicity/hype isn’t it?

    Maybe Sony should rename the cell processor “666” to get more people to buy it.

  13. Eideard says:

    A buddy of mine, next door in AZ, was moving his IT biz into a tiny hamlet notorious as much for Stone Age dedication to religion as to stealing from folks who weren’t “true locals” — and the natural beauty which attracted him. Concerned about hardware goodies he acquired from time to time — instead of relying on the rural mailbox his neighbors used, he went to the local post office and rented the always-vacant box #666.

    Never had a thing go missing. It’s been 20 years, now.

  14. David says:

    Sure, let’s make up some fiction on the Holocaust. You know, maybe only two million died instead of six. Let’s see if those that react can be told to just ease up.
    Question whether our state gods in the form of presidents lied us into war. Again, ease up folks just having some fun with the facts.

    Depends whose ox is being gored I guess.

  15. catbeller says:

    “Have you even bother to read the novel. Each Chapter Starts with the word “FACT”. I know that you are not exactly the Christian type, but give me a break. John if you wrote like this you would have been black balled from journalism along time ago.”

    The word “fact” in the chapter header doesn’t mean it’s a fact. The book is a piece of fiction. That’s what the author says, and that’s the label on the jacket. The “facts” were part of the story, like say, Asimov’s quotations from the Encyclopaedia Galactica at the start of each chapter of The Foundation.series.

    And as for his proposed blackballing as a jounalist, that would be justice, of course, if he were a journalist. He ain’t. So I don’t understand the relevance.

    People who read fiction for their life’s inspiration and call it fact naturally seem to have a problem distinguishing between fact and fiction in other works. Sorry. You all are embarrassing yourselves.

  16. catbeller says:

    Oh — one more thing. Nowhere in the Bible does it say Yeshu ben Joe was a virgin, nor that he never married, nor that he had no children. What, was he gay? He was 32 when he died, geez.

    Remember these stories collected in the NT were written long after he was dead. Remember that Paul, particularly, had an obvious hatred of women and their pollution of manly virtue, and wrote the story accordingly. Misogyny was and is a part of life in the middle east.

    Okay, one more thing. Mary Magdeline. A huge misunderstanding is the idea she is a prostitute. If you READ the passage, the prostitute who washed Jessie’s feet was never named. Mary M. was mentioned in the next paragraph, and for centuries people have assumed she was the same woman. From context, it seems not. The writer would have made it plain; he wasn’t sparing the detail.

    Okay, two more things. Jessie’s brothers were mentioned in one of the gospels, so Mary and Joe had sex. Oooh. Icky.

    And if Jessie was conceived from Godly DNA, without sperm from Joe, exactly why did the writers of the gospels spend so much time tracing his geneology from David? How exactly was he related if he was god-spawned? Seems that two stories were welded together that didn’t have a common narrative.

  17. catbeller says:

    16., the Holocaust is well documented. Jessie’s life is completely missing from the age of what, ten, until he started his campaign at the age of 30 or so. Fiction isn’t absolute. A holocaust with only 2 million dead would be alternative timeland story, not mainstream fiction.

    So much detail was intentionally dumped from the Jesus story that it might as well be fictionalized.

  18. JimSl says:

    I have an idea…
    Let’s write a “fictional” account about a man, let’s call him “J. Dvorak” who commits unspeakable crimes against his family, his friends, and his co-workers. Let’s paint him in an extremely negative light, and let’s twist the details of his life so that even his closest friends are appalled and disgusted. Then, let’s publish this work, and just say, “Hey, it’s fiction, no big deal” “This will not affect J. Dvorak or his work or how people think of him…No! It’s just FICTION!!!”

    Using the word fiction to describe any work does not decrease it’s potential impact. In fact, many fictional works have had tremendous impact on the world, on world opinion, and on world history. In fact, those of you who laugh at Christians for believing that the Bible is “literal”, are in fact saying that the Bible is fiction. Well, for two thousand years, billions of people have placed their faith in the words of this “fictional” work. Words have meaning. They change things. They alter opinion, and stir emotions. Brown OBVIOUSLY intended for his book to stir up controversy. That’s why he wrote it. Whether he believes a word of it does not make the words themselves any less powerful. And those with opposing view points have every right, and many would say, the responsibility, to shout with their loudest voices that what Brown says is garbage. Fiction, non-fiction, it does not matter. The book has entered the common arena of ideas. It has caused people to think and to question. But, it has also opened itself up to HONEST, REAL criticism.

    Lastly, labeling those you disagree with is highly uncalled for. While we may disagree, calling people “fundies” is as disturbing as calling homosexuals “fags”. These words do not ad too, but take away from, proper discourse. Hatred is ugly, whether it is liberal or conservative.

    While this may come as a surprise to some, many Christians, myself included, actually and truly do love Jesus. We think of him as our Savior, our best friend, our confidant, and our Lord. Any disparaging remark about him, no matter how it is labeled, is offensive to us, just as any disparaging remark made about your mother, your wife, or your husband would be highly offensive to you. Labeling does not soften the blow.

  19. RBG says:

    “Uh, do any of these people know exactly the meaning of the word FICTION!??!!?”

    And yet the filmmakers would rather die than put a card up front that says, “The following work is fiction.” Why do you think that is?

    RBG

  20. Their has been this silent war between the greatest scientists of the world who believe in evolution and people who beileve in the bible.
    No one has the answer as to who, what, or is there a god?
    And what is the form God.
    I don’t have the answer.
    What ever happened to free Speech.
    If you say something out of line of what they want you to think your knuckles get cracked by the wooden ruler. Ba hum bug.
    It’s Ok to think and express your beliefs Thats what a free Society is all about. Not everyone has to be the same or have the same ideas
    The reason the bible and davinci code is fiction is because it never has been proven. It’s a story based on some fact but not all fact.
    The Founding fathers of The United Staes where Masons.
    Let the devil talk so we can all put everything in to perspective.

  21. “While we may disagree, calling people “fundies” is as disturbing as calling homosexuals “fags”.”

    No it’s not, that’s trying to spin it to make them look like the victim.

    What do you suggest that we call these fundamentalists who are trying to get religion taught in science class in place of evolution, and are trying to get works of fiction (Harry Potter and the Da Vinci Code) banned from being able to be read (and not just in Christian schools and libraries, from any school or library)?

    Now, a sane, non-fundamentalist Christian (or person from any religion) is easy to talk to (and they have nothing against the movie), it’s the fundies who picket and try to get things they disagree with banned, and they always get the press attention (everybody remember “Thank God for Dead Soldiers”?)

  22. FriedTurkey says:

    I wouldn’t be suprised if the quote is from like a year ago. All the movie studios need is a couple of people who protest the movie to give to the press as free advertising.

  23. Michael Ward says:

    Nice picture. Looks like the one we have posted on the MagazineArt.org site here , but with one of the titles changed by a Photoshop user. Nice job.

    How about a credit line? We can always use the referrals.

    Michael Ward
    MagazineArt.org

  24. TKane says:

    Paul, you always manage to spoil your arguments by summing them up with something stupid to say. This time it was baiting JimSI’s comment. I suppose you were just trying to be funny but it only drowned out your point. By the way – there is a difference between the budhha and Christ. The philosophies are similar, but Christ’s approach to saving the soul differs. So you can’t just lump them together and say ‘eh, it’s the same thing”. Perhaps excessive attachment to the character and not to the concept can and does distract. But since I’m not a theologian, I will not pontificate on what constitutes too much attachment. Neither should you.

  25. site admin says:

    Hmm, I collected that pic a long time back from a huge collection of cover art that wasn’t your site. I do the Photoshop stuff myself and love re-wording old magazine covers.
    By looking at the smudge pattern it may be from the same source although your jpg looks bigger and would have been easier to edit. Next parody I’ll grab one of yours and put a note and link. I am reluctant to change the post as I just upgraded and the last change I made blew up the template and I had to delete the post altogether. But I will make it up by doing a direct post about your site. It’s great! Thanks.

  26. Jim Burrows says:

    Please. Dan Brown himself makes a big deal about how “thoroughly” he researches his books and on his official web site includes sections about the “Bizarre True Facts from…” each of his novels. Bizarre “true” facts that include incidents known to have been hoaxes long before he published his book. A major contributing factor to the numerous debunking shows, books and articles is Brown and his publicists’ claims of “impeccable research” and fact-based mysteries. Sure he’s always careful to say at least once per interview that his book of the day is a novel, but he always portrays it as a fiction set in a carefully researched real situation.

    And for the record, no, I’m not a Christian. I am an Agnostic. I just can’t stand people who can’t be bothered to get their history, art, or theology correct. I haven’t read The Da Vinci Code, but only because I have read Angels and Demons and would categorize it in the “This book should not be put down lightly. It should be hurled with great force” category. It was a stylish and interesting read, totally beyond historical or theological possibility, and presented real world institutions in a way that was demeaning and insulting, all the while sounding its own horn for deep research and historical grounding. One Dan Brown novel is easily enough for a lifetime.

    JimB.

  27. blank says:

    What difference does it make? How will any of this really matter? A work of fiction that says it’s fact talks about another work of fiction that millions of people say is fact. They’re both fiction! (your opinion may differ)

    Also, have any of you actually tried to READ “The DaVinci Code”? While the underlying story may be interesting, my 12 year old could write better prose than Dan Brown. I mean, it’s REALLY bad.

  28. Don Marsh says:

    I read the book months ago, about the time my spiritual brothers and sisters were getting into a lather. Most of them don’t remember how much free publicity we gave “The Last Temptation of Christ” or they would have just kept their mouths shut.

    As far as the book is concerned, it’s dull. And the underlying plot is an old story that the church has dealt with before.

    It’s kind of goofy to use the paintings of Da Vinci as evidence of anything pertaining to the person of Christ. I mean, it’s not a photograph. And Da Vinci lived hundreds of years after Christ. We might as well write a book called “The Seinfeld Code”, and look for all the hidden messages in the TV series that could debunk Christianity. At the very least, it would be more entertaing.

    A lot of the initial reviews are that the movie is as predictably dull as the book. The threat to Western civ is over.

    Unfortunately, there are a lot of Christian publishers who are cashing in on this dull melodrama to sell sensational books against Dan Brown’s snoring festival. It’s more about money than combatting any real threat, I’m sad to say. It’s enough to make me wish we were still glued to “The Purpose Driven Life”.

  29. doug says:

    look, this is pretty much standard stuff. a variation on “We must protest against how men/women/gays/latinos/arabs are ‘portrayed’ in [insert film name.]” Even though the “portrayal” does not purport to be a documentary.

    Grievance-hunting folks think that we are all so stupid that the rest of us will make up our mind based upon 110 minutes of celluloid. Or they are NOT so stupid and are (1) looking for free publicity for themselves; and (2) disregarding the fact that they are providing free publicity for the work that they hate.

  30. GregAllen says:

    Ironically, the United Arab Emirates is ALLOWING this movie to run, despite their rhetoric during the cartoon controversy about not allowing media that offends religious people.

    I defend the right of anyone to boycott but it seems like, in this case, it just creates buzz for a movie most reviewers are calling a stinker.

    I’m waiting for the bootleg version so I can watch it without supporting the movie! 😉


1

Bad Behavior has blocked 11533 access attempts in the last 7 days.