May 29, 2006

A Topical Post On Christianity

And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain,
and your faith is also vain.

1 Corinthians 15:14 (King James Version)

Several people asked me why I didn't boycott the Da Vinci Code movie, as requested by a number of Christian churches, including the Bulgarian Orthodox Church. There are at least three reasons: first, my sceptical contempt for conspiracy theories; second, my faith rests on different - and secure - grounds, (in biblical language on rock, not on sand); third, I haven't read the book, nor am I planning to, and I wanted to be aware of this cultural phenomenon of our times.

I like to be familiar with enemy ideologies, too:P This one, pretending to shake the foundations of Christianity, is an easy target. The reference to the Council of Nicaea as the starting point of belief in Christ's divinity was the most outrageous statement in the movie, which is also the easiest to refute. Yes, the Council of Nicaea finalized the creed, but the majority of Christians had believed in the human and divine nature of Jesus Christ even while he was a minor prophet from a provincial town in Galilee. He was sentenced to death for blasphemy, ffs. He claimed to be God, which for his Jewish contemporaries is simply impossible to accept. Judaism is emphatically different from pagan religions where 'sons of gods' roam happily the earth having casual sex with god-fearing human maids. When Jews said 'God' they thought of the Creator of heaven and earth, the all-powerful, the eternal. And the concept of a man who claimed he was Son of God was deeply disturbing, for enemies and friends alike.

The movie mentions Christ's crucifixion, and death, as a fact. The death of Christ was disputed for a long time by heretical theologians, even more so than the resurrection. They talked of 'feigned' death, because they didn't doubt the resurrection, and wisely so. The evidence for the 'empty tomb' is overwhelming, for any unbiased historian and psychologist. When Jesus died, he left a group of discouraged men and women who had denounced him. How did they transform into the boldly preaching apostles we see in the Book of Acts in the New Testament? They must have seen something that changed their lives. They refused to believe, at first, some wanted empirical evidence of the senses (Thomas is one of my favorite characters). The very rise of the early church is a miracle, considering the historical facts. The claim that until the fourth century and Constantine the church believed Christ to be only a man is utter and profound BS.

The alleged relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene is not startling news. It was hinted at in Jesus Christ Superstar musical, too;) However, the person sitting on the right side of Jesus, depicted in the Last Supper painting by Leonardo, is John. Period. The same one to whom he entrusted the care of his mother. The same one, whom he 'loved' in a more special way than others. Why not fabricate a lovely gay conspiracy theory using the information? Ah, because we need a feminine connection, the pagan one. The symbolism of the womb seems to be an essential ingredient of any cult, and I don't mind, having had two kids:D But hey, Christianity already has a feminine cult. Good guess, it's the other Mary. The mother of Christ. The one called Theotokos in Greek, Bogoroditsa in Bulgarian, and Virgin Mary in English, which does not render the significance of 'Christ's Birth-giver' at all. Alas, I can't write a post without lyrics. It's inevitable:D

Rejoice, you through whom joy shall shine. Rejoice, you the Redemption of the tears of Eve.
Rejoice, Height hard to climb for human thought. Rejoice, Depth hard to explore even for the eyes of Angels.
Rejoice, for you are the Throne of the King. Rejoice, for you sustained the Sustainer of all.
Rejoice, Star that causes the Sun to appear. Rejoice, Womb of the divine Incarnation.
Rejoice, you through whom creation is renewed. Rejoice, you whom the Creator is born a Babe.
From the Orthodox Akathist to Mary (as long as the Bilhana poem)

I'm not going to say anything on the topic of immaculate conception, virgin birth, and the role of Mary in salvation. I just would like to stress that yet another womb in the Christian religion would be a little excessive.

A final thought: if Jesus was 'just a man', and not the Saviour, as purported by the Church, why are his descendants so important? Why not the descendants of any other ancient figure? Descent is central to Judaism, by the way, and Jesus' descent is traced back to king David, and to Adam, for that matter. So Sophie is an heir of Adam, too. Wow. What else can I say...

The next movie I'd like to see, is The Body. Now this is serious challenge. In any case, Antonio Banderas is a joy to look at, which cannot be said of Tom Hanks.

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

one of my favourite quotations on the matter - this is from slate magazine [http://www.slate.com/id/2141970/]

"As Rosemary's Baby proved, deciphering anagrams from the beyond is not inherently uncinematic, and there's no reason a goofy pulp novel can't be turned into a scary, sexy film. The Da Vinci Code is neither—unless, of course, every line of dialogue in the film is an anagram for another, better one."

:D

of course - for the religious part - i'm not convinced. but you know me ;)

hazel said...

I read this review too:) I haven't seen Rosemary Baby, it's in the to-see list though. When I retire and do tapestry;)
I don't expect you to be convinced, just to get thinking:D

Anonymous said...

"The evidence for the 'empty tomb' is overwhelming, for any unbiased historian and psychologist."

No, it isn't, sorry. Any scientist will want to see the tomb, at least :) Anyway, don't try to prove your faith, it IS a contradiction in terms

Ah, indeed, Jesus comes from David, no wonder he's gay then (cf. David and Jonathan :P~)

That the holy grail is in fact the womb of Mary Magdalene IS the "official secret dogma" ot the Knights Templar, at least to my limited knowledge (and I have had it before the book came out).

Yes, this seems to be that meme-starter, I wonder why it wasn't forbidden by the church then :) Oh wait, it wasn't filmed, right...

Mordred

hazel said...

The debate on *how significant* beliefs are, is a totally different debate. The fact that people believe wrong things about reality, does not change reality, let alone the Ultimate Reality.

Now, if we are talking history here, we can try to examine the facts presented by historical documents. I am deeply skeptical of almost all history (alongside conspiracy theories:P) But, assuming that history is a reliable scientific discipline, for the sake of the argument, historical evidence of the empty tombs is there. The tomb is there, too:) It's in a church now.
http://www.holyfire.org/image/grob1.jpg

Otherwise, I've known about the Holy Blood and the Holy Grail for a long time. Holy, you say? What's so holy about someone who didn't even manage to rise from the dead?:D

Here's one of the spinoff documentaries on the Code:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000EDWLUA/002-1968686-8608023?v=glance&n=130

Tony Robinson ftw:)

ikew said...

Знаеш ли колко лесно е да се изнесе и закопае някъде мъртво тяло от първобитна гробница? Празната дупка е почти толкова могъщо доказателство, колкото снимка, на която аз НЕ пия. С която снимка с опитвам да докажа, че съм пълен въздържател. Yeah right.
Освен това, възкресението на Йисус не се опитва да е било физическо, т.е. не се е появил в този свят в тяло, а е пре-оживял на "небето", мне? Иначе трябва да има ДРУГО тяло, онова, което е било напуснато, когато Ийсус е умрял по-късно ПАК и най-накрая е отишъл горе, защото никой не живее вечно НА ЗЕМЯТА.
За учениците - да, нещо е променило живота им. Но това не е било възкресението, а самото дело на jesus. Аргументацията ти е толкова unкохерентна, че изобщо не ми е ясно дали всъщност се опитваш да докажеш нещо или просто разказваш история. :)

(допускам, че съм малко по-заядлив, отколкото повелява добрия вкус. Същото обаче мога да кажа за количеството религия и най-вече безпочвено доверие в постинга ти, така че мисля, че сме квит :)
)

Колкото за Адам и наследниците му - да бе, през цялото време съм се чудил - баси инцеста ще да е било, още повече, че е бил планиран предварително от бог - когато е създал само един мъж и една жена, инцестът е неизбежен като единствен начин за видът да оцелее. Добре, че е нямало развалени рецесивни гени, които да се проявяват като тежки увреждания при следващите поколения, щото всички първоначални гени са били ftw и направо божествени, но грехът в божите очи си остава. Шибан лицемер. Можел е направо да остави хората долу без да си търси виновник...


а, и последно - ако ийсус има наследник, това е адски важно по следните три причини :

1) паранормалните способности може да са наследствени. А скоро ще имаме нужда от някой, който да превръща водата в петрол :)

2) авторски права. Като наследник на част от творческия колектив "бог", Йисус младши има известни права върху стария завет. Освен това може да съди за клевета всеки, който печата евангелята, защото надали имат писмено разрешение от йисус да разказват историята му, особено с коземтичните промени.

3) идеален е за следващ американски президент.

ikew said...

п.п. - по точка 2, авторските права...

"Бог" не се е появявал в публичното пространство последните 2к години, което всъщност е напълно достатъчно за модерното правораздаване, за да го счетем за мъртъв. Пък и Ницше ще е доволен, той отдавна го твърди това и още не е оборен.

С което евентуален Ийсус jr. става пълен притежател на авторските права върху библията. Муахаха. Баси, би бил най-богатият човек на земята.

hazel said...

@ Mira: I'm not saying much about the movie, only examining some of the possibly controversial issues that might be seen as a threat to Christian beliefs and the crusade against drugs;)
As for Tom Hanks: I lived to see the day when you and I do NOT share exactly the same taste in men:PPP

@ ikew: wait and see, dude ^^

Anonymous said...

Most appalling inconsistency? I vote for the use of a Renaissance painting as a source for historical data about Jesus. No other bullshit in the movie beats that.
And the explanation "because Leonardo was a grand-marshal"? Puh-lease.
- W.

P.S. OK ok! Why not proclaim him the biggest traitor of the order, then? It turns out he betrayed the Great Secret, encoding it in a painting he laid out there for all who have eyes to see.

P.P.S. I bet there's people out there who think Leonardo was actually present at the Last Supper... sketching the apostles while they were having dinner and all. Your standard documentary photographer.