True or not...


I would love to believe it IS true. It appeals to my feminist instincts and gives me hope for this sad world.

reply

It's been debunked numerous times. Wanting it to be true does not make it so

1 mark deducted for not being Curse of Fenric. Insert 'The' into previous if you are Ant-Mac

reply

Oh, I know. "If wishes were horses, beggars would ride."

reply

I would love to believe it IS true.
Keep on believing. As Langdon suggests near the end to Sophie, there aren't a lot of historically proven facts known about Jesus, so really why not? 🐭

reply

Because, if true, it would mean nothing more than Mary Magdalene was only important as a receptacle for a man - hardly 'feminist'
1 mark deducted for not being Curse of Fenric. Insert 'The' into previous if you are Ant-Mac

reply

You kind of miss the point of the sacred feminine - of course women are receptacles for men, who are little more than seed suppliers for women, if you look at it on a base level. The point is they are supposed to be complimentary, 2 sides of a coin, yin and yang or whatever - different but equal parts of a whole that are meaningless without each other.

The thing the Da Vinci code doesn't get into is the hypocrisy and falseness of Semitic monotheism - derived from Aten as a way to counter growing naturalism, never some bush in the desert that spoke to Moses and helped slaves escape. Whether Jesus and Magdalene existed in reality, or had a child, is ultimately irrelevant - what is relevant is that before monotheism the feminine was as sacred as the masculine and it was the exclusivity of a singular god that removed this, removed all choice and the freedom for humans to find the divine in themselves.

Sons and daughters of gods were a regular occurrence in paganism, so regular the mythology opened the divine to everyone. The Torah, The Qu'ran, The Bible, Moses, Mohamed and God - all exclusive concepts designed to control rather than promote human thought and spirituality.

I'm all for spirituality but aren't we smart enough to find a better God?

reply

I'm all for spirituality but aren't we smart enough to find a better God?


Hahaha!! We don't have a choice. That's like saying "aren't you smart enough to find better birth parents?".

The God we have, is the God we have. Don't like it ? Go start your own universe.

I don't love her.. She kicked me in the face!!

reply

MY question is but a turn of phrase - perhaps I should word it differently, like:

I'm all for spirituality but aren't we smart enough to invent and worship a better God?

Our concept of God is a human construct, which can (and has) change(d). We didn't so much fins God, as we did invent it as an answer to questions - it's time we upgraded our invention to enable better understanding of the ethereal.

reply

Our concept of God is a human construct,
You're sure speaking for a lot of people who would categorically disagree with you. For instance me. You have no idea what my concept of God is.

I don't love her.. She kicked me in the face!!

reply

But I know what it's based on - I know the history of it's invention.

reply

Please share. I'd like to know how God got invented.

I don't love her.. She kicked me in the face!!

reply

The origin of Semitic monotheism (Christianity/Judaism and Islam) is an Egyptian god known as Aten.

Aten is based on Ra and was developed as a more exclusive concept in response to the rise of philosophical naturalism. Ra is based on the father god from the proto Indo-European pantheon, this pantheon is based on even older Neolithic dietys.

Ultimately, all gods are based on humans trying to understand the world around them - the sun, the sky, reproduction etc. God has been previously and should be continuously updated in respect to our understanding of these things.

Note I'm not saying there is no God - or that there is no deeper spirituality to existence (everyone seems to see a similar light when they die, for instance) but I am saying that the version of God Semitic monotheism is clinging to is outdated.

The problem is that the church upgrading it's idea of God is much like our industry dropping it's reliance on fossil fuels. Elements are so entrenched in infrastructure of both establishments that change is almost impossible without external shocks now.

reply

A very interesting perspective. Assuming there is a God (which I believe there is), I would say He is sovereign and our desires/attempts to "update" Him would probably hold no interest for Him, whatsoever. Our understandings/ideas of Him are as numerous as grains of sand on the beach. What we may call/have called Him is really irrelevant. Again, if there is a God, He is who He is, irrespective of what we want or think we know. YWHW means (I'm taking a little liberty because I don't remember it exactly) "I am and becoming to be". Or something like that. So He's actually "updating" HImself, so to speak. 😀


I don't love her.. She kicked me in the face!!

reply

Well yea, I'm not trying to assume God's perspective on humanity - doing so is foolish and arrogant, IMO. It (I don't believe we should anthropomorphise it as he or she because that also represents human arrogance) could actually be opposed to humanity. We just don't know. Whatever it is it will remain forever at the fringes of our understanding.

What is important is that we change our understanding of whatever it is, not expect to understand how it views us. We should not give it names like YHWH or haShem, or Aten, or Zues or Dyeus the father because doing so not only tries to humanise it, it also limits how we can view it.

Personally, I prefer concepts such as Tolkien's White Source, or Lucas' the Force. It ain't human and whether it cares about you or not depends more on you than it - you might be able to connect with it but you will never be able to get it or converse with it on a level that makes mental sense to you. And, most importantly, just because someone is a priest in a church does not mean they understand it's will better than anyone else.

reply

I appreciate your thoughts and ideas :) I personally do believe in the Judaeo-Christian God (thus, the Bible) so our ideas on identifying Him, etc. are definitely different but I respect your position.

I don't love her.. She kicked me in the face!!

reply

That's fair enough - and I respect that (most) Christian people live moral lives, which is something to be cherished in our increasingly greedy and amoral world. My mind is just personally too exploitative to be bounded by existing theological definitions - it doesn't mean i cant see the good in them.

reply

Oooh.... the "f" word that sets off the neanderthal in many.

More power to you though. Seriously.


You want something corny? You got it!

reply

I wasn't aware truth was a 'neanderthal' concept

1 mark deducted for not being Curse of Fenric. Insert 'The' into previous if you are Ant-Mac

reply