I will reply at length to scamp when I have the time (i.e. after have submitted thesis tomorrow hopefully - yeah!!), but just so you know they decided what went into it in a big conference of theologians who met in Nicea

History is decided by the winners so those who met at Nicea were men and left out the more contentious parts of the bible out, eg. the gospel of Mary Magdalene. Aside from religion I would agree history is subjective as it all depends on what viewpoint and you look at it from. There are two sides to every story, it just depends on which one you believe and how strongly you believe it!

I do not believe either (well, not totally) in Da Vinci Code but it does raise a point. After all, why should someone believe less in research that is conducted today and believe more in a book (The Bible) that was written 2000 years ago by locals in a non scientific way and was changed again and again by people who arbitrarily decided what would be included and what not? Not to mention the different versions of it... (different religions, different translations etc.)

Yes, you are right! Dan Brown changed the facts to make money! On the other hand, the Bible from the moment of its creation onwards, was written just to spread the word of God, without the thought of any kind of political profit, monetary gain etc . Evil Dan Brown...

So Dan, you would rather beleive someone with a straightforward, easily understandable argument, than people who are constantly in disagreement over details and facts. I wonder which side you'd back in the old Evolution vs. Creation debate?

MistaG, I will repeat myself: You think that Dab Brown wrote Dan Vinci to sell. Haven't you thought that people throughout the history had equally good (if not much better) reasons to create/change the Bible, such a powerful book?

Popular book that Bible. I bet this God fella was well chuffed that its shifted so many. I wouldn't have thought he would be that bothered about his work being tampered with seeing as the editors have obviously done a cracking job on it. Its really been flying off the shelves AND sales have held up for a long while now. Maybe it is time for him to release a (book version of a) directors cut though, with all the Mary Magdelene not being a Prossie thrown in.

My personal view of "the truth" is that Jesus was Mary Magdelenes pimp. It was actually Noah that got her up the duff (hence the "Ark" in raiders of the lost Ark. - thats a little clue for us). Jesus pumped all the money she took into PR and the carpentry business.

No, MistaG. The discussion was not about Dan Brown. But regardless of the validity of his book, what he did is that he started a discussion about the Bible bringing up the idea that not everything in it is true. He made people question where they get their information from! And after all, Dan Brown just sold a book; Bible changed the direction of humanity. Christians live their lives according to the Bible, not Dan Brown's book.

People are always keen to slate the popularly succesful. So Dan Browns book is not a bastion of historical truth? So what? It was an enjoyable page turner that sold massive amounts. If it was easy to make a book that enjoyable to such a wide audience, everyone would do it.

I say: hail Dan Brown for writing a book with such wide appeal and at the same time invigorating an interest in religion, art and history (three worthy subjects) in thousands of the most ignorant plebs to walk the planet.

Ed

I think what you said about Jesus was VERY OFFEENSIVE. Would you say the same thing about Mohammed and the Koran.

As I said before atheists and non believers can be very judgemental about other people's beliefs. Please show some sensitivity!

DanB

I won't bothering answering your pathetic question, as you already know the answer. Anyhow haven't you got any work to do?

ditto, and DanB's follow up. I just came on the forum to do something about it but the rules only say "stereotype or offend groups on the basis of ethnic origin, age or sexual orientation " (not religion)

that was ditto to Jenny's first post.

Thank you Sue Freedom of speech is one thing but being insulting and insensenitive is another thing. DanB et al think they are being witty, when in fact they are being down right RUDE!

Ah Ha!!! So you have read some of the bible. Yes Mary was a prostitute and turned back from her way to become a Christian. If you read in the bible Jesus did not judge her.

Now read the rest of Mary life as Jesus life and ministry in context, cover to cover page to page.