For me personally, it's not so much the issue of whether or not he overstepped bounds; we know Dan Brown is not a Christian (which is contrary to what he claims, which I'll post here):

ARE YOU A CHRISTIAN?
Yes. Interestingly, if you ask three people what it means to be Christian, you will get three different answers. Some feel being baptized is sufficient. Others feel you must accept the Bible as absolute historical fact. Still others require a belief that all those who do not accept Christ as their personal savior are doomed to hell. Faith is a continuum, and we each fall on that line where we may. By attempting to rigidly classify ethereal concepts like faith, we end up debating semantics to the point where we entirely miss the obvious--that is, that we are all trying to decipher life's big mysteries, and we're each following our own paths of enlightenment. I consider myself a student of many religions. The more I learn, the more questions I have. For me, the spiritual quest will be a life-long work in progress.

(source: http://www.danbrown.com/novels/davinci_code/faqs.html)

Note that he says yes and later says "I consider myself a student of many religions." We as Christians believe Jesus is THE way, THE truth, and THE life, not ONE of the truths, ways, or lives.

I don't think it's about what we think of Dan Brown's creation, I think it's more about how we as Christians (if whoever may read this is in fact a Christian, I don't want to speak exclusively and assume here) respond to it. I myself enjoyed the book because I enjoy well-written FICTION. I like it for what it was, I think it had an interesting and suspenseful plotline that intrigues many readers and keeps you reading. I never stopped to consider it being more than fiction, even amongst all the chaos that it created. I don't think that people who are..."new" and still somewhat insecure in faith should read it if they believe they may take some of it as truth; that's a dangerous position to be in and as with anything that disputes Christianity I recommend praying for discernment beforehand. I'm not saying anyone is completely secure and perfect in their faith -- we all struggle -- but you need to be at a point in your walk with God where you won't be questioning Him or your faith at every little argument that's made against Christianity. As Hebrews 11:1 says, "Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see." We need to have faith in...faith, even when others try to dissuade us.

I really think people have made much too much of a fuss about this. Do I think Dan Brown set out to write this book with the purpose of offending Christians? Of shaking the faith of Christians by his one work of fiction? I say anyone who truly believes can enjoy this book for what it is - well written fiction. If something as silly as that can waver your faith in God, then shame on you. Don't blame the author.

Absolutely, Kayleigh; I think he picked a topic that would intrigue a lot of readers and it unfortunately got blown out of proportion. I don't believe he meant to "attack" any religious group...unfortunately, it got taken that way so much that people (a lot that I know, anyway) started saying, "What if he's got a point there?" He isn't trying to have a point, he's trying to make a good plotline. FICTION!!!!

A. How is it that this post is titled "religion and faith" when all we're talking about is Dan Brown?

B. I know everyone has their own likes and dislikes, but I don't consider this to be anywhere near good fiction. He wrote it so that it could easily be adapted for the big screen, so he could make more money, like many of his other books.

Dan Brown overstepped because it is crappy literature. It has no real spiritual implications for me.

Ksleigh I guess what I am really asking is it right for Dan Brown to twist the Holy Scriptures and make money on it?

Dan Brown didn't make any money off of me. I didn't read the book and didn't see the movie. I heard what was being discussed and recognized it as crap not worth my time or energy.

Sylviac asked -
what I am really asking is it right for Dan Brown to twist the Holy Scriptures and make money on it?

I had no clue this discussion was about Dan Brown when I opened it because it didn't say so in the title ... but since I read the book (enjoyed it for a fun fictional read) and saw the movie (boring) I'll answer. Sure, it's okay for Dan Brown to do what he did. That's what authors do - they write books. And the successful ones write books that prove to be popular and make money.

Now, if someone had a moral or ethical or religious problem with the book or its topic or premise, but STILL went out and bought the book, then I'd say that was probably wrong for them or at least inconsistent with their values.

"Sylviac asked -
what I am really asking is it right for Dan Brown to twist the Holy Scriptures and make money on it?

I had no clue this discussion was about Dan Brown when I opened it because it didn't say so in the title ..."

Don't be too surprised that sylviac goes off-topic in her own post. She goes off-topic everywhere else. I'm surprised that she did't work homosexuality into this somehow.

Is it OK for Mel Gibson to make tons of money with that disgusting travesty of Scripture called "The Passion of the Christ?"

Klaatu No I dont think it was right of Mel Gibson to make that movie either.

"Ksleigh I guess what I am really asking is it right for Dan Brown to twist the Holy Scriptures and make money on it?"

I'd postulate that this happens and has been happening for the two thousand year history of Christianity by many Churches, Preachers and Theologians as well. Nothing new here. :)

Sorry I'm new here and accidently deleted my post. To recap. Fiction is just that fiction. I went to the movie mostly because Tom Hanks was in it. I really enjoyed it. for the story that it was.

Blessings

go back to jadewoman. The question was is it right ot twist the scriptures?
Well, it happens all the time, often quite innocently.

Was it sleazy of Brown to do it? Yeah. probably. Hey. This is the real world. I think Christianity can handle it. just don't bundle yourself up in righterousness and say the real world isn't allowed to touch you.

graeme

I enjoyed the book, but hey, I like mysteries and conspiracy stories....and in some ways this is the granddaddy of all conspiracy stories. I agree with most people...this was a work of fiction and should be approached as nothing more; a bit of brain candy.

I get really frustrated with people who try to place all sorts of religious implications where it simply makes no sense. The Da Vinci code is a popular work of fiction. Harry Potter is a kid's story, my kids love the books. Tinky Winky (the teletubby) is not gay, he (or she, hard to tell with this purple, triangle topped, purse carrying creature) is a child's plaything...and so on. To start suggesting that these stories or images mean anything religious is silly.

And I would also agree that people have been "making" money off the Holy Scriptures for thousands of years. I can think of a few tv evangelists that immediately come to mind.

We rented the movie and I enjoyed it. I saw it as fiction. Why would anyone assume otherwise?

Sometimes people complain that society is too 'secular' that we don't have good movies/books/TV shows involving religion in any way, shape or form. We don't discuss it, we don't have it as part of our popular culture, we try to ignore it or hide it away. And they wonder why? The answer is simple: Any time anyone says/writes/makes art that even slightly touches on ANYTHING near ANY religion, a subgroup of people go bonkers, no matter the intent. So we bury it away, lest we offend someone and 'religion' stays behind the walls of a church.

Sylviac, you queried "Is it right for Dan Brown to twist the Holy Scripture and make money"?

Silly question to my way of thinking. He didn't restyle the Bible and sell it as Gods word ..... he wrote a really interesting work of fiction and I just do not see how that was wrong for a fiction writer to do.

Poorly writen book, made a ton of money and lots of people liked it. I sure didn't see why but we all have different tastes.

My objection to the book was all the stuff he wrote about "these are true facts....." Although we all talk about it as fiction and he sold it as fiction it was presented in the book as more of a historical fiction. I think there would have been a ton of people who read it as fact.

If you read any of the books writen about it the facts were so in dipute it was hilarious. Even facts of geography were in error.

however as many theologians did comment at least people were talking about Jesus again.

Sylviac, I didn't think that you want to be the one that censors topic for movie making do you? It seems more like a make small talk ..... which I'm no good at all so carry on.

Sylviac talked about how 'the book of revelations talks about not taking or adding from scripture'. this illustrates the problem with fundamentalism like yours; it's a hermetically sealed system! the bible is true because it says so in the bible. any arguments that contradict the belief of fundamentalists are dismissed as the creation of someone who is 'lost'. question creationism? well, you're just being manipulated by the devil! having read your posts sylviac, my point illustrates why you're immune to any sort of reasoning. God bless the poor souls on this site who have attempted to reason with you!
What i find infuriarating is your comment that "Dan Brown has overstepped". Granted, Dan Brown isnt a very good academic and his work is mildly-amusing fiction at best. however, he hasnt overstepped anything. it's a free country and he has the right to public what he did. sylviac, just because you believe whathever you do, no one is else obligated to accept your premises.

I have not read the book yet nor seen the movie.
I will watch it when it comes out on TV.

There were a great many religious movies made that do not follow the scriptures accurately.
They usually reflect the personal belief of the writer.

They are fiction.
We take the best and leave the rest.

Of course the book and movie were made to cause controversy.
Look at the free publicity it's getting.
You can't buy that kind of exposure.

Let me get this straight. An author is condemned by Sylviac for writing a work of fiction (The Davinci Code) based on what I would assert is another work of fiction (The Bible) and we should judge him why?

The quality of the writing in either is open to debate also.

Holden

holden, holden, my future ex-husband...many, many people are condemned by sylviac. i'd be concerned for anyone who isnt.

It's a one trick pony....I read Angels and Demons...basically the same premise reworked. It was an amusing story.

HC: An author is condemned by Sylviac for writing a work of fiction (The Davinci Code) based on what I would assert is another work of fiction (The Bible)

UC: The DVC was (loosely) based (but worthy of a lawsuit) on the Holy Blood and the Holy Grail. An entertaining piece of speculation.

I am positive that the second coming of Christ will not be for the purpose of hiring a lawyer to accuse the nefarious Mr. Brown of copywrite infringement on the Good Book.

Please my good man. Some decency!

And for "Heaven's Sake" do your homework!

UC
;-)