Read this:
Now I'm sure you all know the reactions to the movie in the US and the Western world, but what do you think about the actions against it in Thailand? First of all, basic fact: Thailand is pretty much 98% Buddhist. It's probably around 95% but the people who have access to watching the Da Vinci code are 98% Buddhist. There are Muslims and Islamist Radicals down in the south, but that's a whole new discussion about the war there.
Read this if you don't know what's happening in Thailand:
Anyway, for those unaware of the The Da Vinci Code issue here, there were talks of banning the movie before it came out. There are several movies banned here already (famous example, the King and I as it wrongly depicts Thai royalty and other things), freedom of expression is not so powerful here. Talks of banning the movie for the obvious reasons, the reasons apparent in every country, the reasons for the protests and petitions, etc, in the United States. Matters changed, and for a while they said the last 10 minutes were to be cut out of the movie. The last 10 minutes, for those unknowing, contianing the major 'questioning of truth' part, the part that caused so much unrest about the movie's authenticity and effect on people. In the end however, just before it was released, the government decided to let the whole movie be shown, with a small preface about the fictitiousness of the movie. Reasonable, but unnecessary. For those who have viewed the movie, a large portion is in French and there are English subtitles. However, here, even after the movie has been released, there are no English subtitles, just Thai ones. Normally in English theaters they will put Thai subtitles, no big deal, but by blocking out the English ones with Thai for the French dialogue is ridiculous. There are rumors now that the Thai subtitles had been altered from what really was being said (me and my friends however could understand enough of the French to get the gist but none of us read thai). Not sure where this is going.
Read this:
First off, people should be able to diferentiate between fact and fiction. Okay, Dan Brown did say the entire story was truth and everything was fact in his book, that the Priory of Sion is a true organization, and that his book is not, for lack of a better word, fiction. But who was Dan Brown to say anything? Was he a historian? Was he a theologist? Did he have any credibility in his story? The answer is no, he didn't. Why else would he pretty much go into hiding after people started to question his work? Notable people, scholars and professors, real historians and real theologists.
Read this if you don't know about the credibility of the book:
Little lesson to those unaware of the fictitious state of The Da Vinci Code. Dan Brown's book is based on assumption upon assumption. The three major sources that he claims he got his evidence are the Gospel of Philip, the Council of Nicea and the Priory of Sion. First of all, the Gospel of Philip. This is a Gnostic book, written more than 200 years after Jesus Christ died, as opposed as to the more accurate New Testament, written less than a generation after the death of Jesus. Credibility is an issue here already. Assumption number one; the Gospel of Philip is entirely true. The main lines lie where Jesus kisses Mary Magdalene. First of all, this is not even credible by itself, as tehre are gaps in between those words. Second assumption right there. Thirdly, Dan Brown was not educated very well on the philosophy of Gnosticism, which revolves around the passing of 'secret' knowledge via oral kissing. Now we don't even know if he kissed her on the lips, but already people assume that Jesus marries and has a baby with mary Magdalene. Assumptions three and four. If Brown had known anything about Gnosticism, he'd have thought that the kiss (if at all) was a sign of knowledge passage, not of marriage and offspring. Second part, the Council of Nicea. The part Dan Brown refers to mainly is the canons, but that's gonna take too much space to explain and in anyway is not an important part. But the third, the Priory of Sion, supposedly a secret cabal organization, dedicated to protecting the descedants of Jesus and Mary Magdalene, among other things, is the easiest to disprove. The Priory of Sion does not exist. It is widely accepted now that a French man named Pierre Plantard made the whole thing up, and confessed to it after numerous studies and books were written. Namely, The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, which contained much of the false conspiracy theories and lengthy elaborate texts on the Priory of Soin, and which Dan Brown read and took as fact. Soon after, Pierre Plantard came forward, dismissed the whole thing as a hoax and since the Priory of Sions was declared all bullshit. Case closed. Dan Brown had no credibility in his fiction and so the Da Vinci Code, is a work of fiction.
Read this:
That aside, the Da Vinci Code is fiction. People, especially Christians with good faith, should simple wave this on as another movie. They should, because if they truly believe in what they believe in, this is just a stupid little piece of fiction. It's not going to disrupt anyone's beliefs or faiths. Faithfulness does not leave behind insecurity. Everyone should learn to accept that it isn't true. Those who believe the evidence of the Da Vinci Code are blind. I understand that some people swaying on the brink of Faith may have this as a last straw and turn them away from Christianity, but that's a very small minority, especially in Thailand, and it's not like they cared that much for Christianity if they were in such a position anyhow. Hey, why don't we try and bend spoons with our mind? After all, this is all just the Matrix and not the real world. That's what the movie tells us, anyway. And while we're at it, why don't we kill all the apes on the world so we make sure the Planet of the Apes never happens? Point across. People should get around to the fact that some things are just made up and are for the entertainment of others. What is equally stupid is how the Thai government would even consider doing anything to a movie that shakes the foundations of a religion that only holds 1% of it's population. And now the whole theory of the misleading subtitles, why bother? Isn't this load of crap just ridiculous?
Okay rant and rave whatever. Bleh.
edit; added little tags
Now I'm sure you all know the reactions to the movie in the US and the Western world, but what do you think about the actions against it in Thailand? First of all, basic fact: Thailand is pretty much 98% Buddhist. It's probably around 95% but the people who have access to watching the Da Vinci code are 98% Buddhist. There are Muslims and Islamist Radicals down in the south, but that's a whole new discussion about the war there.
Read this if you don't know what's happening in Thailand:
Anyway, for those unaware of the The Da Vinci Code issue here, there were talks of banning the movie before it came out. There are several movies banned here already (famous example, the King and I as it wrongly depicts Thai royalty and other things), freedom of expression is not so powerful here. Talks of banning the movie for the obvious reasons, the reasons apparent in every country, the reasons for the protests and petitions, etc, in the United States. Matters changed, and for a while they said the last 10 minutes were to be cut out of the movie. The last 10 minutes, for those unknowing, contianing the major 'questioning of truth' part, the part that caused so much unrest about the movie's authenticity and effect on people. In the end however, just before it was released, the government decided to let the whole movie be shown, with a small preface about the fictitiousness of the movie. Reasonable, but unnecessary. For those who have viewed the movie, a large portion is in French and there are English subtitles. However, here, even after the movie has been released, there are no English subtitles, just Thai ones. Normally in English theaters they will put Thai subtitles, no big deal, but by blocking out the English ones with Thai for the French dialogue is ridiculous. There are rumors now that the Thai subtitles had been altered from what really was being said (me and my friends however could understand enough of the French to get the gist but none of us read thai). Not sure where this is going.
Read this:
First off, people should be able to diferentiate between fact and fiction. Okay, Dan Brown did say the entire story was truth and everything was fact in his book, that the Priory of Sion is a true organization, and that his book is not, for lack of a better word, fiction. But who was Dan Brown to say anything? Was he a historian? Was he a theologist? Did he have any credibility in his story? The answer is no, he didn't. Why else would he pretty much go into hiding after people started to question his work? Notable people, scholars and professors, real historians and real theologists.
Read this if you don't know about the credibility of the book:
Little lesson to those unaware of the fictitious state of The Da Vinci Code. Dan Brown's book is based on assumption upon assumption. The three major sources that he claims he got his evidence are the Gospel of Philip, the Council of Nicea and the Priory of Sion. First of all, the Gospel of Philip. This is a Gnostic book, written more than 200 years after Jesus Christ died, as opposed as to the more accurate New Testament, written less than a generation after the death of Jesus. Credibility is an issue here already. Assumption number one; the Gospel of Philip is entirely true. The main lines lie where Jesus kisses Mary Magdalene. First of all, this is not even credible by itself, as tehre are gaps in between those words. Second assumption right there. Thirdly, Dan Brown was not educated very well on the philosophy of Gnosticism, which revolves around the passing of 'secret' knowledge via oral kissing. Now we don't even know if he kissed her on the lips, but already people assume that Jesus marries and has a baby with mary Magdalene. Assumptions three and four. If Brown had known anything about Gnosticism, he'd have thought that the kiss (if at all) was a sign of knowledge passage, not of marriage and offspring. Second part, the Council of Nicea. The part Dan Brown refers to mainly is the canons, but that's gonna take too much space to explain and in anyway is not an important part. But the third, the Priory of Sion, supposedly a secret cabal organization, dedicated to protecting the descedants of Jesus and Mary Magdalene, among other things, is the easiest to disprove. The Priory of Sion does not exist. It is widely accepted now that a French man named Pierre Plantard made the whole thing up, and confessed to it after numerous studies and books were written. Namely, The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, which contained much of the false conspiracy theories and lengthy elaborate texts on the Priory of Soin, and which Dan Brown read and took as fact. Soon after, Pierre Plantard came forward, dismissed the whole thing as a hoax and since the Priory of Sions was declared all bullshit. Case closed. Dan Brown had no credibility in his fiction and so the Da Vinci Code, is a work of fiction.
Read this:
That aside, the Da Vinci Code is fiction. People, especially Christians with good faith, should simple wave this on as another movie. They should, because if they truly believe in what they believe in, this is just a stupid little piece of fiction. It's not going to disrupt anyone's beliefs or faiths. Faithfulness does not leave behind insecurity. Everyone should learn to accept that it isn't true. Those who believe the evidence of the Da Vinci Code are blind. I understand that some people swaying on the brink of Faith may have this as a last straw and turn them away from Christianity, but that's a very small minority, especially in Thailand, and it's not like they cared that much for Christianity if they were in such a position anyhow. Hey, why don't we try and bend spoons with our mind? After all, this is all just the Matrix and not the real world. That's what the movie tells us, anyway. And while we're at it, why don't we kill all the apes on the world so we make sure the Planet of the Apes never happens? Point across. People should get around to the fact that some things are just made up and are for the entertainment of others. What is equally stupid is how the Thai government would even consider doing anything to a movie that shakes the foundations of a religion that only holds 1% of it's population. And now the whole theory of the misleading subtitles, why bother? Isn't this load of crap just ridiculous?
Okay rant and rave whatever. Bleh.
edit; added little tags
Last edited by Coolbeano (2006-05-28 01:27:17)
