Replies

"The meek shall inherit the earth." Not that complicated. Need some vocabulary help or something?

Ok, since you haven't responded to me, allow me. You imply that I just need a dictionary to decipher this sentence. "Meek", according to dictionary.com, means, "Showing patience and humility; gentle. Easily imposed on; submissive."

However, that is not what the original bible (untranslated) meant. The word we translated into 'meek' really was closer to meaning 'learned', which makes more sense. If you have ever taken Latin, Greek, or other ancient language, you will understand that many words are not perfectly translated into English.

Ok, anyone want to guess what "turn the other cheek" means?

I just finished reading Brown's book, "The DaVinci Code."

The theory upon which it operates is this. Jesus was married to Magdaline. The Catholic Church, however, wanted a male dominated church and felt threatened by having Magdaline paired up with Christ. In their attempt to cover any reference to Magdaline, they initiated a conspiracy campaign against everything feminine. Evidence of this campaign is illustrated through great works of art, language, and tarot cards. Only by denigrating the feminine could the church hold power.

Brown aserts that women were essentially equal to men prior to the church's conspiratorial campaign. And that women only slipped behind men in rights and status after the church started slandering them and covering up the truth.

That assertion is simply false. Women have unfortunately been second class citizens from time immemorial, across nearly every culture, and the church had absolutely nothing to do with it. The chuch did not control China, had no influence over Hindus, yet women were porrly treated in those cultures as well. The church was a product of the prejudices which existed at the time of it's creation, and altough it may have been a vehicle to perpetuate those prejudices, it can't be said that it created those prejudices.

Some of the examples of this conspiracy were less than compelling for me. For example, the author claims that women were associtated with the left (sinister) and men were associated with the right (dexterity) because the church wanted women to be percieved negatively. No proof was provided about just how the church orchestrated such a linguistic manipulation, in several languages mind you, to achieve the desired result. Brown just left the reader to assume the chuch did it (because he said so) and then assume that the association helped support his overall theory: Magdaline was married to Christ.

Brown essentially uses the old UFO technique to prove his case. The absence of actual facts serves to prove the cover-up, and the cover-up serves to prove the absent facts.

Nevertheless, Brown does write an exciting murder-mystery, if one can get over the rather silly premise. He weaves in his theory deftly in a page-burning plot which makes it hard for the reader to put the book down. And while the premise is silly, it is also very interesting.

Other than a good read, the book struck me as an awfully elaborate explanation for something which, even given the prejudices of the time, seemed inconsequential in comparison.