<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Review of Breaking the Da Vinci Code</title>
	<atom:link href="http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2009 18:49:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/comment-page-1/#comment-8499</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Oct 2004 09:34:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/#comment-8499</guid>
		<description>I personally don&#039;t get what all the fuss is about. It&#039;s just some people believing one fictional book over another.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I personally don&#8217;t get what all the fuss is about. It&#8217;s just some people believing one fictional book over another.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carin</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/comment-page-1/#comment-2750</link>
		<dc:creator>Carin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2004 15:49:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/#comment-2750</guid>
		<description>I read the book, only because so many had read it (and I had previously read many critiques of the book.)   Many of my friends had enjoyed it, and didn&#039;t &quot;get&quot; what had people upset; that there was nothing wrong with it being a bestseller, all the while slamming Christians.  My friends told me, basically ... to take a chill pill. One actually asked me why I &quot;read&quot; so much into things ... why couldn&#039;t I just ENJOY books, movies, etc ... w/o examining them? Sigh. Doesn&#039;t say much for my friends ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I read the book, only because so many had read it (and I had previously read many critiques of the book.)   Many of my friends had enjoyed it, and didn&#8217;t &#8220;get&#8221; what had people upset; that there was nothing wrong with it being a bestseller, all the while slamming Christians.  My friends told me, basically &#8230; to take a chill pill. One actually asked me why I &#8220;read&#8221; so much into things &#8230; why couldn&#8217;t I just ENJOY books, movies, etc &#8230; w/o examining them? Sigh. Doesn&#8217;t say much for my friends &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: roger</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/comment-page-1/#comment-2653</link>
		<dc:creator>roger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2004 16:00:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/#comment-2653</guid>
		<description>La Shawn -

Great site, by the way.

As a Catholic, I get the feeling that I was supposed to feel offended or challenged, but frankly, I never did.  I just found the story to be a pretty good read.  Not great, but pretty good.

I think I was able to avoid the hysteria largely because I read Dan Brown&#039;s, &quot;Angels and Demons&quot; first, and was aware of the direction he was heading.

I read fiction to be entertained, not informed, and I distance myself from the &quot;facts&quot; accordingly.  Take the movie, The Patriot (Mel Gibson), for instance.  I loved the movie precisely because it entertained me the entire way.  My younger brother, as a student of that era&#039;s history, didn&#039;t care for it because of many historical inaccuracies and liberties taken.  Much like The Patriot, though, the DaVinci Code was created to entertain, and consequently make a lot of money.  To look at either as a documentary is foolish as accepting any Michael Moore movie as uncontested fact.

Of course, I also fully support the work of those &quot;debunking&quot; the Code, since many were apparently taken in by the fiction.  That such an effort is necessary, however, may be the finest endorsement of Dan Brown&#039;s work yet.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>La Shawn -</p>
<p>Great site, by the way.</p>
<p>As a Catholic, I get the feeling that I was supposed to feel offended or challenged, but frankly, I never did.  I just found the story to be a pretty good read.  Not great, but pretty good.</p>
<p>I think I was able to avoid the hysteria largely because I read Dan Brown&#8217;s, &#8220;Angels and Demons&#8221; first, and was aware of the direction he was heading.</p>
<p>I read fiction to be entertained, not informed, and I distance myself from the &#8220;facts&#8221; accordingly.  Take the movie, The Patriot (Mel Gibson), for instance.  I loved the movie precisely because it entertained me the entire way.  My younger brother, as a student of that era&#8217;s history, didn&#8217;t care for it because of many historical inaccuracies and liberties taken.  Much like The Patriot, though, the DaVinci Code was created to entertain, and consequently make a lot of money.  To look at either as a documentary is foolish as accepting any Michael Moore movie as uncontested fact.</p>
<p>Of course, I also fully support the work of those &#8220;debunking&#8221; the Code, since many were apparently taken in by the fiction.  That such an effort is necessary, however, may be the finest endorsement of Dan Brown&#8217;s work yet.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Francis</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/comment-page-1/#comment-2642</link>
		<dc:creator>Francis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2004 11:42:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/#comment-2642</guid>
		<description>WRT your comment on my blog. I think we are mostly in violent agreement. I was attempting to compare and contrast the &quot;Religion of Peace&quot; with Christianity.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WRT your comment on my blog. I think we are mostly in violent agreement. I was attempting to compare and contrast the &#8220;Religion of Peace&#8221; with Christianity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lyana</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/comment-page-1/#comment-2594</link>
		<dc:creator>Lyana</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Sep 2004 15:15:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/#comment-2594</guid>
		<description>Hadn&#039;t heard much about it when it was our book of the month for a book club I&#039;m in.  It just basically sounded like a conspiracy/thriller novel, something I enjoy, but wouldn&#039;t consider taking seriously.

Can&#039;t say I really enjoyed it - I thought the plot had some interesting twists and turns, but once I figured out where it was going, the whole &quot;sexual experience (or depravation thereof)as the highest enlightenment&quot; was a big turn-off.  

But what really floors me is now many people are reading it as though it&#039;s gospel truth!  Just goes to show that many people tend to believe what they want to believe - and don&#039;t so much worry about whether it&#039;s actually true or not (which would, I guess, explain why so many people believe in conspiracy theories).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hadn&#8217;t heard much about it when it was our book of the month for a book club I&#8217;m in.  It just basically sounded like a conspiracy/thriller novel, something I enjoy, but wouldn&#8217;t consider taking seriously.</p>
<p>Can&#8217;t say I really enjoyed it &#8211; I thought the plot had some interesting twists and turns, but once I figured out where it was going, the whole &#8220;sexual experience (or depravation thereof)as the highest enlightenment&#8221; was a big turn-off.  </p>
<p>But what really floors me is now many people are reading it as though it&#8217;s gospel truth!  Just goes to show that many people tend to believe what they want to believe &#8211; and don&#8217;t so much worry about whether it&#8217;s actually true or not (which would, I guess, explain why so many people believe in conspiracy theories).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pat in NC</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/comment-page-1/#comment-2563</link>
		<dc:creator>Pat in NC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Sep 2004 00:43:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/#comment-2563</guid>
		<description>I will read the original story in my Bible. I do not need the entertainment of a novel which mocks my beliefs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I will read the original story in my Bible. I do not need the entertainment of a novel which mocks my beliefs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: abraxas</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/comment-page-1/#comment-2530</link>
		<dc:creator>abraxas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Sep 2004 12:22:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/#comment-2530</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m curious to know why one of the links(http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/trinity.html) was provided. The link&#039;s page entitled, &quot;Jesus Christ as God and the Trinity Was Not Invented Until the Fourth Century?&quot;, uses as it&#039;s primary Early Christian source, the Didache, to imply that perhaps the divinity of Jesus was acknowledged as early as 100 A.D. in written form.  I may be mistaken, but isn&#039;t the Didache an extra-canonical piece of writing, whose legitimacy is under dispute? My understanding was that the exact nature of the Trinity was evolved over time, and only much later solidified as various factions came to power and the splinter groups sufficiently persecuted into ignominy.

I have not read either of the two books mentioned, so I can only assume that the link was provided to dispute something specific in the DaVinci book. Most of the history development of the early Christian canon is fairly well documented online. Along with this, one can find a somewhat less well documented history of groups that have been labelled as heretical (there are many). And of course there are the extra-canonical writings and the relatively recent written discoveries as well. I should stop rambling now.
[/ramble}</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m curious to know why one of the links(http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/trinity.html) was provided. The link&#8217;s page entitled, &#8220;Jesus Christ as God and the Trinity Was Not Invented Until the Fourth Century?&#8221;, uses as it&#8217;s primary Early Christian source, the Didache, to imply that perhaps the divinity of Jesus was acknowledged as early as 100 A.D. in written form.  I may be mistaken, but isn&#8217;t the Didache an extra-canonical piece of writing, whose legitimacy is under dispute? My understanding was that the exact nature of the Trinity was evolved over time, and only much later solidified as various factions came to power and the splinter groups sufficiently persecuted into ignominy.</p>
<p>I have not read either of the two books mentioned, so I can only assume that the link was provided to dispute something specific in the DaVinci book. Most of the history development of the early Christian canon is fairly well documented online. Along with this, one can find a somewhat less well documented history of groups that have been labelled as heretical (there are many). And of course there are the extra-canonical writings and the relatively recent written discoveries as well. I should stop rambling now.<br />
[/ramble}</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kiki B.</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/comment-page-1/#comment-2526</link>
		<dc:creator>Kiki B.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Sep 2004 07:08:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/#comment-2526</guid>
		<description>First off, Beau, please let us know as soon as you can if you&#039;re okay.  We are praying that you don&#039;t get blown to Oz by Frances.

Now something way off topic.  I think we need to keep those people in Russia in our prayers.  It sickens me to think of what those Muslims did to those poor children and their families.  I pray that God will comfort the grieving, and that Russia will go full-force after the evil people who did this, and punish them greatly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First off, Beau, please let us know as soon as you can if you&#8217;re okay.  We are praying that you don&#8217;t get blown to Oz by Frances.</p>
<p>Now something way off topic.  I think we need to keep those people in Russia in our prayers.  It sickens me to think of what those Muslims did to those poor children and their families.  I pray that God will comfort the grieving, and that Russia will go full-force after the evil people who did this, and punish them greatly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RepJ</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/comment-page-1/#comment-2524</link>
		<dc:creator>RepJ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Sep 2004 04:15:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/#comment-2524</guid>
		<description>La Shawn,

Just for reference, I was dragged kicking and screaming to see a movie called &quot;Eyes Wide Shut&quot;.  You might remember that movie being mentioned in Brown&#039;s book.  The same pagan rituals are observed in that movie that Brown talks about in the book.  I think it&#039;s wrapped up in the same storyline, too.  Secret society, rituals, mystery, blah blah blah.  There is nothing Christian about that movie or Brown&#039;s book, IMO.  I DO NOT RECOMMEND seeing that movie.  It&#039;s porn with an R rating.

Regarding BK&#039;s comment, Very good.  They say the &quot;Mona Lisa&quot; is a self portrait of Da Vinci in drag.  Sounds about right.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>La Shawn,</p>
<p>Just for reference, I was dragged kicking and screaming to see a movie called &#8220;Eyes Wide Shut&#8221;.  You might remember that movie being mentioned in Brown&#8217;s book.  The same pagan rituals are observed in that movie that Brown talks about in the book.  I think it&#8217;s wrapped up in the same storyline, too.  Secret society, rituals, mystery, blah blah blah.  There is nothing Christian about that movie or Brown&#8217;s book, IMO.  I DO NOT RECOMMEND seeing that movie.  It&#8217;s porn with an R rating.</p>
<p>Regarding BK&#8217;s comment, Very good.  They say the &#8220;Mona Lisa&#8221; is a self portrait of Da Vinci in drag.  Sounds about right.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BK</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/comment-page-1/#comment-2523</link>
		<dc:creator>BK</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Sep 2004 03:53:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/#comment-2523</guid>
		<description>I have read The Da Vinci Code at the behest of my older brother who was completly taken in by it.  I have a BA in Art and an interest in religion and history.  I was curious.
My first clue the story was false is right ther on the dust jacket just above Mona&#039;s eye--A NOVEL. Leo never called the painting Mona Lisa, but rather, La Gioconda: The Smile or because it&#039;s a portrait of a woman, Girl with a Smile, The Smiling Girl, or Woman Smiling, etc.
As a known homosexual with a fondness for twelve year old boys, it&#039;s very doubtful that Leo would have been the head of any holy order with any connection to Christ.
Brown says that one of the symbols of the secretive Freemasonry is a dolphin wrapped around an anchor. It&#039;s also the logo of Doubleday Books--his publisher.
And lastly, the novel is just very poorly written. If one must read the novel, borrow it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have read The Da Vinci Code at the behest of my older brother who was completly taken in by it.  I have a BA in Art and an interest in religion and history.  I was curious.<br />
My first clue the story was false is right ther on the dust jacket just above Mona&#8217;s eye&#8211;A NOVEL. Leo never called the painting Mona Lisa, but rather, La Gioconda: The Smile or because it&#8217;s a portrait of a woman, Girl with a Smile, The Smiling Girl, or Woman Smiling, etc.<br />
As a known homosexual with a fondness for twelve year old boys, it&#8217;s very doubtful that Leo would have been the head of any holy order with any connection to Christ.<br />
Brown says that one of the symbols of the secretive Freemasonry is a dolphin wrapped around an anchor. It&#8217;s also the logo of Doubleday Books&#8211;his publisher.<br />
And lastly, the novel is just very poorly written. If one must read the novel, borrow it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Trubador</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/comment-page-1/#comment-2510</link>
		<dc:creator>Trubador</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Sep 2004 00:56:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/#comment-2510</guid>
		<description>One of the best of the debunking books is &quot;The Da Vinci Hoax&quot; by Carl Olson.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One of the best of the debunking books is &#8220;The Da Vinci Hoax&#8221; by Carl Olson.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: La Shawn</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/comment-page-1/#comment-2509</link>
		<dc:creator>La Shawn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Sep 2004 00:27:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/#comment-2509</guid>
		<description>Thanks for commenting, Pamela. Living this Christian life is not easy, and refuting false claims about our faith is part of the deal, so to speak. I accept the task with gratitude.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for commenting, Pamela. Living this Christian life is not easy, and refuting false claims about our faith is part of the deal, so to speak. I accept the task with gratitude.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pamela</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/comment-page-1/#comment-2505</link>
		<dc:creator>Pamela</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Sep 2004 00:10:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/#comment-2505</guid>
		<description>I am just now reading Brown&#039;s book and will follow it with Mr. Bock&#039;s book.  

The standard characters are all in place. This is not nearly the first book to place the catholic church in the center of evil conspiracy. The story line of Jesus supposed marriage to Mary Magdalene is not new nor is the goddess worship or the whole theory of early Christians taking pagan symbols and remaking them as Christian symbols. What is new is that the novel is so widely read and believed. We may be heading into a new dark age if there are so many people so willing to believe a novel can be used to proclaim the ultimate truth. 

Ah, well, there are none so blind as those who only see what they want. The ones who are so anxious to believe this don&#039;t want to have to deal with the reality of Jesus.

I felt strongly that I needed to pray for discernment when I read this. I almost decided not to read it at all, but I do feel that it is important for Christians to be able to discuss The Da Vinci Code and be able to refute the claims calmly and knowledeably. So, I finally got it from the library. 

Thank you for what you do and God bless.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am just now reading Brown&#8217;s book and will follow it with Mr. Bock&#8217;s book.  </p>
<p>The standard characters are all in place. This is not nearly the first book to place the catholic church in the center of evil conspiracy. The story line of Jesus supposed marriage to Mary Magdalene is not new nor is the goddess worship or the whole theory of early Christians taking pagan symbols and remaking them as Christian symbols. What is new is that the novel is so widely read and believed. We may be heading into a new dark age if there are so many people so willing to believe a novel can be used to proclaim the ultimate truth. </p>
<p>Ah, well, there are none so blind as those who only see what they want. The ones who are so anxious to believe this don&#8217;t want to have to deal with the reality of Jesus.</p>
<p>I felt strongly that I needed to pray for discernment when I read this. I almost decided not to read it at all, but I do feel that it is important for Christians to be able to discuss The Da Vinci Code and be able to refute the claims calmly and knowledeably. So, I finally got it from the library. </p>
<p>Thank you for what you do and God bless.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mike from oregon</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/comment-page-1/#comment-2501</link>
		<dc:creator>mike from oregon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Sep 2004 21:18:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/#comment-2501</guid>
		<description>I would say it&#039;s close to what Moore&#039;s 9/11 film was to the real 9-11.  That is to say that it is fiction, pure and simple, Moore&#039;s film took real events, portrayed them in such a way that it made people think that his spin was real.  In this book, they take a few facts and spin them and embellish them and call it fiction.  People watching the Moore film (many of them) bought it hook line and sinker; ditto this book.  The only REAL difference between the two is that this book does claim to be fiction, Moore claimed to be a mockumentary, er, documentary.  Gave documentaries a bad name in my book.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would say it&#8217;s close to what Moore&#8217;s 9/11 film was to the real 9-11.  That is to say that it is fiction, pure and simple, Moore&#8217;s film took real events, portrayed them in such a way that it made people think that his spin was real.  In this book, they take a few facts and spin them and embellish them and call it fiction.  People watching the Moore film (many of them) bought it hook line and sinker; ditto this book.  The only REAL difference between the two is that this book does claim to be fiction, Moore claimed to be a mockumentary, er, documentary.  Gave documentaries a bad name in my book.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Beth Donovan</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/comment-page-1/#comment-2494</link>
		<dc:creator>Beth Donovan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Sep 2004 18:52:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/09/04/davinci/#comment-2494</guid>
		<description>I didn&#039;t read the book until a couple of my co-workers told me that it &#039;proved&#039; that the Catholic Church was really evil. I&#039;m Catholic. I read it. This book has influenced people to believe that this piece of fiction is non-fiction.  They use the book as proof that Christ is not divine. It gives them a reason to call all Christians and especially Catholics stupid idiots.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I didn&#8217;t read the book until a couple of my co-workers told me that it &#8216;proved&#8217; that the Catholic Church was really evil. I&#8217;m Catholic. I read it. This book has influenced people to believe that this piece of fiction is non-fiction.  They use the book as proof that Christ is not divine. It gives them a reason to call all Christians and especially Catholics stupid idiots.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

