Monday, May 22, 2006

"It's just fiction", not!

"It's just fiction", I once said when asked how I felt; referring to Dan Brown’s novel, The Da Vinci Code. I thought it was a wonderfully written piece of fiction that deserved high marks for entertainment. I never considered it to be on an equal footing with scripture, something which would have had an impact on my testimony of the Gospel; after all, “It’s just fiction”.

The news media, to include the Hollywood trash peddlers, have had a field day exploiting the book, fact or fiction, it didn’t matter how it was handled; it was making a bunch of money. I’ve lost track of how many television specials sprang up to cash in on the sudden interest in Gnostic beliefs, phony French ancestral files, Holy Grail myths and the possible connections to Jesus Christ. These investigative reports filled prime time slots, all in the name of “clarifying” myth from truth.

I got the distinct impression that while these shows claimed to be open minded investigations, they were in fact fulfilling an agenda item of the Left; casting doubt on the foundations of Christianity. The manner in which the information was provided, as strictly “facts” was delivered as a skillful and intentional impeachment of Christian beliefs, no different than the way a trial lawyer destroys any testimony given by a witness. If those listening to the “testimony” had to rely strictly on the information obtained from the media sources, they would have no choice but to doubt the Gospel truths because the information has been tainted by the manner in which it was presented.

There are many who claim to be Christians, having been born into a Christian family, attended church services and taken a cursory glance at the scriptures on occasion. Their knowledge of the Gospel is limited as is their testimony of the truths found therein, truths which can only be gained by the witness of the Holy Ghost. These people are most susceptible to attack because their foundation of spiritual strength has never been established. Those workers of spiritual destruction, those who have chosen to follow Satan, are willing accomplices in the destruction of those teetering on the edge of belief.

I have enjoyed the performances of many fine actors and actresses in what used to be called the entertainment industry. I have to wonder if these folks have signed on the dotted line and sold their eternal souls for a handful of silver, no different than Judas who later hanged himself after he realized what he’d done.

I used to think that Tom Hanks was one of the best; maybe he still is, until he signed with the movie, Philadelphia. He lent his name, knowingly or not, in support of the homosexual agenda and the so called fight against the HIV plague. He performed to the top of his ability and there was no doubt that he deserved to win awards for his acting. That movie’s success along with the name Tom Hanks may have been the opening of a door, one that had been closed to other shows and actors because of the “taboo” on the subject of open homosexual activity until that point, when other actors of lesser known status could then portray homosexual tendencies without fear of canceling their careers.

This is not an attack on homosexuals; simply an observation, one that has been brought out by their own admission. I watched a show documenting the public’s acceptance of homosexual activity in the entertainment industry. It was aired on PBS or one of the discovery channels, not so different than the “fact finding” shows relating to the Da Vinci Codes. In that short documentary it became evident that the screen writers of today are intent on undermining Christian core beliefs one at a time and that the movie, Philadelphia had been a key element in providing legitimacy to that cause.

Now we have the movie, The Da Vinci Codes, a blockbuster if ever there was one bringing millions upon millions of dollars to the box office. Guess what, Tom Hanks is out in front, sleuthing the clues that will unravel and finally prove all the darkest of secrets of a false religion, Christianity; built one lie at a time in order to empower the clergy, to make them rich, to enslave the masses. Thank you very much; think I’ll pass on this one; “It’s not just a piece of fiction”.

I would like to thank DL at TMH Bacon Bits for his article (linked via title bar) that reminded me to put my thoughts down on this particular issue. I know that I’ve read several articles and that I could mention and thank many others; all the same, DL got me off my butt.
Posted by Picasa


The probligo said...

TFS, your measured tone got me to sit down and examine (again) my motives for having no part of this book, the movie, the myth and the lies.

I make no secret of the fact that I have no desire to read the book, or to see the movie in exactly the same way as I had no desire to see the Passion according to Mad Max or even Ten Commandments. The Sang Real myth has floated in and out of any number of stories - from TH White's "Once and Future King", to Chaucer (I am sure that Joseph of Arimathea gets at least one mention).

When I get down to it, I think that the rationale comes in two parts.

The first is money. The justification for all of these entertainments is not the "discovery" of the truth, or the portrayal of the truth. The primary motive is money. Who, out of the progenitors of all of the above, has given their entire proceeds to the Church? Not a one to my knowledge.

The second is out of my respect for the story. A story such as that of Christ, or the Greek gods, or Bhudda, or Mohammet does not require the interpretation of others - believers or not - as an attempt at a modern visual Magnificat.

The old Magnificat did not interpret - they were written in the glorification of God as God.

As a more direct comparison, JSB's Passions (both St Matthew and St John) have singers who present the words spoken by Christ; there is musical interpretation of the emotion, action and events but somehow the presentation is more objective and impersonal.

Perhaps there is a big part of my answer - the impersonation. Mel Gibson did his best to "portray" Christ in "Passion". He emerged with a poor impersonation instead.

All of the Sang Real stories are little more than an impersonation of a truth - and as such succeed as well as Mel Gibson, or Erich von Daniken, in their attempts to portray "truth".

T. F. Stern said...


Your thoughts are a welcome change from the knee jerk reactions I've been reading around the blogosphere. Thanks for your input.