Should Dan Brown be put to death?

fair

Originally posted by KAFKOV
theres no validity to something that does not have a reasonable basis
i cant speak to what could have occured in a particular place in the world, by a particular organization, because of a particular reason that you believe would have warranted a death penalty

So you do not believe that were the Da Vinci code released in let's say the 15th Century, that Dan Brown would have been executed for heresay?

you dont see heresy trials and accusations about those issues during the 15th century, with the rise of newer forms of Biblical interpretations during the 18th century you see things similar to what Brown alleges, and there people werent executed...
during the 15th century the issues were different, so i cant really honestly answer that question

Originally posted by KAFKOV
you dont see heresy trials and accusations about those issues during the 15th century, with the rise of newer forms of Biblical interpretations during the 18th century you see things similar to what Brown alleges, and there people werent executed...
during the 15th century the issues were different, so i cant really honestly answer that question

Yes Dan Brown would have been fine a few hundred years before a scientist was put up on heresy charges for advocating that the Earth orbits the Sun not the reverse.

Originally posted by Nemesio
Just the opposite! He should be canonized. He wrote several very authoritative books
documenting facts about art, history and the Church!

Nemesio

Clever little monkey. This isn't about Brown, of course. I agree with that Kiwi chick, he's a horrible author.

Originally posted by KAFKOV
Its no different when you seperate yourself by a few centuries or millenias.

I was merely trying to emphasize your historical shortcomings

You were doing nothing of the sort. You responded in a fit of pious pique, deciding that I somehow "denigrated" an era that produced your "beautiful Saints". That's fine, I don't mind...but let's not lose sight of the topic.

I dont think Brown should be put to death, because I believe that life has a sacredness in it that should not be extinguished.

So, what do you make of the executions of scientists and free thinkers carried out by the medieval Church in the name of the Christian God, then? Do you condemn those acts as immoral?

Originally posted by vistesd
Now, David—I’m sure that if K ever makes a mistake in history or other factual matters, he will delight in being corrected in the same felicitous manner...

Ever the diplomat, vis. I suppose I should learn to choose my verbiage more carefully in order to communicate my idea more clearly.

Originally posted by David C
Clever little monkey. This isn't about Brown, of course. I agree with that Kiwi chick, he's a horrible author.

So what is it about?

Judging history (or the history of Christianity, in this case) with modern day values is not only fruitless, it is intellectually dishonest.

Learning from history doesn't imply assigning good/bad values to the institutions or people that supported it.

Originally posted by Palynka
So what is it about?

Judging history (or the history of Christianity, in this case) with modern day values is not only fruitless, it is intellectually dishonest.

Learning from history doesn't imply assigning good/bad values to the institutions or people that supported it.

Sigh. I guess my delivery could use some work, eh? The idea should have been that morality is not absolute. The example was provided to illustrate that even the most rigorous adherents to the supposed source of "objective morals" are not immune to their changing nature.

Damn your fame, Dan Brown!

Originally posted by David C
Sigh. I guess my delivery could use some work, eh? The idea should have been that morality is not absolute. The example was provided to illustrate that even the most rigorous adherents the supposed source of "objective morals" are not immune to their changing nature.

Damn your fame, Dan Brown!

Sorry, my rant wasn't about your delivery but about some of the witch-hunting atheists of this forum.

There should be the equivalent of Godwin's Law regarding mentions of the Inquisition in theological arguments.

Originally posted by Palynka
Sorry, my rant wasn't about your delivery but about some of the witch-hunting atheists of this forum.

There should be the equivalent of Godwin's Law regarding mentions of the Inquisition in theological arguments.

Perhaps when people stop pretending the Catholic Church has always been a benevolent and science loving organisation with the best interest of humanity at its core it won't be required to bring it up anymore.

Originally posted by XanthosNZ
Perhaps when people stop pretending the Catholic Church has always been a benevolent and science loving organisation with the best interest of humanity at its core it won't be required to bring it up anymore.

The fact that the Inquisition happened has little to do with the modern day Catholic Church. The former Pope has already acknowledged the Crusades and the Inquisition as mistakes, and apologized for them.

Any Christian that doesn't acknowledge them as mistakes is simply contradicting his previous Pope.

Originally posted by Palynka
The fact that the Inquisition happened has little to do with the modern day Catholic Church. The former Pope has already acknowledged the Crusades and the Inquisition as mistakes, and apologized for them.

Any Christian that doesn't acknowledge them as mistakes is simply contradicting his previous Pope.

Is this thread about the Modern Day?

EDIT: Talk to ivanhoe and LucifiersHammer about the last point.

Originally posted by XanthosNZ
Is this thread about the Modern Day?

EDIT: Talk to ivanhoe and LucifiersHammer about the last point.

Not exactly, but my post that you've replied to is.

Originally posted by Palynka
Not exactly, but my post that you've replied to is.

Really? Because there isn't any indication that it is.