"...readers were asked if Opus Dei had ever carried out a murder. Seventeen percent of readers believe it had, compared with just four percent of non-readers."What a disappointing survey...
I don't think it's even necessary to address all the dishonesty surrounding the "Code," but in difference to the standard boycott theme, I personally recommend everyone read the book (Hey, it's a good read!), watch the movie, and take a deep retrospective look at understanding your faith. Learning the real facts of biblical history is just the first step. Bearing faith to the witness of the writers of ancient past in honoring the Christian legacy is much more difficult, else we wouldn't be running into these kinds of issues...
5 comments:
the poll is a crock of sh*t. funded by Opus Dei, so one can imagine how the questions were phrased. the telling point isn't that 60% of the respondents believed Jesus fathered children after reading the book; its that 30% believe that without reading the book.
go back and study early church history. the fact that the 'trinitarians' won does not necessarily mean it was because God was on their side.
oh yeah, and its "in deference to", not "in difference to".
I see your opinion of Opus Dei is not of much esteem. Whatever it is, we "can imagine" many ways the murder question was framed...
For example: "Do you believe Opus Dei has in some form contributed to the killing of another human being during its existence for the purposes of either protecting its beliefs or advancing its agenda?"
Not direct enough? How about this: "Do you believe a member of Opus Dei has committed murder in the name of its beliefs?"
How much spin do you think Opus Dei needs to get their numbers down to say, oh, 2%? Do you think the number should be much higher than was reported in the survey? I don't particularly...
So what does 30% of those surveyed believing Jesus fathered children "without reading the book" really mean (especially if Opus Dei spun the questions)? Are more people studying "early churh history" and discovering the Gnostic gospels are suddenly very believable?
So if "God" was not on the side of the trinitarians, whos (if any) was he on?
Oh yeah, "in deference to" generally means "out of respect for" or "in consideration of." I was making a dividing statement in saying I disagreed with the calls for boycott, so it really was in "difference" to. Perhaps "to" should have been "from."
Oh yeah, the "'trinitarians'" should really be in double qoutes instead of single quotes. Single quotes are for quoting inside quotes, at least in American style English.
Also, when accenting a word or phrase with quotes, any punctuation should be inside the quotes. For example: "in deference to", should read "in deference to," and so forth.
Look out for those grammar cops.
What's more embarrassing is that you were right, and he couldn't figure that out - even from context.
Anyway, we got into a discussion last night about this and I was surprised to find educated people who believe this Da Vinci code tripe. These are fellow grad students, supposedly taught to question! I heard "it's based on historical fact" a lot, and failing to break through the morass of ignorance, diverted my attention to the far more interesting Cavs-Pistons game.
Goes to show you, if someone really wants to believe something (say, ahem, global warming), they'll believe it.
Opus Dei was obviously trying to maximize the number of respondents who believed they were capable of murders, in order to demonstrate the damage the book has done to their organization.
I don't have any opinion one way or another re Opus Dei. From what little I know about them, they are rather zealous with a few wackos in their midst. The same can be said for most religious groups.
The Gnostics were no better and no worse than the trinitarians, both in ethics and in dogma. But the church nowadays wants to imply that the trinitarians "won" because they were right and God was on their side. That's not necessarily so.
Do you really think the poll was intended for that reason? I find it more likely they were hoping like hell the numbers would be low. Maybe I'm ignoring the obvious... Anyway, it appears the poll organization isn't some random group of religous fiends who edited their questions four times over... http://www.opinion.co.uk/who-we-are.aspx
I understand the church is made of human kind, and thus still flawed with an inherently selfish nature. But what is the church supposed to say? "We're not really what God wants, but you're stuck with us anyway. See you on Sunday"....? ;) If there is a God, I don't think he minds the attention.
Post a Comment