This is an archive of the old Stones Cry Out site. For the current site, click here.

« Press Bungling of Katrina Coverage | Main | A Polar Cap is Not a Presidential Platform »

May 24, 2006

"The Trashing of the Christ"

How did the media treat an historically accurate portrayal of Christianity vs. a movie that accuses Christianity of being false? The Media Research Center runs the numbers (either in short summary form or the full report with charts and details).

Posted by Doug at May 24, 2006 03:43 PM

Trackback Pings

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference "The Trashing of the Christ":

» An analysis of press coverage: "DaVinci Code" vs. "The Passion of the Christ" from Mike's Noise
Via a link at Stones Cry Out, here is an interesting analysis of the press coverage surrounding The DaVinci Code, as compared to the press coverage of Mel Gibson's The Passion Of The Christ two years ago. While I'm usually [Read More]

Tracked on May 24, 2006 11:30 PM


I'm honestly curious: How did the DaVinci Code accuse Christianity of being false? I've read the book and watched the movie and I reckon I've missed it thus far.

Posted by: Dan Trabue at May 30, 2006 05:33 PM

That was Brown's intent, at least he's been quoted as saying so.

Posted by: Doug Payton at May 30, 2006 11:42 PM

But how did what was written in the DVC accuse Christianity of being false? Have you read it?

Some characters within the fictional story make the case that Jesus-as-divine was a fiction created by the church in the 4th century. Specifically, this is the position taken by the "bad guy."

The hero, on the other hand, makes the case that, Why couldn't Jesus have married and still been divine? And then proceeds to cite the good done by the church and by faith as evidence of the divine nature of Jesus' teachings.

Hardly an assault. If the author wants to do a research piece and make claims that Jesus wasn't divine, then I think some could spend time and effort debunking it if they wish.

But to spend all this time on a piece of fiction seems an odd thing.

After all, the Narnia series makes the case that there's another world ruled by another "god" called Aslan but no one is up in arms about that. Because it's fiction and its theme can be taken as an analogy for christianity.

The DVC is fiction and while the author may or may not be hostile towards the church, the book, for those who've read it, isn't. Or at least I don't see it.

Posted by: Dan Trabue at May 31, 2006 10:34 AM

A narrow view of the issue--that the book is called "fiction"--misses the wider context; how the author intended it to be taken, and indeed how it is being taken. Read my previous post on DVC and you'll see that context. Brown claimed that it's "99% true". You can't ignore that in considering its impact.

C. S. Lewis never claimed that that anything in his book was real. Brown does, and much of what he claims is true is outright false. When you blur those lines, you pave the way for the reader to take as truth much more than really is. "Well if all that about Jesus is wrong, can I really believe all that other stuff?" And down the road go the uninformed.

Are you really willing to condemn them just because they believed the author who claimed his book was 99% true? If not, then understand that neither are those who "spend all this time on a piece of fiction". Except they're doing something about it; trying to shed some light on the subject. Certainly nothing wrong with that, especially when eternity is at stake.

Posted by: Doug Payton at May 31, 2006 10:57 AM

I'm suggesting that there are many many many more turned away from the church because of her rejection of clear teachings of Jesus (Love your enemies) than this little fiction will ever turn away. Shoot, if all it takes to end Christianity is a few books of fiction, then the Teabigs of the world have it made.

SPOILER ALERT: (IF you haven't read the book or seen the movie, quit reading!)

[and for those of you who haven't read the book, Teabig is the murdering antagonist who believes the church is doing much more harm than good and who sets out to destroy the church...he could have just written a novel and accomplished the same thing, apparently.]

[Also, it is interesting to note that the BAD guy is the one who is convinced that Jesus wasn't divine. The hero is somewhere between uncertain and a believer, being more of a believer towards the end of the book.]

Posted by: Dan Trabue at May 31, 2006 04:28 PM