Works of FICTION vs. works of NON-FICTION

Seeking thin spaces


I recently made a comment on a post by a loveley woman who has a problem with the Da Vinci Code and Dan Brown. Good Gravy people! Let's re-adjust our mirrors and take a look at the Definition of fiction.


Here's the thing Ladies, It's a WORK OF FICTION!!!

If I wrote a book about Satan having a child on earth, or a book about Jesus getting his driver's license, and people took those obvious works of fiction as truth, it's not me to blame, it's them! If the public cannot discern fact from fiction then you have to question their upbringing.

(and I'm sorry, but having a hissy fit over a movie that portrays Christ as a family man is not bad. Perhaps IF Jesus was married and had children, then MORE marriages would survive, because of the example he set. It wouldn't make Christ any less divine, I mean he came in the form of a man because he was to be WHOLLY human... I was asked by a non-catholic "If Jesus was a woman, would she have menstruated? Would that have made her 'less divine'?")

I'm a roman catholic, and I have no problem reading this book, or watching this movie for the simple fact that it is a work of fiction. Nothing more than a couple of hours entertainment. If these were produced under the pretense that they were the truth, then I would feel much differently about the subject. I would believe that Dan Brown was wrong in his statements and then I might boycott the film.

You mentioned going to 'Over the Hedge' this weekend instead. Enjoy it, but be careful. If you don't teach them any differently, your kids might start to believe that animals can talk. And after that, they might believe that Jesus got married!