Catholics To Boycott "The Da Vinci Code" movie

[-Painted Fan-]

The Vatican is asking Catholics to boycott the Ron Howard film "The Da Vinci Code", saying it is blasphemous to the Christian faith.  It stars Tom Hanks, and opens in theatres May 19th.  Are other denominations to follow?

Gee, where was the church when these movies came out?
The Exorcist
The Omen
Stigmata
Rosemary's Baby

the list goes on.....

I, for one, plan to see the movie, based on the Dan Brown novel.  This reminds me of when people where in an uproar over the Harry Potter films.  There were a few people at my church that handed out flyers to the kids, asking them to boycott the movies, books, and anything else associated with it (without my knowledge or consent).  It's a movie.  Nothing more.  Nothing less.

[chrismurphy19]

I'll go see it. I can see how the Catholics would be asking for a boycott of the movie. Two of Brown's novels are all about the Catholic church. You're exactly right when you say it's a movie, nothing more, nothing less. You just have to take all of the information in the movie for strict entertainment value. What's funny is, Dan Brown himself is a Christian, and many priests, bishops, and nuns have thanked him for writing The Da Vinci Code, because it has stirred up more interest for Christianity.

[hsu1]

there's also the exorcism of emily rose.  how come in hollywood, the catholic church seems to represent all christians

[chrismurphy19]

I just hope they don't divert the movie too far from the book. That will ruin it.

[Chief_Osceola™]

there's also the exorcism of emily rose. how come in hollywood, the catholic church seems to represent all christians

The same reason Tom Cruise represents all scientology.

[MikeDiesel™]

I just hope they don't divert the movie too far from the book. That will ruin it.

With Ron Howard and Tom Hanks, I can almost guarentee it'll be as close to the book as possible.

[hsu1]

there's also the exorcism of emily rose. how come in hollywood, the catholic church seems to represent all christians

The same reason Tom Cruise represents all scientology.

true true

[c4blueflames]

What is the Da Vinci Code?

[memphisguy]

What is the Da Vinci Code?

It is a book and now a move an author name Dan Brown.The story begins with the murder of the Louvre's curator. But this curator isn't just interested in art; he's also the Grand Master of a secret society called the Priory of Sion. The Priory guards a secret that, if revealed, would discredit biblical Christianity. Before dying, the curator attempts to pass on the secret to his granddaughter Sophie, a cryptographer, and Harvard professor Robert Langdon, by leaving a number of clues that he hopes will guide them to the truth.
So what's the secret? The location and identity of the Holy Grail. But in Brown's novel, the Grail is not the cup allegedly used by Christ at the Last Supper. It's rather Mary Magdalene, the wife of Jesus, who carried on the royal bloodline of Christ by giving birth to His child! The Priory guards the secret location of Mary's tomb and serves to protect the bloodline of Jesus that has continued to this day!
The controversy is Brown's playing fast and loose with church history. He claims while the book is a book of fiction he says, "All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate". The theology he is trying to push as truth is a gnostic feministism. Very hereticial and I did read on his website that he claim to be a Christian but if he is, it is not the orthodox Christianity of today but of heretics of long ago.
While it is quite wordy, the following link is a great read to refute to "truths" of this person and his book:http://www.jesusanddavinci.com/theology/crashdavincicode.html

[mudturtle]

Pulp Fiction wasn't exactly a shining example of Christian values either.

DaVinci Code - It's a movie!!!! not a theology course.  Could they get confused? Yeah like they could with Angels in the Outfield, or Oh, God!, or Bruce Almighty, or any number of movies that draw from our Christian roots.

Go see it, hate it if you like, but at least be informed about it before you attack it.

[memphisguy]

Pulp Fiction wasn't exactly a shining example of Christian values either.

DaVinci Code - It's a movie!!!! not a theology course. Could they get confused? Yeah like they could with Angels in the Outfield, or Oh, God!, or Bruce Almighty, or any number of movies that draw from our Christian roots.

Go see it, hate it if you like, but at least be informed about it before you attack it.

Uh, did it sound like I was uninformed? I don't think so. What does Pulp Fiction have anything to do with it? Honestly the things you come up with.

[amehr36]

Isnt Brokeback mountain is full of queers...

[Boss Man]

there's also the exorcism of emily rose.  how come in hollywood, the catholic church seems to represent all christians

You don't have to listen to the Vatican if you don't want to. If your not a Catholic then don't worry about it. If you are, like I, take what is said to heart. As for Catholic speaking for all christian, no, we speak for ourselves. Remember though that Catholicism makes up 85% of Christianity you may not know that since mostly the whole south is protestant.

[Texarkana_Piggie]

i am not catholic, but i can understand why the catholic church would be upset by the book.  it doesn't paint the church in the most flattering light.  it accuses the catholic church of manipulating history to tell the story of jesus the way they wanted it told.  i can see their gripe.

[Boss Man]

Thank you, you guys don't forget that all christians share the same view point on christ.

[ASU Rugby]

I wish people would quit being so narrowminded. I am a christian and I will try to go see this move and I read the book. I personally though Brown was a little irresponsible writing the book mixing fact with fiction, but the fact is it is fiction, take it as fiction, and let it be. The Catholic Church needs to undestand nobody(unless a very small few) takes this book as nonfiction.

[memphisguy]

I wish people would quit being so narrowminded. I am a christian and I will try to go see this move and I read the book. I personally though Brown was a little irresponsible writing the book mixing fact with fiction, but the fact is it is fiction, take it as fiction, and let it be. The Catholic Church needs to undestand nobody(unless a very small few) takes this book as nonfiction.

I wish that was true but I can't tell you how many people I have talked to asking me about if all the things in the book is true or at least some of it or at least the concepts given in the book. Again, Brown himself has plainly said he feels the things in the book are historically true, even though they clearly aren't.

[chrismurphy19]

Upon venturing to that site posted earlier on this thread, I found a great quote, and felt compelled to share it. Sorry for how cheesy that sounds. It's just amazing how true this is when you think about it, and you think about all the stuff you see every day.

By observing the world of nature around us, we can detect something of God's existence, and discern something of His divine power and glory. We might say that the whole world is God's "kindergarten" to teach us the ABC's of the reality of God. Human beings cannot open their eyes without being compelled to see God. Indeed, God has engraved unmistakable marks of His glory on His creation.

[Texarkana_Piggie]

it was a very good and exciting book to read.  lots of action.  but if someone who was unsure of the bible or of their faith, it could, i think, cause confusion and cause them to question.  i just read another book along the same lines.  i didn't see where the theory in this book was going until i was so far into it that i had to see how it turned out but it was, to me, bordering on heretical and blasphemous.  and it, too, could cause confusion if you weren't sure of your faith and your beliefs.

[mudturtle]

I don't think Dan Brown, Ron Howard, or Tom Hanks are "selling a viewpoint".  I think they are just trying to make a bunch of money.  I suspect they will each go on to other subjects at once.

I agree that mixing fact with fiction can be a little dangerous.  JFK and Flight 93 are just two examples of movies in which the cinema version of the "facts" might becomes "real facts" to some people.  Anyone who saw the film version of Scarlet Letter rather than read the book would have a very distorted perception of what Hawthorne was trying to say.  Good or bad we see this all the time.  Michner's books, Clavell's books such as Shogun, TV movies like Amistead, etc.  Everyone needs to be able to tell a novel from an encylclopedia.

I've heard Holy Blood Holy Ground covers much of the same material and in fact was the source work for DaVinci Code, so much so that the authors unsuccesfully sued Brown.  I don't know how biased that book is, but it is not a novel.

[Boss Man]

You will be amazed at how many people believe that the book has lots of truth to it. It is quite sad and the percentage that believes it is very underrated.

[Flyer 87]

I won't be watching it. Just as I didn't watch Harry Potter or anyone of the movies on the list at the top of this thread.  I don't think it's a good idea to watch things that are evil, my opinion.  I don't watch movies with lots murder, sex, normal or other, cursing, witchcraft, etc... either.  Color me catholic for the day.

[SMC]

Maybe the Catholic Church should boycott raping and sexually abusing young boys before they worry about a movie.

[mudturtle]

Well this is a lot there that IS true, and there is some that experts disagree on.  There is a lot that is made up to make an interesting story.  

You can learn some things about ancient Japan by reading Shogun.  You can learn a lot about whaling from Moby Dick. Just don't use either as a history book ---they are NOVELS - like the TDC

[Boss Man]

Maybe the Catholic Church should boycott raping and sexually abusing young boys before they worry about a movie.

Those were micro cases in proportion to the amount of churches and people in the Catholic faith. There is sexual abuse in Protestant churches to not to mention money laundering (happend in a baptist church in Monticello) and other impurities so don't try to make it look like that Catholics are the only ones just because we are the Vast Majority makes us a big target. When your denomination becomes 85% of Christianity then maybe you'll here some things that paint your denomination in a bad light until then you can sit safely in a corner and not have the target on your chest!

[CatsRule]

Maybe the Catholic Church should boycott raping and sexually abusing young boys before they worry about a movie.

I'm not Catholic, but I think I can speak for them when I say they don't condone "raping and sexually abusing young boys."  The fact that a number of priests have done so and painted a negative picture of the Catholic church, does not mean they condone such actions.  I'm a little confused though.  Was that statement an attack on him/her for trying to do what he/she feels is right?  Sure, he/she may not be perfect, and their may be others that share his/her faith that are sick and twisted, but that doesn't mean he/she can't at least try to live his/her life in a good way to avoid more shortcomings. 

[memphisguy]

Well this is a lot there that IS true, and there is some that experts disagree on.  There is a lot that is made up to make an interesting story. 

You can learn some things about ancient Japan by reading Shogun.  You can learn a lot about whaling from Moby Dick. Just don't use either as a history book ---they are NOVELS - like the TDC

Ok, you says there is a lot that IS true. Give me an example or two or three.
You can't say, well he did mention a guy by the name of Constantine and there was a guy name Constantine. Or you can't say, there was a council of Niecia and that's in the book. He gives very distorted and dishonest points about events and people, what they did or didn't do.

[Uncle Ivan]

When your denomination becomes 85% of Christianity then maybe you'll here some things that paint your denomination in a bad light until then you can sit safely in a corner and not have the target on your chest!

I take greater offense to Catholics practicing idolatry and various other non-Biblical practices before I would of that.

Also, in this country, we Protestants outnumber Catholics, and that gap is only growing wider.

[mudturtle]

Ok, you says there is a lot that IS true. Give me an example or two or three.
You can't say, well he did mention a guy by the name of Constantine and there was a guy name Constantine. Or you can't say, there was a council of Niecia and that's in the book. He gives very distorted and dishonest points about events and people, what they did or didn't do.

The Coucil of Nicea is a great place to start.  It did exist.  It did decide what Books to accept.  It did ignore the majority of texts were available.  (Did it introduce bias?)

There is a character in DaVinci's Last Supper that looks a little like a women.  A lot of people through the ages have wondered about that.  Did DaVinci do that on purpose? (It is a picture, not the actual Last Supper)

The 3 "Marys" did appear to intentionally combined at one point, an issue that was addressed last century by the Vatican.

Gnosticism.

I have run into several men of the cloth who looks athe TDC to offer a fantastic opportunity.  It has brought people to them who vocalize questions that have been raised through their reading of the book.  It has given them opportunities to explore and deepen the level of faith through a loving dialog.

[memphisguy]

Mudturtle you wrote "The Coucil of Nicea is a great place to start.  It did exist.  It did decide what Books to accept.  It did ignore the majority of texts were available.  (Did it introduce bias?)"
Thank you for proving my point. The Council of Nicea didn't decide what books were accepted. In none of the 20 Cannons (Laws) that were passed at this great Christian event did the discussion of which books would be considered scripture and which one didn't. At no point at no time.
The points you made about the painting and the three Marys made no sense and you wrote the word Gnosticism as if that is suppose to mean something. All it means to me and Orthodox Christianity is heresy which Paul clearly points out in his Epistles.

[trackstar07]

I take greater offense to Catholics practicing idolatry and various other non-Biblical practices before I would of that.

Also, in this country, we Protestants outnumber Catholics, and that gap is only growing wider.

excuse me! what idols do catholics worship? and what other "various non-biblical practices" do catholics perform? its people like you who give catholics a bad name because they dont take the time to look things up before they say stuff.

[mudturtle]

.....Memphisguy you are right.  That's what I get for trying to comment on a book I read 2 years ago without rereading it.

  You are absolutely correct.  The Bible has always had exactly 66 books, and anyone who doesn't accept that is going to Hill. 

  You are also correct on the painting.  Dan Brown's book makes absolutely no mention of a feminine figure in DaVinci's last supper.  Anyone who has looked at the picture to see what he wasn't talking about is a idiot.

Gnosticism was spawned by Satan and nothing good every came of it.  Rather than study early schism in the Church it should be ignored.  The fact that a small number of people believed in it is proof that morons exist.  In any event the last Gnostic died in 334 BC so who cares.

Sorry for the confusion about the Mary's. I had assumed I was interacting with someone who had read the book.

Background:
Part 1:
The Greek Fathers, as a whole, distinguish the three persons:

the "sinner" of Luke 7:36-50;
the sister of Martha and Lazarus, Luke 10:38-42 and John 11; and
Mary Magdalen.

On the other hand most of the Latins hold that these three were one and the same. Protestant critics, however, believe there were two, if not three, distinct persons. It is impossible to demonstrate the identity of the three; but those commentators undoubtedly go too far who assert, as does Westcott (on John 11:1), "that the identity of Mary with Mary Magdalene is a mere conjecture supported by no direct evidence, and opposed to the general tenour of the gospels." It is the identification of Mary of Bethany with the "sinner" of Luke 7:37, which is most combatted by Protestants. It almost seems as if this reluctance to identify the "sinner" with the sister of Martha were due to a failure to grasp the full significance of the forgiveness of sin. The harmonizing tendencies of so many modern critics, too, are responsible for much of the existing confusion.

Part 2: Where did the idea of Mary Magdalene's being a prostitute start? This false label stemmed from a homily of Pope Gregory in the year 591 where he declared that she and the unnamed woman in Luke VII were, in fact, one and the same, and the faithful should hold Mary as a penitent idiot.

Here is the pertinent portion of that historic homily with the erroneous notion about Mary Magdalene:

"She whom Luke calls the sinful woman, whom John calls Mary, we believe to be the Mary from whom seven devils were ejected according to Mark. And what did these seven devils signify, if not all the vices? ... It is clear, brothers, that the woman previously used the unguent to perfume her flesh in forbidden acts."

In 1969, the Catholic church officially corrected Pope Gregory's error of labeling Mary Magdalene a penitent idiot. However, almost nobody paid any attention to the correction.

Brown never refers to this events, facts,  controversy, heresy, etc in TDC just as neither of the 2 authors above did.  Anyone who reads either of the three articles is just wasting his time and endangering his chances to go to Memphisguy's heaven.

NTTTAPTS.  IWYTAITP

[trackstar07]

  You are absolutely correct.  The Bible has always had exactly 66 books, and anyone who doesn't accept that is going to Hill. 

 

My bible has always had 73 books. and i believe that 85% of the christian population is not going to heckfire

[memphisguy]

Mud you protest too much. I did notice that you attacked me and not the absolute historical fact that the Council of Nicea didn't decide which books were scripture or not. Which was the point you made and I correct refuted.  A clever ploy when your argument is defeated or weak or you have nothing else to say. Notice I didn't go after you personally so I can't imagine why you went after me by saying things I didn't write or even imply.
I have no ideal what NTTTAPTS.  IWYTAITP means.
At least we agree that according to Orthodox Christianity, that gospel which was given once for all, gnosticism is from Satan. Paul refuted it at every turn in his gospels, especially Galatians and Colossians. So Paul said gnosticism isn't from God, so it must be from Satan. That makes sense. BTW, I have read about the early controversies of the early church so I am quite familiar with most of these. I never said they shouldn't be read, they should, so when those very same heresies come up again, we will be able to refute them. Like I am doing with you.
Just because in the painting a figure might have a feminine look doesn't proof anything so I'm not sure what your problem is there.
I also never wrote, said or implied that reading the book or any articles would endanger your soul.
I will say rejecting Jesus Christ as your Savior, not repenting of your sins, not committing your life to Christ, not confessing with your mouth Jesus as Lord of your life. I will say not doing those things will, after you die, put you in a place you rather not be.
If you are going to quote me, please do it correctly.

[mudturtle]

Memphisguy......When I said that there a lot of true parts in it you asked for an example of something he said in the book that is true.  I  tried to provide a few.  I didn't review the book.

Someone decided which books to include in the Bible (obviously there is still dissention).  Maybe it wasn't the Council of Nicea, but Brown points out that were was a selection and many candidates were excluded.

I could care less about the painting, but there is a long standing question about whether there is a woman in the painting and who it might be.  He weaves this into the novel.

Whether it is still followed are not, there WAS a culture of gnosticism.  They called themselves Christians.  Brown elaborates and exaggerates their role.  He doesn't invent it.

I am almost certain the controversy with the Mary's was in the book.  Again he didn't invent it.  The controversy is a fact. 

Does he turn dull facts into riveting fiction.  He does for many.

[memphisguy]

Right you provided a few and then I turned around and gave you facts to prove that it wasn't true. Which was my point in the first place. Then you proceeded to imply things I never wrote, said or thought and then I simply refuted that.
The guy plays fast and loose with historical fact and tries to imply that it is truth. It is simply not the case.
A great book, I have been told, on  this is Breaking the DiVinci Code by Dr. Darrell L. Bock, PhD.
The people who recommended this book, I trust totally.

[ASU Rugby]

I would definately assume Protestants outnumber Catholics, even though we are in a part of the country without very many Catholics. I myself am a protestant, Lutheren.

[Boss Man]

When your denomination becomes 85% of Christianity then maybe you'll here some things that paint your denomination in a bad light until then you can sit safely in a corner and not have the target on your chest!

I take greater offense to Catholics practicing idolatry and various other non-Biblical practices before I would of that.

Also, in this country, we Protestants outnumber Catholics, and that gap is only growing wider.

You are totally misinformed you have no idea what your talking about. We don't worship idols that is the most consistently ignorant statement we Catholics hear, why do you worship Mary, Saints, ect. Please show me the numbers where Protestant members are increasing. Don't forget that over 90% of Mexicans are Catholic and the number of Mexicans are growing by the second so please check your figures again. Yes Catholics are outnumbered now but at this rate not for long.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1175429/posts

[Uncle Ivan]

I have a Catholic in the family, so I've been to plenty of masses.  I saw a line after the benedictory of everyone kneeling to a statue of Jesus, some kissing the feet of it. 

Saw that with my own two eyes, and if that isn't idolatry, nothing is.

Not to mention the whole purgatory thing, which doesn't even exist.

Not to mention the whole kneeling thing, especially to the Pope.  I'm sorry, but I kneel to no man.

And the whole praying to Mary deal.  Catholics may not worship her, but they sure as heck pray to her.  I'm sorry, but she ain't divine.

I don't dislike Catholics, but there's some things that they do that disturb me.

[Uncle Ivan]

Also, Protestants outnumber Catholics in this country by at least two to one.

Catholics have a looong way to go if they want to catch up.

http://www.adherents.com/rel_USA.html

[COWTOY]

How come they left Baptists off that list at adherents.com?

[Uncle Ivan]

Baptists are mentioned frequently on there.

[johnharrison]

Mud - You totally missed the boat on the Council of Nicea.  I once did a report on that.  There are groups that codified the Bible, but that wasn't one of them.

I LOL'd when you talked about looking at the painting.  When I was reading the Davinci Code I stopped reading and went to the library to find a picture of the woman in the painting. 

I had always heard that Mary Mag. was a idiot (though Yvonne Elliman gave her an angelic voice in Jesus Christ Superstar).  MemphisGuy may have already known it, but I certainly didn't know about Pope Gregory's "error" before I read the Davinci Code.

Whats the difference in Coptics and Gnostics?

[COWTOY]

Baptists are mentioned frequently on there.

The page I looked at had Protestants and Catholics but no Baptists.

I ain't no stinkin' Protestant!

[Boss Man]

I have a Catholic in the family, so I've been to plenty of masses.  I saw a line after the benedictory of everyone kneeling to a statue of Jesus, some kissing the feet of it. 

Saw that with my own two eyes, and if that isn't idolatry, nothing is.

Not to mention the whole purgatory thing, which doesn't even exist.

Not to mention the whole kneeling thing, especially to the Pope.  I'm sorry, but I kneel to no man.

And the whole praying to Mary deal.  Catholics may not worship her, but they sure as heck pray to her.  I'm sorry, but she ain't divine.

I don't dislike Catholics, but there's some things that they do that disturb me.

Mary isn't divine? Mary isn't divine? She was the mother of Christ and she isn't divine. She Ascended to heaven and she isn't divine? You have got to be kidding me, are you just absolutely out of you mind. So suspect you think that God just randomly picked a female to carry his son and save the world.

I think your talking about Good Friday. We kiss a crucifix. We venerate the cross. We kiss the cross because of what it represents, the cross shows that we acknowledge that he suffered for us, that erasing original sin was small task. We don't worship it we are just paying respect. Do you kiss your wife? I hope so. Does that mean you are worshipping an idol or are you showing respect and love for what she had done for you?

[chrismurphy19]

Baptists are mentioned frequently on there.

The page I looked at had Protestants and Catholics but no Baptists.

I ain't no stinkin' Protestant!

Cowtoy--Any part of Christianity that is not Catholic is Protestant. It comes back from the 15-1600s, when in England, the King broke away from the Catholic church to set up the Church of England. That was the first church (first major one, at least) in Christianity that broke away from the Catholics, and it done in protest--the king did to protest the Catholic church's denial of his request for a divorce. Since then, Methodists, Presbyterians, Lutherans, Baptists and any other denomination of Christianity have all been grouped together as Protestant.

If you think about it, some things Catholics do make more sense than what Protestants do. Confession--the Bible calls for us to confess our sins. Yeah, you can do that on your own, but I like the way the Catholics do (although, I would be a little freaked out doing a confession. I have a friend who said they're a little scary). The Catholic baptism is one that I don't agree with. You dunk, not sprinkle. Look no further than Jesus's own baptism by John the Baptist. He was submersed in the river, water wasn't sprinkled onto him. I do think that Mary is devine, but not worthy of my prayers. She was selected to give birth to the Son of God and the Savior of Mankind, and she gave that birth as a virgin. To be selected by God Himself, and to carry out such a miracle...if that's not devine, I don't know what is. However, all my prayers are directed one way...to God Himself. Catholocism at its core, for the most part, is probably one of the most correct denominations or sects of Christianity there is. All of the Protestant denominations were formed because mainly around a person's or a group of peoples' personal beliefs on Christianity, because they disagreed with something in Catholocism or some other denomination.

In case someone in the future of this thread decides to ask me (and even if they don't) I'll go ahead and say it now: I don't associate with any denomination or church in Christianity. I believe in God, and I believe and accept the fact that He sent His Son to die for not only my sins, but the sins of all mankind throughout history. I just personally don't feel that I have to go to Church to be a Christian. I can learn as much, if not more, reading my own Bible as I can in a church. I can worship God through my everyday actions just as much, if not more, than I can in a church.

To everyone who reads it, I apologize if this comes across as a rant. Finals are approaching, beginning this Saturday and ending Tuesday, and I needed to blow off some steam in some way. Prayers would be appreciated.

[CatsRule]

You have my prayers.  Be sure and finish strong.  It'll definately make you feel better going into this summer.   

[chrismurphy19]

You have my prayers. Be sure and finish strong. It'll definately make you feel better going into this summer.

It definitely will, seeing how if I finish strong, I keep my car, and the XBox and the XBox 360 will be introduced to life in Fayetteville next year.

[memphisguy]

Derrick,
Just a couple of things.
Protestian-ism didn't start in England but with Martin Luther and the Reformation in the early 1500s.
King Henry the 8th did start the Angelian church when he was angry that the Pope wouldn't annul one of his marriages.
Glad you are a Christian but I would encourage you, after your finals for which I will be praying for you, to seriously re-consider your views of the local church.
While technically true, you don't have to be a member of a church to be a Christian. Repenting of your sins, asking Jesus to become your Savior and Lord is all that is required.
But part of being a Christian is aliening yourself with a local church for your own spiritual growth and to use the spiritual gifts that God has given you. Hebrews 10:25 says don't forsake the fellowshiping of yourselves together as some have. This letter was written to Christians Jews in a local church. How do I know that, just three chapters later he tells the people to submit themselves to the pastors for they keep watch over their souls.
You can be a Christian and not be a member of a church (I guess) but you can't be an obedient Christians and not be a member of a local church. Food for thought.

[chrismurphy19]

Derrick,
Just a couple of things.
Protestian-ism didn't start in England but with Martin Luther and the Reformation in the early 1500s.
King Henry the 8th did start the Angelian church when he was angry that the Pope wouldn't annul one of his marriages.
Glad you are a Christian but I would encourage you, after your finals for which I will be praying for you, to seriously re-consider your views of the local church.
While technically true, you don't have to be a member of a church to be a Christian. Repenting of your sins, asking Jesus to become your Savior and Lord is all that is required.
But part of being a Christian is aliening yourself with a local church for your own spiritual growth and to use the spiritual gifts that God has given you. Hebrews 10:25 says don't forsake the fellowshiping of yourselves together as some have. This letter was written to Christians Jews in a local church. How do I know that, just three chapters later he tells the people to submit themselves to the pastors for they keep watch over their souls.
You can be a Christian and not be a member of a church (I guess) but you can't be an obedient Christians and not be a member of a local church. Food for thought.

Eh, I knew it was something around Luther or something like that. Right now, my mind is focused on oxidation/reduction reactions, nuclear chemistry, and functional groups. You know, all that stuff I might not ever need again after Saturday. heh heh.

I do have a church up here I attend, but attendance is not regular. There's also a thing called Student Mobilization (StuMo) I go to every Tuesday that's pretty much like church for college students, it just doesn't meet on Sunday. After finals, I'm actually moving to Destin for six weeks, where I'll become part of a local church, spend nights during the week in descipleship training, and weekends spreading God's Word on the beach.I guess most of the views I gave in that last post was from my experience with my old church back home, and from not taking the extra time to think about it. Thanks for pointing that out though, I appreciate it.

Now, back to the exciting world of oxidation/reduction reactions in acidic and basic solutions. Woo Hoo!