the book is not against the divinity of jesus. in fact, acc to dan brown, jesus was a "great philosopher", when we know that he was less than mediocre. it does, however, highlight mithras, osiris, etc precedents to the crucifixion and resurrection; this may be the only relevant point as far as indians are concerned.
That jesus may have been a charlatan is not brought out in the book. it is ok to be a lecher but not a charlatan, a hoaxter, as far as public opinion goes.... notice that the major muslim complaint against the satanic verses was not that mohammad was portrayed as a womanizer, but against the insinuation that his scribe may have "altered" the koran, or that aishia had said that mohammad's "revelations" came down only at opportune moments.
the suppression of the "divine feminine" by the church aspect is only scandalous to euros and other christians. indians in fact would immediately dissociate the jesus persona from the nasty church affairs. after all "hindus are more christian that the christians".. and, above that, there is mother mary!!!!.. it was the church (not christ) who transformed the holy chalice mary magdalene into a whore....... christ's reputation as blue eyed good guy remains untouched.. never underestimeate hindu capacity for self-delusion
as long as christ is associated with the euro white skin, he is an unassailable model of superiority for the average indian.
we may even now get some histrionic types claiming to be christ's long lost brother or such... as has happened previously in the northeast as well as in china (taiping)...
That jesus may have been a charlatan is not brought out in the book. it is ok to be a lecher but not a charlatan, a hoaxter, as far as public opinion goes.... notice that the major muslim complaint against the satanic verses was not that mohammad was portrayed as a womanizer, but against the insinuation that his scribe may have "altered" the koran, or that aishia had said that mohammad's "revelations" came down only at opportune moments.
the suppression of the "divine feminine" by the church aspect is only scandalous to euros and other christians. indians in fact would immediately dissociate the jesus persona from the nasty church affairs. after all "hindus are more christian that the christians".. and, above that, there is mother mary!!!!.. it was the church (not christ) who transformed the holy chalice mary magdalene into a whore....... christ's reputation as blue eyed good guy remains untouched.. never underestimeate hindu capacity for self-delusion
as long as christ is associated with the euro white skin, he is an unassailable model of superiority for the average indian.
we may even now get some histrionic types claiming to be christ's long lost brother or such... as has happened previously in the northeast as well as in china (taiping)...