The Da Vinci code has me wondering........

[fatpimp]

Here is my background.....

Born into a Catholic society and forced to go to Sunday school and stuff. I guess I believed in God and the story of Jesus Christ we were told. Fast forward to me a week ago, still believed in the concept of God, but thought that organized religion in general was a farce and caused more grief, hatred, general stupidity and frustration than anything else.

Anyways, I am in the middle of the Dan Brown book and I didn't know ANYTHING about the controversies/historical facts he talks about. Now, I don't want to be somebody who takes 'facts' from a work of fiction and leave it at that. Are there any books I should read on this subject? A quick Google of the subject just brings up moronic Christian/Catholic "its all crap" sides of the issue. I just want the truth, not somebody's interpretation of it.

Also, anybody's views on the subject are welcome.

Thanks

[surftheiop]

I am a Christian so take this with a grain of salt... but remember its a work of fiction.

[fatpimp]

[ QUOTE ]
I am a Christian so take this with a grain of salt... but remember its a work of fiction.

[/ QUOTE ]


Now, I don't want to be somebody who takes 'facts' from a work of fiction and leave it at that.

I understand the book is fiction, but the historical facts seem to be accurate from the brief research I have done.

[surftheiop]

Like which sort of facts, ive read the book and its been awhile but most of what i remeber was a high paced, entertaining, conspiracy novel. I do have to say i really enjoyed it but i would like to know which facts you are referring to especially some involving this alleged blood line of Jesus.

[chrisnice]

Holy Blood, Holy Grail would be the book to read but your not really going to get many definative answers.

[yukoncpa]

In the history channel show, “Digging for the Truth” Josh Bernstein uncovered the facts versus the fiction of the Davinci Code. The book is a work of fiction who’s “facts” are based on a proven hoax. There was no Priori of Sion in the middle ages for example, (this was all made up). DNA tests show that the Marovingian blood line is all European, no middle eastern. The dead sea scrolls in real life, don’t mention anything about Jesus because they are just old testament documents. And on and on. Almost all of the Davinci Code is a purely made up work of fiction.

[spanshcastlemagc]

ive consulted the history channel a few times on this and the so-called facts of the da vinci are wrong, the priory of scion never existed (it was made up by some guys in the 70s or something who forged les dossiers secrets, they admitted to it) the PS in that church somewhere is someones initials i think, and the majority of respected historians dont buy the knights templar bit, i dont remember all the details but i was thoroughly convinced that dan brown lavishly exagerrated historical evidence and was frankly wrong in his main arguments, basically enjoy the thriller, ignore the "Fact: ..." page, good book though

[ThinkQuick]

There is an academic basis to the story Brown presents, but its been widely disproven and "hoax" is definitely the proper term to use for the priory.

Frankly, I didn't think it was a very good story - the cheesy detective plot is exactly the same as in Angels and Demons and Deception Point, but the interesting part of the book is the crazy theory and interesting facts that disparage the modern church. I guess the book serves a purpose if it's got you wondering about Christianity being a farce. There's lots of different documentation you want to be looking for in that regard though, not this da Vinci code bs.

[ripdog]

I couldn't sleep the other night and was channel surfing when Jerry Falwell's ugly mug hit the screen. He introduced a piece called "The Da Vinci Code Deception". Some "Doctor" of something went on and on about the real purpose of the book, and boy are they pissed off. The book apparently has God being a woman, Jesus being a mere mortal who was married to Mary Magdalene (who was the really the exalted one). It's all a plot for female mastery (anyone thinkning "NO MAAM" here?) of the world and rampant lesbianism. I didn't watch the whole thing because the dude started repeating his "facts" at around the one-minute mark, so I extrapolated the information as if I had watched the entire program and added the rampant lesbianism remark. I also have not read "The Code", nor do I have any desire to. My gut instinct that Robertson and Falwell and anyone who believe's what they say and sends them cash are actually as stupid as they seem on TV sits on some pretty rock hard ground after watching "The Deception".


A note to all of you religious folks out there: Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson are the face of organized religion to a whole lot of people out here. I think that if the majority of you stood up to these charlatans the word religion might not make our non-religious stomachs turn.

[guesswest]

The Da Vinci code is very likely a load of crap in terms of how it refers to reality, but I'm not sure 'hoax' is exactly the word - it's a work of interpretive fiction is all.

Brown more or less paraphrases Baigent and Lee's book 'Holy blood, holy grail'. To the extent that they're somewhat annoyed, (Teabing, Brown's character and expert on the bloodline, is an anagram of Baigent). But even they said it was just interpretive theorizing, there's no evidence for any of it. I'd read it for what it is, a clever idea - but not one with any kind of reliable basis. You could come up with a whole host of whacky ideas that are difficult to immediately disprove if you go back in history sufficiently far that we don't have that many reliable factual landmarks.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
You could come up with a whole host of whacky ideas that are difficult to immediately disprove if you go back in history sufficiently far that we don't have that many reliable factual landmarks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Christianity, for instance.

[guesswest]

/images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[ripdog]

[ QUOTE ]
The Da Vinci code is very likely a load of crap in terms of how it refers to reality, but I'm not sure 'hoax' is exactly the word - it's a work of interpretive fiction is all.

Brown more or less paraphrases Baigent and Lee's book 'Holy blood, holy grail'. To the extent that they're somewhat annoyed, (Teabing, Brown's character and expert on the bloodline, is an anagram of Baigent). But even they said it was just interpretive theorizing, there's no evidence for any of it. I'd read it for what it is, a clever idea - but not one with any kind of reliable basis. You could come up with a whole host of whacky ideas that are difficult to immediately disprove if you go back in history sufficiently far that we don't have that many reliable factual landmarks.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought that the premise of the speech was ridiculous and that the participants came off as complete morons. I sat there and couldn't believe that anyone could take them seriously. But then I remembered a quote I read recently:

Noone ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.

[guesswest]

Don't get me wrong, I wasn't suggesting it's a good book, it's a cheeseball.

By 'clever idea' I was referencing Baigent and Lee.

[CallMeIshmael]

Personally, I'm MUCH more interested in the DaColbert code.

Powerful stuff.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

I'm not a Christian, but The Da Vinci Code is indeed a work of fiction. While I don't consider it out of the question to think that Jesus sired children, I'm pretty sure it'd be hard to prove. In fact, I'd venture to guess that its pretty sketchy to think we know exactly what happened 2000 or so years ago, when we don't even know exactly what happened in Dallas in 1963 and we have film of that.

[purnell]

[ QUOTE ]
Noone ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is still generally valid, but Harry Shearer used the failure of the XFL to refute it a few years ago. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[vhawk01]

I'm not a Christian, and while the book was mildly entertaining, I think it actually does serve some useful purpose. If reading the book causes a large number of 'Christians' in this country and elsewhere to actually take a look at the origins of their faith, that would be great. I got no beef with Christianity, as long as you accept what claiming to be a Christian represents.

[ripdog]

[ QUOTE ]
Don't get me wrong, I wasn't suggesting it's a good book, it's a cheeseball.

By 'clever idea' I was referencing Baigent and Lee.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never read it and probably never will. I assumed that the book is a work of fiction and I don't care how good or bad it is. What I thought was ridiculous was the wacked out right-wing Christian lunatics getting all pissy over a work of fiction. Especially when I consider the Book that they will defend to their grave's to be a work of fiction as well. My beef is with the religious fanatics, not you.

[pstripling]

Check out the Case for Christ written by Lee Strobel. My background is very similar to yours. DaVinci Code is a great book, as are all the Dan Brown books. Not historically accurate though.

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
The Da Vinci code is very likely a load of crap in terms of how it refers to reality, but I'm not sure 'hoax' is exactly the word - it's a work of interpretive fiction is all.

Brown more or less paraphrases Baigent and Lee's book 'Holy blood, holy grail'. To the extent that they're somewhat annoyed, (Teabing, Brown's character and expert on the bloodline, is an anagram of Baigent). But even they said it was just interpretive theorizing, there's no evidence for any of it. I'd read it for what it is, a clever idea - but not one with any kind of reliable basis. You could come up with a whole host of whacky ideas that are difficult to immediately disprove if you go back in history sufficiently far that we don't have that many reliable factual landmarks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah..like the Bible!