Arguements against the Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown

[Archangelus]

I always just said the book was fiction etc... but anyone got any really good knock down arguements against the da vinci code because one of my Athiest friends is reading it and I can see her trying to debate it with me

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

I always just said the book was fiction etc... but anyone got any really good knock down arguements against the da vinci code because one of my Athiest friends is reading it and I can see her trying to debate it with me

Sorry if I'm speaking out of place here, but it is fiction. Tell your friend that for the real story, read the Bible and the Church Fathers. My wife and I will be seeing the movie this weekend.

Respectfully,

Mark

 

[longhair75]

I agree with my friend Mark. It is a work of fiction. In debate with your atheist friend, all you need do is request legitimate primary sources for his assertions. If your atheist friend is already convinced that the theories put forth in Dan Brown's fiction are true. it is likely that you will be unable to change his mind.

Using facts in a debate used to be the standard, but lately opinion seems to trump fact.

 

[JennyKatz]

Why, oh why, do people look to the latest best-seller for their religious knowledge? It amazes me how many people have read Dan Brown and gone, "Oh, look! See, this proves the church is evil! It says it right here!" It's a novel! And it's not even a well-written novel at that.
Demand that your friend provide scholarly sources for her arguments, not a work of fiction.

 

[Winter]

You can suggest to your atheist friend to read the investigative work of Lee Stroebel that disuputes the Da Vinci Code, such as "The Davinci Delusion" or "The DaVinci Deception." Here are his books: http://www.leestrobel.com/store.php

Besides, professional scholarly historians don't support any of it.

 

[BAFRIEND]

I have not seen or read DC and don't plan on seeing it anymore than I plan on seeing Milk, Brokeback Mountain, or the new Demons movie.

Angels and Demons is getting really bad reviews and I hope it destroys Opie Taylors reputation and career.

 

[wiggsfly]

Here we go again with the debates over novels.....

 

[Catherineanne]

I always just said the book was fiction etc... but anyone got any really good knock down arguements against the da vinci code because one of my Athiest friends is reading it and I can see her trying to debate it with me

Your first argument is indeed the best one. It is just a work of fiction, and not a particularly good one.

If she wants to debate it with you, then you debate Lord of the Rings with her. Tolkein's books are far better written, and contain much more truth.

 

[JennyKatz]

Here we go again with the debates over novels.....

Unfortunately, people's (mostly non-believers) tendency to look to these novels as a source of historical fact makes it necessary.

 

[InTheCloud]

I think that debunking the Da Vinci code is a good way to study what the Early Church believed and practiced and how the Bible was codified.

 

[CrusaderKing]

Unfortunately, people's (mostly non-believers) tendency to look to these novels as a source of historical fact makes it necessary.

I've known believers to ask questions over these things. It's good to get the conversation going sometimes even if it is because of a work of fiction. I'm not a huge fan of Dan Brown's work because he doesn't strike me as a good writer, but he is successful because he panders towards the conspiracy fiction crowd. He found a niche.

 

[AMDG]

You might want to get Amy Welborn's book de-coding Da Vinci: The facts behind the fiction of The Da Vinci Code. It's really good. Addresses many issues raised by that best selling novel The Da Vinci Code. Clearly and objectively lays out the facts about the ancient Christian teaching and history, and points out the fiction's errors about religion, history and even art!

I wonder if she is going to have another book out debunking the other work of fiction: Angels and Demons.

 

[Gwendolyn]

Tell her this -

The person who spawned all of the conspiracy theorism that inspired The Da Vinci Code made it up in his basement in the mid-20th century. He wanted to prove that he was descended from the Merovingian line (main nobility who ruled what we now know as France back in the day) so that he could rule France, and in order to make the Merovingians seem extremely important and royal, he made up a bunch of stuff about how the Merovingians are related to Jesus. Then he could say, "I am descended from the man they call the Christ! I deserve to rule France!"

I am not joking. There was a tv show about the guy, and they showed an interview with him. I apologise, but I cannot remember his name.

It was weird and he was really wacko.

But his ideas got the conspiracy theorists going and BAM, now it's "cool" for people to think that this stuff is true because it gives them a reason to feel superior to those dumb Christians.

 

[Gwendolyn]

Clearly and objectively lays out the facts about the ancient Christian teaching and history, and points out the fiction's errors about religion, history and even art!

One of the funniest things in The Da Vinci Code was that nonsense about how St. John was secretly a woman in the painting of the Last Supper. Art historians all over the world must be rolling on the floor laughing. Young men were always depicted as looking virginal and slightly effeminate in Renaissance art. Even grown men were painted with a slightly effeminate look to them. "Oh, look! His cloak is PINK! He MUST be a woman!" It's just so ridiculous and silly.

 

[SpiritualAntiseptic]

It is always amazes me what people will believe in whilst rejecting God.

You have an atheist friend who basically believes stuff in a book that is labelled fiction and even called that by its author - but can't imagine God existings at all.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Well the simplest argument against the Da Vinci Code, is that its based on a hoax, perpetrated by a French Historian, Pierre Plantard, who created false parchment manuscripts, back in 1956. He himself, publicly admitted to the hoax, but people like Dan Brown, knowing that the general public wouldn't have a clue, wrote the book anyway.

Jim

 

[Bombila]

Tell her this -

The person who spawned all of the conspiracy theorism that inspired The Da Vinci Code made it up in his basement in the mid-20th century. He wanted to prove that he was descended from the Merovingian line (main nobility who ruled what we now know as France back in the day) so that he could rule France, and in order to make the Merovingians seem extremely important and royal, he made up a bunch of stuff about how the Merovingians are related to Jesus. Then he could say, "I am descended from the man they call the Christ! I deserve to rule France!"

I am not joking. There was a tv show about the guy, and they showed an interview with him. I apologise, but I cannot remember his name.

It was weird and he was really wacko.

But his ideas got the conspiracy theorists going and BAM, now it's "cool" for people to think that this stuff is true because it gives them a reason to feel superior to those dumb Christians.

Pardon my agnostic intrusion.

Gwendolyn is right, and I watched the same documentary on Canadian television a few months ago.

It is not true, either, that atheists/agnostics are more likely to believe Dan Brown's fictions. We are not one facet skeptics, generally speaking, and anyone who falls for such outright fabrications is probably a very naive person, whatever their god beliefs consist of.

 

[kisstheson]

ask her why would the early Church Father's hide a fact like Jesus being married to magdalene? Jesus would have been a great husband and father and would have been held up as the perfect model for all husbands. many rabbi's WERE married and for this to be the BIG SECRET everyone is trying to hide is ridiculous.

the truth is Jesus is referred to as a Husband many times in the NT. he even calls Himself a Bridgegroom. He is married, to the Church, His Bride.
2 Cor. 11;2

 

[JennyKatz]

I've known believers to ask questions over these things. It's good to get the conversation going sometimes even if it is because of a work of fiction. I'm not a huge fan of Dan Brown's work because he doesn't strike me as a good writer, but he is successful because he panders towards the conspiracy fiction crowd. He found a niche.

I didn't mean to suggest that believers never ask questions about these things. In my personal experience, it's been non-believers who tend to throw out the idea that the existence of this book somehow disproves Christianity. But I can't claim to have discussed the book with an extensive number of people (mostly because I think the whole to-do over it is ridiculous).

 

[Globalnomad]

I would follow AMDG's advice and get that book. It's s bit complex to explain the difference between fact and fiction in the Da Vinci Code.

As a start, the point about the Priory of Sion being a documented nineteenth-century hoax is excellent. Next, I think the easiest point is to point out that Jesus's divinity was fully recognized by the early Church long before Constantine - witness the New Testament from John's Gospel on, and all the Church Fathers.

But these two points are just a quick start.