The Da Vincci Code

[zoe_uu]

I read it last year. I liked it. It was a very fast-paced thriller.

 

[Cordelia]

I have the book, haven't read it yet. I have to say, I love controversy, so I bought it out of curiosity. A woman in the shop told me about the companion book, Cracking the Da Vinci Code, I think it is. I was spending my last bit of cash on the novel, so I said I'd be back. She said something like, "You'll be gagging for that other book by the time you get to chapter (whatever)!"

So I'm looking into this...

 

[Hikari]

I was looking forward to reading the Da Vinci Code, because i thought it was going to be a good book. After reading it i was really disappointed. The action in the story was great, and i liked the mystery, but there were many things in the book that were totally against my beliefs.

 

[bubblegirl0101]

I just finished reading the Da Vinci Code like a week ago, and I thought it was a fairly good read, but the author didn't do a very good job keeping my disbelief suspended. There are so many glaring errors in the book, that it was distracting. A good example is when he says the Dead Sea Scrolls are among the earliest Christian texts. A couple of times I had to stop reading to laugh for awhile. If you can ignore that kind of thing though, and concentrate on the fast-paced mystery, it's pretty good. He kind of loses that after page 300 or so, where he gets bogged down in historical narrative, still rife with error. It picks up again toward the end, but the ending was so lame I almost threw the book across the room. I think he wants us to buy his sequel, but I won't, because the ending was far too boring for me to care what happens next.
In general I wouldn't recommend this book.
If you're on a quest for the truth, you're not going to find it in this book. In the beginning, there are 3 "facts" listed that the book is based on. Even these are half-truths at best, and it makes it appear as though the rest of the book is grounded in fact. It plays off people's natural desire for novelty and mystery, and turns it against Christianity, the church, its teachings, and individual Christians even, which I find especially grievous. They are made to seem gullible and uneducated, and like fodder for Machiavellian church leaders. It often also plays to peoples' anti-Catholic or feminist sentiment (nothing against feminism just the deceptive use of it by the author), and contains alot of pop-philosophy, which further gives it an air of credibility to some. To me, it really sort of came off like anti-Christian propaganda, using "facts" that weren't even facts in the first place, and twisting them around into an exciting story that would seem to be more interesting than traditional Christian teachings, all the while subtly demeaning Christians as "stupid" while promoting a new knowledge to take Christianity's place, for those who are "smart", and thus better.
If you want truth about Jesus and his life you might want to read the gospels, which were written by people who knew Jesus, not by people living 200 years later like the Nag Hammadi "gospels", or 2000 years later by Dan Brown. Then, if you kept reading you might also learn that your love for others is more important than your knowledge. 1 Cor 13:2 And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.

 

[nekohakase]

I read the book, but I didn't feel as if it was diluting Christianity or twisting its message. (Of course it wasn't exactly Christian.)

Nor did I find it anti-Christian, either.

While I did take the whole book with a spoonful of salt, and there are a lot of things in there that I’m kind of “whatever” about, my impression was simply that if there are things in there that are true, that the Christianity is just DEEPER and has an ever longer and more complex history than the simple stuff I've been taught.

I mean, the ideas about religion being used politically is nothing new, and not all people who helped promote Christianity were as saintly as Christ Himself, though we’re often taught to believe that. (Gosh! Just read anything by St Augustine LOL) While Constantine and those freemasons (or whoever) certainly didn’t create the concept of Christ, nor did they create the concept of Holy Trinity and all that stuff, their naming it, choosing to highlight it and promote the concept of it certainly influenced the way we view Christianity today.

The New Testament had to be complied by someone. It figures that, considering the times in which it was complied, there would be at least some political interference.
But thinking that doesn't challenge my faith in the core concepts that Christ taught.
But since the author DID write fairly convincing arguments, instead of weaken my faith it make me more interested in it. It made me really want to look into the history of Christianity and see how much of what was written in that book was true and how much was bull.

 

[MysteryProf]

I'm amazed that so many people are focused on refuting the book, actually. Once again -- it's fiction. Even though there are factual errors, or parts that may make Christians feel worried, it's important to remember that Dan Brown is twisting facts to create an interesting read, not to convince anyone of anything. Read it because it's entertaining!

Actually, though, there are a lot of books out there that capture some of the same feeling as The Da Vinci Code but are more accurate and better written. Here are a few titles you guys might like:

The Name of the Rose by Umberto Eco. It's a mystery about murders occurring at an abbey, with this huge library at the center of it all. It's great! In fact, it's considered a modern classic. There's a movie of it w/ Sean Connery too.

The Eight by Katherine Neville. It's about this chess set that reveals a secret that people throughout history have been seeking. Pretty fast-paced, interesting characters, very amusing at times. (If you read it, you'll know what I mean when you come across Carioca. Heh.)

The Rule of Four by Ian Caldwell and Dustin Thomason. It's about the secrets of the Hypnerotomachia Poliphili, this really arcane Renaissance document. It beats Da Vinci Code in terms of character development for sure, as it's a combined mystery/coming-of-age story. It's also very well-written.

Anyway, you won't regret reading these if you pick them up!

 

[Filia Mariae]

I'm amazed that so many people are focused on refuting the book, actually. Once again -- it's fiction. Even though there are factual errors, or parts that may make Christians feel worried, it's important to remember that Dan Brown is twisting facts to create an interesting read, not to convince anyone of anything. Read it because it's entertaining!

The fact that it is fiction is obvious to anyone with a basic working knowledge of history. Do you know how many people read it though, and will actually argue with you that it is based on reality?

It also encourages anti-Catholicism.

Plus I don't buy your claim that Brown doesn't want to convince us of anything. Why then, does he claim at the beginning that the book is based on real "rituals" and other nonsense?

 

[MysteryProf]

Plus I don't buy your claim that Brown doesn't want to convince us of anything. Why then, does he claim at the beginning that the book is based on real "rituals" and other nonsense?

I just assumed that if he wanted to convince us of anything (albeit ineffectively), he would have written "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" instead. Although he does seem to actually believe some of his stuff, if you've seen him interviewed. I just don't think Da Vinci Code was written with persuasive aims.

 

[Sinias]

I just got done reading both Angels and Demons and the Da Vincci Code. People these books are fiction with some fact to them. I thought Angels and Demons was actually better then his sequel to it. And if you go to Dan Browns website he says that these theories have been around a lot long then his two books.

There are many groups out there who believe Jesus was married to Mary. Dan Brown didn't come up with this himself. And he is fairly accurate on some of the secret organizations he mentions in the two books. Also some of you really might be mad knowing that Columbia Pictures is making The Da Vincci Code into a movie.

 

[sneakker_pimp]

A friend referred me this book yesterday and I was sold.....i hope i get it soon!!!

 

[Kamtre]

one question, is Dan Brown a christian himself?

 

[dustt10]

Good question, kinda doesn't seem like it though, does it

 

[melvin]

I just finished reading The DaVinci Code and got straight onto the net to do some research into these theories. Theories that have been around for a very long time that I have come across alot in my search for my relegious truth.

Dan Brown does consider himself to be a cristian, as do I who have been looking into most of the theories mentioned in his book for quite some time.

I must say I feel much more comfortable with a balance between the divine masculine and the divine femanine that these theories state.

And I adore all of the symbolism of the pentacle, the blade and chalise, and phi.

 

[cool2bCatholic]

As I posted in the other DaVinci Code thread:

The following articles refute the so-called "facts" in Dan Brown's purely fictional DaVinci Code:
http://envoymagazine.com/planetenvo...Vinci-part1.htm
http://catholic.com/library/cracking_da_vinci_code.asp
God bless you and Pax Christi!
Angela


PS-Yes, it is a fiction book, but many people out of ignorance take the claims in this book to be true. That is why many people have written counter-books and articles, to show that the book is completely false, as well as demeaning to Christianity.

 

[Hero]

Dan Brown is a wonderful storyteller, and many of his so-called findings led me to question Christianity (Be the book fiction or non) and that's all that matters. It matters not if it is labeled 'non-fiction' or 'fiction' but rather, if it makes you think. That is why it is selling millions.

 

[Arkansasguy]

Has anyone read this book? I'm about three quarters through the book and I'm wondering of other's thoughts on this very controversial book. Interesting theory, but incredibly blasphemous. Any takers in here?

I have read it, I won't read any other of Mr. Browns book. I know it is fiction, but he give the historical background stuff as "fact", and he get LOTS of stuff wrong. LOT AND LOTS of stuff about the early Church. It is not the fact that he claims the Christ was married and had children, but he attacks the divinity of Christ. He states in no uncertian terms that the early Church did not considered Christ divine. If Jesus was not the Son of God, then there is nothing to base Christianity on. Therefor he is attacking the whole belief system of Christians.

After reading "Code" I did (stupidly) start A & D, he made me mad so quickly in this one (again, attacking Christianity) that I refused to read any more.

 

[Arkansasguy]

Blessings,

I have read Angels & Demons and the impression I get is that the author does a lot of research into people, places, organizations, and events but his actual novel is fiction. His research makes the novel APPEAR real but that is just good writing.

It does amaze me that people would think his novels were real. That is like thinking The Matrix really exists. In metaphor form the idea works but there really is no machine world having us hooked up in pods and plugged into a virtual reality. In that sense the Matrix is just fiction. I figure same is true for Dan Brown's books.

The people who think the Da Vincci Code is real will just love Angels & Demons. I can see them now trying to track down the .......... can't spoil the book for you .

~ShekinahMoon~

This is my second, and last (unless someone bothers to reply to me, which I doubt) post on this subject. YES, the book is fiction and doesn't pretend to be anything else, but when you read a book that, in part, bases its plot on historical people and events, you assume the "facts" set out in the book are correct. No one would think that the charicters in the book are real, BUT, most people who read it would assume that the "facts" about how the Bible was put together were true (and he puts in just enough REAL facts to snare those who know SOMETHING about the subject, but have not studied it). In fact, he gets the MAJOR facts of the early Church WRONG. It is the "historical background" stuff that angers me.

It would be like me writting a novel about something, and in that novel, saying that Hitler was the leader of England instead of Germany. We all know that isn't true and my book would fail, but since most DON'T know the history of the early Church, they don't recognize the falsehoods.

 

[E-beth]

I just finished reading it because I was interested in seeing what all the hoopla is about.

What I liked about the book is that the author's descriptions and presentation about works of art and architecture made me appreciate them in a whole new way. I had never really glanced twice at the Mona Lisa or The Last Supper, but trying to find these so-caled clues had me studying them in the library. If I lived in France I would have been at the Louvre by now.

As far as the anti-church sentiments, well, all I can say is, Dan Brown knows how to sell a book. What better way to guarantee a best seller than to attack a religious thought or group? He not only guaranteed the naysayers and Church-haters would read it and discuss it, but also that the religious people would read it in order to debunk it. Genius.

 

[choop1212]

I loved the Davincci Code, it was a great work of FICTION

 

[Hero]

You must remember that it was not Jesus that founded Christianity it was Paul, Jesus was but a humble itinerant preacher, claiming not to be the son of God nor the Messiah. You cannot base your knowledge on the Bible. Remember that it was crafted years after Jesus' death by human hands and human hearts; and the versions claiming Jesus to be the Messiah were written some hundred years after his death.