The Davinchi code

[mrcrow]

its a good fiction story..i enjoyed it..and the part referring to jesus activities were just as easy to prove as his resurrection

i prefer to have faith in the latter...its seems to make sense and fulfill my life.

i categorise the book as a pseudo religious rendering of raiders of the lost ark.

 

[TheDag]

The book claims to be giving factual history in a fictional setting.

I don't own a copy of the book so perhaps someone who does can check for me but when I looked at it I'm sure it stated that certain parts of it (dates and figures basically) are true. Can someone verify this or tell me I don't know what I'm talking about??

That is the problem.

I personally think the catholic church gave it more publicity and more creedence as something that should be taken seriously when they assigned a group to refute the claims made in the book.

 

[deu58]

Hi Dag

I don't own a copy of the book so perhaps someone who does can check for me but when I looked at it I'm sure it stated that certain parts of it (dates and figures basically) are true. Can someone verify this or tell me I don't know what I'm talking about??

I can not find my copy of the book but yes it did claim to be a work of fiction based on historical documents etc, I remember that to,

yours in Christ
deu 58

 

[Dale]

I don't believe that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene or anyone else. There would certainly be no sin if he had married. I've always been under the impression that Jesus did not marry at least partly because he knew he was going to live a short life ending in martyrdom.

The significance of people believing that Jesus married is that if married, he might have left descendants. Can you imagine the status that would have conferred, in the centuries following the Cruxifixion, if someone could claim to be the direct descendant and heir to Jesus Christ? On the other hand, the fact that no one ever claimed such a thing is pretty good evidence that it did not happen.

It may also be why God did not want Jesus Christ to marry, because He didn't want anyone to claim divinity as a result of being descended from Christ.

 

[Dale]

Critias in post #17:
<< Brown is convinced of what he wrote to be the truth. This is all based on Davinci's painting of the Last Supper. Davinci was not even around to know who sat where for the Supper, let alone that Mary was sitting next to Jesus indicating that they were married.
>>

Italian painters of the Renaissance period followed Catholic tradition but were notoriously uninformed of Jewish customs at the time of Christ. For instance, Catholic tradition always portrays Christ and the Apostles barefoot. It shows poverty and simplicity in Catholic thought. However, under Old Testament law, the Passover was always eaten with sandals on, as though ready to start on a journey to another country at any second.

Likewise, later European painters always show the group seated at a table. In fact, they were almost certainly lounging on the floor, though possibly on rugs, matts, and pillows.

 

[Critias]

Hi Dag



I can not find my copy of the book but yes it did claim to be a work of fiction based on historical documents etc, I remember that to,

yours in Christ
deu 58

I have the book and this is what it says:

"All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate."

 

[Svt4Him]

Actually, Brown's reasoning for Jesus being married was because all Jewish men got married then. I saw the documentry as well. Brown is convinced of what he wrote to be the truth. This is all based on Davinci's painting of the Last Supper. Davinci was not even around to know who sat where for the Supper, let alone that Mary was sitting next to Jesus indicating that they were married.

It is a rather ridiculous argument presented by Brown, but the book is a good read. I do highly suggest that Christians read it, for it does present witnessing opportunities for those who are not Christians and have read it. The movie comes out in 2006, where Tom Hanks will play the lead role.

If Jesus was married - that is a strong if - wouldn't change a thing about what He did. He is God. He did die for our sins and He did raise from the dead. Marriage would not change this.

He even is wrong about Da Vinci's last supper. If he's claiming it's true, then it's a lie.

Dan Brown's error in The Da Vinci Code is that he calls it a FRESCO. It is not, and this is a critical difference because if the painting been a fresco, we would still have a superb image to view and examine. It is *because* it is not a fresco that we have all these questions. Let me explain, this seems to intrigue people.

Normally, the way a painting like this would have been done would be a "fresco". That means that the plaster is made wet, and then the painting is done on the wet plaster. When the plaster dries, the paint is sort of intermingled with the plaster and it's nice and permanent. However, that type of painting is limited in its colors and can't be retouched. When the plaster dries, you're stuck.

Leonardo wanted to experiment with a new style he had invented - tempera (egg yolk and vinegar) plus oil painting ON dry plaster. That way he could use more colors and redo portions if necessary. The painting took him four years to complete - 1495 to 1498. His patrons were furious at the delay but Leonardo refused to go any faster.

Unfortunately, Leonardo's style experiment was a disaster. The paint almost immediately began falling off the plaster - the humidity was causing the paint to separate from the plaster on which it had been painted. Over the years, the piece has been vandalized and nearly fell apart completely.


http://www.lisashea.com/hobbies/art/lastsupper.html

 

[deu58]

Hi All

Actually, Brown's reasoning for Jesus being married was because all Jewish men got married then.

Apparently Mr.Brown forgot to take Paul into consideration,

yours in Christ
deu 58

 

[Critias]

Yeah, apparently Mr Brown did. I was thinking the same thing when I saw the documentry.

It is apparent what his motive is.

 

[greeker57married]

Dear all

I don't believe that Dan brown believed all of what he called fact in the Da Vinci Code. He simply wanted to sell his book. He does seem to have animosity toward the Catholic Church and Christianity in general. I read the book and have a copy of it.

He definitely has been influenced by the Jesus Seminar people. Here is what James L. Garlow and Peter Jones say in their Book Cracking Da Vinci's Code:

A generation of scholars studied the fifty-two coptic scrolls, only five which are called "gospels," (not eighty) and produced an English translation in 1977. Since that time, a handful of radical, some would say extremist--New Testament scholars associated with a group called the Jesus Seminar have sought to pull off a "palace revolution." In one generation, they have used the scrolls to

1. redefine Jesus,
2. rewrite the origins of church history,
3. redefine the contents of the Canon, and
4. completely reinterpret the Christian faith as a
particular version of "Gnostic" spirituality.

This is actually what Dan Brown tries to do in his book the Da Vinci Code.

The founder of the Jesus Seminar has vowed to take the "new scholarship" to the masses. With the publication of the Da Vinci Code, it has happened. (James L. Garlow and Peter Jones: The Da Vinci Code, pp.159-160

The Gnostic writing did not come before the New Testament all of which is dated before 70 A.D. "The earliest likely date for the Nag Hammadi scrolls is around A.D. 150 and later. when Gnosticism as a system began to flourish. This date is accepted for the Gospel of Philip, which has Jesus kissing Mary Magdalene on the lips, and for the Gospel of Mary, which claims a leading role for Mary Magdalene. The Da Vinci Code draws its Holy Grail myth partly from these two gospels, Claiming that they also predated the Gospels that now apper in the New Testament." (James L. Garlow and Peter Jones: Cracking Da Vinci's Code)

So the accertian by Dan Brown in his book, that the mythical 80 Gnostic gospels predate the New Testament and that these gospels were rejected and changed by the church is rubbish as is most of his book.

You can purchase Cracking Da Vinci's Code by James L. Garlow and Peter Jones at Wal-mart.

God Bless
Greeker

 

[88Devin07]

The Da Vinci code is complete heresy and should be treated as such... Jesus was NEVER married and NEVER had children.
Jesus is God, not some messianic human that is just a son of God. He is those things, and God himself!

If you believe in the Da Vinci code, I'm afraid i have to say your are putting your salvation in jeopardy.

The Da Vinci Code is just as false as other modern doctrines that are called "Christian" (although are just heresy and false doctrines in disguise) like Mormonism, and Evolution.

 

[ChristianDude777]

The Da Vinci code is complete heresy and should be treated as such... Jesus was NEVER married and NEVER had children.
Jesus is God, not some messianic human that is just a son of God. He is those things, and God himself!

If you believe in the Da Vinci code, I'm afraid i have to say your are putting your salvation in jeopardy.

The Da Vinci Code is just as false as other modern doctrines that are called "Christian" (although are just heresy and false doctrines in disguise) like Mormonism, and Evolution.

Very well put..

Tim L.

 

[praying]

If you believe in the Da Vinci code, I'm afraid i have to say your are putting your salvation in jeopardy.

.

'What is to believe in? It isn't a religion, or holy book it was a well written mystery novel, a summer beach read. That's it. I throughly enjoyed the book myself.

 

[Critias]

Honestly, the book is full of junk. It is very well written, but what it tries to teach is just junk.

But, as Christians, we ought to be informed on what is being said and what non-Christians are reading about Christianity. Therefore, if perhaps we are somewhere say like a plane where the person sitting next to you is reading the book, we may have a witnessing opportunity. First, we know what the book has to say, second we can counter it with the truth.

Personally, it is valuable to read it, to know how to approach someone who is or has read it.

 

[ToxicReboMan]

I've heard that the book also implies that it was taboo in those days for Jewish men to remain single. Anyone heard this?

 

[Critias]

I cannot remember if that was what is written in his book, but he(Dan Brown himself) did state that in the documentry about the book.

 

[greeker57married]

88Devin07

The Da Vinci code is complete heresy and should be treated as such... Jesus was NEVER married and NEVER had children.
Jesus is God, not some messianic human that is just a son of God. He is those things, and God himself!

If you believe in the Da Vinci code, I'm afraid i have to say your are putting your salvation in jeopardy.

The Da Vinci Code is just as false as other modern doctrines that are called "Christian" (although are just heresy and false doctrines in disguise) like Mormonism, and Evolution.

I agree 100 percent with you. the Gnositc gospels of Philip and Mary are complete rubbish. they are false writtings. No Jesus was never married. He is the sinless Son of God. Who died in our place for our sin and rose again victorious over death, the grave, Satan and sin.

God Bless
Greeker