Close Topic Options

Da Vinci Code - Page 2

Then provide the scriptures they quote. To simply say someone else says it says so, isn't good enough in my view. You are letting someone else make up your mind for you. How do you know they speak the truth? How can one have a discussion about this topic if it is based purely upon here say of others?

Code Vinci Da

I understand better now.

I went looking for some more information on this subject. I found this site:
https://answers.org/issues/davincicode.html
This appears to be a very deep dive into the scholarship and claims within the book. I say "appears to be" because I haven't been able to read it all yet.

In addition, here is another scholarly approach to the book:
https://www.catholic.com/library/cracking_da_vinci_code.asp

Now, to be fair, there are quite a few videos and books out in support of the book.

The main reason that there even is a controversy about the book is that in the beginning of it, there is a statement that: "All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate." If it was simply presented as a mystery novel, it would not have garnered the attention that it has. But with the claims of veracity, it becomes fair game for verification of the claimed truths, which don't appear to have much truth behind them.

Da Vinci Code Beliefs Religious General

But isn't that what the Bible is? How can one base their entire belief of existence upon the 'here say' of others?

In any case, I feel it is a valid source of information because it isn't allowed to present false information by law, as the book is labled "Non-Fiction". I'm not allowing others to make up my mind for me, I'm simply accepting the research they performed as true. I wouldn't know where to begin to find the scriptures myself. The Bible is HUGE, and I don't feel I'm equipped with the proper knowledge to delve into it efficiently. However, I might look on the internet for some information about it. I would use the book, but it's back with the library. (Though I may get it out again if there is sufficient need).


Anyway, to Nighthawk, thanks for the additional info. It has been most interesting. With concerns to the research paper: My teacher was fond of the Da Vinci Code (I thought he was sortof a jerk actually, but that's beyond the point). I was far better off (grade-wize, sadly enough) presenting it in a positive light. I certainly believe that the grail theory is true, but I was hard-pressed to find a way of making Dan Brown seem credible. I was continually thinking "Okay, if this paper is primarily about the grail theory, WHY AM I DOING IT ON DAN BROWN'S BOOK!? IT WASN'T EVEN HIS IDEA!"
Dan Brown had maybe one or two ideas that I considered insightful, but I personally view him as a fraud overall. Yet, saying this now removes a lot of conviction from some things I said in my research paper. Such as:

"In any case, all evidence considered; the stance presented by Daniel Brown in the DaVinci Code is certainly more believable than the inconsistent and disorganized story of Christ."
I felt a tinge of nausea writting that originally. The "stance" I refer to is the grail theory, though I fear that in that sentence Dan Brown's stance about the sacred feminin is included as well. I didn't want to include THAT stance because I really don't believe it at all, but alas for the need to appease a specific audience. . .

Well, with this brought to light, I fear I haven't been completely honest in my debating so far. I didn't mean to hide this clarification, I truthfully just forgot. So, for that I appologize.

The funny part is, I didn't even finish the Da Vinci Code. I got to about chapter 95 and my interest just died. That certainly tells you something about the quality of the book if the climax is the part that I lost interest.

So anyway, that's about that. I'm pretty much spent on this topic anyway. But thanks for discussing it with me. It was enjoyable. But if there is anything you really have a problem with, please don't hesitate to present it. I'm not THAT spent.

Page 2 Code Vinci Da

At first I was too a little confused, but than I made the distinction between Brown's novel and the Graal theory. I think the Saint Graal theory is a plausible/possible conspiracy theory (I can believe that Christ has descendents), but the novel as a writing is week. The characters are "cartoon-like", the story is alert, but predictable and the end is not so great.

P.S. to Zeuts: I think it's not commendable to write an essay on a book you haven't finished.

Code Vinci Da

Review of Documentary: The Real Da Vinci Code

If you are interested in the Da Vinci code and have not seen this documentary by the BBC then you are really missing out. It is about two hours long and covers various aspects of truth and fiction. Well documented using many locations around the world it seeks to find the truth (some of it is quite sarcastic) and in the end it shows how the recent Da Vinci Code novel is really ripe with fiction and should not be taken as fact. However, it also leaves you thinking about certain aspects that are fact and mysterious. The religious philosophies are of course also covered.

Da Vinci Code

I think the paper, like the book, leaves much to be desired in terms of research. While claiming to be based on scholarly research, the Da Vinci Code (DVC), used gnostic sources exclusively, and many of the cited sources are in conflict with each other. The most famous of the gnostic sources, The Gospel of Thomas, which is held out as a credible source, in the end contradicts all the feminist drivel in DVC. The final verse says: "Simon Peter said to them: "Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life." Jesus said, "I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the Kingdom of Heaven." So, to get to heaven, women must become male. If you accept the gnostic writings, you must accept a body of work which is self-contadictory and which, as the above example does, contradicts one or more of the main themes of DVC. DVC also tries to claim the New Testament is false, and our beliefs of who Jesus is are false, and yet there is no credible scholarship at all to support this. To support this with something that resembles truth, the support has to be self-consistent, and examined in light of everything else. The earliest gnostic writings came about from 50 to 300 years after the New Testament writings, and reflect a historical struggle against the Christian Church, not a reflection of what was happening within it. To accept what DVC says, you have to take as true what was written 50 to 300 years after the New Testament writings, and project them back into first centry Christian culture and practice, and yet all of the writings from the first century reflect a consistency with traditional Christian teaching, and none exemplify the notions expounded in the gnostic writing sourced by Brown in DVC. According to Brown, Christianity is a fraud, and he has nothing credible to back up this theory. The basis for the gnostic theory is all experiential, with no supporting foundation. We have numerous modernist examples in Scientology, Rosicrutians (sp?), and many others who all have the gnostic foundation of "secret knowledge", and no scholarship to back them.

Da Vinci Code - Page 2

To argue over the Da Vinci code without having all written works from the New Testament Prophets (not just those compiled in the Bible versions we have now) is to start down the road of speculation. Indeed, we need not read a novel to raise questions, many verses from the Apocrypha could start a dozen 'Codes' all on their own.

Da Vinci Code General Religious Beliefs - Page 2

Jesus' Bloodline

The recent discovery of a remote tomb in the mountains of southern France could shed light on the controversial theory, popularized by the book "The DaVinci Code," that Jesus Christ was married to his follower, Mary Magdalene, and that the pair had children. Could a secret society called the Priory of Sion have been protecting this ancient knowledge?
Ref. ABC Nightline