Originally Posted by AlanC
I object to all the things he claims are true that are not. There is no evidence that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene nor that he fathered a child. Anyone can assert anything and dare others do disprove it. There is no secret tomb of Mary Magdalene in the Louvre although Brown asserts that it is "FACT" that all his architectural descriptions are accurate. The Dead Sea Scrolls contain no information at all about Jesus as they were pre-Christian Jewish writings although Brown declares as "FACT" that all his descriptions of documents are accurate. The Gnostics were ascetics and certainly would have thought that any ideas of the "sacred feminine" and pagan fertility rites would be repulsive.... It would probably be easier to list the things in the book that are actually true.
Originally Posted by Dan Brown
"The Priory of Sion - a European secret society founded in 1099 - is a real organization. In 1975 Paris's Bibliotheque Nationale discovered parchments known as the Les Dossiers Secrets, identifying numerous members of the Priory of Sion, including Sir Isaac Newton, Botticelli, Victor Hugo, and Leonardo da Vinci."
It seems to me that there is a fundimental difference of opinion about what is stated as "fact" and what is not, and yours is heavily influenced by your faith. There is nothing wrong with that, and I'm not here to criticise it, change your mind, or sway the opinions on others. We are dealing with an issue of wording here that may have been obviously biased by Dan Brown's personal viewpoints, but is careful enough to avoid saying exactly what you assume that he said. First of all, the Priory of Sion DID exist. Whether it was a fabrication or not, it was registered with the French government in 1956, therefore it was a real organization. The only questionable "fact" actually offered on the first page is that it originated in 1099. The evidence that ties the new Priory to anything historical is shaky at best, though it does exist, as there are references to Sionists and etc. in texts long before 1956. But I'll give you that as a fallacy (or at least an unproven assumption, but not a fact). There is evidence that both Plantard and/or Sauniere forged many if not all of the modern documents and findings regarding the Priory, but the documents WERE found in the Bibiotheque Nationale in1975, and they DID list the above mentioned people as members. Nowhere in the statement taken directly from the "Fact" page of the book does it say that the documents were real or that Leonardo WAS IN FACT a member. I sometimes think that Dan Brown worded these statements exactly the way he did to purposefully draw out the pointless criticism of the Christian faction over something he never actually said. He also never states as a fact that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married or had children on the facts page, everything in the body of the book, past the page that is listed as "FACTS:" is clearly a work of fiction.It is based on the opinions and theories of other people that one could be inclined to call "conspiracy theorists" who draw questionable conclusions about such things. Regardless, Dan Brown has repeatedly stated that everything in his book aside from the facts page is fiction. And its not the first fiction book to broach the subject either by the way, just the most recent and probably the most popular. IMMSMC, the book never actually states that there is a tomb hidden in the Louvre. The main character comes to that conclusion that what he's looking for is buried under the inverted pyramid, but never actually spells it out as clearly as "there is a hidden tomb in the louvre that contains the body of Mary Magdalene", and in the book he never proves this assumption is correct. These literal accusations that you are flinging are based on YOUR assumptions of what was written, not what was actually there. The Dead Sea scrolls are pre-Christian and Jewish... yes. Just like the Old Testament, which is also Pre-Christian and Jewish. Once it was adopted by Christianity in the Bible, it becomes shared theology. A more accurate descripton of the Dead Sea Scrolls would be scriptures predating the church, some of which was compiled and assembled as the Old Testament by Constantine. The real problem you SHOULD have with the description of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that he calls them "Gospels" which is easily misinturpreted because of the fallacious Christian association of the word "Gospel" with the New Testament. Rest assured, however that the word Gospel is also closely connected to the Old Testament
prophesies of the Messiah and conveys the idea of foretelling and proclaiming the fulfillment of the promised Messiah by Jewish scholars. The root of the word Gospel means God's tidings or good tidings. I'm not trying to nitpick, but we all have to realize that both Dan Brown as well as the Christian church have a political stake in promoting their particular agendas. I personally enjoyed the book as a work of fiction, and I think that the protestations and all the attention that the church is giving to this movie will only make more people go watch it. To be honest, in my opinion, the evidence supporting the literal wording of The DaVinci Code is more plentiful than the evidence supporting the literal wording of the Bible, but the Bible's messages should be more important to a Christian than the various factual inconsitancies and theological contradictions found within either book. If you truely attempt to live your life the way Jesus hoped you would, The DaVinci Code is a non-issue. Be happy that you have faith in whatever it is you have faith in, praise the Lord, don't judge others lest you be similarily judged, and love thy neighbor. Those are pretty simple tenants that I find most Christians either completely ignore or find extremely difficult to apply in a practical sense, though they are the cornerstones of their religion. Best of luck to you Alan. I wouldn't worry about the movie too much. OK, I'm done.