I am a skeptic and desperately wanted it to be true, but I've found that there are many descrepencies on Brown's (the author) part. The Gnostic gospels never made jesus seem more human, they made him into a pure god, not a man at all. the priory of sion was apparently a hoax made up by a guy in the mid 1900's. it really just seems that this is a conspiracy theory, very fun to read and think about, but not true. (not saying that Christianity is true though)
138203
I don't think everything he writes about is true, of course. The author himself admitted to this. The only thing that I'm starting to be sure of is Jesus' relationship with Mary Magdalene and her being present in Da Vinci's "The Last Supper". We shouldn't believe everything the book tells us, but we might be able to read between the lines.
334179
cdf-rom: You are a lunatic. No one is trying to sway people away from the faith. Seriously. If you honestly believe that is a real motive for anyone, anywhere in this whole Magdalene/DVC controversy, then you suffer from paranoid delusions and need to get your head checked. \n\nIt just seems weird to a lot of people, myself included, that so many Christians (not all, but a lot) went totally apesh*t over the mere suggestion of Jesus acting like a normal guy of his times.\n\nI really like Mary Magdalene, always have. Never cared much for the Madonna, though. What did she do, really? She had a kid, supposedly while a virgin (not actually true, see Hebrew version of Isaiah 7:14, definitely says young woman, not virgin). So, basically she had a kid. Which is what the "Church Fathers" believed was all women were really good for, anyway. So their number one female figure is a girl whose biggest accomplishment is getting knocked up.\n\nNow take a look at this passage from the Pistis Sophia, referring to Mary Magdalene:\nJesus, the compassionate, answered and said to Mariam:\n"Mariam, thou blessed one, whom I will complete in all the mysteries of the height, speak openly, thou art she whose heart is more directed to the Kingdom of Heaven than all thy brothers."\n\nYeah, she was bright, she got was Jesus was saying, apparently more than his other (male) disciples. And that's nothing compared to the Gospel of Mary (go look it up). So I figure, why not have the female co-star of Christianity be Jesus's wife instead of his mother? She was actually an intelligent woman, rather than just a pregnant one. Aren't we a little past the 'barefoot in the kitchen' era?
513972
Hello, my friend. This book--"Mere Christianity"--and especially this bit about Christ's being either a lunatic or else the Son of God, was instrumental in my opening up to Jesus, simply on account of the fact that I had, for years, "respected" Jesus of Nazareth as a great teacher, ever ignoring the (what I then thought to be) creepier things he was quoted as saying in the Gospels (such as "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Light")...and Lewis, with this very simple and basic observation, blew my cozy little respect for Jesus of Nazareth out of the water.\n\nWhich did something to a door. Meaning, I then had to face the very choice that Lewis proposed in this book. In other words, I was either going to have to open the door all the way (and believe Christ was who he said he is) or else close it (and believe Jesus of Nazareth to be deranged and blasphemous).\n\nUltimately, I would say that I chose to believe that Christ is God's Son, but truly God gave me the knowledge that Christ is his Son (John 6:44)...and perhaps he gave me the gift of faith for the sole reason that I was seeking it.
118142
Having read the four gospels several times, I'm fairly confident that he did exist as a person. As an atheist, however, I feel certain that he was not the son of God and that many of the events described in the gospels are metaphorical. I do strongly believe that he was an extremely charismatic individual who was a positive force in the world. Of course, many of his teachings (Love thy neighbor, for example) came from Judaism.
267480
All the hype around the Da Vinci Code makes me laugh.  The book is listed as SPECULATIVE FICTION.  That means that there is some historical facts but the basis is fiction.  I haven't read it, nor will I see the movie.  I have my own theories on Jesus and him being married.  I have more of a chance of being accurate than the book.  You see Jesus was jewish and became a rabbi.  Rabbinical law back then stated that a rabbi HAD TO BE MARRIED.  So the wedding at Caanan was his to Mary Magdelen.  He probably did have kids and that was the Medici line of rulers that claimed "divine right of rule".
203680
As I said in a similar answer, I am thrilled with these kind of reports.  Science will soon put an end to the "miracles" of Jesus.  Eventually it will prove my belief that Jesus was a man and nothing more.  I do hope and expect that CBS and the NY Times will continue with the illuminating news pieces like they have  over the last few days.  Christians certainly have something to think about now, especially those Christians who are pro-science at the expense of their "faith." Sometimes science and faith simply do not agree despite the best efforts of some to twist words and theories to show they do.
209480
Its another fake Gospel written by an early christian sect who obviously had no contact with Jesus, the disciples or the disciples followers. It was common for christian sects with no direct link to church founders to create bogus gospels to support there beliefs.\nIf the gospel is real it would have been mentioned somewhere in the ancient history or copies of it would have surfaced elsewhere. Not to mention a true gospel always matches with what the rest of the bible says.\nPeople have a bad habit of thinking if a text is old then it must be a part of Gods word.  This is not true!
242690
The DaVinci Code is a work of fiction pure and simple.  I think the reason some think it's fact is that there have been a number of conspiracy theories surrounding the gnostic gospels for a long time.\n\nThe History channel did an interesting show last night interviewing biblical scholars who all said that the conspiracies all fall apart when examined closely.
318644
I understand your confusion, and to a ceratin extent, I agree with you.\n\nI read the book, and I plan to see the movie (as soon as the hype dies down).  I think that the reason this book is taken so seriously is for two reasons:\n\n1.  Dan Brown begins the book by stating that all of the groups, artwork, etc. are completely true.  People assume that if these things are true and accurate, then the whole book must be as well.\n\n2.  The whole premise, that Jesus was married and that the "holy grail" isn't a cup but is in fact the holy bloodline of Jesus, isn't a new theory and is one that some people have argued for many years.  Plus, it is plausible!  I'm not saying that it is likely, but it is possible.\n\nWhat I don't understand is why this film has to change poeple's faith.  Even if it was discovered with 100% certainty that Jesus was married, that doesn't change my faith in Christianity at all!  (It makes me wonder about the people who made the decision to cover it all up, but it doesn't change my faith in God.)  In fact, learning that Jesus was married might actually make me identify with Him more than I currently do.\n\nI wish that people would think about that more seriously... what has REALLY changed?
440968
Christianity being hopelessly self-contradictory to begin with, it's not all that amazing that you heap more contradictions on top of it to create your own special witches' brew of a religion.  It's basically what every so-called "christian" does.  \n\nSure, the bible was altered.  Over and over again.  Compiled from scraps, edited, misinterpreted, mistranslated, edited again.  The result is a document that one would have to be technically insane to take seriously, let alone "literally."  It's fascinating legendary fiction, and I read it for entertainment at least as much as the average "christian" reads it for enlightenment.  But it's absolutely crazy to try to rationalize your actions based on texts from the bible.  You might just as well look for precedent for everything you do in the works of Edgar Allen Poe.\n\nAs for "magick," "Christ" himself, or rather the historical personage(s) from whom the legend of the gospels is partially drawn, would certainly qualify as a "magician" or holy man of the standard Middle Eastern type.  He'd probably be amused to know that people continue to worship his image, conflated with legendary elements from pagan mystery cults, to this day.
348411
I found this ,it may answer some of your questions.(these or not my writings)\n\nA would-be historian and wannabe scholar by the name of Hugh Schonfield who did a book titled something like, “In Search of Historic Jesus.” It didn’t take long to realize that this man was out to prove that the divine Jesus, the Son of God, didn’t exist, and that he – Schonfield – had an anti-God, anti-Faith agenda behind his writings. He made the outrageous supposition that “the early Church fathers may have rewritten some of the New Testament books and influenced others to rewrite the story of Jesus” despite a total absence of any historical or documentary proof to support such a thesis.\n\nAnother wannabe historian, Gary R. Habermas, took it even a step father with his claim that “the Gospels represent the teachings of the early church and not those of Jesus himself.” These kinds of spurious claims are johnny-come-lately efforts of liberals and leftists who neither know, nor have a relationship with Jesus Christ, nor have they ever even made an effort to personally put Jesus’ claims to the test.\n\nThat said, let’s examine some of the historical evidence that does exist. \n\nMany years ago, my father made reference to a volume of historical documents he had looked at when he was studying in Bible College. He later obtained a copy and sent it to me. The book was titled, The Archko Volume, and represented the culmination of many years of effort of two eminent scholars, Drs. McIntosh and Twyman of the Antiquarian Lodge in Genoa, Italy. Published in 1887, the work provided copies of writings and works taken from the Talmud and the Sanhedrin contemporary to the time of Christ, along with a copy of “Acta Pilati,” which was a report sent by Pontius Pilate – the Roman procurator or governor of Judaea – to Caesar detailing the arrest, trial and crucifixion of Jesus. Some of the other documents included Gamaliel’s interview with Joseph and Mary concerning Jesus. Gamaliel, you may remember, was the Pharisee at whose feet Paul the apostle sat while he was yet a Pharisee, being instructed in the ways of the sect.\n\nThe Archko Volume also includes some documented reports of Caiaphas, the High Priest who presided over the Jewish trial and judgment of Jesus prior to His being brought before Pilate, as well as his report to the Sanhedrin concerning the resurrection of Jesus.\n\nAccording to the testimony of the two researchers and archeologists who came up with the documents, the sources of these documents were ancient libraries in Constantinople and the Senatorial Docket in Rome.\n\nWhen you read these documents, it provides an interesting perspective and an otherwise not-considered view of others who either participated in or observed events and people who were involved in some way with Jesus Christ.\n\nOne of the things often overlooked by those who seek to authenticate the historical Jesus is the fact that what we now refer to as the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) were written as personal testimonies of men who walked and talked with Jesus. These were eyewitness accounts. What makes them all the more intriguing is the fact that they were written at different times, in different places, and in three different languages (Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic), and yet they agree with each other. Each of the writers has a distinct personality and a perspective that differs from the others; and that personality comes through in the writing style. Nevertheless, there is synoptic agreement between Matthew, Mark and Luke. \n\nJohn writes from a totally different perspective as Jesus’ best friend, and the majority of what he writes details the final week of Jesus’ life and what He taught before He was crucified.\n\nBut, let’s step away from the accepted canon for a moment and look at the works of historians who were contemporary to the time.\n\nPhilo Judaeus of Alexandria, Egypt was a contemporary of both Jesus and the apostle
220122
I have not had the opportunity to read the book or see the movie. My son is reading the book and telling me about it. We are both Christians. We believe it is possible that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene. The Church, in all its "wisdom," removed many books from the Bible many centuries ago. I think it's a tragedy that they felt they had to do our thinking for us. I am looking forward to reading the book. I believe we are all intelligent enough to decide for ourselves what we believe. The Da Vinci Code is a work of fiction. I'll probably wait to see the movie when it comes out on DVD.
130234
3rd or 4th-century document called "The Gospel of Judas" was launched upon an unsuspecting world yesterday by no less a biblical authority than the National Geographic magazine in Washington. Its contents were "explosive", according to Mario Roberty, president of the Swiss foundation which now owns the ancient papyrus manuscript. \n\nSo as the heat faded from the television lights at the press conference, has 2000 years of orthodox Christianity been overturned? Well, not quite. But it was all jolly interesting, for those who love that sort of thing.\n\nHalf of the 62-page codex, written in Coptic script, is devoted to an account of the final days of Jesus Christ written from the viewpoint of the man who has for two millennia been excoriated as Christ's deadly betrayer. The text begins: "The secret account of the revelation that Jesus spoke in conversation with Judas Iscariot three days before he celebrated Passover..."
175625
yes\n\nthe gospel of Judas is false doctrine, written by gnostics in 300 AD... \n\ndont just accept what dan brown says people
291051
The Da Vinci Corrode - An Opinion Piece by Schneb\n\nI am amazed at how gullible people are at believing the so-called "facts" that this book brings up. Out of thin air! 80 gospels written!? And Constantine only chose 4, then corrupted them? First, including all the false gnostic gospels, there was hardly a quarter of that amount. Second, Constantine had nothing to do with the Canon of scripture.\n\nDon Brown states through the main character that it was the council of Nicea that voted to say that Jesus was God--and that it was a "close vote". Yeah, a close vote of 316 to 2. Wow, how close. Funny, though, a few months ago they discovered in Megiddo, the oldest Christian church dating back to the 2nd century. 100 years before the council of Nicea did their "close vote", we see a mosaic dedication that reads, "dedicated to the God Jesus Christ". This belief was confirmed by the 2nd century writings of Ignatius, Polycarp, Justin Martyr, Irenius and Clement of Alexandria (again, 100 years before Nicea).\n\nAnd then he has the gall to say there were true gospels in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Man, this guy is delusional. There is not ONE mention of Jesus in ANY of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Yet people are eating this nonsense up.\n\nMary was Jesus' mother, and He told John, while on the cross, to take her into his home and take care of her. Mary Magdalene was there as well. If they were married, Jesus would have provided for her as well. Do you think after the resurrection that Jesus would have known that Mary M. was pregnant with their child? Yet, when He spoke to her, she called Him "teacher", not "husband", and neither spoke of activity in the womb. A little common sense is needed here.\n\nIf you don't want to believe, then say so. But don't base it on ignorant revisionist history like the Da Vinci Code. Looks like the world is all ready for the coming deception...\n\n2 Thessalonians 2:11-12\nFor this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
299554
The book is fictional so doesnt spread any false rumours about Christianity. Its a fictional story (albeit quite convincingly written)\n\nIf it was a non fiction book though it could cause quite a panic amongst the Christian community.\n\nI feel that the Chistian community are causing their own problems by feeling the need to slate what is, at the end of the day, a fictional story.  Their own insecurities are challenging their faith. Not Dan Browns work
256955
the story of jesus was a myth.\n\nit comes from another pagan cult that predates christianity by 900 years called mithra.  mithra is the original cult claiming to be a savior from a virgin birth, later tortured and killed, then resurrected.  a god would have never written or inspired anything so poorly authored as the crap in the bible.  a second-year communications student from USC could do better...\n\nPeople will comment here about false doctrine, but in reality, the bible is the biggest, most false collection of dogma there is.  it's like the biggest practical joke ever pulled on mankind.