How much truth is there to The Davinci Code?
353477
Very little... \n\nIt is consistantly regarded that the "Mary" next to Jesus in "The Last Supper" is John, who was constantly portrayed as affemenant during the reformation.  There is virtually no evidence to support the fact that Jesus had offspring, nor is there any reason to believe that there is anything significant hidden in the works of Da Vinci...\n\nBut it really is a heckuva lot of fun to think about.
378024
I agree with Donna. The Da Vinci Code says alot of things about Jesus like he was married and had kids that are historically and biblicaly inaccurate. They are blaphemous and it is unfortunate that such a thing has become so popular. Also remember even though there are people who believe the false facts in the Da Vinci Code to be true they are not true and the book is listed as fiction not historic.
563850
Well I´ve read the book and enjoyed it throughly! But sad to say there is a lot of thingd in the book that is false, \nbut it does makes you wonder. \n\nWhat I can´t understand is that a few years ago there were some old scripures found, but wouldn´d be accepted by the church. These scriptures underwent all the neccassary test to prove its validity(and it was found to be written the time Jesus was alive and 100 after he died).But it was a little bit contridicting to what is in the bible.\n\nAnyway what the da vinci code does is start to put doubt in the minds of people, and why did  the church reacted so strange to this book which is a novel! \n\nAnd okay the thought that Jesus actually has a living heir is strange, but Dan Brown was not the first to write about this there are many other listed books. And ´if´ that were true then the church would clear not want that knowledge to be known because it would loss a lot of credibility.\nSome modern writers,including Dan Brown, have come forward with claims that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus. These writers cite Gnostic writings to support their argument. Sources like the ´Gospel of Philip´ do depict Mary Magdalene as being closer to Jesus than any other disciple. \nHowever, there is no known ancient document that claims she was his wife and Gnosticism was generally non-supportive of sexuality. The closeness described in these writings depicts Mary Magdalene, representing the Gnostics, as understanding Jesus and his teaching while the other disciples, representing the Church, did not.\nMary Magdalene appears with more frequency than other women in the canonical Gospels and is shown as being a close follower of Jesus. Mary's presence at the Crucifixion and Jesus's tomb, while hardly conclusive, is at least consonant with the role of grieving wife and widow, although if that were the case Jesus might have been expected to make provision for her care as well as for his mother Mary. Given the lack of contemporary documentation, this scenario cannot be proven, and although some consider the idea desirable to believe, most scholars do not take it seriously.\n\nAn argument for support of the married status of Jesus is that bachelorhood was very rare for Jewish males of Jesus' time, being generally regarded as a transgression of the first mitzvah (divine commandment) — "Be fruitful and multiply". According to this reasoning, it would have been unthinkable for an adult, unmarried Jew to travel about teaching as a rabbi.\nA counter-argument to this is that the Judaism of Jesus' time was very diverse and the role of the rabbi was not yet well defined. It was really not until after the Roman destruction of the Second Temple in A.D. 70 that Rabbinic Judaism became dominant and the role of the rabbi made uniform in Jewish communities.\nPaul of Tarsus was an example of an unmarried itinerant teacher among Christians. Jesus himself approved of voluntary celibacy for religious reasons and explicitly rejected a duty to marry: "There are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He that can take, let him take it." (Matthew 19,12)\n\nThe idea that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus was popularized by books like the pseudo-historical Holy Blood, Holy Grail (1982) and The Da Vinci Code (2003), a novel heavily influenced by the former book. These assertions have found no acceptance from scholarly circles.\n\nAnd secret societcy are meant to be kept secret so I don´t expect the historians to find a lot of concrete information about the Priory of Sion. \n\nAnd maybe Leonardo did discover something and instead of just saying or exposing it out right he decided to be clever and hide it within his works of art. After all he was known as a genuis.\n\nSo I(am born and raised catholic, but was taught to have an open mind about things.) personally an very intrigued by this idea of Dan Browns, but I am neither for it nor against it. I
171955
It could be most of it fiction or reality.Still yet, whe don`t know if The Holy Grail really existed.Holly Blood And Holly Grail is the main book used in  Dan`s Brown book"The DaVinci Code".
623494
Depends what is meant by 'truth'. If by 'truth' unquestionable fact like the answers to maths questions is meant then its just the religious nuts. \nHowever, if 'truth' in the way that oral history is truth then the bible's a pretty good record of that. Its got stories about different groups of people and their question to find God and the meaning to life.\nLike the creation story. Its pretty unlikely that the universe was created in 7 days by God speaking, however, when you read it don't look for facts look at the way its written. Imagine it being told by a bard to a bunch of kids - its prefect, got a good structure and a repeated refain and is relevant to people's lives because its seperated into days.
1044434
The DaVinci Code was on the New York Times bestseller list for over a year now, and it's still being sold and read.\n\nThe major controversy in the story is that the Holy Grail isn't a cup, but is the bloodline of Jesus Christ, and that Jesus didn't die on the cross and was resurrected in three days, but married Mary Magdalene and had children.
563098
ALL LIES! Da Vinci Code is all lies!
1141509
Ok, once again, you found it in the fiction section, correct? Then it is not true. Fiction=non truths. \nDan Brown didn't do his homework, not even historically. (Definitely not Biblically.) Aquila wasn't there, Dan Brown wasn't there, and the painting? That was made about what ?? 1200- 1500 years later? Doubt if he knew who sat where, or what they looked like. \nThe council that was suppose to have voted on Jesus's divinity, did no business on that supposed " big day," and on and on and on....\nOh, by the way, why didn't Jesus take time out to say goodbye to his wife and son when He was on the cross? Took time out for other important people...(Would have had to be a son, to carry on the bloodline, and they always put the sons in the picture.)\nCome on, something that big would have been recorded in the Bible. Jesus was the authority. The New Testament is largely about Him.  If he had been married, it would have been accepted, would have been ok,  and would have been written.
591903
I don't believe it.  Through the ages there has been phophesy as well as factual history recorded.  Why would the DiVinci codes not be widely known or atleast very widely speculated?  It hasn't been.  It is only through media hype and sacreligion that it has gained huge popularity.
854644
It's nice that you listed so many of these inaccuracies, lies, and internal contridictions.  That gives us a lot to go on.\n\nActually, the Bible is one of the most accurate historical documents that exists today.
693099
You raise a good point, about what standard we use to determine credibility.\n\nThe problem with the Da Vinci Code is that Dan Brown is basically saying, "Okay, here's a novel for you, but I'm basing it on facts." He begins his novel, with a page titled "Fact" in which he says: "The Priory of Sion--a European secret society founded in 1099--is a real organization. In 1975 Paris's[sic] Bibliotheque Nationale discovered parchments known as Les Dossiers Secrets, identifying numerous members of the Priory of Sion, including Sir Isaac Newton, Botticelli, Victor Hugo, and Leonardo Da Vinci..." The problem with that statement of fact, is that it's absolutely not true.\n\nThe Priory of Sion was founded in 1956 and the list of members a complete fabrication. You can go and research the Priory of Sion online(and I think the wikpedia has a good starting point)and discover for yourself that the claims Dan Brown makes in his book are false.\n\nI don't think there is any solid extra-biblical information that Jesus had children with Mary Magdalene or anyone else. I have to admit that there is a personal bias here, because I think Jesus was fully God and fully man. I think he channelled his sexual desires into an immense love for everyone. We as mere humans are not capable of that kind of love. That's just my personal opinion there.\n\nAlso, if Jesus was fully God, how is it possible for God to love just one woman?\n\nNow, if he's just man then there are no theological problems with him getting married and having children and if he's just a man, then we'd be stupid to follow him too.\n\nI don't care if people want to see the movie or read the book. I read the book and didn't think it was well written. It contained laughable dialogue and situations. Especially the dialogue between Sophie and Langdon. But they need to realize it's fiction! Of course, if people want to read a novel and see a movie and believe that it's true, then that's their problem, I suppose.\n\nIn regards to the Bible, Christians who are inquisitive do wonder about bias, error and fiction. That's what Bible study is for. There are mountains of books on the Bible, with differing viewpoints. As the movie tagline says, "Seek The Truth".
502610
ABC Primetime has a store where you can buy DVDs of certain broadcasts, but the only thing I could find on there was a special where Elizabeth Vargas when to the Holy Land to look up stuff from "The DaVinci Code."  it wasn't called "The Facts  Behind the Fiction" though.  so I dunno.  maybe e-mail someone at Primetime and ask.
1005930
News flash:  The last supper is not a photograph.  It was painted 1500 years after the event.  If it tells us anything at all, it tells us about what DaVinci believed but it does not tell us that his beliefs were correct.  Furthermore, the notion that he planted clues to his beliefs seems rather far-fetched to me.
457979
It is all open to conjecture. Some of the characters or events are actual historical persons/events e.g. Mary Magdalene did exist..whether she was indeed the "wife" of Jesus is open to debate...the Knight's Templar did exist..whether they were privy to "the great secret of Jesus's marriage and blood descendants" is another story...same goes for Leonardo da Vinci. Dan Brown does not make claim that any of these events are in fact true; they are loosely based on historical facts. Archaeology and in deed biblical history/archaeology has a hard time reconciling events in the bible to factual historical accounts. This is because the bible was borne out of oral traditions. There is little that is "eye witness testimony". It is however safe to say that christian beliefs, rituals and practices are an amalgamation of other religious traditions since nothing is born in a vacuum.
658625
Another Dan Brown and Da Vinci Code question. While it is true of the existence of the Gnostic writings, most of these were incomplete as Dan Brown indicates, and the liberties that he took in writing his book. Also of the existence of an organization know as "The Priory of Sion", an actual organization that was founded in 1956, therefore impossible for Davinci himself to belong to the organization as Brown tells in his fable. True there was a man known as Jesus, and that he was crucified. Jewish scholars have written this down as evidenced in the writings of Josephus.\n\nThis is directly from Dan Browns website\n\n"HOW MUCH OF THIS NOVEL IS TRUE?\nThe Da Vinci Code is a novel and therefore a work of fiction. While the book's characters and their actions are obviously not real, the artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals depicted in this novel all exist (for example, Leonardo Da Vinci's paintings, the Gnostic Gospels, Hieros Gamos, etc.). These real elements are interpreted and debated by fictional characters. While it is my belief that some of the theories discussed by these characters may have merit, each individual reader must explore these characters' viewpoints and come to his or her own interpretations. My hope in writing this novel was that the story would serve as a catalyst and a springboard for people to discuss the important topics of faith, religion, and history." \n\nand the writings of Josephus Antiquities 18:3:3...\n\n"3. Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, (9) those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; (10) as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day."\n\nRead and believe the following, if you are interested in the truth.
999104
Not all Christian truth is in the Bible. A lot of Christian truth is made up of sacred tradition.
480865
The secret behind the Da Vinci Code is that it's claims are flat wrong and that the major basis of has already been proven bogus and manipulated.  \n\nIt tried to disprove the bible.  Dan Brown claims that:\n\n-"The Bible is a product of man...not of God." (Page 231)\n-"The New Testament is false testimony." (Page 345)\n-"The New Testament is based on fabrications." (Page 341)\n-"The Bible... has evolved through countless translations, additions, and revisions. History has never had a definitive version of the book." (Page 231)\n\nIs there a woman in Leonardo’s Last Supper?\nLet’s do the math. Jesus and twelve apostles (all men) = 13 people. That’s how many people are in the picture. If Leonardo wanted Mary Magdalene in there, he would have to paint 14 people. \n\nLet’s do the history. The Last Supper was painted to decorate a dining room of a group of Dominican friars. Anyone of them was surely capable – especially when the painting was fresh and new – of noticing and asking why a woman was in the painting. But there is no record of anyone thinking that the figure to Jesus’ right was anyone but St. John because St. John was usually portrayed as a beardless, “pretty” rather than handsome youth. This “prettiness” was the artist’s way of highlighting his youth.\n\nLog on to www.wga.hu, click on Enter Here, click on “B” under “Artist Index,” scroll down and click on Bassano, Jacopo, scroll down his paintings and click on his Last Supper to get an enlarged view and see another young and “pretty” St. John.\n\nOr just think of Jeffrey Hunter playing Jesus in the “King of Kings” for a modern counterpart.\n\nAllow me to refer you to websites that would provide answers to your questions.