Has anyone researched the facts in the Novel "The Da Vinci Code", and questioned their faith afterward?
468029
I never questioned my faith from the start and even after I finished reading it.  However, I tried to research for the facts that are claimed by the book.  When I did, the more my faith was strengthened fro what I have come across are evidences that proves that the book's claim is utterly false and flat wrong.
598573
I believe that there is a lot more truth in the Da Vinci code than any religious institution is going to admit.  After all, it stands to under mind all they have been teaching for centuries.  Symbologists, I believe so--this isn't the only place they have been mentioned.
1014837
Damn good question>>>>Its like one can preach but can hardly practice the same thing.da Vinci Code had an interesting plot and it helpedhim rake the moolaah.When people write fiction, they know that its fiction but they still write it anyway for the purpose of audience entertainment and also for giving vent to their own creativity.\n\nHowever,Its very possible that Dan Brown believed in what he wrote and then changed his statement and stand post controversy when the Vatican actually became involved.
523871
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.
1179313
The book is fiction.\n\nHowever the parts of the book that provide background to the story and that are causing so much controversy may be true (pesonally I believe that there is good evidence to say that they are)--however it's not Dan Brown's job as a fiction author to support or prove those theories.\n\nRead the Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, The Head of God, The Hiram Key,  The Tomb of God or any of a couple of dozen non-fiction, well researched books and then decide for yourself.
684848
People who have absolutely no idea will scream, "LIES" without even reading the book or investigating the history behind it. From what I was able to find, here is what's true and what's not:\n\n- Gnostic Gospels: True, except the text in the Gospel of Mary Magdaline where is says, "Jesus kissed Mary on the lips" is actually, "Jesus kissed Mary on the (hole in parchment)". Brown took a liberty here. Also, there are several references in the Gnostic gospels as well as the bible itself that refer to Jesus "favoring" Mary Mag but they don't go into detail...leaving room for speculation.\n\n- Priory of Sion: A real org., however every bit of information about links it to one of 3 men in the 1950s, and there's no information or reference of the org before that. It's thought to be a hoax.\n\n- Myth of Jesus's Family: The book is correct that Mary Mag was not a prostitute. The bible makes absolutely no reference to that at all. As for the legend of Mary Mag fleeing to France, the only evidence that I know of is a reference in a 15th century book, and an old French myth. Supposedly she had a daughter named Sara, which in Hebrew means Princess. So, the conclusion could be reached that she was the child of Jesus, but its a bit of a stretch.\n\nDa Vinci: Some agree 100% that Mary Mag is in the painting of the last supper. Several art historians claim that during the Rennesaunce (spelling) John was often painted feminine.\n\nConstantine: This was about 80% true from my research. Yes, Constantine formed the Christian religon as it is now (more or less). History is a little fuzzy though as to how much involvement he had choosing which books to include in the bible (some say it was him alone, some say it was several people over several years). However, he DID remove all other religions claiming to follow another messiah, and shape the Christian religion the way he wanted it and make it mainstream. Whether that's following God's influence or a personal agenda, you decide.\n\nOver all, as for the history and theory part of the book I'd say its about 50% fact, 40% legend-theory-assumption, and 10% false. Dan Brown even admits that, "the opinions in the book are conclusions drawn by the characters". He is himself a Christian.\n\nNow...isn't that better than an angry Christian screaming "LIES" when they don't have a clue what they're talking about?
390398
You know the theories in the Da Vinci Code are bogus, right? They come from another fiction book. Here's a great article in the NY Times: http://www.iit.edu/~misa/L2i/1/Miller_Da-Vinci-Con.html
659150
Doesn't it seem as if people cling to their beleifs so hard, they will refuse to acknowledge anything that might question that? I mean, what if you found out that your Mom was a crackwhore for the first half of her life and you were the offspring of her pimp? (no offense to any mothers. This seems to be the case. besides, those 2000 year old beleifs, were the beleifs for 2000 years. This Da Vinci schmuk has just surfaced as a new beleif that can be considered by the mases. Or is it... global warming? I haven't read the book nor seen the movie, but I am familiar with the subject matter through schooling. When in school, or watching a movie that makes you think, it is enlightening. If we did not question things, there would be no need for Jesu, right? Why stop questioning now. I apologize, but it seems this Da Vinci controversy has surfaced the weakest of humans and found great fault in religion just by questioning it, whether true or not. The uproar confirms this. And for the twist... I agree with the author of this question, maybe not in the exact same sense. But I am God folks, not the one you all know, but my own. Think about this concept! What does God do for you? What is his purpose? Can these things be accomplished by yourself? It can be done.
686351
There are many facts in it and there are many hoax's weaved in with it.  Don't believe anyone saying that "it's all a lie" and don't believe anyone saying that "it's all true".  Pick a part that you have doubts about or interest, and then do your own research.\n\nFor starters though, most items related to the Knights Templar and what happened to them is true.  Their final fate is the subject of legend.\n\nThe Catholic church has apologized and admitted to the 2000 year old smear campaign against Mary Magdaline.  She was not a prostitute, and was in fact one of Jesus' most favored companions.  Suppositions after this fact have no concrete record, such as that he was married to her or had children by her, but are open to translation and interpretation.\n\nThe claim that there were three competing sects of Christianity at the time of Emporer Constantine's death is true.  The fact that one sect (Orthodox, modern Catholic) with royal backing had the other two (Aryanism and Gnosticism) hunted down and slaughtered is true.\n\nIn the book several word origins and translations were presented as a fun lesson, and these are true.\n\nEverything else is either part of a hoax or subject to interpretation.
335227
Yeah, and the "Is the Da Vinci Code true?" loons.
614798
Most of the book is a fabrication.  The National Geographic channel and 60 min. recently had specials on this topic, exposing the completely fraudulent claims made in the book. \n\nThe thing I find the most humorous is that numerous non-Christians have exposed many of the false claims.  Any knowledgeable historian who has looked into the matter will tell you the same thing.\n\nA plethora of books have been published exposing the bogus claims of the book, including the "FACT PAGE".  \n\nThe title itself is repugnant to art historians.  da Vinci means "from Vinci", it is not a last name. Any art buff will tell you they refer to him as "Leonardo". Furthermore, Leonardo experts will tell you that he did not put hidden meanings into his paintings.  In his painting of the Last Supper, there is a picture of John to Jesus' left. The book claims that this is actually Mary Magdalene. John has a somewhat feminine appearance, but John was young. Leonardo and others painted what we know was John many other times with feminine looking features, we still have these paintings.\n\nThe book claims that there was a secret organization called the Priory of Scion created to protect documents that proved Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married. THERE IS NO FACTUAL EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THIS CLAIM.) On a logical level, if this secert were so terrible, then why wouldn't they just destroy the documents? It doesn't make sense. \n\netc.etc.etc.
149233
Da Vinci code can not be proven true.  People are playing it off to be a huge conspiracy.  I think it's a load of horse pucky. If it were true it would have been completely covered up YEARS AGO.  The church has a huge amount of power, even still today.
553337
The problem is that too many Christians claim to follow Christ but are scripturally illiterate--they haven't read the Bible they claim to believe. So of course the "Da Vinci Code" would threaten their belief system, because their belief system hasn't been solidified yet. It's kind of like freshly poured cement on a sidewalk--until it's firm, anyone can put any impression into it. Christians need to go back to the source of their belief--the Bible--and then movies like this will be seen for the fiction they really are.
1074931
Do you people not realize that "Jesus" was just a man like any other man. Historical facts. Let me guess, the bible? The word of "God"? What did they hold a press conference so that they could get all the facts from "Jesus" and print them in one "historically accurate book"? I don't think so. I'm sorry but the bible is nothing more than a person or group of peoples perspective on a point in time. \nJesus was a human being! He had needs and desires just like every one else. Religion doesn't want to admit that because what, it will make him seem less "God like"? \nI think you people need to re-read the book. Yes "The Da Vinci Code" is a work of fiction. But I believe that a lot of the historical premises is based in truth. To what extent I don't know. The same with the bible. There may be a lot of truth there, but just like so much other written history, facts get lost or changed to suit the intentions of the author. \nCall it what you will, but I like to believe that maybe, just maybe the bloodline of Christ still exist out there today. What would be so wrong with that?
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.
274688
The Da Vinci Code is a novel written by American author Dan Brown and published in 2003 by Doubleday Fiction (ISBN 0385504209). It is a worldwide bestseller with 36 million copies in print (as of August 2005) and has been translated into 44 languages. Combining the detective, thriller and conspiracy theory genres, the book is part two of a trilogy that started with Brown's 2000 novel Angels and Demons, which introduced the character Robert Langdon. In November 2004, Random House published a "Special Illustrated Edition", with 160 illustrations interspersed with the text.\n\nThe plot of the novel involves a conspiracy by the Catholic Church to cover up the true story of Jesus. This implies that the Vatican consciously knows it is living a lie, but does so to keep itself in power. The novel has helped generate popular interest in speculation concerning the Holy Grail legend and the role of Mary Magdalene in the history of Christianity. Fans have lauded the book as creative, action-packed and thought-provoking. Critics have attacked it as inaccurate and poorly written, and decry the many negative implications about the Catholic Church.\n\nThe book opens with the claim by Dan Brown that "all descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate"; but this claim is disputed by academic scholars in the fields the book discusses (see Criticisms of The Da Vinci Code and the further reading list below). As widely noted in the media, there has been substantial confusion among readers about whether the book is factual. Numerous works have been published which explain in detail why any claim to accuracy is difficult to sustain.
638113
The Da Vinci Code isn't completely true. What bothers me is that the Vatican is complaining. They thought Catholics would see right through a book based solely on speculation and stories that are probably false, oh wait.....