do you think the da vinci code is more plausible than the bible?
492756
Yes, Everyone loves a conspiracy theory!
362940
I have been reading about that as of late and find it interesting.  plausible. The bible has seen a lot gone through a lot in that i mean translations.  It also stands that some books were purposely left out.  With that in mind I don't feel it proves with out a shadow of a doubt that its true.  However it does leave enough room for the thought and probability.
1147963
The "Da Vinci Code" is basically a mixture of distorted facts and fiction. I think the book is composed of about 90% fiction.\n\nThe author, Dan Brown, claims in his fact page that all his depictions of artworks, secret societies, and rituals are true. However, his main sources for the his 'facts'--"Holy Blood, Holy Grail" and "Templar Revelation"--are only pseudo-histories. Even the authors of "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" accept that Jesus MIGHT have been married, but it is UNLIKELY.\n\nThe Da Vinci Code supports the claim that Jesus might have been married by mentioning the Gnostic gospels. In reality, the Gnostic gospels don't mention much about Jesus's life. The only Gnostic gospel that suggests that Jesus was married was the Dead Sea Scrolls--but it is impossible to know whether the word "companion" meant "wife," because the words are in Coptic and they can't be translated the way Dan Brown says.\n\nOne more thing Brown claims to be true is that a secret organization, the Priory of Sion, exists to protect the "secrets" of Jesus's real life. The Priory of Sion was NOT created by Godfrey of Bouillon in the 11th century, it was only actually created in the 70s by an anti-semitic supporter of the Vichy government, Pierre Plantard, fir personal gain. He wrote a family tree of the Merovingian royal family and included himself on the list. He also made a list of the "Grand Masters" of the Priory of Sion. A great Renaissance painter, Leonardo Da Vinci, was included in the list. After writing all those documents, Pierre Plantard deposited them in the Bibliotheque Nationale and claimed to have "found" them years later. So the Priory of Sion was actually only a fake organization created by Plantard.\n\nBrown also says that the Church "demonized" Mary Magdalene. But she is actually a saint in both the Catholic and Orthodox churches. The only thing close to "demonizing" Magdalene that the Church did was sometime during the 6th century when Pope Gregory merged three women named "Mary" in the Bible into one person.\n\nOne more thing, Brown says that Jesus's divinity was created by the Council of Nicaea. The Council of Nicaea in A.D. 325 was actually a response to the threat of the Arian heresy, which claimed that Jesus was a semi-divine creature, not of the same being as God. This was quickly becoming a popular belief and threatening the unity of Christianity. \n\nThere are more facts that I can write, but I hope what I did write is enough. Read the books below in the sources.
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".
505064
ugh.... if you actually read the book, you'd know that the Da Vinci code is NOT condemning religion. its a FICTIONAL NOVEL. its only meant to entertain, and all it does is give a theory as to how jesus may have lived. \n\nif you're so afraid of a book or a story destroying your faith, do you really have that much faith to begin with??\nread the book, then make the decisions for yourself.
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.
719605
The Da Vinci Code is a novel.\nThe writer put some historical facts in it, but it remains a novel where he spun a nice fantasy web.\nIt is not because somebody writes that the world is square that you have to believe it!
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.
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.
595535
Before you believe on the claims of the Da Vinci Code, allow me to refer you to these references that will prove that all claims of the book are just rubbish.  \n\nhttp://www.catholic.com/library/cracking_da_vinci_code.asp\nwww.priory-of-sion.com\nwww.jesusdecoded.com
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.
988691
I can only speak from my personal experience in this life. I have read the bible and I have done some reseach. I have been in church and heard sermons. The conclusion I came to, is that the bible is for the most part a well intentioned spiritual text. It is written by men inspired by that which inspires all human kind. I do not believe it was written by God anymore than the Da Vinci Code is written by God.  Perhaps God wrote both? Perhaps Dan Brown in 1000 years will be considered a prophet of God. Who knows? The world is very crazy place. A person writes a book with certain intentions and before they know it , the world has twisted the message. So, quoting the bible to me as an authority on spiritual matters is a waste of time.  Just my two cents.
1017173
Really?  I think the Da Vinci Code is a fictional work of Dan Brown's.
403228
it is a GREAT movie/book i read the book and it is so addicting!! read this interview:\n\nHOW 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\nBUT DOESN'T THE NOVEL'S "FACT" PAGE CLAIM THAT EVERY SINGLE WORD IN THIS NOVEL IS HISTORICAL FACT?\nIf you read the "FACT" page, you will see it clearly states that the documents, rituals, organization, artwork, and architecture in the novel all exist. The "FACT" page makes no statement whatsoever about any of the ancient theories discussed by fictional characters. Interpreting those ideas is left to the reader. \n\nIS THIS BOOK ANTI-CHRISTIAN?\nNo. This book is not anti-anything. It's a novel. I wrote this story in an effort to explore certain aspects of Christian history that interest me. The vast majority of devout Christians understand this fact and consider The Da Vinci Code an entertaining story that promotes spiritual discussion and debate. Even so, a small but vocal group of individuals has proclaimed the story dangerous, heretical, and anti-Christian. While I regret having offended those individuals, I should mention that priests, nuns, and clergy contact me all the time to thank me for writing the novel. Many church officials are celebrating The Da Vinci Code because it has sparked renewed interest in important topics of faith and Christian history. It is important to remember that a reader does not have to agree with every word in the novel to use the book as a positive catalyst for introspection and exploration of our faith. \n\nWHAT DO YOU THINK OF CLERICAL SCHOLARS ATTEMPTING TO "DISPROVE" THE DA VINCI CODE? \nThe dialogue is wonderful. These authors and I obviously disagree, but the debate that is being generated is a positive powerful force. The more vigorously we debate these topics, the better our understanding of our own spirituality. Controversy and dialogue are healthy for religion as a whole. Religion has only one true enemy--apathy--and passionate debate is a superb antidote. \n\nPARTS OF THE DA VINCI CODE DESCRIBE THE ACTIVITIES OF THE RELIGIOUS GROUP OPUS DEI. HOW DOES OPUS DEI FEEL ABOUT YOUR NOVEL? \nI worked very hard to create a fair and balanced depiction of Opus Dei. Even so, there may be those who are offended by the portrayal. While Opus Dei is a very positive force in the lives of many people, for others, affiliation with Opus Dei has been a profoundly negative experience. Their portrayal in the novel is based on numerous books written about Opus Dei as well as on my own personal interviews with current and former members. \n\nSOME OF THE HISTORY IN THIS NOVEL CONTRADICTS WHAT I LEARNED IN SCHOOL. WHAT SHOULD I BELIEVE?\nSince the beginning of recorded time, history has been written by the "winners" (those societies and belief systems that conquered and survived). Despite an obvious bias in this accounting method, we still measure the "historical accuracy" of a given concept by examining how well it concurs with our existing historical record. Many historians now believe (as do I) that in gauging the historical accuracy of a given concept, we should first ask ourselves a far deeper question: How historically accurate is history itself?\n\nARE YOU
531741
Dear Lord, you have to realize that the book is FICTION. F-I-C-T-I-O-N!!! Do you honestly believe that Dan Brown is the keeper of the truth? NO! The Bible is God's word, not The Da Vinci Code. C'mon.
446522
Fear is the only thing I can guess.  The Bible was written as fact, the DaVinci Code was written as fiction, yet they buy into the fictional work.  The Bible prophesizes such.
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