Da Vinci Code contreversy?
609023
The book is about Jesus reportedly marrying Mary Magdalene and having a daughter, sarah.. and that the Holy Grail is not the cup that jesus drank from at the last supper, but the sacred feminine=mary magdalene..also contains references to symbolism trying 2 prove Jesus married and had a child.\nAs per the book an organisation called the Priory of Sion was founded by the Templars to protect the holy secret of the church. The Curator of the Louvre..who happens to be the Grand Master of the Priory is found dead within the museum the night he is to meet an american symbolism prof..Mr.Langdon. Langdon meets his granddaughter ..who has had a falling-out wiht her granddad after witnessing a sacred act.\nIt shows how they discover the secret of the Priory and of sophie(granddaughter's family).
758015
man find clues to the bloodline of jesus through the works of Da vinci\nman has lady to help him\nman falls in love with lady\ntogether they work out the clues ...\nhappy ending all round\nvery good book ... equally good movie\nsmall facts cleverly thrown in with a lot of fiction\nloads of food for thought
332496
Have you really studied about your question or are you just asking because of something you may have heard?  The Da Vinci code is fiction.  On the front of the book it says novel.  As for the picture Da Vinci supposedly painted himself in the picture.  He is supposed to be the one at Jesus' left side that has his back to Jesus.  Now, think about what you said about the 1st and 14th centuries.  It there any chance Da Vinci took part in the Last Supper?  Fiction is a tale that writers spin to entertain us.  Some people take this entertainment to another level and use it for monetary gain, shock, and pure old diversion of the truth.
456151
What a fascinating observation. When I read Dan Brown's novel The Da Vinci Code, I remember thinking about this unusual connection between painter Leonardo da Vinci and hoaxster Rory Emerald too. I think author Dan Brown or perhaps another writer is definitely planning on publishing something about this. I have seen questions and answers under religion & spirituality about Rory Emerald before. Leonardo was psychically connected with Rory in some bizarre way. There are tons of stories about Leonardo and Rory all over the internet. What is going on? (great question, you got me interested!)
1185911
First read the Da Vinci Code itself,.. u 'll get to know a lot from there,.. about what da vinci had to do with jesus. and if u want more info. just search for it on google a thousand pages 'll open for u as this is the most searched for topic these days. or u can also look for books in library or book store on relatesd topic
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.
638866
There are many aspects of the book that might prove interesting to debate. One of the most controversial items that the book brings forth is the question of whether Jesus was married and had children. It has NEVER been church doctrine, that such was the case. However, some members and a few leaders back in the early days of the church have speculated on the subject of marriage. In the end, since we do not know, it remains, just that, speculation. \n\nOne of the biggest problems that I, personally, have with the book is that, in the end, Brown's theory seems to be more about Jesus being human rather than divine. I completely disagree with this viewpoint. Members of our church are generally well read. I can't see this book affecting the faith of anyone who has taken the gospel seriously. \n\nDespite Brown's claim that everything is "accurate," people seem to be forgetting that it is just a clever and somewhat interesting piece of entertainment. There may be bits of truth in it, just as in other fictional novels, yet it is still just a work of fiction. \n\nMany religious groups seem to be overly concerned about this book's message or impact. I am of the opinion that while the book may cause some few to doubt, there will be others who may actually start reading the scriptures to find out just what they say. Opposition is not a bad thing. Many people may find their faith strengthened as a result of all of this religious fervor. Is that such a bad thing?\n\nThis is just one "mormon's" opinion on the matter.
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.
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
152241
Plot Summary for\nThe Da Vinci Code (2006)\n\nWhile in Paris on business, Harvard symbologist Robert Langdon ('Tom Hanks') receives an urgent late-night phone call: the elderly curator of the Louvre has been murdered inside the museum. Near the body, police have found a baffling cipher. Solving the enigmatic riddle, Langdon is stunned to discover it leads to a trail of clues hidden in the works of Da Vinci - clues visible for all to see, and yet ingeniously disguised by the painter. Langdon joins forces with a gifted French cryptologist, Sophie Neveu (Audrey Tautou), and learns the late curator was involved in the Priory of Sion - an actual secret society. In a breathless race through Paris, London and beyond, Langdon and Neveu match wits with a faceless powerbroker who appears to work for Opus Dei - a clandestine, Vatican-sanctioned Catholic organization believed to have long plotted to seize the Priory's secret. Unless Langdon and Neveu can decipher the labyrinthine puzzle in time, the Priory's secret - and a stunning historical truth - will be lost forever.\n\nSummary written by bondish\n\nWhen respected American religious symbology expert Dr. Robert Langdon(Hanks) is summoned to the Louvre by the French version of the FBI, led by Captain Bezu Fache(Reno), he soon discovered that he is the #1 suspect for the murder of a historian Langdon had been scheduled to meet with.. Assisted by a French cryptographer and government agent named Sophie(Tautou), Langdon is challenged to decipher a chain of cryptic codes and puzzles, all the while trying to stay ahead of Fache's lawmen in a chase through the Louvre, and out into the Parisian cityscape, and finally across the channel to England. Can Langdon and Sophie decipher the nature of a secret dating back to Leonardo Da Vinci and earlier before those responsible for the historian's murder add them to their hit list..?\n\nSummary written by Austin4577@aol.com
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.
705256
I didn't like the movie and it really isn't possible. Josh McDowell has written a really short book about it. Google his name and Da Vinci Code and you can find it.
655666
Nothing, everyone wants to make a fuss over it because it contradicts the bible.  However, the author of the Da Vinci Code says himself that this is fiction.  He made it up, it is a story just like every other movie we watch.  If you want the truth go to the bible.
1014192
daVinci had nothing to do with this book.  He is a famous Renaissance artist and inventor/engineer.  So he got dragged into this because the author of this book used his name and fame in this work of fiction.  As to the underlying premise, well, the author of "The Da Vinci Code" stole it from other guys, who wrote a couple of books on the subject, one of which is "Holy Blood, Holy Grail."\n\nTheir books are much more credibly written and make the deal sound much more plausible.  How "real" their claims are is anybody's preference.  Baigent et al, the authors, claim that this Jesus was married, probably to Mary Magdelene, was slipped off the cross while still alive, recovered, and he and his family escaped to what would become France.\n\nWell, Baigent and his coauthors do in fact raise some very good questions about the whole traditional story of the lives of Jesus and his crowd.  Things there are not the neat and tidy package that traditional Christians like to think, so to speak.
562431
No this is not true. I saw a documentary on Discovery channel, and the Da Vinci code is fiction pure and simple, created by three guys in France back in the seventies. All the documents were faked, and their is no evidence that Jesus married Mary Magdalene or fathered any children. It's just something to confuse people, none of it is true. Check your local listings for the Discovery/Times channel and they'll be playing it again, I think it's titles "the real Da vinci code" or something along those lines.
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
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.