Do u think the DaVinci Code has a shadow of truth in it?
613361
Actually the shadow of truth is not about the holy grail, the church doesn't care about this part... but the truth from the novel is that Jesus is a mortal prophit and his divinity was invented by men long ago. This is what people should research for, and not quote the bible cause the bible has already been modified.
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.
718414
It certainly is worht looking into; however, you'll have religious people who are so closed-minded by this that they will makeup things about it. How untrue it is or claim that it is an attempt to discredit religion.\nIt is very sad that they can not open their mind to the possiblity. \nI laugh at all those who refuse to even give a benefit of a doubt to gosple of juda, mary magdelene and da vinic code.\nSilly closed-minded religious people open up your mind if you have any
1146134
Unfortunately, A lot of people have a problem distinguishing the difference between fact and fiction. To make matters worse there are people who know this and try to blur the line even more. This causes even more people on the fringes to be sucked into the hog wash also. \n\nAs for the DaVinci Code the story line has been around for long before the book and debated for a long time. So the movie industry has used that to there advantage to market the movie and try and suck more people in for the almighty dollar. A lot of people love controversy.
1084398
I believe that the DaVinci Code was a good book and nothing else.  What I think is really interesting is the fact that the church feels it needs to defend itself from this work of fiction.  Is the church so short of faith in its own institution that it believes a Tom Hanks movie can shake its very foundation.\n\nEvery religion is built on lies as a means to control the masses.  It is the most primitive, and resilient, form of government.  I wish the book had proven to be true, but I guess I'll just have to wait for the next scandal to get further entertainment.\n\nPray for the Revolution!
818087
I believe that there is a lot of compelling evidence for the theory behind the Da Vinci (everyone should notice that that's what you asked about, not the novel itself)\n\nThe Priory of Sion part is highly questionable, but the evidence for the bloodline of Christ is very plausible and at least as "provable" is the orthodox Christian account.
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
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.
606281
I do believe that there is some truth to the Code and to the subjects covered in the book. I have reexamined the painting of the The Last Supper and I absolutely see the image of Mary Magdalene in the picture and I believe that Jesus could have been married and also fathered a child. You have to have an open mind and want to contemplate the possibilities that it could be true because I truly believe that it is very possible.
992839
This is what Dan Brown would have you believe, but there is no historical evidence to back him up.   In particular,\n\n1) The Council of Nicea (AD 325) did not even discuss the question of "canon" (that is, what belongs in the Bible)!!   In any case, well before this time there was widespread agreement on which books were accepted  (evidence going back to the early 2nd century).   There is NO evidence of authorities "inserting" or "removing" stuff.\n\n2) Not only did Constantine not foist his own view of the deity of Christ on others,  ALL those at this Council (representing the viewpoing of churches throughout the Roman world) agreed that Jesus was divine!   The only question was precisely how that idea was to be UNDERSTOOD.   \n\nAlso, contrary to various insinuations, the vote was not even close!   The Council of Nicea was almost unanimous in its final statement (two out of over three hundred disagreed... though again, they did NOT disagree that Jesus was divine!)
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?
1176751
Of course there's a significant element of truth to it. Why do you think the Catholic Church is so wound up about it ? Why haven't scholars been allowed to translate the Dead Sea Scrolls in the public arena ? Catholicism has manipulated the truth for it's own ends .... it's used threats over the centuries to ensure there is no debate. The end is nigh .... if there's nothing to hide they'd happily open their vaults & show the full spectrum of religeous texts .... not just the ones they'd like us to see. Now the truth is becoming available with or without their consent - Truth Lives once more.
677173
A thought I've had, too! \nAnd, yes, I agree COMPLETELY-- it would be absolutely, mind-bogglingly funny as all h*ll!\nAnd the Vatican thought they were in an uproar over "The Davini Code"-- that'd be ridiculous, by comparison!
29328
Yeah, it's the DaVinci Code. Dan Brown, the author, uses just enough truth mixed in with his fiction to make what he says believable. Most people don't know enough about the Bible to know that what he's saying is false, and so they accept it because he's a good writer.
1029286
It's astonishing how many people think the DaVinci Code is a real story.\n\nNo, it's just fiction. There's no such office at Harvard (or anywhere else) as that of religious symbology. What a waste of a PhD's mind that office would be, don't you think?\n\nThe Priory of Scion was invented in the 1960s as a bizarre way for some unemployed French 20-somethings to get elected to office.\n\nThe Rosicrucians were a similar "joke" order as no one has verified whether this order actually exists.\n\nThe stories reflected in the gnostic gospels (ie, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Jesus) are apochryphal at best, having been dated several hundred years after the commonly-accepted time of Christ's life on earth.\n\nMerely because someone says or writes somethign doesn't make it true, and the denial of that thing does not constitute a conspiracy.\n\nBesides, there are no monks in Opus Dei. Albinos perhaps, but no monks. It's mostly an order of married persons.
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.
806801
As long as it is organized and protected. Someone above has already said that it tends to become a religion of falsehood. Yes at that time the Nature ruptures it and the Truth emerges from the limbo of falsehood. Truth has its own expression and timing for it.