"Da Vinci Hoax"
Author: Carl Olson and Sandra Miesel
No. Pages: 329
The Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown’s best selling novel, purports to be more than fiction: it claims to be based on fact and scholarly research. Brown wants his readers to believe that he is revealing the long-concealed truth about Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and early Christianity, a truth that he says has been suppressed by the malevolent and conspiratorial forces of the Catholic Church. The novel alleges that there has been throughout history a secret group of true followers of a Gnostic Jesus and his wife, Mary Magdalene, the true “Holy Grail”. Almost everything most Christians and non-Christians think they know about Jesus, according to Dan Brown, is completely wrong, the result of Catholic propaganda designed to hide the truth from the world.
But are The Da Vinci Code’s claims fact or just plain fiction? Is the novel well-researched as claimed? What is the truth about Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and the early Church? Has the Catholic Church distorted the real Jesus? Why is the novel so popular? What about the anti-Catholic, anti-Christian agenda behind the novel?
Best selling author Carl Olson and journalist Sandra Miesel answer these and other important questions. Their painstaking research into The Da Vinci Code and its sources reveals some surprising truths. No one who has read or heard about The Da Vinci Code should miss this provocative and illuminating new book.
Who's read this book the "Da Vinci Code" ? Is it any good ? Should I read it ? Seems to be a lot of bunk to me ..... Jesus Christ married Mary Magdalene .... sure why not ?
Originally posted by ivanhoeAt the Christian Book store they have books against it lots one is called (The De Vinci Code Deception.
Da Vinci Hoax
Author: Carl Olson and Sandra Miesel
No. Pages: 329
The Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown’s best selling novel, purports to be more than fiction: it claims to be based on fact and scholarly research. Brown wants his readers to believe that he is revealing the long-concealed truth about Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and early Christianity, a truth ...[text shortened]... this provocative and illuminating new book.
Who's read this book the Da Vinci Code ?
Originally posted by ivanhoeAs a woork of fiction, about 4 out of 10. As fact, about a 1. Some things are interesting - but there are logical holes you could drive a bus through which makes even the 'maybe stuff' pretty dubious.
"Da Vinci Hoax"
Author: Carl Olson and Sandra Miesel
No. Pages: 329
The Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown’s best selling novel, purports to be more than fiction: it claims to be based on fact and scholarly research. Brown wants his readers to believe that he is revealing the long-concealed truth about Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and early Christianity, a t ...[text shortened]... ems to be a lot of bunk to me ..... Jesus Christ married Mary Magdalene .... sure why not ?
Basic premise from what I remember is the the Catholic church has suppressed the feminine side of the Gospel, that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus and her role is denied. Yet the Protestionist churches also do this - are they part of the conspiracy too?
Originally posted by ivanhoeBadly written. Little or nothing proved. Just another story about Jesus.
"Da Vinci Hoax"
Author: Carl Olson and Sandra Miesel
No. Pages: 329
The Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown’s best selling novel, purports to be more than fiction: it claims to be based on fact and scholarly research. Brown wants his readers to believe that he is revealing the long-concealed truth about Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and early Christianity, a t ...[text shortened]... ems to be a lot of bunk to me ..... Jesus Christ married Mary Magdalene .... sure why not ?
That Jesus and Maria Magdelena would have had a love relationship seems not so implausible to me.
It puzzles me how you can write so lofty about a critic on the book, while you haven't written the book itself.
fjord
Originally posted by fjordI once watched a documentary followed by a debate over this subject, or a subject related to it. I can't be sure, I haven't read the book.
Badly written. Little or nothing proved. Just another story about Jesus.
That Jesus and Maria Magdelena would have had a love relationship seems not so implausible to me.
It puzzles me how you can write so lofty about a critic on the book, while you haven't written the book itself.
fjord
What the documentary was getting at was that Jesus and Mary (Magdelena) had a baby and this baby was brought to Italy. This baby is the holy grail. He contains the blood of Jesus.
Now this birthline supposedly was kept secret for obvious reasons and guardians of it were the knight's templers.
As times went on, so did the blood line and the Free masons took over from the knight's templers (or the knight's templers expanded into the free masons and form a seperate sect within the framework...it's been a long time since I seen it).
The documentary finished by alleging that the grand wizard (or whatever the boss of the masons is) is actually the bloodline of Jesus.
Since the masons are very anti-catholic, it is no small wonder the catholic church would deny this.
But since the catholic church persecuted the knight's templers for herecy, that is the reason the mason's are anti-catholic.
I'm probably muddling everything up, but that's how I remember it.
Then again, I don't know what day it is either.
Originally posted by shavixmirSome simple maths. Two parents, four grandparents, eight great gradparents and so on. Two hundered and fifty years ago you had a thousand people as your ancestors. Five hundred years and it is a million. Two thousand years ago and I had a million million million million ancestors.
I once watched a documentary followed by a debate over this subject, or a subject related to it. I can't be sure, I haven't read the book.
What the documentary was getting at was that Jesus and Mary (Magdelena) had a baby and this baby was brought to Italy. This baby is the holy grail. He contains the blood of Jesus.
Now this birthline supposedly ...[text shortened]... everything up, but that's how I remember it.
Then again, I don't know what day it is either.
If Jesus had kids, he would be pretty sure to be an ancestor of all of us. So what needs guarding?
Originally posted by steerpikeThat doesn't sound quite right.
Some simple maths. Two parents, four grandparents, eight great gradparents and so on. Two hundered and fifty years ago you had a thousand people as your ancestors. Five hundred years and it is a million. Two thousand years ago and I had a million million million million ancestors.
If Jesus had kids, he would be pretty sure to be an ancestor of all of us. So what needs guarding?
Let's see: Two kids a per two parents per 30 years...well i can't work it out. but it's obviously not true.
Anyways, what if he was kept from ever having more than one child?
Originally posted by shavixmirThat is perhaps worse. With only one chiild per generation , the child never encounters another wth the genes of Jesus - so a half dilution per generation. 25 years a generation, 80 generations so half something 80 times.
That doesn't sound quite right.
Let's see: Two kids a per two parents per 30 years...well i can't work it out. but it's obviously not true.
Anyways, what if he was kept from ever having more than one child?
One part of Jesus in a million million million million.
Don't blame you for not trusting the numbers. They seem unbelievable but check them if you like - 0.5 to the power of 80
Originally posted by steerpikeUh...
That is perhaps worse. With only one chiild per generation , the child never encounters another wth the genes of Jesus - so a half dilution per generation. 25 years a generation, 80 generations so half something 80 times.
One part of Jesus in a million million million million.
Don't blame you for not trusting the numbers. They seem unbelievable but check them if you like - 0.5 to the power of 80
well, if you say so.
So, I'm related to you. Is that what you're saying here?
Originally posted by shavixmirUnless you or I come from a very isolated population such as an island, we could probably find a common ancestor. Most of our ancestors are counted many many times as there were only a few million people around thousands of years ago. Even a single traveller could leave millions of descendents in the most unlikely places given enough generations.
Uh...
well, if you say so.
So, I'm related to you. Is that what you're saying here?
I am assuming the descendents of Jesus went through the same process of gene shuffling we all go through. Christians believe he was the Son of God and not the result of a normal pregnancy so it may not be a correct assumption.
So - a logical error in the book. Our genetic material is being multiplied through many descendents. As discrete entities, genes are not diluted but your contribution effectively halves each generation.
Evolutionary perspective: Humans are all related to each other, and in fact quite closely - how else could we have so little genetic diversity? In addition, humans are all related to chimps, bananas, tuberculosis bacteria and all other living things on Earth - at the end of the day everything is the xth cousin y times removed of everything else.
Creationist perspective: Humans are all descended from Adam + Eve.
If the author of the Da Vinci Code says it's partly based on fact, I'd treat that as part of the promotional hype. Primarily it sounds like a novel to me, in the same way Battlefied Earth is still fictional even if John Travolta thinks it has something to do with real life.
We don't really know what the Knights Templar got up to: what we do know is that a) they were apparently disbanded in the 14th century, after the Pope declared them to be heretics, and b) some branches of Freemasonry were inspired by the practices of the Knights Templar. However, neither the Knights nor modern-day Masons are hereditary, unless you make some weird claim along the lines of initiates being tested for having the blood of Christ in them or something.