Changes

----  

----  

The Da Vinci Code is a bestselling novel by author [[Dan Brown]]. It has sold over 40 million copies worldwide, and has been translated into over 40 languages. (ParisInfo.com) It has been on the top of the [[NY Times]] Bestseller List since its release in 2003, and held the coveted #1 spot for many weeks. (Catholic.com) The book’s exciting storyline and interesting characters have contributed to its record sales—as has its highly controversial content.  

'''''The Da Vinci Code''''' is a bestselling novel by author [[Dan Brown]]. It has sold over 40 million copies worldwide, and has been translated into over 40 languages. (ParisInfo.com) After its publication, it was on the ''[[New York Times]]'' Bestseller List for more than two years, and held the coveted #1 spot for many weeks. (Catholic.com) The book’s exciting storyline and interesting characters have contributed to its record sales—as has its highly controversial content.  

[[Image: davincicode.jpg|thumb|right|120px|''The Da Vinci Code'' book cover (UK 1st edition)]]   

[[Image: davincicode.jpg|thumb|right|120px|''The Da Vinci Code'' book cover (UK 1st edition)]]   

The Da Vinci Code creates an alternate history of Christianity which contradicts much of the historical record, leading to protests that the book is attacking the church. Dan Brown holds that he was merely writing a work of entertainment fiction, joking once that he (Dan Brown), should had, "written about Buddha instead." Although only a novel, Dan Brown feeds the impression throughout The Da Vinci Code of having meticulously researched the history of Christianity, although many assertions have been pointed out as spurious, including the existence of the Priory of Sion, an organization created in 1099 in the book, while in truth it was a hoax created in 1956. He includes a fact page in the beginning of the book and makes references to numerous historical sources, historians and scholars throughout to give an appearance of scholarly research. In an interview on [[Good Morning America]], Dan Brown stated with conviction that if he had been asked to write a non-fiction version of The Da Vinci Code he would change none of the historical material he included in the novel. Brown's critics of his claims for historicity asked him to appear with them and answer the charges of his many errors (over 30), but Brown refused to do so, saying he was too busy working on his next book.

''The Da Vinci Code'' creates an alternate history of [[Christianity]] which contradicts much of the [[Bible]], leading to protests that the book is attacking the church. Dan Brown holds that he was merely writing a work of entertainment fiction, joking once that he should have "written about [[Buddha]] instead." Although only a novel, Brown feeds the impression throughout ''The Da Vinci Code'' of having meticulously researched the history of Christianity, although many assertions have been pointed out as spurious, including the existence of the [[Priory of Sion]], an organization created in 1099 in the book, while in truth it was a hoax created in 1956. He includes a fact page in the beginning of the book and makes references to numerous historical sources, historians and scholars throughout to give an appearance of scholarly research. In an interview on ''[[Good Morning America]]'', Brown stated with conviction that if he had been asked to write a non-fiction version of ''The Da Vinci Code'' he would change none of the historical material he included in the novel. Brown's critics of his claims for historicity asked him to appear with them and answer the charges of his many errors (over 30), but Brown refused to do so, saying he was too busy working on his next book.

Many authors have written books debunking the historical inaccuracies in the Brown's book, selling millions of copies.

Many authors have written books debunking the historical inaccuracies in Brown's book, selling millions of copies.

==='''Plot Summary'''===

===Plot Summary===

----

----

The book is set up to be a thriller. Robert Langdon, a Harvard “symbologist” (a fictitious field of study), is summoned to help solve a murder committed at the [[Louvre]]. Langdon and Sophie Neveu, a cryptographer with the French police, are left with a trail of clues to unravel, and with the help of resident scholar Sir Leigh Teabing, crack the codes to uncover groundbreaking secrets.

The book is set up to be a thriller. Robert Langdon, a Harvard “symbologist” (a fictitious field of study), is summoned to help solve a murder committed at the [[Louvre]]. Langdon and Sophie Neveu, a cryptographer with the French police, are left with a trail of clues to unravel, and with the help of resident scholar Sir Leigh Teabing, crack the codes to uncover groundbreaking secrets.

The first astounding thing Langdon discovers is "the truth" about the biblical figure [[Mary Magdalene]]. In the novel Mary Magdalene was a Jewish woman from the tribe of Benjamin and [[Jesus]]’ single most important disciple—in fact she was more than his disciple, she was his lover and wife, and the mother of their child, Sarah. She was Jesus’ female counterpart, if not entirely “equal” to him, she was pretty close, and meant to be worshipped as a goddess.

The first astounding thing Langdon discovers is "the truth" about the biblical figure [[Mary Magdalene]]. In the novel Mary Magdalene was a Jewish woman from the tribe of Benjamin and [[Jesus]]’ single most important disciple—in fact she was more than his disciple, she was his lover and wife, and the mother of their child, Sarah. She was Jesus’ female counterpart, if not entirely “equal” to him, she was pretty close, and meant to be worshipped as a goddess.

Furthermore, according to the novel, Mary was actually intended to be the leader of the church after Jesus’ death (instead of Peter), but was demonized and diminished by Peter and his followers—the chauvinistic “winners"—until history saw her as nothing more than a prostitute. Although every historical document recording these so-called facts about Mary were destroyed by the “winners”, some groups of people throughout history knew and preserved the secret. Specifically, these organizations were the [[Knight’s Templar]] and the [[Priory of Scion]] who were dedicated to preserving the truth of who Mary Magdalene was. One way of doing this was through the legend of the [[Holy Grail]], which the book says is Mary Magdalene’s womb—the sacred vessel which bore the blood line of Christ. Both organizations secretly worshipped Mary Magdalene as a goddess.   

Furthermore, according to the novel, Mary was actually intended to be the leader of the church after Jesus’ death (instead of Peter), but was demonized and diminished by Peter and his followers—the chauvinistic “winners"—until history saw her as nothing more than a prostitute. Although every historical document recording these so-called facts about Mary were destroyed by the “winners”, some groups of people throughout history knew and preserved the secret. Specifically, these organizations were the [[Knight’s Templar]] and the Priory of Sion who were dedicated to preserving the truth of who Mary Magdalene was. One way of doing this was through the legend of the [[Holy Grail]], which the book says is Mary Magdalene’s womb—the sacred vessel which bore the blood line of Christ. Both organizations secretly worshipped Mary Magdalene as a goddess.   

[[Image: monalisa2.jpg|thumb|left|200px|''The Mona Lisa'']]

[[Image: monalisa2.jpg|thumb|left|200px|''The Mona Lisa'']]

   

   

Jesus’ divinity in the novel is another issue altogether. It wasn’t until 300 years after his death that his divinity was invented by [[Constantine]] at the [[Council of Nicaea]]. His disciples did not view him as God in the flesh, but instead as a mere mortal prophet. As for the Biblical Gospels, well they were four of “over eighty” which were selected at the Council of Nicaea—the four gospels that emphasized Jesus’ divinity and demonized women the most. The rest were destroyed, and the Canon as we know it today is not the inspired Word of God as many believe.

Jesus’ divinity in the novel is another issue altogether. It wasn't until 300 years after his death that his divinity was invented by [[Constantine]] at the [[Council of Nicaea]]. His disciples did not view him as God in the flesh, but instead as a mere mortal prophet. As for the Biblical [[Gospel]]s, well they were four of “over eighty” which were selected at the Council of Nicaea—the four gospels that emphasized Jesus’ divinity and demonized women the most. The rest were destroyed, and the canon as we know it today is not the inspired Word of God as many believe.

It is story above revealing this fictional conspiracy that gives the Da Vinci Code its allure.

It is story above revealing this fictional conspiracy that gives ''The Da Vinci Code'' its allure.

==='''Part I: Mary Magdalene, Wife of the Messiah?'''===

===Part I: Mary Magdalene, Wife of the Messiah?===

----

----

Mary Magdalene is a good place to start, because she and her supposed marriage to Jesus are the cornerstones upon which Brown’s claims rest. In The Da Vinci Code, Brown states that Mary Magdalene is a “royal” Jewish woman from the tribe of Benjamin and Jesus’ single most important disciple. She is not a prostitute—in fact this was a lie invented by the Catholic Church to demonize her. She is also his lover, wife, and the mother of their daughter, Sarah. She was supposed to be the leader of the church after Jesus’ death, but was forced by “Peter’s Party” aka “the winners” to escape to Provence, France with her daughter. Her womb is the “Holy Grail”, her bones are buried under the glass pyramid at the [[Louvre]], the Priory of Scion and Knight’s Templar were dedicated to preserving her story and worshipped her as a goddess, she was the “Divine Mother” and represented the real purpose of Jesus’ life and teaching—to reintegrate the “Sacred Feminine” into society. However, Mary Magdalene is mentioned only a few times in the gospels—and never once is a single one of Brown’s claims about Mary supported by the Biblical record.  (Welborn 63)   

Mary Magdalene is a good place to start, because she and her supposed marriage to Jesus are the cornerstones upon which Brown’s claims rest. In ''The Da Vinci Code'', Brown states that Mary Magdalene is a “royal” Jewish woman from the tribe of Benjamin and Jesus’ single most important disciple. She is not a prostitute—in fact this was a lie invented by the Catholic Church to demonize her. She is also his lover, wife, and the mother of their daughter, Sarah. She was supposed to be the leader of the church after Jesus’ death, but was forced by “Peter’s Party” (aka “the winners”) to escape to [[Provence]], [[France]] with her daughter. Her womb is the “Holy Grail”, her bones are buried under the glass pyramid at the [[Louvre]], the Priory of Sion and Knight’s Templar were dedicated to preserving her story and worshipped her as a goddess, and she was the “Divine Mother” and represented the real purpose of Jesus’ life and teaching—to reintegrate the “Sacred Feminine” into society. However, Mary Magdalene is mentioned only a few times in the gospels—and never once is a single one of Brown’s claims about Mary supported by the Bible.  (Welborn 63)   

Where did all of these ideas come from? According to The Da Vinci Code’s resident scholar, Teabing, “the royal bloodline has been chronicled in exhaustive detail by scores of historians,” citing The Templar Revelation and [[Holy Blood, Holy Grail]] as sources. Interestingly, these books (which are also found in Dan Brown’s official bibliography) are dismissed by all serious historians, and described as being “schlock pseudo-history and conspiracy-theory.” (Welborn 63) Teabing also mentions ''[[The Woman with the Alabaster Jar]]'' and ''[[The Goddess in the Gospels]]'', both by [[Margaret Starbird]], who uses, among other things, [[numerology]] (the sum of the numbers in her name), to conclude that Mary Magdalene was worshipped as a goddess. Additional sources for Brown’s claims lie in the [[Gnostic gospels]] (Welborn 63)

Where did all of these ideas come from? According to ''The Da Vinci Code''’s resident scholar, Teabing, “the royal bloodline has been chronicled in exhaustive detail by scores of historians,” citing The Templar Revelation and [[Holy Blood, Holy Grail]] as sources. Interestingly, these books (which are also found in Dan Brown’s official bibliography) are dismissed by all serious historians, and described as being “schlock pseudo-history and conspiracy-theory.” (Welborn 63) Teabing also mentions ''[[The Woman with the Alabaster Jar]]'' and ''[[The Goddess in the Gospels]]'', both by [[Margaret Starbird]], who uses, among other things, [[numerology]] (the sum of the numbers in her name), to conclude that Mary Magdalene was worshipped as a goddess. Additional sources for Brown’s claims lie in the [[Gnostic gospels]] (Welborn 63)

[[Image: littlemermaid.jpg|thumb|right|200px|In TDVC, Brown gives credence to Margaret Starbird’s idea that Ariel, the ‘Little Mermaid’ in the Disney film, is not just a fictional fairy tale character, but a symbol representing Mary Magdalene. According to Brown, Walt Disney was a believer in the Sacred Feminine and purposefully filled the movie with hidden codes about Mary Magdalene, including Ariel’s red hair (supposedly MM’s was red as well) and the painting she finds at the bottom of the sea ([[Georges de la Tour]]’s [[Magdalene with the Smoking Flame]]). (Starbird) These claims seem to be disproven given that Walt Disney had been dead for over 20 years when The Little Mermaid was made in 1989.]]  

[[Image: littlemermaid.jpg|thumb|right|200px|scene from Disney Productions' "The Little Mermaid"]]In TDVC, Brown gives credence to Margaret Starbird’s idea that Ariel, the "Little Mermaid" in the [[Disney]] film, is not just a fictional fairy tale character, but a symbol representing Mary Magdalene. According to Brown, [[Walt Disney]] was a believer in the Sacred Feminine and purposefully filled the movie with hidden codes about Mary Magdalene, including Ariel’s red hair—supposedly Mary Magdalene’s was red as well—and the painting she finds at the bottom of the sea ([[Georges de la Tour]]’s [[Magdalene with the Smoking Flame]]). (Starbird) These claims seem to be disproven given that Walt Disney had been dead for over 20 years when ''The Little Mermaid'' was made in 1989.   

Even with these incredulous sources to occasionally back him up, most of Brown’s claims about Mary Magdalene have no historical evidence behind them whatsoever. There is no record anywhere to even suggest that Mary Magdalene was of the tribe of Benjamin—and this would not have made her “royal”.  (Ehrman 160) It is true that in the gospels there is no mention of Mary Magdalene as having been a prostitute. This idea first came into existence 500 years after the gospels were written, and became popular in the [[Middle Ages]] and [[the Renaissance]]. In 1969, the [[Catholic Church]] issued a formal statement clearing Mary’s reputation, and separating her from Mary from Bethany, the “sinful woman.” (Van Biema)

Even with these unreliable sources to occasionally back him up, most of Brown’s claims about Mary Magdalene have no historical evidence behind them whatsoever. There is no record anywhere to even suggest that Mary Magdalene was of the tribe of Benjamin—and this would not have made her “royal”.  (Ehrman 160) It is true that in the gospels there is no mention of Mary Magdalene being a prostitute. This idea first came into existence 500 years after the gospels were written, and became popular in the [[Middle Ages]] and [[the Renaissance]]. In 1969, the [[Catholic Church]] issued a formal statement clearing Mary’s reputation, and separating her from Mary from Bethany, the “sinful woman.” (Van Biema)

The idea continually perpetuated by Brown throughout The Da Vinci Code that the church demonized Mary Magdalene (and women in general) for centuries is also highly inconsistent with historical record. Incidentally, this idea is not an original one—in fact, it is quite popular among feminist scholars and professors. (Welborn 68) They teach that Christianity is about men being “the winners” and women being suppressed and diminished and “use a few Gnostic gospels (written over 100 years after Jesus’ death) to speculate [their] ideologically-motivated interpretation of Christianity.” (Welborn 69)   

The idea continually perpetuated by Brown throughout ''The Da Vinci Code'' that the church demonized Mary Magdalene (and women in general) for centuries is also highly inconsistent with historical record. Incidentally, this idea is not an original one—in fact, it is quite popular among feminist scholars and professors. (Welborn 68) They teach that Christianity is about men being “the winners” and women being suppressed and diminished and “use a few Gnostic gospels (written over 100 years after Jesus’ death) to speculate [their] ideologically-motivated interpretation of Christianity.” (Welborn 69)   

This is totally incompatible with historical evidence, however. During the time period that Mary was supposedly being subdued by Peter’s party, prominent church leaders such as [[Hippolytus]], [[St. Ambrose]], and [[St. Augustine]] were writing her praises in their literature, describing her as “the new Eve” and “the apostle to the apostles”. If the mainstream Christian church—the winners—were trying to eliminate Mary’s influence and reputation would they at the same time be extolling her virtues and cherishing the fact that she was the first to see Jesus after the Resurrection? (Welborn 69-70)   

This is totally incompatible with historical evidence, however. During the time period that Mary was supposedly being subdued by Peter’s party, prominent church leaders such as [[Hippolytus]], [[St. Ambrose]], and [[St. Augustine]] were writing her praises in their literature, describing her as “the new Eve” and “the apostle to the apostles”. If the mainstream Christian church—the "winners"—were trying to eliminate Mary’s influence and reputation would they at the same time be extolling her virtues and cherishing the fact that she was the first to see Jesus after the Resurrection? (Welborn 69-70)   

The evidence upon which the idea that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married is found in a portion of the [[Gnostic gospel of Philip]], written 200 years after Jesus’ death, which states, “and the companion of the […] Mary Magdalene.  […] her more than [all] the disciples [and used to] kiss her [often] on her […].” Brackets indicate where holes exist in the original manuscript, and clearly any interpretation of this passage requires much guesswork. Many assume [mouth] was the place where [Jesus] used to kiss Mary [often], however, it could just as likely have been forehead, cheek, arm, hand, or foot. There is no way of knowing if it was even speaking of Christ. (Bock 21)   

The evidence upon which the idea that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married is found in a portion of the [[Gnostic gospel of Philip]], written 200 years after Jesus’ death, which states, “and the companion of the […] Mary Magdalene.  […] her more than [all] the disciples [and used to] kiss her [often] on her […].” Brackets indicate where holes exist in the original manuscript, and clearly any interpretation of this passage requires much guesswork. Many assume [mouth] was the place where [Jesus] used to kiss Mary [often]; however, it could just as likely have been forehead, cheek, arm, hand, or foot. There is no way of knowing if it was even speaking of Christ. (Bock 21)   

There is no evidence anywhere that indicates that Jesus was married.  (Bock 32)  In the [[Bible]], women are often identified by the men whom they are associated with.  (Mary the mother of Jesus, the mother of Mark, and the wives of several of the apostles are mentioned.)  Mary was never tied to any male when she was named.  Instead, she was identified by her hometown, Magdala. (Bock 41) While the Bible talks in great detail about Jesus’ other relationships—his mother, father, siblings, aunt, uncle, disciples’ parents, disciples’ wives, not once is Jesus’ wife mentioned. (Welborn 60)

Teabing apparently is of the belief that Jesus used to kiss Mary on the mouth, and reports this to Sophie and Langdon as a fact without any explanation. He then goes on to inform a spellbound Sophie and Langdon that “as any Aramaic scholar can tell you, the word ‘companion,’ in those days, literally meant spouse.” (Ehrman 142) However the word is not Aramaic, the Gospel of Peter is written in Coptic and the actual word for companion is a loan word from Greek. The Greek ''koinόnos'' is a word used for friends and associates. (Ehrman 143)

Additionally, when Jesus was dying on the cross, he turned to John and instructed him to take care of his mother. He shows no concern whatsoever for Mary Magdalene in his last moments, which seems odd. After all, if she was his wife, pregnant with his child, his last hope for restoring the sacred feminine, the future leader of his church, etc. …wouldn’t he be slightly worried about her well being? Widowed women in those days had little hope of anything but a destitute future with no caretaker. Perhaps the reason why Jesus did not mention her is because, well, she wasn’t his wife. (Bock 44)

Further evidence that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were not married is the fact that in his letter to the Corinthians, Paul cites reasons why men should marry. [[Darrell L. Bock]], P.H.D. writes about this evidence against Jesus’ marriage in the following excerpt:

 

Additionally, when Jesus was dying on the cross, he turned to John and instructed him to take care of his mother. He shows no concern whatsoever for Mary Magdalene in his last moments, which seems odd. After all, if she was his wife, pregnant with his child, his last hope for restoring the sacred feminine, the future leader of his church, etc., wouldn't he be slightly worried about her well-being? Widowed women in those days had little hope of anything but a destitute future with no caretaker. Perhaps the reason why Jesus did not mention her is because, well, she wasn't his wife. (Bock 44)

 

Further evidence that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were not married is the fact that in his letter to the Corinthians, Paul cites reasons why men should marry. [[Darrell L. Bock]], Ph.D., writes about this evidence against Jesus’ marriage in the following excerpt:

<blockquote>

<blockquote>

''First Corinthians 9:4–6 may be the most important text for this topic. It reads, “Do we not have the right to the company of a believing wife, like the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas? Or do only Barnabas and I lack the right not to work?” Paul noted in this aside that the apostles, the Lord’s brothers, and Cephas (Peter) had the right to a wife. In other words, they had every right to be married. It would have been simple for Paul to add that Jesus was married—had He been. Such a point would have sealed his argument, but he did not make that point…This 1 Corinthians 9 passage shows that the church was not embarrassed to reveal that its leaders were married—or to suggest that they had the right to be. The same would have been true of Jesus if He had been married. In fact, had Jesus been married, there would have been no better place for Paul to say it than here. It would have clinched Paul’s case that he also had the right to be married. Paul did not mention it because Jesus had not been married.''</blockquote>

''First Corinthians 9:4–6 may be the most important text for this topic. It reads, “Do we not have the right to the company of a believing wife, like the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas? Or do only Barnabas and I lack the right not to work?” Paul noted in this aside that the apostles, the Lord’s brothers, and Cephas (Peter) had the right to a wife. In other words, they had every right to be married. It would have been simple for Paul to add that Jesus was married—had He been. Such a point would have sealed his argument, but he did not make that point…This 1 Corinthians 9 passage shows that the church was not embarrassed to reveal that its leaders were married—or to suggest that they had the right to be. The same would have been true of Jesus if He had been married. In fact, had Jesus been married, there would have been no better place for Paul to say it than here. It would have clinched Paul’s case that he also had the right to be married. Paul did not mention it because Jesus had not been married.''</blockquote>

If it were true, Jesus’ marriage would have been a significant addition to Paul’s argument –but it is not mentioned. Perhaps this is because Jesus was not married.(Bock 42)

If it were true, Jesus’ marriage would have been a significant addition to Paul’s argument, but it is not mentioned. Perhaps this is because Jesus was not married.(Bock 42)

The Da Vinci Code assumes Jesus must be married “because Jesus was a Jew and the social decorum during that time virtually forbade a Jewish man to be unmarried. According to Jewish custom, celibacy was condemned.” Actually, celibacy was not condemned, nor was it even looked down upon. (Bock 53)  Several Jewish sects—most notably the Essenes—lived celibate lives dedicating their time wholly to their religion. Additionally, many Jewish prophets and teachers were unmarried and chose to remain celibate: Jeremiah, John the Baptist, and many scholars believe, Paul. It was a way of expressing total devotion to God, but those who did choose to marry were not viewed as any less. (Welborn 60) In an article, [[Archbishop George H. Niederauer]] points out that when Brown talks about Jesus’ marriage, he “stresses the importance of the social decorum at that time. If “social decorum” had been a high priority for Jesus he wouldn’t have healed people on the Sabbath, talked to the Samaritan woman at the well, knocked over the moneychangers’ tables in the Temple, or socialized often with public sinners.” (Niederauer 2)

''The Da Vinci Code'' assumes Jesus must be married “because Jesus was a Jew and the social decorum during that time virtually forbade a Jewish man to be unmarried. According to Jewish custom, celibacy was condemned.” Actually, celibacy was not condemned, nor was it even looked down upon. (Bock 53)  Several Jewish sects—most notably the Essenes—lived celibate lives dedicating their time wholly to their religion. Additionally, many Jewish prophets and teachers were unmarried and chose to remain celibate: Jeremiah, John the Baptist, and many scholars believe, Paul. It was a way of expressing total devotion to God, but those who did choose to marry were not viewed as any less. (Welborn 60) In an article, [[Archbishop George H. Niederauer]] points out that when Brown talks about Jesus’ marriage, he “stresses the importance of the social decorum at that time. If ‘social decorum’ had been a high priority for Jesus he wouldn't have healed people on the Sabbath, talked to the Samaritan woman at the well, knocked over the moneychangers’ tables in the Temple, or socialized often with public sinners.” (Niederauer 2)

Teabing states that Jesus’ marriage is “a matter of historical record,” and has been meticulously documented by “scores of historians” throughout history.  OK, so where might these historical records be found? The answer is, nowhere… except in Dan Brown’s imagination, perhaps.  Essentially, in every single early Christian writing combined there is not one single reference to Jesus’ marriage.  This includes the canonical and non-canonical texts—the Constantine-approved, biased selection of scripture known as the Bible as well as the unaltered, censored Gnostic gospels.  (Ehrman 153)  In his book, Darrell L. Bock explains… in my office there are 38 volumes or early church documents, each several hundred pages, double columns, in small print.  The fact that out of all this material only two texts can be brought forward as even ancient candidates for the theory shows how unlikely it is..

Teabing states that Jesus’ marriage is “a matter of historical record,” and has been meticulously documented by “scores of historians” throughout history.  OK, so where might these historical records be found? The answer is, nowhere... except in Dan Brown’s imagination, perhaps.  Essentially, in every single early Christian writing combined there is not one single reference to Jesus’ marriage.  This includes the canonical and non-canonical texts—the Constantine-approved, biased selection of scripture known as the Bible as well as the unaltered, censored Gnostic gospels.  (Ehrman 153)  In his book, Darrell L. Bock explains... in my office there are 38 volumes or early church documents, each several hundred pages, double columns, in small print.  The fact that out of all this material only two texts can be brought forward as even ancient candidates for the theory shows how unlikely it is..

==='''Part II: “Peter’s Party” vs. “Mary’s Party”'''===

===Part II: “Peter’s Party” vs. “Mary’s Party”===

----

----

While Dan Brown exalts Mary Magdalene to the point of goddess status, at the same time he ironically claims that the early church did not believe Jesus was divine, and in fact, that Jesus himself did not claim to be the Son of God!  This is a myth invented by the “winners”, beginning with Jesus’ chauvinistic disciple Peter.  According to Dan Brown, after Jesus’ death, Mary Magdalene was intended to be the leader of the church, but egotistical Peter took over, and Mary was forced to flee to France with her child.  Peter’s goal was to suppress the truth about who Mary was.   

While Dan Brown exalts Mary Magdalene to the point of goddess status, at the same time he ironically claims that the early church did not believe Jesus was divine, and in fact, that Jesus himself did not claim to be the Son of God!  This is a myth invented by the “winners”, beginning with Jesus’ chauvinistic disciple Peter.  According to Dan Brown, after Jesus’ death, Mary Magdalene was intended to be the leader of the church, but egotistical Peter took over, and Mary was forced to flee to France with her child.  Peter’s goal was to suppress the truth about who Mary was.   

If Brown had told the whole story, perhaps Sophie would not view the Gnostic Jesus as the “original feminist”.  ("Jesus was the original feminist. He intended for the future of the church to be in the hands of Mary Magdalene." -Sir Leigh Teabing TDVC 248)

If Brown had told the whole story, perhaps Sophie would not view the Gnostic Jesus as the “original feminist”.  ("Jesus was the original feminist. He intended for the future of the church to be in the hands of Mary Magdalene." -Sir Leigh Teabing TDVC 248)

==='''Part III: The Gnostics & the Non-canonical Gospels'''===

===Part III: The Gnostics & the Non-canonical Gospels===

----

----

So, the Peter-party myth has been “busted.”  We have seen that the Bible does not demonize Mary Magdalene the way Dan Brown claims it does, and the Gnostic texts Brown used for “evidence” did not present an accurate representation of Gnosticism.  So, who exactly were the Gnostics?  They were one of the first of many cults—or groups that branched off from Christianity because of disagreements with aspects of Christian doctrine.  Brown conveniently does not mention Docetism, a first century cult of the belief that Jesus Christ was only God, and not at all human.  (Niederauer)  [[Gnosticism]] arose in the century after Jesus’ death and (not unlike Dan Brown himself) believed they held the key to some secret, hidden knowledge (or gnosis) about Jesus.  (Ehrman 42)  The Gnostics claimed to rely entirely on knowledge or reason, and viewed God as an intangible, mystical force.  The term “agnostic” is now used to refer to individuals who claim that understanding God is impossible because it is somehow beyond human reasoning.  (Schlafly)  However, what Dan Brown claims they believed about Jesus is a far cry from the truth.

So, the Peter-party myth has been “busted.”  We have seen that the Bible does not demonize Mary Magdalene the way Dan Brown claims it does, and the Gnostic texts Brown used for “evidence” did not present an accurate representation of Gnosticism.  So, who exactly were the Gnostics?  They were one of the first of many cults—or groups that branched off from Christianity because of disagreements with aspects of Christian doctrine.  Brown conveniently does not mention Docetism, a first century cult of the belief that Jesus Christ was only God, and not at all human.  (Niederauer)  [[Gnosticism]] arose in the century after Jesus’ death and (not unlike Dan Brown himself) believed they held the key to some secret, hidden knowledge (or gnosis) about Jesus.  (Ehrman 42)  The Gnostics claimed to rely entirely on knowledge or reason, and viewed God as an intangible, mystical force.  The term “agnostic” is now used to refer to individuals who claim that understanding God is impossible because it is somehow beyond human reasoning.  (Schlafly)  However, what Dan Brown claims they believed about Jesus is a far cry from the truth.

Dan Brown asserts throughout The Da Vinci Code that Gnostics knew the truth about Mary Magdalene, wanted to restore the sacred feminine, and were even the first “feminists”.  In spite of Brown’s wishful thinking, we have already seen conflicting evidence that Gnostics believed women were less than men.

Dan Brown asserts throughout The Da Vinci Code that Gnostics knew the truth about Mary Magdalene, wanted to restore the sacred feminine, and were even the first “feminists”.  In spite of Brown’s [[wishful thinking]], we have already seen conflicting evidence that Gnostics believed women were less than men.

Dan Brown is also of the belief that the Gnostics did not believe Jesus was divine.  Brown states that orthodox Christianity ignored Jesus’ humanity, while the Gnostics—who believed Jesus was merely a mortal prophet—stressed his humanity far too much for the likes of the “winners.”  Thus, their gospels were censored, and their hidden secret knowledge locked away and forgotten for centuries—until now.  Brown presumes to reveal to his readers the truth about Jesus—that he was completely human, that he was married, and that he had sex.

Dan Brown is also of the belief that the Gnostics did not believe Jesus was divine.  Brown states that orthodox Christianity ignored Jesus’ humanity, while the Gnostics—who believed Jesus was merely a mortal prophet—stressed his humanity far too much for the likes of the “winners.”  Thus, their gospels were censored, and their hidden secret knowledge locked away and forgotten for centuries—until now.  Brown presumes to reveal to his readers the truth about Jesus—that he was completely human, that he was married, and that he had sex.

Bart Ehrman in his book Truth and Fiction in the Da Vinci Code, critiques six typical examples of [[non-canonical gospels]].  The gospels he discusses include [[The Infancy Gospel of Thomas]], [[The Gospel of Peter]], [[The Coptic Apocalypse of Peter]], [[The Coptic Gospel of Thomas]], and [[The Gospels of Philip and Mary]].  Each one presents a consistently more divine picture of Jesus that the canonical gospels.  Some even stand directly against the view that Jesus was human and deemphasize his humanity.  (Ehrman 49-71)

Bart Ehrman in his book Truth and Fiction in the Da Vinci Code, critiques six typical examples of [[non-canonical gospels]].  The gospels he discusses include [[The Infancy Gospel of Thomas]], [[The Gospel of Peter]], [[The Coptic Apocalypse of Peter]], [[The Coptic Gospel of Thomas]], and [[The Gospels of Philip and Mary]].  Each one presents a consistently more divine picture of Jesus that the canonical gospels.  Some even stand directly against the view that Jesus was human and deemphasize his humanity.  (Ehrman 49-71)

==='''Part IV: Constantine and the Council of Nicaea'''===

===Part IV: Constantine and the Council of Nicaea===

----

----

<blockquote>

<blockquote>

''…for inasmuch as error is falsification of truth, it must needs be that truth therefore precedes error.'' –Tertullian in ''Against Marcion''

''…for inasmuch as error is falsification of truth, it must needs be that truth therefore precedes error.'' –Tertullian in ''Against [[Marcion of Sinope|Marcion]]''

</blockquote>

</blockquote>

The [[Council of Nicaea]] (325 AD)—presided over by Roman Emperor [[Constantine]]—was the first ecumenical gathering of Christians.  In The Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown makes some startling assertions about the Council Constantine.   

The [[Council of Nicaea]] (325 AD)—presided over by Roman Emperor [[Constantine]]—was the first ecumenical gathering of Christians.  In The Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown makes some startling assertions about the Council Constantine.   

Third, Brown makes this startling claim: “until that moment in history, Jesus was viewed by His followers as a mortal prophet... a great and powerful man, but a man nevertheless. A mortal.”  This is entirely incorrect.  In their book, ''[[Cracking the Da Vinci Code]]'', [[James Garlow]] and [[Peter Jones]] list a dozen examples of church leaders—apart from the Bible—who spoke directly of Jesus’ divinity from 105 A.D. to 305 A.D.—historical proof of Christians who believed Jesus was divine at least two centuries before the Council.  [[Clement]] said in 150 A.D., “It is fitting you should think of Jesus Christ as God,” and [[Novation]], “He is not only man, but God also.”  (Garlow and Jones 94)

Third, Brown makes this startling claim: “until that moment in history, Jesus was viewed by His followers as a mortal prophet... a great and powerful man, but a man nevertheless. A mortal.”  This is entirely incorrect.  In their book, ''[[Cracking the Da Vinci Code]]'', [[James Garlow]] and [[Peter Jones]] list a dozen examples of church leaders—apart from the Bible—who spoke directly of Jesus’ divinity from 105 A.D. to 305 A.D.—historical proof of Christians who believed Jesus was divine at least two centuries before the Council.  [[Clement]] said in 150 A.D., “It is fitting you should think of Jesus Christ as God,” and [[Novation]], “He is not only man, but God also.”  (Garlow and Jones 94)

Fourth, Brown states that "Establishing Christ's divinity was critical to the further unification of the Roman empire and to the new Vatican power base…"  Brown states that the divinity of Christ was an invention by power-hungry Constantine seeking to unify the Roman Empire under the banner of Christianity.  If it hadn’t been for Constantine, Christianity would never have survived throughout history.  We certainly would not have the great and powerful establishment know as [[“the Vatican”]] (which Brown apparently thinks is the sum total of Christianity) that we have today.  Gradually, Christianity would have fizzled out and died and few would even remember the mortal prophet Jesus today.

Fourth, Brown states that "Establishing Christ's divinity was critical to the further unification of the Roman empire and to the new Vatican power base…"  Brown states that the divinity of Christ was an invention by power-hungry Constantine seeking to unify the Roman Empire under the banner of Christianity.  If it hadn't been for Constantine, Christianity would never have survived throughout history.  We certainly would not have the great and powerful establishment know as [[“the Vatican”]] (which Brown apparently thinks is the sum total of Christianity) that we have today.  Gradually, Christianity would have fizzled out and died and few would even remember the mortal prophet Jesus today.

Now, even if it were true that Constantine invented Christ’s divinity, it is highly doubtful that this would have had any effect on the power and success of Christianity…just look at Islam.  Muhammad was a completely mortal prophet, yet the religion he founded “unified empires and gave great power to religious authorities.”  (religiousfacts.com)  According to Brown, the success of Christianity was the result of Constantine’s endorsement of the religion.  However, the opposite was true!  It is very likely that Constantine’s motive was “to enlist the cooperation of what had become the strongest element in the empire: Christianity”.  Christianity would have survived with or without Constantine’s endorsement.  (Latourette 105)

Now, even if it were true that Constantine invented Christ’s divinity, it is highly doubtful that this would have had any effect on the power and success of Christianity...just look at Islam.  Muhammad was a completely mortal prophet, yet the religion he founded “unified empires and gave great power to religious authorities.”  (religiousfacts.com)  According to Brown, the success of Christianity was the result of Constantine’s endorsement of the religion.  However, the opposite was true!  It is very likely that Constantine’s motive was “to enlist the cooperation of what had become the strongest element in the empire: Christianity”.  Christianity would have survived with or without Constantine’s endorsement.  (Latourette 105)

The last claim Brown makes is that Constantine personally compiled that Bible as we know it today at the Council.  He included books that emphasize Jesus’ divinity, and excluded books that mention his humanity.  We have already seen that the books excluded from the Bible, including the Gnostic texts, do not emphasize Jesus’ humanity whatsoever.  In fact, they do the opposite.  What Brown fails to note is that the Bible itself speaks much more, and in great detail about Jesus’ humanity.  Once again, perhaps if Brown had bothered reading the Bible while conducting research, he wouldn’t have made this flagrant error.

The last claim Brown makes is that Constantine personally compiled that Bible as we know it today at the Council.  He included books that emphasize Jesus’ divinity, and excluded books that mention his humanity.  We have already seen that the books excluded from the Bible, including the Gnostic texts, do not emphasize Jesus’ humanity whatsoever.  In fact, they do the opposite.  What Brown fails to note is that the Bible itself speaks much more, and in great detail about Jesus’ humanity.  Once again, perhaps if Brown had bothered reading the Bible while conducting research, he wouldn't have made this flagrant error.

The Gnostic Jesus ”shares wisdom, reveals secrets, and wanders around in a gently spiritual fog, and talks, and talks.  And talks.”  (Welborn 57)  In the Bible, Jesus is described as “eating, drinking, being angry, frightened, lonely, grieving, suffering, and dying.”  The poignantly human descriptions of Jesus found in the four Biblical gospels starkly contrast to the mystical, unapproachable and verbose Jesus of the Gnostic gospels.  Only someone totally ignorant of the Bible would dream of saying its depiction of Jesus ignores his humanity. (Welborn 57)

The Gnostic Jesus ”shares wisdom, reveals secrets, and wanders around in a gently spiritual fog, and talks, and talks.  And talks.”  (Welborn 57)  In the Bible, Jesus is described as “eating, drinking, being angry, frightened, lonely, grieving, suffering, and dying.”  The poignantly human descriptions of Jesus found in the four Biblical gospels starkly contrast to the mystical, unapproachable and verbose Jesus of the Gnostic gospels.  Only someone totally ignorant of the Bible would dream of saying its depiction of Jesus ignores his humanity. (Welborn 57)

Brown also states that the four chosen gospels were “embellished” to further demonize Mary Magdalene, emphasize Jesus’ humanity and so forth.  By the fourth century there were hundreds—maybe thousands of copies of those four gospels in existence.  It is impossible that some authority ordered every copy altered.  Today, among surviving ancient copies of these gospels no “embellished” versions exist.  (Garlow and Jones 147)

Brown also states that the four chosen gospels were “embellished” to further demonize Mary Magdalene, emphasize Jesus’ humanity and so forth.  By the fourth century there were hundreds—maybe thousands of copies of those four gospels in existence.  It is impossible that some authority ordered every copy altered.  Today, among surviving ancient copies of these gospels no “embellished” versions exist.  (Garlow and Jones 147)

==='''Part V: Secret Societies'''===

===Part V: Secret Societies===

----

----

The first page in The Da Vinci Code is entitled “facts”.  The following statement is made about the ancient, secret society known as the “[[Priory of Scion]]”:

The first page in The Da Vinci Code is entitled “facts”.  The following statement is made about the ancient, secret society known as the “[[Priory of Scion]]”:

==='''Part VI: Feminism in The Da Vinci Code'''===

===Part VI: Feminism in The Da Vinci Code===

----

----

The Da Vinci Code is so much about the Church demonizing women throughout the centuries that it is no surprise it is a huge hit among women—and feminists in particular.  The amount of ideologically-motivated material in The Da Vinci Code is startling.  One example is that Brown perpetuates the idea of the “Sacred Feminine/Mother Goddess” throughout the book.  This idea basically states that in ancient times, people primarily worshipped female deities.  Because their religion was based on femininity, reproduction and therefore agriculture played an important part in their lives.  Ancient societies were made up of peace-loving farmers, who were in tune with nature, respected women, did not engage in warfare or even own weapons designed for killing humans.  (Welborn 74)

The Da Vinci Code is so much about the Church demonizing women throughout the centuries that it is no surprise it is a huge hit among women—and feminists in particular.  The amount of ideologically-motivated material in The Da Vinci Code is startling.  One example is that Brown perpetuates the idea of the “Sacred Feminine/Mother Goddess” throughout the book.  This idea basically states that in ancient times, people primarily worshipped female deities.  Because their religion was based on femininity, reproduction and therefore agriculture played an important part in their lives.  Ancient societies were made up of peace-loving farmers, who were in tune with nature, respected women, did not engage in warfare or even own weapons designed for killing humans.  (Welborn 74)

This school of thought holds that it was not until Indo-European invaders arrived that these egalitarian, matriarchal societies were brought to an end.  Warfare, weapons, male warrior gods, and patriarchal society were introduced and the age of the mother goddess ended.  (Welborn 74)  Dan Brown presents this view of ancient civilization as historical fact, and states that Jesus’ main goal was to restore the sacred feminine by introducing Mary Magdalene as the new female deity, bringing things back to their natural order.  However, there is one problem with this: numerous recent archaeological finds have proved the mother goddess theory to be nothing but a myth.  There is no evidence that such a period in time ever existed.  (Welborn 74)   

This school of thought holds that it was not until Indo-European invaders arrived that these egalitarian, matriarchal societies were brought to an end.  Warfare, weapons, male warrior gods, and patriarchal society were introduced and the age of the mother goddess ended.  (Welborn 74)  Dan Brown presents this view of ancient civilization as historical fact, and states that Jesus’ main goal was to restore the sacred feminine by introducing Mary Magdalene as the new female deity, bringing things back to their natural order.  However, there is one problem with this: numerous recent archaeological finds have proved the mother goddess theory to be nothing but a myth.  There is no evidence that such a period in time ever existed.  (Welborn 74)   

Another area in which Dan Brown misconstrues facts to further the feminist cause is when, through the character Teabing, he makes the following declaration: "the Church burned at the stake an astounding five million women" over a three-century time period (he doesn’t specify which three centuries, but it can be assumed he meant 1500-1800).  Considerable recent research on this subject states the number to be around 40,000.  Dan Brown is not even close.  

Another area in which Dan Brown misconstrues facts to further the feminist cause is when, through the character Teabing, he makes the following declaration: "the Church burned at the stake an astounding five million women" over a three-century time period (he doesn't specify which three centuries, but it can be assumed he meant 1500-1800).  Considerable recent research on this subject states the number to be around 40,000.  Dan Brown is not even close.  

The church certainly would not have felt threatened by any of these women, as Dan Brown suggests; they were poor and unpopular—not powerful, freethinking women.  Furthermore, it was rare that church authorities accused witches; it was almost always ordinary citizens, and often other women!  Interestingly, 20-25% of witchcraft charges were made against men and more than half of witch-trial defendants—male and female—were acquitted.  As Amy Welborn puts it, “the witch-trial hype was apparently a nuisance to authorities.”  (Welborn 77)

The church certainly would not have felt threatened by any of these women, as Dan Brown suggests; they were poor and unpopular—not powerful, freethinking women.  Furthermore, it was rare that church authorities accused witches; it was almost always ordinary citizens, and often other women!  Interestingly, 20-25% of witchcraft charges were made against men and more than half of witch-trial defendants—male and female—were acquitted.  As Amy Welborn puts it, “the witch-trial hype was apparently a nuisance to authorities.”  (Welborn 77)

Additionally, Brown states that the [[Malleus Maleficarum]] “Hammer of the Witches” was a “universal guide” to witch trials, mass produced and used by church authorities everywhere— basically, the misogynist bible.  The Malleus Maleficarum was a real book, and it certainly was an evil work, but it only went through 30 printings (amazon.com) and its author was not Catholic, but a Dominican Inquisitionist [[Heinrich Kramer]], an unsuccessful fraud.  Although Kramer claimed experience in over 100 trials, he actually only tried 8 women and was thrown out of the second town he went to. (Welborn 78)

Additionally, Brown states that the [[Malleus Maleficarum]] “Hammer of the Witches” was a “universal guide” to witch trials, mass-produced and used by church authorities everywhere— basically, the misogynist bible.  The Malleus Maleficarum was a real book, and it certainly was an evil work, but it only went through 30 printings (amazon.com) and its author was not Catholic, but a Dominican Inquisitionist [[Heinrich Kramer]], an unsuccessful fraud.  Although Kramer claimed experience in over 100 trials, he actually only tried 8 women and was thrown out of the second town he went to. (Welborn 78)

Perhaps the most serious fact overlooked by Dan Brown in his representation of the Catholic Church as anti-female is [[Mary the Mother of Jesus]].  Dan Brown’s total silence on this matter is glaringly obvious to anyone who knows anything about Christianity.  The truth is that the Catholic Church holds Mary in extremely high esteem—some even believe too much.  She is such a central figure in the Catholic faith, that at times she appears as important as Jesus Christ himself.  However, Dan Brown has seemingly never heard of her.

Perhaps the most serious fact overlooked by Dan Brown in his representation of the Catholic Church as anti-female is [[Mary the Mother of Jesus]].  Dan Brown’s total silence on this matter is glaringly obvious to anyone who knows anything about Christianity.  The truth is that the Catholic Church holds Mary in extremely high esteem—some even believe too much.  She is such a central figure in the Catholic faith, that at times she appears as important as Jesus Christ himself.  However, Dan Brown has seemingly never heard of her.

==='''Part VII: Leonardo DaVinci'''===

===Part VII: Leonardo DaVinci===

----

----

So, by this time you are probably thinking as I did, “Brown must have at least gotten Da Vinci right!”  Well, as it turns out—and by this point, it should not be very surprising—he did not.  The list of errors Brown makes about the title-inspiring [[Leonardo Da Vinci]] is lengthy.  On his official website, Brown states that Leonardo was “a prankster and genius" who is "widely believed to have hidden secret messages within much of his artwork."  This is simply not true; it's almost impossible to locate any serious art scholar or historian who believes that about Leonardo Da Vinci.  (Olson and Miesel)

So, by this time you are probably thinking as I did, “Brown must have at least gotten Da Vinci right!”  Well, as it turns out—and by this point, it should not be very surprising—he did not.  The list of errors Brown makes about the title-inspiring [[Leonardo Da Vinci]] is lengthy.  On his official website, Brown states that Leonardo was “a prankster and genius" who is "widely believed to have hidden secret messages within much of his artwork."  This is simply not true; it's almost impossible to locate any serious art scholar or historian who believes that about Leonardo Da Vinci.  (Olson and Miesel)

Georgetown art historian Diane Cappadonna states,  

Georgetown art historian Diane Cappadonna states,  

<blockquote>''I do not believe there is a woman in The Last Supper, and I do not believe in any way that it is Mary Magdalene.  The ‘V’ shapes”—not a single ‘M’ as Brown interprets—“that are there serve a solely artistic purpose—to place emphasis in the composition on Christ and to emphasize perspective.'' (Burnstein 229-230) </blockquote> Brown also argues the case that the figure must be a woman because “Da Vinci was skilled at painting the difference between the sexes.”  It certainly is true that Leonardo was a skilled painter; however all Renaissance artists depicted the disciple John as decidedly effeminate… Leonardo included.  In fact, most young men were painted with very womanly features.  In Leonardo’s painting St. John the Baptist; the face is astonishingly similar to John in The Last Supper—and equally feminine.  Are we to suppose that this also is secretly Mary Magdalene?  

<blockquote>''I do not believe there is a woman in The Last Supper, and I do not believe in any way that it is Mary Magdalene.  The ‘V’ shapes”—not a single ‘M’ as Brown interprets—“that are there serve a solely artistic purpose—to place emphasis in the composition on Christ and to emphasize perspective.'' (Burnstein 229-230) </blockquote> Brown also argues the case that the figure must be a woman because “Da Vinci was skilled at painting the difference between the sexes.”  It certainly is true that Leonardo was a skilled painter; however all Renaissance artists depicted the disciple John as decidedly effeminate... Leonardo included.  In fact, most young men were painted with very womanly features.  In Leonardo’s painting St. John the Baptist; the face is astonishingly similar to John in The Last Supper—and equally feminine.  Are we to suppose that this also is secretly Mary Magdalene?  

 

In addition to The Last Supper, Brown states that "…works like the Mona Lisa and Madonna of the Rocks al[so] …seem to be whispering the same cryptic message.  He goes on to describe the Mona Lisa as an androgynous self-portrait.  Shelley Esaak explains Brown’s reasoning behind making such an assertion:  

In addition to The Last Supper, Brown states that "…works like the Mona Lisa and Madonna of the Rocks al[so] …seem to be whispering the same cryptic message.  He goes on to describe the Mona Lisa as an androgynous self-portrait.  Shelley Esaak explains Brown’s reasoning behind making such an assertion:  

Brown then goes on to state that “the nuns” wished for the painting to contain Mary, Jesus, John the Baptist and the angel Uriel.  Leonardo followed “the nuns” instructions, but the first version he painted contained "explosive and disturbing details."  Actually, the confraternity wanted God the Father overhead, with two prophets on the side panels and the Virgin of the Rocks centered in the middle.  It is not known exactly what conspired between Leonardo and the monks, but it is know that Leonardo did not follow their original instructions.  There was nothing startlingly “un-Christian” in either version. (Olson and Miesel)

Brown then goes on to state that “the nuns” wished for the painting to contain Mary, Jesus, John the Baptist and the angel Uriel.  Leonardo followed “the nuns” instructions, but the first version he painted contained "explosive and disturbing details."  Actually, the confraternity wanted God the Father overhead, with two prophets on the side panels and the Virgin of the Rocks centered in the middle.  It is not known exactly what conspired between Leonardo and the monks, but it is know that Leonardo did not follow their original instructions.  There was nothing startlingly “un-Christian” in either version. (Olson and Miesel)

==='''Part VIII: Dan Brown’s Representation of Christianity'''===

===Part VIII: Dan Brown’s Representation of Christianity===

----

----

Throughout The Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown paints a picture of Christianity, and most importantly, its central figure: Jesus Christ.  In official interviews, he states that he himself is a Christian.  (danbrown.com)  

Throughout The Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown paints a picture of Christianity, and most importantly, its central figure: Jesus Christ.  In official interviews, he states that he himself is a Christian.  (danbrown.com)  

The compromise Latourette speaks of did not come without a price, and that was the loss of the purity of original, organic Christianity as nothing but the worship of Jesus Christ and a desire to emulate his character, his example of self-sacrifice, love and mercy.  Jesus’ message had nothing to do with restoring the sacred feminine—but it had everything to do with restoring and redeeming all of humankind.  Brown fails to grasp this basic meaning of Christianity.

The compromise Latourette speaks of did not come without a price, and that was the loss of the purity of original, organic Christianity as nothing but the worship of Jesus Christ and a desire to emulate his character, his example of self-sacrifice, love and mercy.  Jesus’ message had nothing to do with restoring the sacred feminine—but it had everything to do with restoring and redeeming all of humankind.  Brown fails to grasp this basic meaning of Christianity.

In addition to getting the historical facts wrong about the origins of Christianity, Brown also gets the message of Jesus Christ wrong.  In spite of his seeming desire to make the truth known, Brown contradicts himself by having the attitude that, when all is said and done, it doesn’t really matter what the Bible says, or what history says… “what matters is what you believe.”  (The Da Vinci Code, the movie)  In an official interview on his website, Dan Brown states:

In addition to getting the historical facts wrong about the origins of Christianity, Brown also gets the message of Jesus Christ wrong.  In spite of his seeming desire to make the truth known, Brown contradicts himself by having the attitude that, when all is said and done, it doesn't really matter what the Bible says, or what history says... “what matters is what you believe.”  (The Da Vinci Code, the movie)  In an official interview on his website, Dan Brown states:

<blockquote>

<blockquote>

''Faith is a continuum, and we each fall on that line where we may. By attempting to rigidly classify ethereal concepts like faith, we end up debating semantics to the point where we entirely miss the obvious--that is, that we are all trying to decipher life's big mysteries, and we're each following our own paths of enlightenment. I consider myself a student of many religions. The more I learn, the more questions I have. For me, the spiritual quest will be a life-long work in progress.''

''Faith is a continuum, and we each fall on that line where we may. By attempting to rigidly classify ethereal concepts like faith, we end up debating semantics to the point where we entirely miss the obvious--that is, that we are all trying to decipher life's big mysteries, and we're each following our own paths of enlightenment. I consider myself a student of many religions. The more I learn, the more questions I have. For me, the spiritual quest will be a life-long work in progress.''

Apparently, Dan Brown believes there are no solid truths—that Christian doctrine is malleable and can be tailored to each person’s desires.  However, he is gravely mistaken; faith is not a continuum.  Christianity does not involve shaky, grey areas of doubt and confusion, but is based upon a solid foundation—the rock that is Jesus Christ.  Christians do not rely on their "own paths of enlightenment", instead looking to the Bible and the Holy Spirit for truth and revelation.  As Martin Lloyd-Jones describes it, Christianity “is to be the acceptance of certain truths, and the working out of a reasoned, logical argument on the basis of those truths.  It is not to be something vague, and general, and intangible, which varies with one’s moods and feelings.” (Why Does God Allow War?)  For Christians, the “spiritual quest” simply means following Jesus Christ and seeking to know him more deeply.  Perhaps the biggest myth in The Da Vinci Code is the misrepresentation of Jesus Christ.

Apparently, Dan Brown believes there are no solid truths—that Christian doctrine is malleable and can be tailored to each person’s desires.  However, he is gravely mistaken; faith is not a continuum.  Christianity does not involve shaky, grey areas of doubt and confusion, but is based upon a solid foundation—the rock that is Jesus Christ.  Christians do not rely on their "own paths of enlightenment", instead looking to the Bible and the Holy Spirit for truth and revelation.  As Martin Lloyd-Jones describes it, Christianity “is to be the acceptance of certain truths, and the working out of a reasoned, logical argument on the basis of those truths.  It is not to be something vague, and general, and intangible, which varies with one’s moods and feelings.” (Why Does God Allow War?)  For Christians, the “spiritual quest” simply means following Jesus Christ and seeking to know him more deeply.  Perhaps the biggest myth in The Da Vinci Code is the misrepresentation of Jesus Christ.

==Film adaptation==

==Film adaptation==

Director [[Ron Howard]], producer Brian Grazer and actor [[Tom Hanks]] teamed up to make a film adaptation of the novel. It opened at the [[Cannes Film Festival]] and was conformed of an ensemble cast. It failed to live up to box office expectations which called for a super blockbuster and was critically lambasted for its pacing and ridiculous sounding dialog.

Director [[Ron Howard]], producer Brian Grazer and actor [[Tom Hanks]] teamed up to make a film adaptation of the novel. It opened at the [[Cannes Film Festival]] and was conformed of an ensemble cast. It failed to live up to box office expectations which called for a super blockbuster and was critically lambasted for its pacing and ridiculous sounding dialog.

==='''Bibliography'''===

===Bibliography===

----

----

Schlafly, Andrew.  World History Fourth Lecture – Ancient History.  October 2006.

Schlafly, Andrew.  World History Fourth Lecture – Ancient History.  October 2006.