Fact, Fiction, and The Da Vinci Code

Human Events Online ^ | June 9, 2004 | Darrell L. Bock

[CGVet58]

among all the hoopla, what has been (to the best of my knowledge...) missing is a statement of the obvious; that taking a novel where the author is perfectly entitled to exercise "artistic license" and seeing it transmogrify into a distortion of a religion does not cast doubt upon said religion, but rather reflects the shallowness-of-faith that has already befallen so many

It is a rorschach event; much as Einstein proved that in observing phenomena we effect the outcome, the so-called truthfulness that has come from this book simply proves how brittle the faith of many has become - they have forgotten so much about Christ and about God that the little they do remember is like a fading memory that can easily be tested, swayed and swept away.

Good book, though... but not as good a writer as Clancy, much less Herman Wouk or Leon Uris, but entertaining nonetheless. But that's all it is. And it most certainly is not a powerful enough book to challenge my faith, because my faith isn't that weak.

CGVet58

[Sawman from Phoenix]

Totally agree with you, as a responsible father myself. The author makes no mispresentations that this is not a " novel ". The only two facts he asserts are in the preface that two societies exist. Is it believable to some? Perhaps, depending of their level of education. It's a well done novel - Dan Brown reminds me of the devil's advocate in the debates orchestrated by my profs in my college theology, physics, math, art & comparative religions. Has it influenced our family's faith ? Only to the extent that it reminded us that we have to continually defend it. I wish that Dan Brown had the same freedom of access to research Islam in his next novel as he had with Christianity !

[Caleb1411]

BUMP