[NotQuiteCricket]

"Although many "creation" and "flood" myths are similar, don't the Hebrew ones predate them all?
Ditto with the virgin or godly inspired birth (see Leda and the swan in Greek mythology) "

No. No. and No.

[farmfriend]

Although many "creation" and "flood" myths are similar, don't the Hebrew ones predate them all?

I believe that there is one very similar to Genesis that predates the Hebrew one. I don't remember the culture though.

[Shermy]

in Scripture a redeemed prostitute

What scripture says that?

[hergus]

"Although many "creation" and "flood" myths are similar, don't the Hebrew ones predate them all?"

NOOOOOOOOOOO

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

Question: "The Da Vinci Code - fact, fiction, or heresy?"

Response: None of the above. The book is blasphemy.

[firewalk]

.

[Velveeta]

An excellent read, a thrilling writer. Angels and Demons was terrific as well.

[SamAdams76]

I read this book back in June in about four days while I was in Alabama. It was a good read, very well written, but I thought the timeline was ridiculously farfetched (all the action takes place over a single evening and a LOT happens).

Yeah, I know it's only fiction but still. I like to have my fiction be somewhat plausible.

I never really gave much thought as to whether the premise (of a secret society that held the secrets of the Holy Grail) had any truth to it or not. The foreword does mention that the secret society really exists and that Leonardo da Vinci, Victor Hugo and Isaac Newton, among others, belonged to it. But as for the Holy Grail, I just don't know.

PJ, I ping you to this thread to see if you read this book and if so, what you thought of it.

I have Dan Brown's Digital Fortress on one of my bookshelves waiting to be read. Has anybody read that one?

[Cicero]

I haven't read the book, because it looked like a piece of junk, but I did read a review of it in the latest issue of Crisis Magazine.

I hesitate to speak of a book I haven't read, but I have no reason to doubt the review in Crisis. It demonstrates that the book is unhistorical nonsense, and makes a good case that it is filled with anti-Catholic bigotry.

Among other things, the author seems to think that the figure of St. John in Da Vinci's Last Supper is Mary Magdalene. Yes, he is depicted with long hair, but he is not Mary Magdalene.

There are very early traditions saying that Mary Magdalene repented and became a saint. In part that depends who you think the woman is who enters the Publican's house while Jesus is at dinner, washes his feet with her tears, and dries them with her hair. A long Catholic tradition going back to early times says that the woman is Mary Magdalene, but she is not named in this particular scene, so many Protestant biblical interpreters denied it.

In any case, there is no reason to believe that Jesus and Mary Magalene married and had children, which I gather is what the novel claims. Destructive nonsense, with an obvious antichristian as well as anticatholic agenda.

[StatesEnemy]

Read the gnostics.

[Cicero]

P.S. I didn't think the review article debunking The da Vinci Code would be online this soon, but here it is:

http://www.crisismagazine.com/feature1.htm

[tortoise]

Although many "creation" and "flood" myths are similar, don't the Hebrew ones predate them all?

Not by a longshot. The Hebrew mythologies and cultural epics are greatly pre-dated by similar ones from other much older cultures from which we have archaelogical records.

[CaptainK]

Read Gilgamesh for the the earliest flood tale. It's one of the oldest recorded stories in the world. The story of Gilgamesh is Sumerian and versions were widely known in the third millennium B.C.

[cookcounty]

The Christian-hating bigots are always eagely stumbling over each other to link early Christianity to all manner of pagan cults, utterly ignoring the obvious Jewish intricacies of the New Testament.

The "chalice" would have been the "Cup of Redemption" or the "Cup of Salvation" (the 3rd or 4th cup of wine) from the Jewish Passover.

[Between the Lines]

Another current thread on this subject in the Religion Forum:

Dismantling the Da Vinci Code

[IronJack]

What's that the Bible says about men rewriting the scripture in the last days to suit their own venal ends ...?

[Sam Cree]

Yeah, I am in the middle of reading this book, it's lots of fun. Very provocative, and, I am sure, mostly bull. But what fun! Trashy, but fun.

[Swordmaker]

There is a tradition in Europe that the royal blood of the European houses can trace their lineage back to the children of Chirst and Mary Magdalen through the Carolingian (Charlemagne) line.

This was outlined in a scholarly book "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" by Michael Baigent, Henry Lincoln, and Richard Leigh. The Priory of Sion does exist... but whether it was established to protect the "royal blood line of Jesus Christ" or is an ancient secret society for the protection of ancient secret kooks is unknown: members do not talk.

[Swordmaker]

Also the main theme of the book about the co-equal divinity of the Virgin Mary, Mary Magdalene, and Jesus and the "conspiracy" to hide the "sacred feminine" also exists:

[Woahhs]

Personally, I found the book highly over-rated. The writer plays pretty fast and loose with the scholarship angle, though if you respect the opinion of theological "scholars" that believe a homosexual bishop is just dandy, I guess it's up to you.

Trite and banal is all I could think of the book. It reads like a teleplay, and not a particularly good one either. I got about three quarters of the way through on its reputation, and figured is wasn't going to get any better, so I didn't even care enough to finish it. I'd already had a belly full of that cheap literary device of telling the reader the protagonist found something significant, then waiting five pages to tell what it was.

Also, it almost seemed like plagerism for the writer to flood the landscape of his story with historically great works of art. Kind of a literary equivalent to the nut-case that has a collection of pictures of himself with notable celebrities.

The "sacred feminine" the protagonist explains as an ostensibly neutral observer just showed a lack of guts on the part of the writer in that while our hero takes no position, he speaks rather reverentially of the ancient gnosis.

All in all, I thought the book was the offering of a very gifted person with a tainted taste for the tawdry.

[gonzo]

Hi, Jenn. Long time............FRegards

[Snowy]

I just finished the book and liked it very much. I found this (http://www.lulu.com/content/11494)[download the .pdf file], which is 'a reader's guide' to the book and apparently it explains a lot of the premises found in the book. Also, on the www.danbrown.com website, there is a FAQ which addresses his sources.

[Cincinatus]

I've read it. Not bad, but basically a cheap potboiler. Brown got most of his conspiracy theory from Baigent et al.'s Holy Blood, Holy Grail, which came out in the early 1980's a created quite a little cottage industry in the paranoia literature, linking the Knights Templar, Rosicrucians, Freemasonry, renaissance Hermetic magic, the Crusades, and a variety of other esoteric arcana into one giant conspiracy theory.

Great fun stuff for people who like The X-Files. I would neither take it too seriously nor be offended.

[MississippiMan]

This goofy Christian-hating theory has been around for years, yet was presented in this novel as Earth-shattering, bold, fresh. I took it on a cruise as my primary read. About halfway through, I got so angry that...well, I didn't finish it and I didn't bring it home.

MM

[Prince Charles]

The principal sect that advocated St. Mary Magdalene as the wife of our Lord was the Gnostics. Lest anyone think they (the Gnostics) had a special understanding, it should be noted that one of their main rituals involved anointing each other with semen (presumably freshly obtained).

This alone marks them as very unchristian, IMHO.

[longhornmo]

The Da Vinci Code incorporates ideas from the gnosic gospels, their medieval derivatives, and new age counterparts. A visit to Dan Brown's web site http://www.danbrown.com/index.html reveals a plethora of unsubstatiated "bizzarre facts". His "resources" are a cornucopia of new agers, conspiracy theorists, and gnostics.

In a recent book discussion I was amazed to find a majority of the college-educated group willing to accept his theories as "historical fact" simply because he included a list of "resources" and proved that the theory had existed for a long time. Between "edutainment" and "newstainment" many are becoming gullible, unable or unwilling think critically.

While the plot and storytelling make for good reading, as readers of fiction each of us must decide where our line of tolerance lies. How much are we willing to entertain, even as fiction, that conflicts with our beliefs, principles, or moral standards? I enjoyed "Gone in Sixty Seconds" even though I firmly believe stealing is wrong. I can be entertained by the Indiana Jones tales, the Matrix, or the Silmarillion which take some elements from the same gnostic mythology that the Da Vinci Code uses. The Da Vinci Code crosses my line.

My primary objection is that, as a Christian, the diety of Christ, the integrity of the Bible, and the nature of God presented in it are the basis of my faith, my lifestyle, and my hope for eternity. The Da Vinci Code negates the cross of Christ, it's purpose, and the resulting tranformation in the lives of the apostles and early church fathers. While calling itself fiction, the book deliberately blurs the line between fact and fiction, leading to a huge deception.

An ancient philosophy, gnosticism promises "secret knowledge". In my opinion it is a deception that began with a serpent's promise of power and knowledge that would be available to those who "eat of the fruit" of the tree of life.

[RightWhale]

What is it with Christians that they call each other heretics? Well, maybe Protestants don't care about such trivial distinctions, but the idea that Prester John was a Nestorian makes some people livid.

[dnatree]

I let go of the interpretations about the bible and began to gather synchronicities that eventually took on a much different form than what is offered by society. Shall we say "the smallest of points will soon alter the largest of equations and render all the interpretations meaningless". In other words it will soon be evident that the "right people", those that interpret God for us will be revealed to love their interpretation of God more than they love each other, and when that interpretation has been taken from them they will see what they truly have. This process will probably occur through family relationships quickened by dna as spoken in Matt: 10:34 It is through relationship conflict that the interpretations will be revealed as ignorance. dnatree.us/sarah.htm Is a letter to my daughter revealing a free ebook that contains my experience with christianity.

[RightWhale]

Even if it is true, so what?

[marbren]

The problem is that people who believe this trash end up in HELL.

[SoftballMominVA]

Okay here's a question. Let's just for a moment accept his point that Jesus was married and had a child or children. I keep coming up (in my mind) with a shrug and a "so what?"

The Bible clearly states he was God made man. A man gets married and has children. The children would still be human children, not half gods. Am I missing something?

The stuff about the Sacred Feminine was just annoying and got in the way of a pretty good murder mystery.

[InvisibleChurch]

the book is listed as 'fiction'

[gorush]

"The Da Vinci Code - fact, fiction, or heresy?"

Probably!

[Green Knight]

In Mr. Brown's world, the early church found it necessary to suppress the "goddess" woman centered pagan religion by a) demonizing women (i.e. the apple and Eve) and b) stealing pagan ceremonies for its own (see: Christmas).

Now this is ludicrous. For that to be true, then that would mean that the early church members would have had to have gone back in time and had the writers of older copies of Genesis change what they were writing so that Eve's the one who takes the apple, rather than Adam. That's ludicrous beyond words, to assume that somehow they got their hands on every last copy of Genesis which was put on paper before the birth of Christ and altered it so the story goes that way.

[Louisiana]

You are a "touble-maker." You dangle a theological bone to a bunch of pit-bulls, get them really worked up, trow the bone down, back up, and watch the show.

[BlueLancer]

For another take on this subject, related subject matter in The Jesus Scroll

[aruanan]

a. Although many "creation" and "flood" myths are similar, don't the Hebrew ones predate them all?
b.Ditto with the virgin or godly inspired birth (see Leda and the swan in Greek mythology)

a. No.
b. No.

That said, the DVC is another in a long series of moronic tomes purporting to have the inside scoop.

In Mr. Brown's world, the early church found it necessary to suppress the "goddess" woman centered pagan religion by a) demonizing women (i.e. the apple and Eve)

As far as making women look evil by the story of Eve and the temptation--the Christian take on this from early in the first century AD is that Mary was tempted and fell for a scam while Adam stood by her side, did nothing to stop her, and then, deliberately and with full knowledge of what he was doing, sinned. Now, which of the two genders is the more evil-looking?