Controversial Book 'The Way' Imagines Jesus as a Woman

Christian Post ^ | 09/06/2011 | Jeff Schapiro

[D-fendr]

More specifically:

From the Preface of The Da Vinci Code:

"The secret society of the Priory of Sion was founded in 1099, after the First Crusade. In 1975, parchments referred to as 'Dossiers Secrets' were discovered at the Bibliothèque Nationale, which mention the names of certain members of the Priory, including Sir Isaac Newton, Botticelli, Victor Hugo and Leonardo Da Vinci."

Is Brown stating or implying this as fact: The documents are real, true, and produced by the Priory of 1099?

Are they?

On his fact page and in interviews, Brown, when asked:" “How much of this is based on reality in terms of things that actually occurred?” says:

“Absolutely all of it. Obviously Robert Langdon is fictional, but all of the art, architecture, secret rituals, secret societies—all of that is historical fact."

On page 113, Brown says that Sir Isaac Newton, Victor Hugo, Boticelli were all Grand Masters in the Priory of Sion they were responsible for preserving the “True” identity of Jesus to be released in the future.

This is an obvious reference to the documents (from the 1956 Priory) in the Preface.

Bear in mind this is not a minor point. This secret of this secret society holds up the "factual" basis of the fictional plot.

Brown got all of this from 1982 publication, Holy Blood, Holy Grail. A non-fiction book that got its information from documents provided to them by Pierre Plantard - the fraud of the 1956 Priory of Sion.

[Cronos]

The Priory was not restarted in 1956 -- it never existed prior to that year

D. Brown makes the false statement that this is a FACT.

[Cronos]

Good fiction weaves real events, plaqces, etc. with the story. That’s what Brown did, pure and simple. Every fictional writer uses the same technique.

Good fiction does not present "fiction" as facts -- especially not fiction that can be easily proven as NOT facts.

I point you to Robert Harris' book "Lustrum" where he writes on the lives of Cicero, etc. -- now that is putting real, verifiable facts and building on it -- he does not veer from this and he does not make false claims for things being facts when they are not.

Since Brown never claimed that the story was accurate or historically accurate, I think you are going a little overboard --> not really. As I said, if he said it was a work of fiction, why not. But he doesn't . D. Brown says "FACT: All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents and secret rituals in this novel are accurate." --> It is a work of fiction that presents itself as based in fact -- THAT I strongly object to -- it is lying plain and simple

Now here are some more examples of the errors in the book that are presented as facts

Leonardo Da Vinci is said to have hidden many pagan symbols in his "many works on Vatican commission". There was only one Vatican commission that he made and there are no pagan symbols in this or any other works that he made.

Next, the Code states that Constantine the great collated the New Testament and that Jesus' divinity was "invented" by Constantine at the Council of Nicea. Both are false -- the New Testament canon was collated over several centuries and this was not completed until well after Constantine's death.
Also, Jesus' divinity is attested to as early as the first century -- 200 years before Constantine. The Council of Nicea met to decide whether Jesus was fully God or a lesser divine being (Arian view) -- the Code makes these glaring errors that any real researcher would have dismissed.

These are falsehoods portrayed as facts.

[DustyMoment]

Good fiction does not present "fiction" as facts -- especially not fiction that can be easily proven as NOT facts.

(sigh)

So, we've gone full circle back to the beginning. Despite the FACT that I have presented FACT that Brown did not present his book as FACT, you remain stuck on that falsehood. With respect to your point about fiction, as one who has written fiction, I respectfully disagree.

Thanks for a good discussion.

[D-fendr]

Brown did not present his book as FACT

Matt Lauer: “How much of this is based on reality in terms of things that actually occurred?”

Dan Brown: “Absolutely all of it. Obviously Robert Langdon is fictional, but all of the art, architecture, secret rituals, secret societies—all of that is historical fact."

[DustyMoment]

Obviously Robert Langdon is fictional, but all of the art, architecture, secret rituals, secret societies—all of that is historical fact."

Clearly you don't understand "fiction" or the foundations of fiction. Nothing in Brown's answer conveys that the STORY is real. The STORY is FICTION.

Look up FICTION in the dictionary.

[D-fendr]

Yes, the story, the plot and characters are fictional. But the story’s appeal is that its, according to Brown, factual underpinning is true. This factual underpinning has been shown not to be true.

And it has been shown that Brown claims it is true.

You do understand this point, yes?

In an earlier post, you said you believe: “the facts, as collected and related by Brown are true.”

Specifically, do you believe:

The Priory of Sion, founded in 1099, with members including Sir Isaac Newton, Botticelli, Victor Hugo and Leonardo Da Vinci were responsible for preserving the “True” identity of Jesus to be released in the future?

[DustyMoment]

Specifically, yes, I CHOOSE to believe these things are true based on my own research and the research of others.

But, riddle me this, Batman.

1. Was Leonardo DaVinci a real person?
2. Is the Louvre a real art gallery?
3. Are some of Leonardo DaVinci’s works of art displayed at the Louvre?
4. Is Paris a real city in France?
5. Is the Louvre in Paris, France?
6. Is Robert Langdon a real person?
7. Is London a real city?
8. Is England a real country in Europe?
9. Is London in England?
10. Was Jesus a real person?
11. Is Indiana Jones a real person?
12. Did Indiana Jones really find the Ark of the Covenent?
13. Did Indiana Jones really take the Ark of the Covenent away from the Nazis?
14. Did Indiana Jones really find the Holy Grail in a cave guarded by a 700 year-old knight?

If you answer ‘yes’ to any of questions 1 - 10, then you agree with Dan Brown that the factual underpinnings of the story are true. These are the factual underpinnings about which he speaks. He does not and never has claimed that the STORY is true, anymore than the Indiana Jones stories are true.

BUT . . . . . while the Indiana Jones stories touch on Biblical stories, they didn’t touch the third rail of Christian theology, e.g. anything that dares to suggest that Jesus might have been as real in his day as you and I are. And, part of that reality is that Jesus acted in a way that was natural for a man of his day.

The fact is that we don’t really know what Jesus did in His 33 years among us. MAYBE He took a wife, MAYBE He didn’t. MAYBE He knew from the beginning that He was the Son of God and MAYBE He didn’t.

The point is that we choose to believe the things we want. You choose to disbelieve that the DaVinci Code is a story that Brown claims to be true. I choose to believe that the story is an interesting story of speculation, but nothing more. Philosophically, it presents an interesting “What if?
speculation; just like Indiana Jones.

The difference between you and I is that I know that the DaVinci Code isn’t real anymore than Indiana Jones. You choose to believe that Brown, despite his numerous claims to the contrary, presented the story as being 100% factual, even though he says the opposite in his own words on his own website. One of the great things about America is that we can choose to believe or disbelieve what we want. We can agree or disagree as we choose and, at the end of the day, life goes on.

[D-fendr]

yes, I CHOOSE to believe these things are true based on my own research and the research of others.

Including Brown, whom you agree with. Unfortunately the statement you agree with is only supported by forged documents of admitted fraud. You have other support? Please post it.

If you answer ‘yes’ to any of questions 1 - 10, then you agree with Dan Brown that the factual underpinnings of the story are true.

No-sequitor. Brown is specific in what he claims to be true underpinning his fictional book. That Leonardo DaVinci was a real person is not part of this. Why substitute this for the facts under question?

The point is that we choose to believe the things we want.

Perhaps you do, I hope to seek truth. And, most certainly, you cannot dismiss this discussion in such a fashion. It's about what is fact and what is proven not to be fact that Brown claims as fact.

You choose to believe that Brown, despite his numerous claims to the contrary, presented the story as being 100% factual

No, he presented as factual what he presented as factual - precisely what I've posted twice already. Did you really not read and understand this?

One of the great things about America is that we can choose to believe or disbelieve what we want.

Most certainly, friend. I'm arguing facts with you - and making my case in a debate about what is true. If truth has no value, then we disagree. Otherwise, post your arguments defending what you believe is true in a logical fashion.

I don't think you've done a very good job of that so far. I'll consider whatever you'd like to post in another attempt.

Thanks for your reply.

[DustyMoment]

Facts and truth are relative and there are few universal truths. One universal truth is that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west.

Aside from that and a few other universal truths, truths are relative to our education, environment, religion, etc., etc., etc.

We choose to believe in God, or not.

We choose to believe that today is Wednesday, or not.

History is replete with historical revisionism and much of history is difficult to verify. For example, if we take the Bible, what is supposed to be the Word of God, the first books of the Old Testament were not written until more than 300 years after the death of Christ. Up to that point, the story was passed down verbally.

Then, many centuries later, King James decided that there were issues with the Old Testament and re-wrote it the way that he thought it should be. He changed some facts, made up others and completely misinterpreted the meanings of some of the original text. Even today, Biblical scholars can’t agree on many parts of the Bible because within the pages of the Bible there are so many inconsistencies.

So, we choose what facts we believe and what facts we choose not to believe. This is why cops try to get statements from as many witnesses as possible because all of the witnesses they interview saw the event slightly differently.

You choose to believe certain things about the DaVinci Code based on research you have performed, or others have performed or the time of day. Why you choose to believe these things is personal to you. I choose to believe different things about the DaVinci Code. I also said that I thought it was in interesting story but, at the end of the day, it’s still fiction. Some fiction makes you go “hmmmmm”. Other fiction makes you close the book and move onto the next one without giving it another thought.

I don’t expect ANY fiction to be historically accurate, nor do I expect to be believe that it is factual. That’s why it’s called fiction. If Brown’s research suggests that the art, architecture and secret societies were real, then that’s his reality because that’s his perception of the facts and, for each of us, perception is reality.

Your perception of reality is different from his and you disagree with his presentation of the story. I read the book simply to read a story that presented an interesting plot . . . TO ME. So, my perception of reality is a little different from you AND from Dan Brown.

In everything I have seen that you have posted, your biggest beef appears to be with the Priory of Scion. I haven’t seen you take issue with the Knights Templar or Opus Dei, for example. So, I don’t know if you take issue with those as being “factual”, or if the Priory of Scion issue consumes so much of your attention that you haven’t gotten to some of these other things.

Regardless, you will go back to your initial position and fail to understand any of mine. That’s your choice and you are welcome to think/believe whatever you choose.

Thanks for a good discussion.

(IOW, we can continue to eat up JimRob’s BW and not change each other’s minds. Let’s end it here.)

[D-fendr]

We choose to believe that today is Wednesday, or not.

Today is Wednesday. If we choose to believe otherwise we are choosing falsehood.

The truth matters. A pilot who chooses to believe whatever he wishes about his altitude; a parent who chooses to believe whatever he wishes about his child; a driver who chooses to believe whatever he wishes about cars in the opposing lane…

The truth matters. Spreading falsehoods has consequences. This is, or was, a discussion about what is true.

Let’s end it here.

I can't see a path to continue. A debate on what is true is futile if one side believes that truth is a personal choice.

Thanks for your reply.