[wideawake]

Baigent's book also maintains that:

(1) Christ was never crucified for our sins.

(2) Christ never rose from the dead.

(3) That Christ got married and had children and that his direct-line descendants are alive today and live in southern France.

In short, Christians should steer clear of Baigent's ridiculous, ahistorical, made-up fantasyland of a book and stick to Scripture and reputable historians.

[Xenalyte]

Baigent's book also maintains that:

(1) Christ was never crucified for our sins.

(2) Christ never rose from the dead.

(3) That Christ got married and had children and that his direct-line descendants are alive today and live in southern France.

In short, Christians should steer clear of Baigent's ridiculous, ahistorical, made-up fantasyland of a book and stick to Scripture and reputable historians.

Actually, the book doesn't MAINTAIN anything at all. Baigent et al are very careful about hedging their bets; they explicitly state that their theory is utterly unprovable, and they claim to make no statements of fact. They present it as an intriguing what-if, and historical mysteries (whether fantastic like this, or provable like the fate of the Princes in the Tower) fascinate me.

BTW, your last statement reminds me of the rationale behind the Vatican's old Banned Books list. (I am aware that the list holds no force today.)

[tracer]

Baiget's first two contentions about Jesus are bad enough, but the one about France is really too much...

[Atchafalaya]

You mean the Beldar Conehead family from that small village in France. I'll be darned.

[ET(end tyranny)]

In short, Christians should steer clear of Baigent's ridiculous, ahistorical, made-up fantasyland of a book and stick to Scripture and reputable historians.

Is Irenaeus reputable?