Readers Digest Explanation of the DaVinci Code?

[asphaltgambler]

Could someone here briefly explain the basic premiss of the DaVinci Code (book). There are a h$ll of a lot of people in my area VERY wound up about it

I read somewhere this past week that the Catholic church was filing a lawsuit against the author and trying to get the book banned from publication

[Nathans_Dad]

Da Vinci code in a nutshell:

Basic premise is that Jesus was not celibate but was actually married to Mary Magdalene. He had several children while alive. Those children were hidden away from persecution after the crucifixion by Mary Magdalene and were eventually brought by boat to France where they became integrated into a French line of kings. There is a secret society (the Knights Templar that Da Vinci was a member of) whose job it was to protect the "Holy Grail" which was not the cup used at the last supper as is commonly thought but was another "vessel" that carries Christ's blood, i.e. Mary Magdalene and her descendants.

That's the basic premise, the story itself is sort of a murder mystery with a detective story woven through it as a modern day expert on religion tries to uncover several clues that lead to the "truth" about the Holy Grail.

It really is an excellent work of fiction and an enjoyable read. Some people are getting all worked up because they think it is somehow offering an alternate explanation of the gospel which Dan Brown never said was his intent.

I think the Catholic Church is upset because of how the book portrays Opus Dei which is a group within the Catholic Church.

[Superman]

I think the Church is upset because so many people fail to see the term "fiction" printed on the book's binding. It could not possibly have reached this level of popularity as a fiction story. Its intense popularity stems from the many millions of people who apparently regard this book as a sort of fifth Gospel. That's the problem. This book is leading people, spiritually. The Church thinks that spiritual leadership is its role, and does not appreciate seeing these footprints in its sandbox.

The book has just enough verifiable fact to make the story plausible. As any good fiction story does.

[techweenie]

That's probably a good summary, Rick.

I haven't read the Da Vinci Code, but instead read the book that provided the foundation for it: "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail."

It's interesting that subsequent discoveries of Gnostic and other texts indicate that Magdalene was quite possibly not a 'prostitute' but first among the apostles. It's interesting because it tends to reinforce the central premise of HBHG. I don't know if the Da Vinci Code goes into the Priory or the story of Rennes-le-Chateau, but the whole subject area is pretty interesting, if thinly supported.

When HBHG came out, there was an equally ferocious reaction from the church.

[asphaltgambler]

Why then does it seem that the Catholic church is the most offended by the book?

[IROC]

Originally posted by asphaltgambler
Why then does it seem that the Catholic church is the most offended by the book?

Honestly - because I think it undermines the power that the Catholic church like to wield. It basically plants a seed of doubt in the followers of that faith that the Church has lied to them for centuries and "things aren't exactly as they seem".

Like has been said though - the real problem is that many people regard this story as true. Even Dan Brown has stated that the book is a fictional work based on "facts", but in reality even a lot of his facts don't hold up to scrutiny.

In other words, I think it is misleading to present a story like this (that is so contrary to what people were told to believe) and state that the story is based on fact, when it really isn't.

Mike

[RallyJon]

All religions are based upon the concept that, among various historical documents written by various men, some are "the truth" and the rest aren't. This works well as long as they stick to faith and belief as justification, but as soon as they start arguing historical legitimacy they are vulnerable to every new scroll that gets dug up. It's a slippery slope and the catholic church should avoid battles it can't win.

In other words, I think it is misleading to present a story like this (that is so contrary to what people were told to believe) and state that the story is based on fact, when it really isn't.

How do you differentiate fact from story?

[IROC]

Originally posted by RallyJon
How do you differentiate fact from story?

Exactly. You just summed up most of what's wrong with bible. But that's a subject for a different thread...

Mike

[Rikao4]

It's a fun read, offers another version of the story, and I'm sure the Muslim community regard's the bible as a Da Vinci Code of sorts. Worry about your priest, leave the books to us.
Rika

[Moses]

Some truths to ponder;

Mary Magdalene was never originally thought to be a prostitute. This was a declaration made by a pope about a thousand years later. (I forget which pope).

Jesus was not just a jew, he was a FUNDAMENTALIST jew who was offended by the corruption of his religion and hoped for a return to jewish religious principles. A fundamental tenet of judaism at that time was that men should be married by age 30. Did Jesus not consider himself bound to the traditions of the faith he sought to restore?

As Superman noted, all great fiction weaves a loose fabric made from threads of truth.

[red-beard]

The central issue here is that over the years, Jesus, Mary (His mother) and the rest of the characters in the story have gone from the humble beings they were to these idols of worship. These were very poor people. They didn't wear perfect, clean and glowing colorful robes. The wore clothes from the lowest part of society. All of that window dressing was added after the fact.

For example, Mary being a Virgin and the immaculate conception is a concept that is only a few hundred years old!

[nostatic]

I thought that in a more recent interpretation of scripture, Mary said she was "like a virgin, touched for the very first time."

Madonna 3:69

[Nathans_Dad]

I think you might be confusing the concept of the virgin birth and the concept of immaculate conception. They are different.

The gospels of Matthew and Luke both talk about Mary being a virgin when she conceived. Those gospels are a tad bit older than a few hundred years.

Now immaculate conception is a Catholic dogma that says that Mary was shielded by God from original sin until she gave birth to Jesus. That's more of a Catholic only thing and may have been originated a few hundred years ago.

[Jeff Higgins]

Those of you that have not as of yet done so, should just sit down ad read the Bible. Even if you do not believe a word of it. It really is a great read, and doing so will answer many of your questions about it.

I find it amazing that so many otherwise inquisitive, intelligent people are so willing to accept second hand information concerning this book. With other controversial writings, the first thing many of us will do is sit down to read it to see for ourselves, not being satisfied with others' views and interpretations. In too many cases this is simply not so with the Bible.

Why is that? It is certainly the most read, and the most contoversial book of all time. I would think that in itself would motivate folks to read it. But, alas, there is a stigma surrounding it that many otherwise "enlightened" people just can't get past. There are too many intellectual, social, and even religious circles that frown upon this book and would look askance at any member that dared to read it. Such an individual would be the object of ridicule, scorn, or worse, depending on the circles in which they run. It's really too bad.

It's in these circles where books and movies like this one gain a foothold. Where there is a fuzzy "understanding" of scripture based wholey on second hand exposure at best, and hearsay at worst. If folks would just go to the source, the parts of the DaVinci Code that align with scripture (true or not, depending upon your beliefs) could be readily separated from those that do not. The term "fiction" attached to this book would be emphasized all the more.

[RallyJon]

there is a stigma surrounding it that many otherwise "enlightened" people just can't get past

Kinda like watching CNN.

Lots of good info there for sure, but you can't help getting the feeling that you're only being told part of the story and that someone who thinks they're smarter and more important that you is filtering out content that would provide a more complete picture.

[nostatic]

Jeff, I don't get your point. Are you saying that people who say anything against the bible haven't read it? And what "circles" are you talking about that stigmatize those that have read it?

[Jeff Higgins]

Todd, the context in which I made my comments is important. I was trying to drill down to where the DaVinci Code has apparently gained some credibility beyond the fictional work it is intended to be. Among folks that have just enough knowledge to be dangerous, so to speak. While I realize that many intelligent, inquisitive people who have read the Bible still don't believe a word of it, they are also not the ones assigning any level of credibility to the DaVinci Code.

What circles? Crack a Bible on a college campus some time. You are immediately labelled. Mention you believe the scriptures in acedemic circles and you lose a bit of credibility. Try to discuss the Bible seriously in professional circles (engineers in my case, but just about any will do) and you will get the old "you don't believe that fairy tale, do you?" look and/or response. Many left-leaning political circles (gay rights advocates, pro-abortion advocates, etc.) dissavow much of what the Bible says; show up with one around them and see how far you get. There are many others, but I think that illustrates what I meant. Be seen with a Bible in any of these circles, and folks will think you have been hitting the kool-aid again. I think that keeps a lot of people from reading it, which is unfortunate.

[rouxroux]

And they are getting all lathered up just like Clement XII forbidding Catholics to join speculative Freemasonry...Lighten (or enlighten) up folks...

[stevepaa]

Originally posted by Jeff Higgins
What circles? Crack a Bible on a college campus some time. You are immediately labelled. Mention you believe the scriptures in acedemic circles and you lose a bit of credibility. Try to discuss the Bible seriously in professional circles (engineers in my case, but just about any will do) and you will get the old "you don't believe that fairy tale, do you?" look and/or response.

We keep religion out of the workplace. It seems you want to bring it in. The most effective Christian rocket scientist I knew never brought it up unless you asked him. There are Hindu, Buddhists and Muslims as well as atheists and agnostics and nearly ever Christian sect, I suppose, where I work, and I do not expect them to bring their religious belief or lack thereof to work either. There is a post board for Bible meetings if you want to attend and that's as far as it goes.

Many left-leaning political circles (gay rights advocates, pro-abortion advocates, etc.) dissavow much of what the Bible says; show up with one around them and see how far you get. There are many others, but I think that illustrates what I meant.

I am not sure what your point here is. You want to use the Bible for some political use according to your reading of scripture and wonder why others who want the US governed by the Constitution don't listen to you?

[Superman]

I continue to respect Jeff's ideas and his writing skill. And I will repeat his challenge. Those of you making judgements on Christians, Catholics, Catholicism or any other related subject but who have not read the Bible.......shut up. You are parroting some other person's thinking which you have accepted at face value. If you want to discuss the Bible or Christianity with any degree of credibility, then the LEAST you must do is read the Bible.