Jump to content

The Da Vinci Code


Recommended Posts

I have got the Da Vinci code and it is sat there goading me to read it, but until May 19th i am up to my ears in text books, associated magazines and the like. As soon as my assisgnment is handed in I will read it and i can't wait. Just hope it lives up to all the hype... :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i will have to make the effort to acquire this and read it.

 

am currently re reading a series of seven books by one of my favourite science fiction authors so it wll be at least a week before i have the chance to sort this out. from what i have heard though it is a good yarn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

have read a few science fantasy and cannot say that i dislike them but depends on the author. read a few of Mc Caffery. some of the dragon rider ones when they first came out.

 

cant say i have heard of the other one.

 

Harry Harrison is worth a read, especially bil(one l only as bill with two ls is reserved for officers only) the galactic hero series. most are a send up of modern and not so modern science fiction and fantasy films.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Must admit i am like that. I get a phrase in my head from a well read book and i cannot rest until i have read it again. I re read all my favourites on a regular basis. Its great at the moment because the books my daughter reads are ones that i read at school, so i get to read them all again! :D:D:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I've read the Da Vinci Code too, though I felt it was a severe dumbing-down after interrupting my tour of books on the 11th century kings of England. I could demolish its historical claims in a matter of a few minutes quite easily, but I don't want to spoil the book for those who have not read it. I'd rather you all read it first! :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For a critique of some of Dan Brown's historical-biblical claims through the mouths of his characters Robert Langdon and Sir Leigh Teabing, I will reproduce here my posting from the St John Paul II thread:

 

WARNING: BOOK SPOILERS AHEAD!!! :P8)

 

The books have not been changed. If you refer to other Gospels you have to take into account the fact that there are codices (manuscripts in book form) of the Four Gospels dating from the 2nd century itself, indicating that the classic Four Gospels were already the accepted ones. Irenaeus in his writings c. 160 already takes the Four Gospels as a given, like the four winds and the four 'corners' of the Earth. The Muratorian Canon from c. 170-180 mentions more or less the 27 books we know. This predates Constantine who was Emperor from 306-337.

 

Now, as for the alleged changing of the words, the earliest known manuscript is a fragment of John's Gospel dating from AD 110 and is in the John Rylands University Library in Manchester. But as Kurt and Barbara Aland point out in a table, most of the manuscripts are of entire books or sections of the New Testament and the words have emphatically NOT been changed as a conspiracy. There are something like a staggering 5000 Greek manuscripts of the NT from the first 1000 years, and scholars have even identified families and text-types.

 

Because of the tenacity of variant readings, all the original text has been preserved. As Hort said in the late 19th century, which holds true now, the variants affect less than one thousandth of the NT, and not one of them affect any fact of history or doctrine.

 

If you are referring to the claims of the Da Vinci Code, you have to consider that all of the Four Gospels go back to apostolic times, with Mark being dated around 64, Matthew 70, Luke 80, John 90. The Gospel of Thomas dates from c 160, and is mostly derivative of the Four Gospels but with a Gnostic twist.

 

The irony of the Da Vinci Code is that in reality it weas the Four Gospels whch affirm a totally human Jesus who ate, slept, got thirsty, angry, was compassionate, and really died and rose from the dead bodily.

 

Having studied Gnosticism, you will find that Jesus' humanity is denied, in their writings, He only appears to be human, for in Gnostic teaching matter is evil and only spirit is good, which makes the Da Vinci Code's claims about Jesus marrying Mary Magdalene all the more extraordinary in that the Gnostics forbade marriage and sex.

 

And the Gnostics certainly did not uphold the sacred feminine. On the contrary, the Gospel of Thomas has it that Jesus taught that Mary Magdalene had to become a man in order to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. I found that out possessing a translation of the Gospel of Thomas itself, a translation prepared by one of the Jesus Seminar.

 

Extraordinary!

 

In the case of the New Testament, you need to consult authors such as FF Bruce, Bruce Metzger, Philip Wesley Comfort, Harold Greenlee, and Kurt and Barbara Aland. You won't go far wrong on issues of the text and canon of the New Testament if you go by their work!

 

And, the manuscript evidence for the OT, although less plentiful than for the NT, is even better, for the Massoretes were incredibly disciplined as Scribes. The OT manuscripts amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls predate the Massoretic Text by something like 1000 years, and studies of them, not least with the Scrolls of Isaiah, point to the amazing preservation of the Bible.

 

As for interpreting the Bible, careful study and prayer should reveal the answers for the honest enquirer. A little bit of background knowledge would help, but overall I think that the Bible speaks very well for itself. If there are multiple interpretations, it happens because of man made traditions or because people rip passages out of context.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I found it rather corny, and I must admit that Sauniere's drawing stuff on himself made me laugh.

 

(I can also tell that Dan Brown has not been to the Temple Church in London!)

 

My complaint is that he claims that his research behind the book is factual- but it is just as fictional as the story!

 

Still, so long as people find the book a good fictional read, and take its historical claims with a big bag of salt, it will do no harm.

 

PS Had Mary Magdalene been a married woman, she would not have been identified by where she came from, the town of Magdala in Galilee- the modern town of Migdol.

 

I've also found out that in both His rabbinic and prophetic roles, there were rules which exempted Jesus from marriage. Josephus and Philo mention ascetic umarried rabbis in their writings. Jesus fits firmly in that category, and decided to stay single because He was the only human in history who was born to die.

 

[ 22.05.2005, 23:11: Message edited by: Goonerman ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A good lie will include a half truth. For instance when my students in Korea asked me if I could defeat Chuck Norris in martial arts, I replied EASILY -- he's an OLD, LITTLE person. I throw him around or sit on him at will. Then they would say, "What about Jean-Claude?" I'd say, Oh, please, please. He's YOUNG, MUSCULAR, TOUGH, FAST, he'd kill me in a few seconds.

 

You see? They would swallow the first sentence because I was 'honest' in the second sentence. I'm sure there were those who took me seriously about supremacy over Chuck Norris.

 

Novelists use this trick often - Dan Brown didn't invent it. Years ago, the novelist who wrote THE CAINE MUTINY (name escapes me)wrote another tome (The Lokome Papers ?) in which he claimed he found FRAGMENTS of a MANUSCRIPT, and he was offering them as fiction because he couldn't prove their authenticity. In truth - he didn't find them. He faked them. A better example was the person who faked the Howard Hughes Autobiography. Oops. went off point. If a book is in the FICTION category, it's better to read the author's claims as FICTION -- regardless if he says it is 'research' or if it is his belief based on 'research' it is FICTION.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought it was good up till he had to include the romantic bit in - I mean what the heck? Totally trivial and irrelevant to the story. I liked the book (had all of my housemates hooked at the same time just before Christmas) however, I was disappointed by the ending! I'd have preferred it if he had left the ending open so as to give me something to ponder over!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...