   To clear up some thing about the “Da Vinci code's” ½ truths
  Either read the short or the full article.==================In short The Da Vinci Code"a fascination with conspiracies and cover-ups than revealed truth." "Old and New Testament), is just not as provocative or tantalizing unlike the conjecture, half-truths, cover-ups, and codes that Brown’s book presents.""is classified as fiction  It is also fair to say that the book is both pro-feminist and anti-Catholic, themes particularly in vogue.""many people will read this work, ignorant of Church history, and presume that Mr. Brown''s theories, conjectures and interpretations are true. This is even more problematic because some truths are woven into the fabric of his fanciful fast-paced fiction. For example, Constantine indeed called the First Council, but there was no Vatican at the time."====================full artical that someone sent me."The fact that Dan Brown’s book, The Da Vinci Code, remains near the tops of the best seller lists might be more indicative of our post Vietnam/Watergate fascination with conspiracies and cover-ups than revealed truth. The revealed truth, recorded in the pages of the Holy Scripture (Old and New Testament), is just not as provocative or tantalizing for many Americans, as the 454 pages of conjecture, half-truths, cover-ups, and codes that Brown’s book presents.  To be fair to the author, the work is classified as fiction even though he states that "All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate." It is also fair to say that the book is both pro-feminist and anti-Catholic, themes particularly in vogue.  The premise of the book is that the Church has misled us about Christ and His followers. The book states, "...almost everything our fathers taught us about Christ is false" (p. 223). The story claims that Mary Magdalene and Christ were married and had a child and that anti-feminist Church Fathers, led by the pagan Emperor Constantine, in cahoots with the Vatican, covered up these facts during the first Council of Nicea in 325 AD. He writes, "...until that time in history, Jesus was viewed by his followers as a mortal prophet," (p. 233). He further states, "The Bible, as we know it today was collated by the pagan Roman Emperor Constantine the Great" (p. 231).  It is disturbing that many people will read this work, ignorant of Church history, and presume that Mr. Brown’s theories, conjectures and interpretations are true. This is even more problematic because some truths are woven into the fabric of his fanciful fast-paced fiction. For example, Constantine indeed called the First Council, but there was no Vatican at the time.  Even though the Alexandrian theologian, Arius, taught that Christ was merely a good man of a similar nature to God, the First Council proclaimed what most followers believed about Christ from the earliest days of the Church; that He was Kyrios (Divine Lord) and the same nature (homo-ousios) as God the Father.  Also, while Brown correctly notes that, "the Bible did not arrive by fax from heaven," the process of identifying the canonical scriptures had progressed for centuries before Nicea with little concern for trying to expunge Christ’s relationship with Mary Magdalene. By the year 200 AD lists of the New Testament books were circulating that are very close to the finalized compilation.  Indeed, many other documents from Christ’s followers did not make it into the canonical New Testament. But far from trying to cover this up, many of these books still exist and were used by the Church in other contexts, like its hymnology. Even the Gnostic Gospels were referenced by the early Church Fathers who systematically disputed their false claims.  Finally, while females have often been assigned a secondary role in both ancient and modern societies, Christianity raises up a female, the Virgin Mary (Theotokos), as the model for all human beings to emulate and makes no secret of Christ’s female followers. Mary Magdalene, in the Gospel, is the first witness of Christ’s resurrection. Her courageous belief in Christ’s resurrection is juxtaposed with the unbelief and fear of the other (male) apostles who don’t believe that Christ is truly risen. Far from trying to expunge her relationship with Christ, it is lifted up as a paradigm of true discipleship. Maybe this is the why the Church celebrates her on July 22 and honors her with the title "equal to the Apostles."  The Da Vinci Code is a well written piece of fiction. If you read it, enjoy it for what it is but don’t confuse it for Church history no matter how tempting that might be. As Satan has shown, from his first discourse with humans, half-truths are often at the heart of temptation." by Dan Christopulos 
quote:Original post by nobodynews  Wow, what a coincidence! I put this book on reserve yesterday.  I hope it comes in soon.Oh, and it''s a sad state of affairs when someone has to specifically point out that not everything written in a fictionnovel is fact.  The person who penned that article has a high opinion of people, doesn''t he?   Well the author of the book Da Vinci code does mislead people intentionally it seems which the person of this article pointed out. I remember seeing the news and how they show it that way as well which that is sad. I knew that Dan Brawns information was not true but most of the things that are said in books and are TV are not truthful but what can you do? Many people are also simple minded and believed in Forest Gump and voted for him in one state. ;  I just finished the book and i thought it was a very good bookwether or not i belive the stuff on it i dont care. The point was that the book had a very good story. Although i have to agree it was very Anti-Catholic.  ;quote:Original post by QzarBaron  I just finished the book and i thought it was a very good bookwether or not i belive the stuff on it i dont care. The point was that the book had a very good story. Although i have to agree it was very Anti-Catholic.    I wouldn''t just say Catholic since their others that believe in Christ and aren''t Catholic. Also Catholicism isn’t the original Christian religion. Anyway here is another site that kind of disputes the Da Vinci Code. But I think the above article said it well enough, but at least this one has a link that some can use.http://www.nljonline.com/march04/davinci_code.htmlhttp://www.nljonline.com/ ;  What do people that agree with the book have to say? And why would so many like to read a book of that attacks what others cherish? The author seems sadistic and spiteful, and the news and stores like the hype it up for a quick buck. To have a book like that is strange. Maybe I should ask in the help wanted if anyone wants to make a game that you go back in time and hunt down all the great leader and profits like Christ, Da Vinci, Mozart, Roosevelt, Bill Gates, lol and then go to the future and see how the future will be without guidance, and say “what it’s a imaginative story” and call it “bill and teds beyond Mad Max''s passion”. lol I think its a best seller and I wont need to market it since the news does that well when they see something not proper lol.But who else am I missing on the list to go back in time for? ;  I think he has about as much proof that what he says is true as the people against him have proof that it''s wrong.With that aside, I''d like to say I don''t think Dan Brown took any pleasure in putting down the church. In his book "Angels and Demons" he points out that while members of the church can be currupt, the church is still a very good thing. I''d say on a whole A&D put religion in a good light.