# Why is the "DaVinci Code" being taken so seriously as an attack on the Bible? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 19, 2005, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-davinci-code-being-taken-so-seriously-as-an-attack-on-the-bible/290933 "2005-02-19T20:49:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Helen\_s\_Eidolon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Helen\_s\_Eidolon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Helen_s_Eidolon)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2005, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-davinci-code-being-taken-so-seriously-as-an-attack-on-the-bible/290933/41 "2005-02-21T19:50:41Z")
> [@irishgirl](#): > > [There is evidence that the Church DID play down the fact that Jesus had a female disciple who was given equal standing with the men. There is evidence that several leaders of the early churches were female, and that at the beginning of the church there truly was no differentiation between male and female in the set-up of the church. Cite, please? I’m sure you’ll have no problem producing at least one female bishop. Oh, and that there was any deliberate attempt to cover anything up. I’d absolutely love to see evidence of any of that. I can’t speak for the theological aspects of the book, but I can tell you that the pre-Christian religion and the pre-400 CE history of _The DaVinci Code_ made me actually yell at it. It was like he read one book written by a ‘witch’ and based all his ‘facts’ on that. ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2005, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-davinci-code-being-taken-so-seriously-as-an-attack-on-the-bible/290933/42 "2005-02-21T21:10:10Z")
> [@LaurAnge](#): > > Cite, please? I’m sure you’ll have no problem producing at least one female bishop. Oh, and that there was any deliberate attempt to cover anything up. I’d absolutely love to see evidence of any of that. Not that I didn’t think that the book was well written, or that it said the most rediculous thing about early religions, but I have seen more then one verse giving female desiples equal footing with males. From the King James translation anitated at [http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/mt/27.html](http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/mt/27.html) Matthew 27 27:55 And many women were there beholding afar off, which followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering unto him: Matthew says that the women who followed Jesus to his crucifixion watched from “afar off.” But John (19:25) says that they “stood by the cross.” 27:56 Among which was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedees children. Please note that this is the very same chapter that has a conflict over what the last words of that good Jewish boy gone bad were: “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?.” “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit.” “It is finished.” Mt.27:46 “And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” Lk.23:46 “And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.” Jn.19:30 “When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.” ---
**Author:** ![Helen\_s\_Eidolon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Helen\_s\_Eidolon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Helen_s_Eidolon)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2005, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-davinci-code-being-taken-so-seriously-as-an-attack-on-the-bible/290933/43 "2005-02-21T21:38:38Z")
Again, I don’t know enough about Jesus and his followers to say whether or not there were female disciples. But I do feel fairly confident in stating: a) there was no widespread cover-up and b) there were no female “leaders of the early churches”. And I’m really not sure what you meant by all those quotes - are you saying that the translation is unclear? ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 5:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-davinci-code-being-taken-so-seriously-as-an-attack-on-the-bible/290933/44 "2005-02-22T05:46:41Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > 'm not talking about the whole Merovingian bloodline theory but just the _per se_ suggestion that Jesus may have had sex. That’s what really bothers them and I’m not sure why. Strictly speaking, it’s not even anti-Biblical since nothing in the Gospels says that Jesus was a virgin or even that he wasn’t married. Even so, it seems to be intolerable to some to even consider the possibility that Jesus was sexually active. If you look at Christianity, historically, it’s taken a fairly dim view of sexual activity. From Paul’s teachings that virginity is preferable to marriage, to the “virgin martyrs”…those women who were willing to be martyred to keep their virginity, to Augustine’s teachings about original sin, to celibacy for monks, and then, in the West, for secular priests, to the idea of the eternal virginity of Mary, up to modern preaching against premarital sex, abstinence education, and so on. Those ideas are in Christianity and have been for a while. So, the suggestion that Jesus was sexually active is offensive to a lot of Christians. ---
**Author:** ![FriarTed](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/friarted/32/1052_2.png) [@FriarTed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriarTed)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 10:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-davinci-code-being-taken-so-seriously-as-an-attack-on-the-bible/290933/45 "2005-02-22T10:08:09Z")
> [@Captain Amazing](#): > > So, the suggestion that Jesus was sexually active is offensive to a lot of Christians. I’m a total Trinitarian-Nicene Christian, and while a lot of C"tians are offended by a married sexually-active Jesus, I’m not. I just don’t believe He was married (and thus, definitely not sexual) because there is no indication in the Bible or history or legend or even heretical movements that he was. What offends me about TDVC & many HOLY BLOOD proponents is the denigration of Jesus as Lord, God, Atoning Sacrifice & Risen Savior, and recasting him as New-Age Gnostic teacher & Dynastic Founder. An Eastern Orthodox critique also notes the implicit racism- who is carrying on Jesus’s legacy in this theory but a mystical society of European aristocrats who are destined to rule the world. ---
**Author:** ![Abe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f1d935/32.png) [@Abe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Abe)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 10:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-davinci-code-being-taken-so-seriously-as-an-attack-on-the-bible/290933/46 "2005-02-22T10:45:08Z")
> [@blowero](#): > > So Brown basically got hoodwinked on the Priory of Scion thing, I take it. He didn’t make it up, but he wrongly believes it’s real. He’s not the only one, by any means. Before _The Da Vinci Code_, I was repeatedly appalled by the enduring popularity of _Holy Blood, Holy Grail_, which was written by journalists and passed off as an historically accurate set of claims. This work is the single greatest contributor to nonsense about early Christian history and the holy grail. I don’t think bigger nonsense has been published on the topic. The basis for such execrable claims are the “Secret Dossiers”, which are mentioned in Dan Brown’s book and point to the Priory of Sion; they actually do exist, the only problem is they are a hoax. There is so much wrong with _Code_ that one doesn’t even know where to start debunking it. What’s even sadder is that Michael Chrichton seems to have followed Brown’s example, since his new book _State of Fear_ is chock-full of obtuse, ignorant claims about climate change that have more to do with politics than they do with knowledge. Study the way Brown’s and Chrichton’s characters talk when engaging in clumsy historical/scientific exposition, and if it weren’t for the subject matter, you couldn’t tell the two apart. Even the various fallacies they employ to propagate falsehoods are extremely similar, with the fallacy of authority and _non sequiturs_ topping the list, at my estimate. It’s funny when fictional experts in a field talk about their field with almost no real knowledge of it. Then it all becomes tragic when you look around you and notice that a surprising number of people are actually taking these false claims seriously. For those seriously interested in gripping yarns, viable scholarship in fiction, and secret societies, Brown ripped off virtually all the main elements in his bestseller from Umberto Eco’s _Focault’s Pendulum_ (which is ALL about secret societies and even takes place largely in a museum) and _The Name of The Rose_ (which is an excellent and well-researched whodunit). ---
**Author:** ![scotandrsn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a4c791/32.png) [@scotandrsn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scotandrsn)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-davinci-code-being-taken-so-seriously-as-an-attack-on-the-bible/290933/47 "2005-02-22T13:19:29Z")
> [@astro](#): > > Why does [The DaVinci Code](http://www.danbrown.com/novels/davinci_code/reviews.html) have this power? This is what I find amazing. I enjoyed the Da Vinci Code well enough, although it’s certainly not great. Dan Brown can’t create realistic, consistent characters to save his life, his dialog is ridiculous, but the structure of the plot I found to be a page-turner, even if the details used to flesh it out were a bit, shall we say, far-fetched. In the end, it’s no better or worse than the rest of its genre: Its a crap, pulp murder mystery. Venture to the Mystery section of your local B&N, you’ll find a million others just like it, some better, some certainly worse. I have heard criticism that all his books are more or less the same. In that field, that’s regarded as an asset. Worked for Agatha Christie. When writing such a book, it always helps to up the stakes as much as possible, which he has done. It helps lend a sinister edge to it if you include some real-world, shadowy element that the reader may have half-heard about, such as Opus Dei. It also helps to have a trademark, something that, were the reader to encounter a coverless copy with no author info, they could tell was one of yours (“A is for Alibi”, “The Cat Who Walked Through Walls”, etc.). Dan Brown’s trademark is half-assed semiotics and eternal worldwide Catholic conspiracies. There’s no reason to elevate him to the level of art expert or bible scholar just because that’s the sort of thing he likes to write about. Sure, maybe he has a personal agenda (or at least a collection of personal obsessions), and maybe the success of this book has encouraged him to be more vocal about it, but in the end, he just used all those elements to try and write an exciting book that would sell. His sales figures bear out the fact of his success in that endeavor. People just plain like the book, even though it’s not exactly great literature. Like that’s something new? And if the side effect is that a lot of people’s heads are knocked on their sides by some of the ideas presented therein to the extent that they are actually inspired to question or challenge notions they had never bothered themselves to question before, more power to him, I say. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-davinci-code-being-taken-so-seriously-as-an-attack-on-the-bible/290933/48 "2005-02-22T15:22:37Z")
> [@scotandrsn](#): > > And if the side effect is that a lot of people’s heads are knocked on their sides by some of the ideas presented therein to the extent that they are actually inspired to question or challenge notions they had never bothered themselves to question before, more power to him, I say. Exactly. The book is fiction, and takes a lot of liberties with history, but it does serve the very valuable function of causing people to question their assumptions about the Bible and about Christianity in general. I can give one concrete example. A friend of mine, after reading this book, decided she wanted to know more about the origins of the Bible. I referred her to the [excellent Straight Dope Staff Report on that subject](http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mbible1.html). So whatever bad things you may say about this book, it has set people on a path toward seeking more knowledge about the underpinnings of their faith. And maybe that’s what really has some religious leaders worried. ---
**Author:** ![Loopydude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e56c9b/32.png) [@Loopydude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopydude)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-davinci-code-being-taken-so-seriously-as-an-attack-on-the-bible/290933/49 "2005-02-22T15:53:28Z")
> [@spoke-](#): > > The book is fiction, and takes a lot of liberties with history, but it does serve the very valuable function of causing people to question their assumptions about the Bible and about Christianity in general. So much information has been circulating for so long, of (I daresay) so much higher quality, it is distressing in itself that Brown’s works have served as the biggest catalyst for this process in recent memory. Of all the writings that could have stimulated critical thought, it had to be _The DaVinci Code_? It’s like saying “L. Ron Hubbard got me thinking hard about psychiatry.” Sure, people are questioning things that should be challenged, but the answers they’re likely getting are equally disturbing as their prior misconceptions. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-davinci-code-being-taken-so-seriously-as-an-attack-on-the-bible/290933/50 "2005-02-22T16:14:08Z")
Why question what motivates people to learn? Take the teaching opportunities where you find them, and be grateful to Dan Brown for sparking interest in the subject. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-davinci-code-being-taken-so-seriously-as-an-attack-on-the-bible/290933/51 "2005-02-22T16:17:24Z")
> [@blowero](#): > > Thanks. So Brown basically got hoodwinked on the Priory of Scion thing, I take it. He didn’t make it up, but he wrongly believes it’s real. Actually, the Prior of Sion is, or was, a real organization. But everything beyond that is hazy. From the website of Dr. Steven Mizrach, Adjunct Lecturer at Florida International University, Department of Sociology/Anthropology, [http://www.fiu.edu/~mizrachs/poseur3.html:](http://www.fiu.edu/~mizrachs/poseur3.html:) > [@](#): > > It has been seven years since I wrote my first article on the Priory of Sion/Rennes-les-Chateau mystery. At the time, I was heavily under the influence of the books Holy Blood, Holy Grail and Lionel Fanthorpe’s work. Since then, there have been a number of books released, some better, some worse, than these b.original influences. I have revised some of my theories, challenged some of my own assumptions, learned some new things, and encountered a great deal of contrary data. Now, I am no longer sure that the hypothesis presented at the end of Holy Blood, Holy Grail is the best for explaining the data, nor am I sure that a Priory of Sion with the characteristics ascribed to it (an 800-year uninterrupted history, 9000 members internationally) really exists. I also am not sure that what is presented as “orthodox” with regard to the Sauniere saga can really be trusted. Still, although I have encountered the work of the debunkers, I am sure of two and only two things: > > a. the Sauniere saga cannot be explained away simply by a mass-trafficking pyramid scheme and a bad taste in décor. > > b. Something called the Order de Sion existed in the Middle Ages up until, at the latest, the 17th century; something called the Prieure du Sion existed from at least 1956 to 1984; whether these two things have any actual relationship to each other, I am still trying to figure out. > > \ > > 1090 - 1188 The Ordre de Sion > > According to the “prieure documents,” a conclave of Calabrian monks who left from the Belgian Abbey of Orval in 1090 helped secure the election of Godfroi de Bouillion as de facto king of Jerusalem during the First Crusade (but as is well known, he refused the title, accepting only Defender of the Holy Sepulchre), based on their belief that he was a descendant of the Merovingians, and by that fact, according to these documents, also a descendant of King David through Jesus and Merovech. In return, Godfroi secured their installation into an Abbey on Mount Sion. These documents also claim that the Ordre of Sion and the Order of the Temple (officially, the Poor Knights of the Temple of Solomon, later known as the Knights Templar, and officially recognized as such in 1118) were, until 1188, one unified organization with the same leadership. > > Is there any basis to these claims? Here is what it is apparently true: there was indeed an Order of Sion based on Mt. Sion, and according to a papal bull of the 12th century, it had monasteries and abbeys elsewhere in Palestine (in particular, Mount Carmel), in southern Italy (Calabria), and in France. There is little in the official histories linking Godfroi to this order, but he is said to have founded the Order of the Holy Sepulchre, whose relationships to these other orders (the Temple and Sion) are unclear. And the official histories do not indicate any overlap between these monks and the soldier-monks of the Knights Templar. The Order seems to have occupied its “mother” abbey, Notre Dame de Sion/St. Mary of Mt. Zion, built on the foundations of the original apostolic Cenacle or Coelaneum, up until around 1291 or so, when like many Crusader holdings, it was overwhelmed by the Moslem onslaught. It actually was in the hands of the Franciscans for several more centuries, until it finally was lost to Christian ownership and was converted to a mosque. From [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priory\_of\_sion:](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priory_of_sion:) > [@](#): > > **History** > > Under Article III.c of the original 1956 Statutes of the Priory of Sion, the association was named after the nearby mountain called Sion by the French town of Annemasse. It was devoted to opposing gentrification in the area through its journal, Circuit. The 1956 Priory had its headquarters in Pierre Plantard’s house in Annemasse and was officially registered at the sub-prefecture in Saint-Julien-en-Genevoise on May 7th, 1956, by André Bonhomme and Pierre Plantard. The ironic issue is that despite being formally registered, the cursory information failed to even trace back to either a phone number or a particular address, adding to its mystery of how it got past the allowances into the offical requirements of registration of all French societies. Even more curious, it’s official status was dissolved sometime after October 1956 but intermittently revived by Plantard between 1962 and 1993 as an initiatory order and crypto-political vanguard party dedicated to the restoration of chivalry and monarchy in France. > > Pierre Plantard began writing a manuscript and produced “parchments” (created by his friend, Philippe de Cherisey) that Father Bérenger Saunière had supposedly discovered whilst renovating his church. These documents purportedly showed the survival of the Merovingian line of Frankish kings. That in itself would hardly be surprising. What was the astounding claim that was implied in various “teases” of cryptic information, poems connected to astroloigical signs, bloodline lineages, and secret society grandmaster lists–was that this may link back to a lineage of the historical person known as Jesus, or Joshusa ben Joseph, of the tribe of David (as it says in the Gospels), and literally the “King of the Jews.” > > As further teases, between 1961 and 1984 Plantard, it is claimed, selectively revealed enimagic textual productions. These increasingly elaborated on pieces of a 2,000 year puzzle, so it is claimed. This puzzle involved a mythical pedigree of the Priory of Sion, claiming to have been founded in Jerusalem during the First Crusade. > > Serendipidous research in the late 1960s by Henry Lincoln expanded into a three man team of researchers who eventually were so facinated (and well connected, with the BBC) that they produced a documentary concerning the mysterious claims about Sauniere and Rennes-le-Chateau. > > They eventually wrote a book, attempting to find exoteric (real world evidence) for these esoteric claims of the Priory of Sion story. This book, Holy Blood, Holy Grail was co-written and researched by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, and Henry Lincoln. They took their starting point in the attempt to veryify any of these curious stories about Rennes-le-Château mentioned in other ongoing “Priory Documents” like the Secret Files of Henri Lobineau, compiled by “Philippe Toscan du Plantier”. The ironic issue about these documents was that they could appear within the Biblioteque Nationale of France–and be placed on microfiche–without ever having much documentation of how they got into the library in the first place. Additionally, over time, it was noticed by researchers that someone seemed to be editing or correcting the crudly copies in longhand. Subsequently, cleanly typewritten copies integrating the changes were placed in the library without documentation as well. The process of their appearances–without much fanfare and sometimes nearly impossible to get or withheld or hidden–was compouned by the editing process that was going on. This proces itself would be hard to pull off by itself, and it was probabaly illegal. However, nothing happened. This still meant nothing in terms of their historical accuracy. However, as the co-authors wrote, it almost implied that someone was testing or teasing them to explore further. > > It is a mistake to say that the “Priory Documents” became the source for the book Holy Blood, Holy Grail. This is because the book itself is a very cool and analytical attempt to find any proof at all of the wild claims of the “Priory” documents instead of a book that elaborated on their curious, poeteic, or seemingly esoteric qualities. > > If the “Priory” documents claim themselves to be a partial record of an esoteric (secret) tradition in European culture and politics, Holy Blood, Holy Grail was an attempt to find exoteric evidence of this esoteric tradition. > > One of the most secure bases of public, exoteric ‘double-checking’ of this claimed esoteric tradition of the Priory of Sion is the documentable, archival evidence the co-authors brought to bear. They found archival documents that backed up certain “wild” ideas of the documents. Particluarly, they found confirmation of the interpersonal linkages between all the hypothesized Priory of Sion “navigators” (as they are presumably called) for over 850 years! That chapter (and related appendix) provides enough incentive in itself for reading the book for those interested in European political and religious history. > > Interestingly, since some of information discovered by the co-authors in their attempt to verify the claims of the “Priory” documents" would have been unavailable during the period of the limited publication of the information about the presumed Priory of Sion starting in the 1950s, this was one of the factors that kept the co-authors exploring: they realized or presumed that these ‘people’ releasing this high quality information might indeed have a more accurate “inside track” to some historical issues in European history since verifications kept coming up whenever they looked for them–even in the most arcane achival sources. The mystery deepens, as mysteries tend to do. 😉 Fnord. ---
**Author:** ![AmericanMaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@AmericanMaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AmericanMaid)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-davinci-code-being-taken-so-seriously-as-an-attack-on-the-bible/290933/52 "2005-02-22T16:19:09Z")
> [@spoke-](#): > > Why question what motivates people to learn? Take the teaching opportunities where you find them, and be grateful to Dan Brown for sparking interest in the subject. The problem is that people aren’t learning. They’re assuming The DaVinci Code is fact. I’ve heard that the Louvre is having trouble with tourists who insist that a man was murdered in the museum. ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-davinci-code-being-taken-so-seriously-as-an-attack-on-the-bible/290933/53 "2005-02-22T17:42:40Z")
> [@AmericanMaid](#): > > The problem is that people aren’t learning. They’re assuming The DaVinci Code is fact. I’ve heard that the Louvre is having trouble with tourists who insist that a man was murdered in the museum. I have heard an arguement made. The Jesus Seminars exist. Many scholars and preast hear about them, but the common person does not. So how does it matter at all? Well the fact is that a large number of people have told me this indicates that "the common people have heard about it, since the common people include you and me. Ofcourse, any concept, (the catholic curch is a buncha liars, for example) is liable to be misunderstood, but hopefully, this interest and amount of publicity will lead people towards my situation, intellectual atheism, with an interest in the past. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-davinci-code-being-taken-so-seriously-as-an-attack-on-the-bible/290933/54 "2005-02-22T18:01:39Z")
> [@AmericanMaid](#): > > The problem is that people aren’t learning. You mean _some_ people aren’t learning. Others are. Nearly all are made more curious by what they read in The Da Vinci Code. I prefer that situation to the status quo before the book. ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-davinci-code-being-taken-so-seriously-as-an-attack-on-the-bible/290933/55 "2005-02-22T19:38:59Z")
> [@SentientMeat](#): > > the Priory of Scion (which Dan Brown thinks is a real organisation) was a hoax by three French guys who faked some documents > [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Actually, the Prior of Sion is, or was, a real organization. Aaaaaaaaargh!!! I find these threads frustrating, because everyone seems to want to bash Dan Brown, but nobody ever seems to agree on exactly _what_ they’re bashing him for. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-davinci-code-being-taken-so-seriously-as-an-attack-on-the-bible/290933/56 "2005-02-22T20:25:23Z")
> [@spoke-](#): > > Why question what motivates people to learn? Take the teaching opportunities where you find them, and be grateful to Dan Brown for sparking interest in the subject. > [@AmercainMaid](#): > > The problem is that people aren’t learning. They’re assuming The DaVinci Code is fact. I’ve heard that the Louvre is having trouble with tourists who insist that a man was murdered in the museum. > [@Scott\_plaid](#): > > I have heard an arguement made. The Jesus Seminars exist. Many scholars and preast hear about them, but the common person does not. So how does it matter at all? > > Well the fact is that a large number of people have told me this indicates that "the common people have heard about it, since the common people include you and me. . . . but hopefully, this interest and amount of publicity will lead people towards my situation, intellectual atheism, with an interest in the past. > [@spoke-](#): > > You mean some people aren’t learning. Others are. Nearly all are made more curious by what they read in The Da Vinci Code. I prefer that situation to the status quo before the book. I’m not sure that you folks are all that far apart or that you are really at odds wih each other. The question of the OP was “_ **Why** _ is The DaVinci Code prompting responses from scholarly critics?” **AmericanMaid** ’s answer seems to address that issue without calling for a ban on the book. **spoke-** and **Scott\_** would seem to be correct that the book has performed a service by prompting some people to explore history more deeply. This, of course, does not negate the need to point out the historical errors (and plot points that are legitimate in fiction but which should not be confused with historical fact). . > [@blowero](#): > > I find these threads frustrating, because everyone seems to want to bash Dan Brown, but nobody ever seems to agree on exactly what they’re bashing him for. Well, that is why we’ve let this sit in **Great Debates** rather than in **Cafe Society**. Bring out your facts (with citations, of course) and you can establish the ::: _basso profundo_ ::: _ **Truth** _ ::: _/basso profundo_ ::: and we’ll all profit. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-davinci-code-being-taken-so-seriously-as-an-attack-on-the-bible/290933/57 "2005-02-22T20:51:58Z")
Ohh, I like profit! I am sure that everyone has there own reason, but personaly, I am an athseist, raised in a house hold that knows that they were religious, and “knew” that of course, I am, but had such a loose conception of religion that it was impossible to argue against it. That in mind I believe that the catholic church has claimed real events have happend in the past. The Jessu seminars have proven to scholars that these thing never happend, but have not captured the public’s imagination. This has. Real scholars have been bribed by the catholic church to reclaim hegemony over the people. I am sure that their are quite a few fans of the work that have also alowed themselves to align with any newage movement that has come along, and quite a few people who think of this as an amusing what if scenario, while ignoring the books pointing out the harmfull effect of religion. I believe that the author, Dan Brown, is one of those people. I have read outher books of his, fosted one me by relitives, and have found that in each, a plot by those who want to change the world for the better, is foiled by a avalible batchlor, who seems to represent the establishment. ps. please forgive my sp? errors. I am trying to type fast. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-davinci-code-being-taken-so-seriously-as-an-attack-on-the-bible/290933/58 "2005-02-22T21:34:35Z")
> [@Scott\_plaid](#): > > Real scholars have been bribed by the catholic church to reclaim hegemony over the people. Cite? Names? Anything? ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-davinci-code-being-taken-so-seriously-as-an-attack-on-the-bible/290933/59 "2005-02-22T22:03:29Z")
Cite? Well, for maintaing their hegemony, that is historical fact. They have a big ol’ empire and they would like to keep it that way. As for scholars being bribed, I could claim that I meant “bribe” as they are being paid to report what they believe, but really, that word was just a result of me of me being passonate about the subject. At least that is for right now. I’ll bet if I can find a link to a list of those speaking at the “trial” fro the OP, that I can show a paper that goes against the ideals that they are representing at this “trial” The reson for my sureness, is that once catholics and other religous scholars stop using “faith” as a reason, and start using scholarship, they fail to find a base to their claims. Just see below. from [http://www.westarinstitute.org/Jesus\_Seminar/jesus\_seminar.html](http://www.westarinstitute.org/Jesus_Seminar/jesus_seminar.html) ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-davinci-code-being-taken-so-seriously-as-an-attack-on-the-bible/290933/60 "2005-02-22T23:13:26Z")
> [@Scott\_plaid](#): > > As for scholars being bribed, I could claim that I meant “bribe” as they are being paid to report what they believe, but really, that word was just a result of me of me being passonate about the subject. So, basically, you are just making up claims based on your own prejudices? (You will note that the Catholic Church has had nothing resembling a hegemony in Western Europe in the last 480 years and that there has been no effort to reclaim that hegemony in around 200 or so years.) . > [@](#): > > The reson for my sureness, is that once catholics and other religous scholars stop using “faith” as a reason, and start using scholarship, they fail to find a base to their claims. I suspect that it is far more likely that religious scholars, even (perhaps particularly) Catholic scholars, are very much aware of how much of their beliefs (and, hence, their teachings) is rooted in faith. The notion that biblical scholars of any faith are failing to examine the historical accuracy of the scriptures is rooted in either an _a priori_ desire to believe that claim or in a survey of biblical scholarship that is limited to a very small segment of that population who follow a particular Fundamentalist approach to scripture. (In other words, among all scholars of Christian scripture–Catholic, Protestant, non-believing, or other–there is only a very small segment who deny the historical realities and that group is generally limited to a smaller group within the Fundamentalist movement.) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-davinci-code-being-taken-so-seriously-as-an-attack-on-the-bible/290933.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-davinci-code-being-taken-so-seriously-as-an-attack-on-the-bible/290933.md?page=4)