Are all the facts portrayed in The Da Vinci Code true, or were they all (or some) made up by Dan Brown?

Question

Are facts such as "Sangreal" being the Holy Grail and Jesus having direct decendents proved to be true? If they really are then Dan Brown must be a real creative genius.

Answer 1

The theory that Jesus had descendants has been around for ages. There is very little provable fact about the lives of most of the apostles. The suggestions about da Vinci's art are patently false, but there are churches supposedly founded by Mary Magdalene in modern-day France. There are people in those areas who will say that she bore a child there, but again, nothing is provable. A few older gypsy families will tell you that the major arcana of the tarot tells the story of that child and it's descendants, but again unproven aand based on belief.
There are very few things that we *know* about Mary Magdalene, let alone her relationship with Jesus. One person will cite things one way, while another will cite another historical text another way.

As for the Holy Grail, the early church never mentioned it in any texts. It is only during the times when they're busy converting the peoples of the British Isles and France that these myths of the Grail come up. Many think it was a way to pull them from their pagan beliefs of a lifegiving cup, pot, or cauldron by simply associating those powers of healing, rejuvanation, divinity with the last cup of Jesus.

Answer 2

As a Christian I have to say I enjoy Dan Brown's books immensely and plan on reading them again and again. While he's not the best author in the world, he certainly makes you think and that's what a good author should do.

No, none of it is true, but you shouldn't let that stop you from watching the movie or reading the book. I don't think he's so much a creative genius as a genius at plot development. Meaning that its very hard to lay out a story one page at a time, putting certain facts before others so that the story makes sense that your telling. He does this wonderfully.

Answer 3

There is no proof of Jesus having descendants. That's speculation, and it's been going on for a long time. Dan Brown didn't invent it. Read "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" in Wikipedia. Sangreal means "Royal Blood"

Answer 4

First, there should be no disagreement that the FRAME of the story is fiction. But Dan Brown himself claims that the major substance of the evidence the characters are supposed to be uncovering is historical FACT. He writes that in the front of the book, and used to make a lot of it, until he discovered saying "it's just fiction" would be an effective ploy. (Note, Brown IS pushing his OWN religious convictions in the book...)

Some respond to this by saying "no one can say" what really happened. Maybe Brown's right, maybe not. That's a cop out. In fact, there is very little to back Brown up. His research is shoddy at best. He makes numerous historical blunders and misstatments, and the conspiracy theory books he bases it all on are laughed out of court by experts in the fields he is touching on.

For example:
1) The "secret organization" ("Priory of Sion") da Vinci was supposed to be part of was created in the 1950s!!

2) The "clues" suggested in the Last Supper, etc. totally ignore things art historians know and that are openly observable, e.g., that it was normal for painters of that era to portray young men --like the apostle John-- with soft 'feminine' features (cf. da Vinci's painting of John the Baptist --beareded, but very soft features)

3) The "Holy Grail" stories are medieval (first appearing in the late 12th century). There is nothing about them in the early church (so they could hardly be misunderstandings!)

4) The NT is very clear that it was the apostle John --not Mary-- who was Jesus' "beloved disciple" (esp. in the last chapter of John's gospel, and by comparison with the other KNOWN writings of John)

5) The Council of Nicaea (AD 325) did NOT suddenly foist the idea of Christ's deity on the church -- they already believed it; the only debate was how best to understand it (and their final statement was nearly unanimously supported!)

6) Nor did Constantine & co. throw out other biblical books at that time; not only did Nicea not discuss this particular question, but the basic canon of the New Testament was widely agreed on in the 2nd century (only a few of its books, which had not been as widely read, caused much debate)

7) The NT has a very positive view of Mary (some later ideas of her were based on understandable confusions, since "Mary" was such a common name)

8) The "Gnostic gospels" do not suggest anything about Mary being married to Jesus (in fact, few are anything like "gospels", since they don't tell the story of Jesus' life & work)

9) Gnosticism was a fringe movement... and it did NOT view Jesus as "more human". Quite the contrary, they thought of the whole physical world as evil (only the spiritual world is good). Contradicting the firm belief of the Hebrew Bible, Judaism & Christianity that God created the world good (but people rebelled!) with its hope in the physical resurrection, Gnosticism was a repackaging of Eastern religions and wished to "escape" the physical world.

Gnosticism was also ELITIST, believing that only a handful of people were even capable of the special "knowledge" (gnosis) they possessed (quite the opposite of Christianity, which was proclaimed to ALL --Jew & Gentile, male & female, slave & free..)

10) NO hidden Christian teachings have been discovered in the Dead Sea Scrolls. That community (the Essenes of Qumran) was JEWISH, and the documents found there are copies of OLD Testament writings & things related to the community's understanding of them.

Answer 5

Those ideas of Sangreal and Jesus descendants have never been proven, however the rumors have been circulating around for a little while. There's a note before you begin the book which tells you what facts are true and you can assume that the rest of the facts it doesn't state cannot be true or hasn't been proven yet.

Answer 6

Dan Brown actually is not a creative genius...he stole for his now infamous book from other text on the issue.
No one can really know the "truth" when it comes to this matter...but either way, Dan Brown is a hack that couldn't come up with his own story, but had to steal it from others and declared it his own...that to me proves that nothing that Dan Brown says should be taken seriously.

Answer 7

Brown didn't make up any of the more controversial aspects of his book.

The idea that Jesus married the Magdalene and sired children has been around for literally hundreds of years.

Read "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail", "The Messianic Legacy" and "Rex Deus" for more information.

btw, as Brown describes in the book, there are dozens of serious historical studies, many by established, well-respected researchers, historians,and theologists, who support the thesis of a marriage between Jesus and Mary.

Answer 8

The "DaVinci Code" is nothing more than a novel. The "facts" to which you refer, have been refuted by many knowledgeable, reputable academicians. The book is fiction and is a tribute to Dan Brown's imagination. By the way, have you read the book?

Answer 9

FALSE, FICTIONAL. BUT they are based on Da Vinci's work. Though Leo was an intelligent man, he failed at religion.

Answer 10

Get a Webster's Dictionary and look up the meaning of FICTION.