That was nothing more than a book of fiction, and nobody can present a substantive, logical and informative argument when the starting point is acknowledged fiction.
2006-08-02 03:49:08
·
answer #1
·
answered by ElOsoBravo 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
I do not need to read the book or watch the movie to know nonsense. I read such stuff before Dan Brown popularized it. I think someone may sue him for plagiarism. In the 1950's, a Frenchman chartered a secret society. He made a fictional list of past members that included Leonardo Da Vinci. The group supposedly had secret knowledge that Mary Magdalene came to France with children by Jesus to whom she had been married. Their descendants became kings of France in the Merovingian Dynasty. The fraud claimed that he was of this ancestry. Some say that Da Vinci's "The Last Supper" has Mary on Jesus' right. In truth, Da Vinci sadly used an experimental medium with oils in it, and the painting soon faded badly. No one can say with truth exactly what details the painting had. It was restored, and one cannot expect restorers to match Da Vinci's skill. If any codes exist, restorers are responsible. Da Vinci isn't!
2006-08-02 11:15:09
·
answer #2
·
answered by miyuki & kyojin 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I can not believe why the Don Brown's opinion must be the truth.Or why Leonardo Da Vinci's opinion and thoughts must be the truth.
I read the book and it says that L.Da Vinci has hidden in his art a lot of secrets etc.Those secrets were something that he believed and not necessarally the true history.
Don't ever forget : Whatever happens to this small planet,happens always for the money!
All these years the church had a lot of money and now some others want to have that money.
Some of you can understand what I really mean
2006-08-02 10:53:16
·
answer #3
·
answered by andelska 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
No because:
1.) The Da Vinci Code is a work of fiction.
2.) Why would Jesus need to marry anyway? Christians themselves are the Bride of Christ and we are His Children. So why would Jesus feel the need to "pass on the line" so to speak?
2006-08-02 12:20:52
·
answer #4
·
answered by chrstnwrtr 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
You know in the old days, people wrote plays with animals to keep from getting punished by the King or Queen nowadays, I believe Dan Brown is letting people think what they want to think, probably to avoid being sued. He also says that all groups in the DaVinci code did exist. I think there is a possibility that parts of the story are true and parts aren't. If I had figured out something as explosive as Jesus having a child I sure wouldn't want the Catholic church after me.
2006-08-02 13:30:35
·
answer #5
·
answered by magpie 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
While the DaVinci Code got name pronunciations right (mostly), that is about all that is historically accurate in that book. I am not even talking about those facts relating directly to Christianity. If the book stated any provable fact, chances are it was wrong. If history was personified as a human being, then Don Brown would be going to jail for what he did to it.
2006-08-03 13:52:58
·
answer #6
·
answered by Thought 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
The book if FICTION. Capital F. Capital I. Capital C. Capital T. Capital I. Cpital O. Capital N. FICTION. Lots of people write books which are fiction and use real places or even real people in the books. The books are still FICTION. This guy is capitalizing on the gullibility of people and that something built into us that loves a mystery. But it is fiction. Take it that way, and you'll be O.K. Puzzle your brain over the muddle he created for money and he'll be rich and you'll be confused or crazy.
2006-08-02 12:02:21
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
no because
1) I'm a christian and i don't believe it.
2) Dan Brown classified the book as a fiction, but then admitted it should be non-fiction. Who makes up history???
2006-08-02 12:40:56
·
answer #8
·
answered by HEADING4thelight 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
The movie and the book are ridiculous. Pure Fiction. Read, study, and pray upon the Bible. The Lord will reveal to you the truth.
2006-08-02 11:30:02
·
answer #9
·
answered by Ron B. 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, for the simple reason it was a fictional book that was exploring the world of conspiracy theorists.
2006-08-02 11:35:30
·
answer #10
·
answered by silondan 4
·
0⤊
0⤋