do u think the da vinci code is true...?

Question

do u think that what they say about jesus being married and havin a child is true?

Answer 1

Gosh! 34 answers, and so far as I can tell almost none of the people answering are familiar with the history of the ideas that Dan Brown uses as the basis of his novel. Obviously the characters are fictional, and the basic plot is fictional, but all of the controversial ideas put forward in the story are entertaining versions of academic discussions that have been going on for centuries. The idea that Jesus was married and had a child is obviously controversial and speculative, but from a historical perspective it certainly seems like a reasonable possibility. Christians take on faith that the Bible provides a perfect historical record, but this is just their faith - not history, not science – just brute faith. By the criteria of history, we know so little about the life of Jesus that strong historical opinions on the subject are simply absurd because there isn’t enough evidence for a strong opinion either way.

Many Christians try to use historical or scientific data to support their views, but because they absolutely refuse to seriously consider the possibility that they could be wrong, they completely distort the spirit of history and science. They start with the premise that their view MUST be right (i.e., that the Bible is accurate), then proceed to ignore or distort whatever data makes them uncomfortable, and discard any logic that leads them to unwanted conclusions. This is typically not an explicitly conscious sort of manipulation. It is just that their sense of certainty and desire to see the Bible validated makes them look at everything through a distorting lens. In the true spirit of history and science we are sometimes forced to simply say “I don’t know” or “I think it is probably this way, but I could be wrong, so I will happily reconsider my beliefs in the light of any new evidence that arises.” In the spirit of history and science, the only CORRECT answer to your question is “I don’t really know.” This answer can then be followed by intuitions and educated guesses. For example: “I don’t really know, but in my heart I feel that he was not married.” Or “I don’t really know, but it seems to me as though the Bible would tell us if he was married, so I suspect he was not married?” My own answer would be this: “I don’t really know, but my intuitions are that Jesus did not see sex as sinful or impure, so he probably was not a virgin (there are no good spiritual reason for keeping his virginity, and there are at least some indications that he did have a “girlfriend” or wife). I have no idea whether or not he had a child.”

Dan Brown pulled some age-old historical debates out of the ivory towers of academia and cast them into the form of a popular modern novel. Most of the facts presented are fairly well-founded. Some of the ideas presented are more speculative. But what Christian cannot admit is that most of what people commonly accept as true about Jesus is actually historical speculation. Just because the Bible says that Noah rescued all of the earth’s creatures by building an ark, it does not mean that it actually happened. Just because the Bible says that the virgin Mary was a virgin when she gave birth, it does not follow that she really was a virgin. This is simply not how history (as a scholarly endeavor) works. To believe these things would take a great deal of historical evidence, but in fact there is virtually no evidence at all, other than the Bible itself. (Yes, I’m familiar with all of the supposed evidence for the Biblical stories.) Unfortunately for Christians, claims of this sort not only fail to count as evidence for the truth of the traditional Christ story, but logically count AGAINST claims that the Bible is historically accurate. If you found a diary in your grandma’s attic claiming that your grandma was actually a space alien from Jupiter, would this count as historical evidence in support of the idea that your grandma was a space alien from Jupiter? NO! It would make you suspicious of the historical accuracy of the diary. The account of Jesus’ life offered by the Bible falls into this category. It is reasonable to believe that Jesus was an influential teacher, healer, and spiritual guide, but beyond this, one has to take a leap of pure faith because history, science, and logic currently do not support the more radical claims.

Answer 2

I'm reading it right now with about 150 pages to go.

I'd like to believe some of the stuff about the suppression of the sacred feminine is true, (it makes sense) but as soon as Prof. Teabing came on the scene in the book (with all the Mary Magdalene stuff about marriage and having a kid) the whole premise got silly as far as I was concerned.

I asked a question on Y.A. earlier this week about whether Da Vinci Code has impacted anyone's spirituality and I got some interesting answers including one that said "There are a lot of historians that brought to discussion this Mary Magdalene issue before Dan brown did. There are a lot of books written on this subject and also on the Jesus was a man subject. If you read some of them, you will see that Dan brown was just underlining some of the most spectacular hypothesis... "

I don't think it was just the MM thing.though. Dan Brown seems to have gone looking for the controversial ideas in ALL areas of this book. It's becoming clearer and clearer to me as I read that it's definitely a work of fiction (albeit a thought provoking one.)

Answer 3

Ok if it was true, that doesn't mean Jesus wasn't perfect. He was perfect, and (I'm not saying the di vinci code is real) he could have had a wife and son, now if he had just had sex with Mary and she bore a child then that would have made Jesus imperfect! Get my point. Even if he did have a child and a wife, would u still love him, I sure would. To me that just makes him seem much more real, knowing that what ever did or did not happen doesn't change a thing
in my faith in God!

Answer 4

A couple months ago, this was all anyone could talk about on this site. It's great to see that since then, no one's logic has improved.

Of course it was fiction. It was about a studly Harvard professor and a really hot cryptologist. Such people do not really exist. Does that mean that everything else in it was also fiction? Is the Louvre fiction? How about Opus Dei? Did Dan Brown make up Leonardo Da Vinci?
Arguing that the Legend of the Scion MUST be made up simply because it was mentioned in a novel is unbelievably stupid, even for Christians.

The plot of the novel involved a centuries-old controversy. The controversy existed before the book, and it still exists. Dan Brown took one side of the controversy. Kind of like how Oliver Stone took a side of the JFK assassination controversy. This fact does not make one side any more or less factual.

Whereas we know that the Bible is historical fact. Because it says so in the Bible. Now that's something you can definitely take to the bank.

Answer 5

the DA Vinci Code Book is a work of fiction with very little basis in facts. Certainly would offer a different slat on JESUS but seriously doubt the conclusions. There are many misleading statements which make me believe the story is a false one.

Answer 6

I think Jesus was married and had kids

The davinci code is fiction, a novel (says so on the cover)

Brown uses some good fact, 'loose' myth, but in the end it asks you, would it matter if that part of his life was left out of the bible? Afterall, the 4 gospels were chosen by a bishop around 300AD. It took them that long to do this? There were many accounts of Jesus and it has been left out.....this book is effective in that it can question a religion, but never God. I think alot of people give it a bad rap.

Answer 7

It is fictional, but I find a lot of the points made in the novel curious. When you really think about it, it makes more sense than the bible. Isn't it easier to believe that a man named Jesus spread love to the people, than it is to believe that he walked on water and divided the Red Sea??

Answer 8

The book is fiction, meaning it is not true. The author states that at the beginning of the book. I can see how it can be confusing for people, because he mixes in discussions of real art work and real places and invents an interesting story based on art and art history and secret societies. The mixing of truth and fiction will always confuse people. We should always question what we read and verify it's authenticity.

Answer 9

Jesse D,
It had some amazing facts in it, like the Golden Ratio. But from a Bible scholar's perspective, the author was really terrible on Biblical History. It wasn't meant to be a factual representation in the first place.

I remember seeing an interview with Anne Rice. She seemed to enjoy the book, even found it amusing in places.

Answer 10

It's a conspiracy theory that works backwards but not forwards - in other words why would the original church fathers have given a toss if Jesus had married and had children if it had been true