2006-12-22 04:48:38 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I cannot understand your question.
2006-12-22 04:51:12 · answer #1 · answered by Cold Fart 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
While the story is obviously fictitious, Dan Brown claimed that certain organizations exist or existed with certain agendas and particular historical figures being members as being factual.
And while there is a Roman Catholic Church ( and the churches mentioned do exist) and there is an RCC prelature called Opus Dei and there is an organization called the Priory of Scion, little nothing he claims about these organizations is true. For example, he claims the Priory of Scion has existed for centuries with such illustrious members as Sir Isaac Newton and Leonardo, when, in fact, it was founded in the 1950s.
The Da Vinci Code is no more factual that John Jakes novels set against the backdrop of the American Revolution and the Civil War, or any other 'historical' fiction. And it should be treated as nothing more than a reasonably good, although by now formulaic, detective story.
2006-12-22 13:09:16 · answer #2 · answered by mzJakes 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The coverage was to make sure people did know that it was fiction. Also it said that the organizations and events were based on real groups and people. Many groups were concerned that they were misrepresented in the book. Groups such as the Masons, the Opus Dei wanted to clarify what they are all about. For example Opus Dei was founded in the early 20th Century not some 2000 years ago. This can confuse people who don't study history and know the truth about what really happened
Also it was an attack on The Bible version of events. Any time you attack The Bible version you will get a response.
2006-12-22 12:58:14 · answer #3 · answered by Future Citizen of Forvik 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's palmed off as fact....that is the problem. A person new or weak in faith will take some of what is in the book as fact as they won't know any better. The problem is there is a grain of truth wrapped around pages and pages of fantasy. This was a deliberate attempt by Brown to confuse and trap the weaker people of faith, with nonsense. Furthermore, the coverage was not to make sure everyone knew it was fiction. That was an after thought!
2006-12-22 13:03:20 · answer #4 · answered by JohnC 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because it casts doubt on Jesus and the Christian church. It's the same reason the Muslims got angry over the cartoons of Mohammad.
2006-12-22 12:53:04 · answer #5 · answered by Let there be JIMBO 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
What?
2006-12-22 12:52:35 · answer #6 · answered by impossble_dream 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋