Dan Brown's: Almost everything our fathers taught us about Christ is false

​

​

Copyright © 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.​

By RICHARD N. OSTLING, AP Religion Writer Sat Apr 29, 12:36 PM ET
​

A line from Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code" tells you why it's easily the most disputed religious novel of all time: "Almost everything our fathers taught us about Christ is false."
​

With 46 million copies in print, "Da Vinci" has long been a headache for Christian scholars and historians, who are worried about the influence on the faith from a single source they regard as wrong-headed.
​

Now the controversy seems headed for a crescendo with the release of the movie version of "Da Vinci" May 17-19 around the world. The conservative Roman Catholic group Opus Dei, portrayed as villainous in the story, is among those asking Sony Corp (NYSE:SNE - news). to issue a disclaimer with the film.
​

The novel's impact on religious ideas in popular culture, Bart Ehrman religion chair at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill says, is "quite unlike anything we've experienced in our lifetimes."
​

Assaults on "Da Vinci" don't just come from evangelicals like Witherington, or from Roman Catholic leaders such as Chicago's Cardinal Francis George, who says Brown is waging "an attack on the Catholic Church" through preposterous historical claims.
​

Among more liberal thinkers, Harold Attridge, dean of Yale's Divinity School, says Brown has "wildly misinterpreted" early Christianity.
​

The problem is that "Da Vinci" is billed as more than mere fiction.
​

Brown's opening page begins with the word "FACT" and asserts that all descriptions of documents "are accurate."
​

"It's a book about big ideas, you can love them or you can hate them," Brown said in a speech last week. "But we're all talking about them, and that's really the point."
​

Brown told National Public Radio's "Weekend Edition" during a 2003 publicity tour — he declines interviews now — that his characters and action are fictional but "the ancient history, the secret documents, the rituals, all of this is factual." Around the same time, on CNN he said that "the background is all true."
​

​

Brown's version in "Da Vinci" regarding:
​

_Jesus' divinity
​

Christians viewed Jesus as a mere mortal until A.D. 325 when the Emperor Constantine "turned Jesus into a deity" by getting the Council of Nicaea to endorse divine status by "a relatively close vote."
​

_The New Testament
​

"More than 80 gospels were considered for the New Testament" but Constantine chose only four. His new Bible "omitted those gospels that spoke of Christ's human traits and embellished those gospels that made him godlike. The earlier gospels were outlawed, gathered up and burned." The Dead Sea Scrolls and manuscripts from Nag Hammadi, Egypt, were "the earliest Christian records," not the four Gospels.
​

_Jesus as married.
​

Jesus must have wed because Jewish decorum would "virtually forbid" an unmarried man. His spouse was Mary Magdalene and their daughter inaugurated a royal bloodline in France.
​

​

Brown cites the Nag Hammadi "Gospel of Philip" as evidence of a marriage, but words are missing from a critical passage in the tattered manuscript: "Mary Magdalene (missing) her more than (missing) the disciples (missing) kiss her (missing) on her (missing)."
​

Did Jesus kiss Mary on the lips, or cheek or forehead? Whatever, Gnostics would have seen the relationship as platonic and spiritual, scholars say.
​

​

The whole "Da Vinci" hubbub, Witherington says, shows "we are a Jesus-haunted culture that's biblically illiterate" and harbors general "disaffection from traditional answers."
​

But he and others also see a chance to inform people about the beliefs of Christianity through the "Da Vinci" controversy.
​

"If people are intrigued by the historical questions, there are plenty of materials out there," Yale's Attridge says.
​

British Justice Peter Smith, who recently backed Brown against plagiarism charges, perhaps best summed up the situation in his decision:
​

"Merely because an author describes matters as being factually correct does not mean that they are factually correct. It is a way of blending fact and fiction together to create that well known model 'faction.' The lure of apparent genuineness makes the books and the films more receptive to the readers/audiences. The danger of course is that the faction is all that large parts of the audience read, and they accept it as truth."
​

"Da Vinci" publicity: http://www.davincicode.com
​

Peace and love
​

Yours Sincerely,
​

Cat Stevens
​

Cat Stevens' latest threads
​

My sig
​

Note: Silly, repeated, Irrelevant, and the like, responses, posts, comments will be ignored (it depends on my mood and time if I won't ignore them), taking off the topic is losers' style losers' fate , ask yourself: will you write such response if the writer wasn't a Muslim!
​

 

So criticisms of Christianity are okay, but criticisms of Islam are not?

Get the fuck lost bro. I am disappointed.

 

Hi Hikaru Zero ​

Who said so,​

Dan has his documents, he is not mocking. There is a difference.​

Peace and love
​

Yours Sincerely,
​

Cat Stevens
​

Cat Stevens' latest threads
​

Note: Silly, repeated, Irrelevant, and the like, responses, posts, comments will be ignored (it depends on my mood and time if I won't ignore them), taking off the topic is losers' style losers' fate , ask yourself: will you write such response if the writer wasn't a Muslim!
​

​

 

Are we feeling a little perscuted my muslim brother? let me enlighten you further...

I will say to you what I will say to you no matter what your belief. I am not Yusef Islam, nor am I Salman Rushdie. The Imam are who they are, I am who I am and my opinion is mine alone. If I choose to share this opinion with you, you may choose to accept it or not. You are who you are.

While I appreciate your threads, anti-christian, anti-Zion, or otherwise, ignoring the opinions of others because they are not compatible with your agenda makes you no better than bin Laden. Promote your agenda where it will be attended: In the Muslim forum.

Peace and love.

 

Umm, Cat. Dan Brown's book was fiction. He's said so himself, though at first he tried to claim that it wasn't. But that initial claim was basically a publicity stunt to try and sell more books. Really dude, it's fiction.

 

You. You can't stand criticisms of Islam, so you come to the Christianity board to criticize.

You Muslims and Christians are all alike.

Dan's "documents" are the same one's he's criticizing, ya fool.

And I didn't say he was mocking. Even if he's serious ...

Your acceptance of Christian criticism but rejection of Islamic criticism has nothing to do with what Dan Brown thinks, you're just putting up a strawman so you don't have to own up to your hypocrisy.

I am disappointed a second time.

 

What fry's my goats is when people cite "The DaVinci Code" as making these claims when it was acctually "Holy Blood Holy Grail" by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, and Henry Lincoln.

My sister and I rented "Exposing the DaVinci Code" which was a Christian response to the book. Besides the hilarious re-enactments (for example they used the same footage of Jesus and Mary M. hugging for both the ressurection and when they were talking about the alleged marriage) we literally shouited at our TV nearly every time they said "Dan Brown claims..." or "The DaVinci Code claims...". It was quite funny.

I don't even understand Cat's intent with the post, it doesn't make any statement on the discussion or add to it in any way.

 

It wasn't meant to. Cat's just being the way he's been recently. Idk why he changed, but he's not catstevens anymore, that's for sure.

 

Dirk_Pitt

Ask Dan

Peace and love
​

Yours Sincerely,
​

Cat Stevens
​

Note: Silly, repeated, Irrelevant, and the like, responses, posts, comments will be ignored (it depends on my mood and time if I won't ignore them), taking off the topic is losers' style losers' fate , ask yourself: will you write such response if the writer wasn't a Muslim!
​

 

​

​

​

Peace and love
​

Yours Sincerely,
​

Cat Stevens
​

Note: Silly, repeated, Irrelevant, and the like, responses, posts, comments will be ignored (it depends on my mood and time if I won't ignore them), taking off the topic is losers' style losers' fate , ask yourself: will you write such response if the writer wasn't a Muslim!
​

​

 

Zoomie​

Anti! are you sure! if discussing such issues in respected way (no swear-words) this is Anti, I see.​

catstevens ignores Silly, repeated, Irrelevant, and the like, responses, posts, comments but (it depends on his mood and time if he won't ignore them)​

Peace and love
​

Yours Sincerely,
​

Cat Stevens
​

Note: Silly, repeated, Irrelevant, and the like, responses, posts, comments will be ignored (it depends on my mood and time if I won't ignore them), taking off the topic is losers' style losers' fate , ask yourself: will you write such response if the writer wasn't a Muslim!
​

 

Hi Professor Jumbo ^^

​

​

​

Peace and love
​

Yours Sincerely,
​

Cat Stevens
​

Note: Silly, repeated, Irrelevant, and the like, responses, posts, comments will be ignored (it depends on my mood and time if I won't ignore them), taking off the topic is losers' style losers' fate , ask yourself: will you write such response if the writer wasn't a Muslim!​

​

 

Hikaru Zero​

Quote it.​

The point is: there is a difference when you crticize and discuss and when you swear, or mock etc​

​

Peace and love
​

Yours Sincerely,
​

Cat Stevens
​

Note: Silly, repeated, Irrelevant, and the like, responses, posts, comments will be ignored (it depends on my mood and time if I won't ignore them), taking off the topic is losers' style losers' fate , ask yourself: will you write such response if the writer wasn't a Muslim!​

 

He has and will keep it to himself, and he got what he wanted. try to grasp it, if yoy want to.​

Peace and love
​

Yours Sincerely,
​

Cat Stevens
​

Note: Silly, repeated, Irrelevant, and the like, responses, posts, comments will be ignored (it depends on my mood and time if I won't ignore them), taking off the topic is losers' style losers' fate , ask yourself: will you write such response if the writer wasn't a Muslim!​

 

Oh wow! I never would have guessed you'd reply this way!

What a dope you are, man. Honestly. You're all like, "Dan has his sources" and then we ask what sources and you go "ask Dan" because YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW.

YOU MAKE CLAIMS BASED ON KNOWLEDGE THAT YOU DO NOT HAVE!!

But then again ... stereotypical fundamentalist Muslim. Just like a Christian.

Can't quote something that is implied and not expressed.

You told me once in a PM that the reason you were flooding the Christianity boards with criticism is because they were doing that on the Islamic boards.

That implies that you reject criticism of Islamic beliefs, but you support criticism of Christian beliefs.

There's also a difference between criticizing, and spamming boards with nonsense from an author whose sources you are unfamiliar with, whose work is fiction, where you are clearly taking it as some sort of basis for the real state of affairs.

Feel free to criticize and discuss as you like, but at least do your homework beforehand. Know where your info is coming from. Don't be all lame like "ask Dan." The last thread you made which I talked to you about, was filled with misinformation, misinterpretation, mistake, and even outright lies. After a brief volley, it became apparent that your entire post was just loaded with crap, and that you weren't going to win the argument. What did you do? You said you "werent' in the mood" and never returned again.

So when WILL you be in the mood to finish what you start, cat?

HAH! HAHAHAHHAHAHAH.

Keep it to yourself? That's why you posted this thread, right? To keep it to yourself?

I take my hat off to you, sir.

I could call you a hundred names and none of them would describe the idiocy of what you yourself have so perfectly encapsulated above.

 

03-28-2006

.

Peace and love
​

Yours Sincerely,
​

Cat Stevens
​

Note: Silly, repeated, Irrelevant, and the like, responses, posts, comments will be ignored (it depends on my mood and time if I won't ignore them), taking off the topic is losers' style losers' fate , ask yourself: will you write such response if the writer wasn't a Muslim!​

 

​

3-28-2006

​

​

​

Peace and love
​

Yours Sincerely,
​

Cat Stevens
​

Note: Silly, repeated, Irrelevant, and the like, responses, posts, comments will be ignored (it depends on my mood and time if I won't ignore them), taking off the topic is losers' style losers' fate , ask yourself: will you write such response if the writer wasn't a Muslim!​

 

3-28-2006​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Peace and love​

​

Yours Sincerely,​

​

​

Cat Stevens​

​

​

Note: Silly, repeated, Irrelevant, and the like, responses, posts, comments will be ignored (it depends on my mood and time if I won't ignore them), taking off the topic is losers' style losers' fate , ask yourself: will you write such response if the writer wasn't a Muslim!​

​

 

Dear Hikaru Zero 19 years old​

​

​

I posted all the PMs above, bad analyzer ​

The point is: ​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Click​

Some times I answer the silly (Unserious - sarcastic) questions with silly answers, and sometimes those who seems so or do so mostly in their posts in other threads, I behave and act in the same way when they are serious to let them know how were they .... try to grasp it , info: if you want to make a child laugh you don't tell him a joke he won't laugh, so, I treat with people in a way which they can understand.​

​

​

sarcasm for example, people who often aren't serious, teenagers, childish I give them the suitable responses.​

​

​

where did he get the sources, read his book and ask him. he knows best. ​

​

​

​

​

See, win, 19 years old,​

​

​

#1 I posted that not to discuss it from a scientific side if I wanted to I won't post it in the philosophy section that's why I highlited my points and agreemant with the writer in red color ,# 2 you were behaving as teenagers when they find a different opinion or when they argue (swear-words), why wasting my time, learn how to be respected guy then come to me.​

​

​

Yes, because I want them o try, to try grasp things, not to rely on the others , they should know how to use their brain. so they can grasp things =)​

many threads I didn't write the point of it, some asked what is it, I told them but that's bad, they should try. ​

​

​

Thanks ​

​

​

19 years old.​

Peace and love​

Yours Sincerely,​

​

Cat Stevens​

​

Note: Silly, repeated, Irrelevant, and the like, responses, posts, comments will be ignored (it depends on my mood and time if I won't ignore them), taking off the topic is losers' style losers' fate , ask yourself: will you write such response if the writer wasn't a Muslim!​

 

Right,

CatStevens if you have nothing usefull to say, shut up.
I wonder how old you are... 9 or 10 perhaps?
You and your stupid age bullshit.
You certainly dont act like someone mature...
Nope, you run away if you cant keep your ground in a discussion, how cool.