Da Vinci Code vs Holy Blood, Holy Grail court case

Yes everybody, it was all a hoax.

Well, no-one really know that but I think it is.

For those who aren't in the know - the Authors of The Holy Blood and The Holy Grail are (trying to) sue Dan Brown for nicking their idea. Anyone who knows anything about copyright law knows this is ridiculous because ideas can't be copyrighted.

Anyway - what the general public don't KNOW but might suspect is that The Holy Blood and The Holy Grail - a book that, though slightly influencial, has gone a bit underground in recent years. However, I can tell you as a bookseller that it's sales since this court case have risen by about 100%.

What not many people know, is that The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail and The DaVinci Code are both published by Random House.

Publicity stunt anybody?

Much Love
Sebbi

 

Sure. Read this for more info.


THE DA VINCI CODE ...


<= THE TRUTH WENT THAT WAY =>

Hello all ...

I have only skimmed through the book, The Da Vinci Code, because I read it years ago under another name - The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail. Dan Brown's novel is basically 'Holy Blood' with dialogue and far less substance.

When I saw The Da Vinci Code 'blockbuster' film the other night I was relieved that I had not wasted time wading through the book. The plot was incredible, as in the dictionary definition of 'Having a probability too low to inspire belief'. I can understand why there was laughter at some points during its premiere at the Cannes Film Festival.

If you watched it as just a fantasy story, it was okay if you like that sort of thing. But even as a Hollywood 'thriller' it had more holes than a string vest. A guy carrying 'the secret' is murdered at night in the Louvre Museum in Paris and later the movie's heroes talked at length at the same spot. On both occasions neither incident was detected.

Yet the Louvre is awash with security cameras and other surveillance systems that would pick up intruders in minutes if not seconds. Some of the most priceless art treasures in the world are there, for goodness sake. And how much noise would a gun make amid the silence and echoes of the Louvre? But no-one, it seems, heard a thing. The whole plot is based on the principle of ... when you need something to happen that would not normally happen, ignore the realities or invent a miracle.

The mega-hyped movie tells the story of Robert Langton (Tom Hanks), a Harvard expert in religious symbolism who spends 24 hours on the run from police who believe he is responsible for the murder of the man in the Louvre. Of course, the hero is innocent and, with his cryptologist companion (long story), he follows the clues in Paris and London to unravel a code left by Leonardo da Vinci and a secret carried through history by secret societies like the Priory of Sion and the Knights Templar.

This code reveals that 'Jesus' was married to Mary Magdalene and when he died on the cross she and their daughter escaped to France where the bloodline continued and became known as the Merovingian dynasty.

The 'baddies' are the Vatican secret society, Opus Dei, which is pledged to protect the official Jesus story by killing all survivors of the bloodline and those who know the secret. One of its agents, a mad monk called Silas, is the man who shot the fellah in the Louvre before he could pass on the secret to Robert Langton.

I don't know if Dan Brown is knowingly muddying the waters or if he just saw an opportunity to write a best-selling novel from the basic themes of The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail. Either way, the outcome is that some fact is impregnated with a lot of nonsense and its offspring is diversion.

Yes, there are secret societies manipulating events and many are connected with the Vatican. Yes, the force behind this deceit is based on bloodline and genetics passed on through history. But no, the secret societies are not there to protect or destroy the bloodline of 'Jesus'. The bloodline is nothing to do with 'Jesus', except that the myth is there to hide the truth.

And Jesus said: 'I am a myth, a symbol of the Sun. Know this and thy shall know that the Da Vinci Code is shite.'

A scientist friend of mine, an avid Christian at the time, set out to prove that Jesus really existed. Very quickly he proved the opposite to himself and became a researcher of the greater conspiracy of which the Christian religion is but a part.

The man who became known as 'Jesus' can be found in no credible historical accounts outside the New Testament and even committed Christian scholars and academics have had to accept that they have no idea who wrote the Gospels. What they do know is that they weren't written at, or even soon after, the time that 'Jesus' was supposed to have lived.

In contrast, the story of Jesus can be found, often in detail, in accounts going back thousands of years before Christianity in the story of the 'Sun gods'. One after the other, Tammuz in Babylon, Mithra in Rome and elsewhere, you find the tale of a man, symbolic of the Sun, born on what became December 25th, dying to save our sins, who was called the saviour, the vine, the good shepherd, and so on.


Jesus, Mithra and a stream of other deities throughout history are symbolic representations of the Sun. How could the Sun, therefore, impregnate 'Mary Magdalene'?

Here is a summary of the Sun god themes that recur throughout the ancient world:

The reason why all these narratives are so similar, with a godman who is crucified and resurrected, who does miracles and has 12 disciples, is that these stories were based on the movements of the Sun through the heavens, an astro-theological development that can be found throughout the planet because the Sun and the 12 zodiac signs can be observed around the globe. In other words, Jesus Christ and all the others upon whom this character is predicated, are personifications of the Sun, and the Gospel fable is merely a rehash of a mythological formula (the 'Mythos' as mentioned above) revolving around the movements of the Sun through the heavens.

For instance, many of the world's crucified godmen have their traditional birthday on December 25th. This is because the ancients recognized that (from an earthcentric perspective) the Sun makes an annual descent southward until December 21st or 22nd, the winter solstice, when it stops moving southerly for three days and then starts to move northward again. During this time, the ancients declared that 'God's Sun' had 'died' for three days and was 'born again' on December 25th. The ancients realized quite abundantly that they needed the Sun to return every day and that they would be in big trouble if the Sun continued to move southward and did not stop and reverse its direction. Thus, these many different cultures celebrated the 'Sun of God's' birthday on December 25th. The following are the characteristics of the 'Sun of God':

• The Sun 'dies' for three days on December 22nd, the winter solstice, when it stops in its movement south, to be born again or resurrected on December 25th, when it resumes its movement north.
• In some areas, the calendar originally began in the constellation of Virgo, and the Sun would therefore be 'born of a Virgin.'
• The Sun is the 'Light of the World.'
• The Sun 'cometh on clouds, and every eye shall see him.'
• The Sun rising in the morning is the 'saviour of mankind.'
• The Sun wears a corona, 'crown of thorns' or halo.
• The Sun 'walks on water.'
• The Sun's 'followers,' 'helpers' or 'disciples' are the 12 months and the 12 signs of the zodiac or constellations, through which the Sun must pass.
• The Sun at 12 noon is in the house or temple of the 'Most High'; thus, 'he' begins 'his Father's work' at 'age' 12.
• The Sun enters into each sign of the zodiac at 30 degrees; hence, the 'Sun of God' begins his ministry at 'age' 30.
• The Sun is hung on a cross or 'crucified,' which represents its passing through the equinoxes, the vernal equinox being Easter, at which time it is then resurrected.
Source: http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/christianity_nojesus.html#NoHistory

The Sun god, Sol Invictus (the Unconquered Sun). The halo of rays around his head became the Jesus 'crown of thorns'. The Roman Emperor Constantine, the creator of Christianity as we know it at the Council of Nicea in 325AD, was a follower of Sol Invictus. To him, nothing changed when Christianity became the religion of Rome, except the name of the hero.

The evidence is so vast for the 'Jesus-is-another-Sun god' scenario and there are so many historical inaccuracies in the literal interpretation of the Gospel stories. Even the very basis of the Christian tale, Jesus being nailed to a cross, is not supported by the Roman laws and punishments recorded in accounts of the time.

Add all this together and I was understandably bewildered by the 'Jesus bloodline' idea even before it appeared as The Da Vinci Code. I found much of interest in The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail until it came to the central theme of the hidden bloodline of Jesus and the same with the books of Sir Laurence Gardner. I have sympathy with quite a lot of this information until Jesus and his dynasty take the stage.

The central question of The Da Vinci Code and books on the same theme is this: how can the Sun have children, except symbolically?

The Sangreal or 'Blood Royal' as depicted in The Da Vinci Code. There is a 'royal' bloodline, as perceived by its advocates anyway, but it's nothing to do with 'Jesus'.

I wondered if there was some bigger ulterior motive in all this Jesus bloodline stuff, but I put that aside for a while because the theme was not getting the global attention it needed to make an impact on the human psyche. Then came The Da Vinci Code. The global promotion of the book and the film have been extraordinary, fuelled by the protests of the Roman Church.

The Church and its followers saying the film should be banned or boycotted because its claims are ridiculous is a sight to behold. Applied in reverse it is a call to ban and boycott the Christian Church in all its forms. The claim that Jesus fathered children is no more or less baloney than the Gospel version on which the whole of Christianity is built.

Across the world the protests against the movie have come from those who have their own nonsense to defend. In mostly Hindu India, which is also home to 18 million Roman Catholics, Joseph Dias, head of the Catholic secular Forum, began a hunger strike in Bombay and said other people were joining him. 'We want the movie to be banned,' he said.

What, just because they disagree with it?

'Boooo, our bollocks is better than your bollocks ... booooo ...'

Austin Ivereigh, co-ordinator of the Da Vinci Code Response Group, a London-based collection of Catholic clerics and theologians, described the film as a 'Pythonesque' comedy. Yes, in parts it is, but can it compete with the belief that 'God' sent his only begotten son to die on a cross, disappear from a tomb, fly to heaven off a hilltop and consign everyone to hell who refuses to accept that he is their 'saviour'? I think not. When it comes to drivel, the Roman Church plays Superbowl.

A survey by the Ivereigh group claims to have found that those who had seen the film were now twice as likely to believe the Catholic Church was involved in a cover-up. That's good, but if they go with the Dan Brown/Holy Grail version of what is being covered-up they have mounted the wrong stallion.

There is a centuries-old cover up, but its not about Jesus and his lineage. It is the fact that there was no Jesus and the bloodline is not his, but the network of families who came out of Babylon and relocated their 'Church' in Rome. These are the same families under different names still in power today. They were the force behind Emperor Constantine whose Church changed the name of Sol Invictus to what became 'Jesus' and created the global mind-prison called Christianity.

Through this vehicle, these families plundered the world in the name of 'Jesus', using their befrocked agents, stooges and followers to kill and slaughter on an unimaginable scale to 'Christianise' country after country. In doing so, they forced out of general circulation the very ancient esoteric knowledge held by them within the inner core of their 'Church'. The tiny inner circle understands the Biblical symbolism while the vast outer congregation is ordered and indoctrinated to take it literally. Judaism, Islam, and their like conform to the same structure.

These are among the secrets held and perpetuated by the Knights Templar, Opus Dei, the Jesuits and all the rest.

Why no thriller about the real secret that Jesus was another mythical Sun god, Mr. Brown? Now that would have been a real blockbuster and the protests would have known no bounds. Getting it through the Hollywood truth-filter would have been quite a feat, however.

There are some good things about the Da Vinci Code in that it highlights in the public mind the existence of secret societies that manipulate information and events. The danger is that it is diverting the attention of many into another 'Jesus' cul-de-sac. Christianity, Islam, the New Age and so many more religions have their versions of 'Jesus' and Jesus-the-dad is just the latest.

Understanding that there was no Jesus would set so many free to open their minds to infinity.

I have read suggestions many times over the years that the 'Jesus bloodline' story would be promoted and manipulated until large numbers of Christians and others believed it. Once established, an Illuminati operative would be 'found' to be of the bloodline and sold as the rightful leader of the world. I don't know if there is any truth at all in this, but its worth holding on file just in case.

For now, Da Vinci and his code appear to be the only show in town, but soon, pray, the hysterical hype will fade without too much damage to human perception.

At one point in the film, a character says: 'I am so glad this bullshit is over'. As the closing titles rolled, I could not have put it better.

 

Dude I'm talking about a commercial publicity stunt, not how awful the DaVinci Code is or isn't.

Ah well, I half expected this. You say "DaVinci" anywhere near conspiracy theorists now...

 

It applies. I just felt the truth should be on record if we were discussing the Da Vinci Code. It is rather long, but if you don't wanna read it, don't. And I'm sure it is a publicity stunt.

BTW, did anyone know there's a Da Vinci Code video game? It's insane.

 

Maybe I should have named this thread "Random House publicity stunt Conspiracy"

 

Or maybe you should shut the fuck up.

Hellopeople - Goddess worship is extremely prevenlant in the ancient illuminati religions on which all modern religions are based. Mary is the modern version of ancient deities such as Queen Semiramis/Isis, who is in turn symbolic of the moon. Jesus is a modern version of ancient deities such as Horus/Tammuz, symbolism for the sun. Modern religion is all ultimately based on sun worship.

 

You're confusing me too. What secret, and why doesn't it make sense to have it?

 

i read an article recently which may be of inetrest in this converation. it said da vinci was known to be avidly gay, which was covered up by myth and time (the mona lisa is supposedly leanardo in drag.) it also said that it is possible jesus was gay, and that peter was actually his lover. if you look at old paintings of the last supper and other biblical pictures, as well as in the bible itself, it seems just as possible as jesus having children. this, of course, is unnacceptable to the catholic church. i don't know how credible it is, it was in a newspaper called the providence phoenix, which is known for having very out there stories.

 

An Italian like Davinci would be hardpressed not to put some feminity in his paintings, even if his patrons are macho Church fathers.


My opinion is that the origin of the Davinci Code may precede Holy Blood Holy Grail because the latter book is similar to the Royal Conspiracy theories of the successful book Jack the Ripper, The Final Solution, which has a similar conspiracy and came 10 years earlier. A prostitute named Mary, a secret child, Freemasons, and even an artist with a code, in this case Sickert. I still haven't found anyone who can prove there were any publications related to the Davinci Code or Mary Magdalene/Jesus rumour prior to 1970. I think it was barely a rumour until modern times which became a sensation inspired by Ripper author, Stephen Knight.