WARNING, if anyone has not read the book and wants to or plans on seeing the movie instead, I suggest they not read this thread. Discussion of the themes of the book may reveal plot twists and spoil enjoyment of the book.

I just finished reading the book and found it very interesting. It's a better than average thriller but the historical themes I found extremely interesting. Some things I had already known, but others were new to me. In fact I was surprised that I had not known about them.

One of the main points is that much of the New Testament was written by the Roman Emperor Constantine 300-400 years after the death of Christ. Constantine saw Christianity rising and apparently took the attitude, if you can't beat 'em join 'em. Rather then let Christianity bring down the Roman Empire he decided to take control of it. The plethora of pagan symbology in Christianity seems to support this.

Another thing I found interesting is that, apparently, much of the historical points made in the book are not new or unknown but have been suppressed from being made widespread knowledge because of damage it might do.

For example I looked at the Last Supper and the figure to Christ's right is clearly a woman and not John. I consider myself pretty widley read yet I'd never heard of this before.

Anyone else want to comment?

Scott<>

Scott.Odd that you should bring this up.Last night,here in the UK,on National Geographic channel,was a two hour special on the Gospel of Judas.Explosive stuff or what.30 Gospels or more,only four chosen for the New Testament.Mathew,Mark,and Luke's Gospels,were not written by them.Judas's Gospel is dated (carbon dated),to about 170-200AD.He has a bad press,Jesus told him to betray him.Judas was Jesus's favourite.Wow.And that's just the first 45 minutes.
Before all this,same channel,Dan Brown was on,talking about unwrapping the DaVinci Code.Mary Magdelene was Jesus's wife.They had a daughter called Sara,and lived happily every after.
That painting by DaVinci,The Last Supper,does indeed show a woman,to Jesus's right.Both he and her,are in a "V" shape apart.A clear suggestion of the womb,and that both were "married".
The movie comes out May 25th,here in the UK.I can not wait to see it.Do I believe any of it... no.

Hi,
Since you posted this in the Religion Category, I will only add that Christians' religious beliefs come from the Bible and the Church. Books are written all the time, but the only one that counts is the Bible.

Nez, Yes I've been reading Judas documents. Apparently the document was stored in a safe deposit box in a bank where I do my banking! Oddly enough though, I think the revelations of that document actually support the concept of Jesus's divinity. Why would he ask Judas to betray him if he didn't anticipate what would happen? It indicates that he set the whole thing up.

Getting back to The DaVinci Code, do I believe that descendants of Christ exist? I don't know. I would have to see more evidence then contained in the book. Do I believe that the Church has suppressed facts and evidence that don't support its carefully crafted story of Christ? You bet I do!

There is no question that Jesus Christ was not one of the most, if not THE most, influential characters in recorded history. His teachings about peace and love should be followed and revered. But was he the son of God? Sorry, but I don't believe in that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fredg

Hi,
Since you posted this in the Religion Category, I will only add that Christians' religious beliefs come from the Bible and the Church. Books are written all the time, but the only one that counts is the Bible.

---

Counts in what way? Are you saying that anything that contradicts the Bible doesn't count? What is the Bible, but a book?

The idea and teaching about the "judas" documents are really nothing new, we studied various *other documents or writings* and the idea that Judas was merely acting on Jesus instruction is a concept that some have accepted. One of the other things is that the greek word we use for betray actually means to "turn over" so it does not automatically mean that he turned him over against his wishes or will, but merely he turned him over.

The only way we know if it was a betrayal, is to know the idea of the use of the word. Christian teachings have assumed betrayal but if you change the word betrayal in the bible to merely handed over, it will give you a different outlook.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fredg

Hi,
Since you posted this in the Religion Category, I will only add that Christians' religious beliefs come from the Bible and the Church. Books are written all the time, but the only one that counts is the Bible.

---

Most will agree that you are completely wrong about this.

The vatican CONTROLS EVERYTHING religion... you will never see the total truth about Jesus and you will not see ALL the gospels... as is the vatican knows of new gospels according to Mary Magdelene but will never print them because who she was... to me the bible is nothing more than a bunch of stories written by different people and different periods... can they all be true.. NO... why? Because people interpret what they hear and see in different ways and write them down to make it more exciting... humans makes mistakes.. there are many INCONSISTENCIES in the bible... if you don't believe me do a search... the Vatican is the final word when it comes to what we know about Christianity... is there more somewhere... MOST Definitely... will we ever see it.. NO... thats why I take this religion with a grain of salt... I DON'T BELIEVE ANY RELIGION IS PERFECT OR ABSOLUTELY RIGHT ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY CENSOR THEIR OWN WRITINGS... do I believe there is 1 powerful being who made all the universes and galaxies and decided EARTH will be the ONLY 1 with LIFE.. OH HELL NO!

Chuck,
That was my understanding. I was somewhat surprised by the hype about these new documents since I always thought there was at least differing schools of thought.

This actually points out how things have gotten garbled over the ages. It is clear, that the name of Judas has become synonymous with betrayal and treachery. That Judas' alleged betrayal is the root of anti-semitism. So, if these new documents confirm what some scholars have thought it takes away much of the reasons for Christians (at least) to hate Jews.

As a side note,The Roman Catholic Church has never officially stated that it believes Judas is in Hell, it does not know where his soul is.In other words, if he had not hanged himself,but repented his actions,it would still have been possible? For him to be made a saint, as was (Saint) Peter who had denied Christ three times.
As for the (Church) surpressing "important" historical documents,I believe that this probably happened.After Jesus's death,and the Romans attempt to keep the lid on Christianity,various sects would have had their own agenda.When Christianity became the main (Roman) religion,the Vatican,as it was later to become,must surelly have sensored documents to keep the masses "on the correct" track.I'm not saying that Catholisism is bad by the way,as I know many Catholics,wth whom I can have many rational discussions,even though it's not my view point.Yet that ugly word politics always rears it's head from time to time,and once again we have many different views upon the subject,which will continue long after all of us have gone to dust.

Related to hiding or suppressing documents:

Remember, "the Church" is generally not who discovers ancient texts... and to boot, most of the most famous ones were found by either non-Christians or non Catholic Christians: neither of which are interested in protecting the name of Catholic Christianity.

I'm not so sure about that, Rick. Firstly, in more ancient times, literacy was mostly the province of the Church. So, any documents found were more likely to be brought to the Church. Secondly, ancient documents discovered in modern times were often bought to the church for translation and/or verification.

I disagree on both counts.

1. Can you cite reputable source claiming that "literacy was the province of the Church"?

2. Can you name an ancient document discovered in modern times that was brought to the Church - with the exception of Codex Vaticanus?

Until the last couple hundred years, even the Church itself was not so interested in discovering old documents: I cite, for example, the discovery of the Codex Sinaiticus in 1859 in the rubbish bin of a monastary.

Despite that Archaeology was all but non-existent until the 18th century, "the Church" has always had plenty of enemies. Surely a huge reward would await the person who discovered something that proves what the church teaches or believes on a significant issue is wrong.

I believe the evidence shows that the Church is far more interested in truth over protecting a false belief. Example: the Church's allowing the Shroud of Turin to be tested. Granted the tests are not conclusive, but most Catholic Scholars agree that it does not date back to the time of Christ.

Quote:

---

... Constantine saw Christianity rising and apparently took the attitude, if you can't beat 'em join 'em. Rather then let Christianity bring down the Roman Empire he decided to take control of it. The plethora of pagan symbology in Christianity seems to support this...

---

True, Constantine was more interested in political union within the empire than in true worship. That's why many of those who were baptized were allowed to retain their unChristian beliefs. The result was that Christianity began to fall away from the original teachings. This merging with the world had been warned against.

1 John 2:15-17; James 4:4; Rom. 12:2. James 1:27

http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org...hi/church6.htm

Thankfully the Church has recovered. A close examination of the beliefs and practices of today's Catholicism/Orthodoxy, along with an examination of what we have available to us from the writings of the earliest Christians, we find, an incredible consistency.

Thankfully, we now have an abundancy of ancient texts incredibly close (far closer than nearly any other ancient texts) to their dates of original composition - of both books of the NT and of writings of early Church Fathers - to affirm this.

:)
Hello everybody!
Will you allow an ignorant Jew to join this debate?
When I say "ignorant", I mean it: my knowledge regarding Christianity and the way it reached it's present "forms" so toeasto say, is merely nerolgeneral, and derived from History classes during high school (I oftenl regret not having a broader history knowledge - I find it necessary - almost imperative in many daily situations).
So:
I've read "Da Vinci Code" as a fascinating thriller. I regarded it as a wonderful historical fiction book.
Then, all of a sudden, there was a "burst" of nON FICTION programs dealing with the core of this book.
On the Natl. Geog. Channel, debates on the BBC Prime channel, on Discovery channel. To my great astonishment, I found out there were serious considerations regarding the most important issues brought to light in this book, and now, to spiced it even more, the whole story of Judas gospel was brought to public attention.
I'm not even trying to join the debate concerning the question of what is the truth, or why is it presented (or not) as it is, and how did it happen that Christianity reached it's state today, and how and why Constantinus turned to Christianity.
|I only wish to make one point, without getting involved in the debate concerning the origin of the Bible: I know that HUMAN beings decided which books were included in the Old Testament, and there are books we know about, but were excluded, although they already existed at that time, like for example the two Maccabean books.
If we, the Jews have knowledge of all our excluded books? How can I know, but I know there are more than one.
In the same manner, and for all the possible reasons one might think of, the same might have happened with the books concerning the beginning of Christianity.
I apologize if I might have hurt anybodies feeling, I had NO intention to do that.
Bye,
Millie

I don't think anyone will be offended by what you say.

I, too, am always amazed when fictions like The Davinci Code and The Last Temptation of Christ get so much hubbub.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rickj

I disagree on both counts.

1. Can you cite reputable source claiming that "literacy was the province of the Church"?

2. Can you name an ancient document discovered in modern times that was brought to the Church - with the exception of Codex Vaticanus?

---

1. Well I can't cite any specific source, but googling Medieval literacy brings back several links that appear to support what I said. Maybe if I rephrase it you will understand better. Most people could not read into medieval times. Peasants and such were not educated. News and entertainment were brought by minstrels or travelers. Literacy was something that was taught by the church to clergy and the nobility. Schools were almost always run by clergy.

2. No I can't, but then archeology is not my field.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by milliec

:)
Hello everybody!
Will you allow an ignorant Jew to join this debate?

---

Millie,
All are welcome who wish to participate with open minds and/or civil discourse.

You make a valid point. I think the issue may be why certain books were excluded. The premise of The DaVinci Code is that they were excluded because they didn't support, or worse contradicted, the books that were included. Not sure if that is true of anything omitted from the Old Testament.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottGem

2. No I can't, but then archeology is not my field.

---

Oh, so saying "Secondly, ancient documents discovered in modern times were often bought to the church for translation and/or verification." was just a guess?