- "It's 'just' a novel.... It's 'just'
- This appears to be the main argument
against a tide of considerable concern that the Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown
is far more than that, mostly because of Brown's own assertions.
- If the Da vinci code is only a fiction,
why does the book and the author claim certain "facts" to be
true, when in reality they are not? Had Brown said "This is just a
fiction..." there would be no issue. But his book and he himself,
in hundreds of interviews, has claimed the elements featured to be based
on "facts" which numerous scholars and historians have refuted
as absolute error, if not outright lies - both historical and theological.
- The Catholic Church has had to hire special
teams of people to stand along a "route" of various sites presently
being visited by gullible people who believed many elements of Brown's
"fiction" to be quite true (as he claimed it was) in order to
inform them that what the book purports is untrue, inaccurate or in many
cases, a complete invention.
- "But because Dan Brown claims that
all descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals
in his novel are accurate, many readers greet even the book's dubious historical
assertions with less skepticism than they otherwise might" (The Spectator)
- 'Da Vinci Code' Errors: A Quick List
- We are all entitled to our own opinions,
but we are not entitled to our own facts. It is OK for a novelist to create
a fictional story and even a fictional setting if he wishes. What you can't
do with impunity is create a fictional foreground and fictional background,
the latter of which you claim is based on fact. That is precisely what
Dan Brown has done. His novel, "The Da Vinci Code," claims to
be based on facts, but his "facts" are just as much fiction as
- Upon examination, "The Da Vinci
Code" is chock full of errors. Some are unimportant; others, if true,
would spell the end of Christianity. Here is a short list of "Da Vinci
Code" errors. More errors from the book are rebutted on the new documentary
special, "The Da Vinci Delusion," which airs May 13 and May 14
nationwide. For listings, go to www.davincidelusion.tv.
- Error: The book tells readers that "The
New Testament is false testimony."
- Rebuttal: The New Testament was sealed
with the apostles' blood. They put their money where their mouths were.
The Greek word for "witness" as in the idea of witnessing
to the truth about Jesus is "martyro," from whence we get
the word martyr. Why? Because so many witnesses to Jesus, e.g., the apostles,
were killed for testifying about what they themselves saw. Brown glibly
ignores this history and, instead, exalts the questionable writings of
second-, third-, and fourth-century Gnostic Christians, who were sexual
libertines for the most part. (Other Gnostics were strict legalists.)
- Error: The doctrine that Jesus was divine
was created by a pagan emperor in the fourth century, Constantine, for
the purposes of manipulation: "It was all about power."
- Rebuttal: After the Resurrection, Christians
worshiped Jesus because He was divine. They called Him "Kurios,"
the Greek word for "Lord." In the Septuagint the Greek
translation of the Old Testament that Jesus and the apostles had (translated
roughly 150 B.C.) the word used for Yahweh is Kurios. For a Jew to
say that a human was Kurios was absolutely forbidden.
- Error: No one believed, prior to the
Council of Nicea in A.D. 325 that Jesus was divine.
- Rebuttal: Again, in the Gospels, written
in the first century, we see that Jesus was divine. This is why He was
delivered up to be crucified. The Jews accused Him of blasphemy, which
is why they arrested Jesus and had a "trial" among themselves:
Dan Brown's view that the early Christians believed Jesus was only a mortal
rests on historical quicksand. From the very beginning, Christians worshiped
Jesus as the Son of God. "Cracking Da Vinci's Code" authors Jim
Garlow and Peter Jones have compiled a list of several Church Fathers
all of whom wrote before the Council of Nicea in A.D. 325 affirming
this most basic Christian doctrine that Jesus was divine. Those Fathers
include: Ignatius (writing in A.D. 105), Clement (150), Justin Martyr (160),
Irenaeus (180), Tertullian (200), Origen (225), Novatian (235), Cyprian
(250), Methodius (290), Lactantius (304), and Arnobius (305). Furthermore,
one of the earliest Christian creeds was "Jesus is the Lord"
(Kurios) (1 Corinthians 12:3).
- Error: Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene,
and the Gnostic gospels teach that.
- Rebuttal: There is the flimsiest of evidence
for that. There is one passage in the pseudo Gospel of Philip, written
about A.D. 250, long after Philip the apostle had died, that claims Jesus
often kissed Mary Magdalene on her ________ (where he kissed her is obscure
in the manuscript). The word could have been mouth, cheek, forehead, or
whatever. Even liberal scholar Karen King of Harvard University observes
that this is referring to a holy kiss that is asexual in nature. Just like
it says in the Bible, greet one another with "a holy kiss" (Romans
16:16). Let's also remember that this was written more than 200 years after
Christ. So even Dan Brown's sources from antiquity don't make his case
- Error: In "The Last Supper,"
Leonardo da Vinci allegedly painted Mary Magdalene seated next to Jesus.
- Rebuttal: One of Dan Brown's proofs is
that John looks so feminine, but John is often portrayed in such a way
in art because he was young. Go to any cathedral and look at the stained-glass
images of John. Just as you can identify Peter because he is holding keys,
and you can tell Andrew because he is holding a Cross like an X (the kind
on which He was crucified), so you can tell John by his feminine looks.
But suppose it were the case that Leonardo intentionally painted Mary Magdalene
next to Jesus instead of John, because Jesus and Mary were allegedly married,
and Leonardo was in on the secret, then where is the "beloved disciple"
John? He is not in the picture. Where is he? Under the table?
- Error: The Gnostic gospels uniformly
teach the "sacred feminine" the pagan idea that sex with
a woman is the route to a relationship with God.
- Rebuttal: Unlike the four Gospels, the
Gnostic gospels can be actually degrading to women. The Gospel of Thomas
declares that a woman cannot be saved unless God first changes her into
a man (the very last verse of Thomas, 114).
- Error: The Priory of Sion, which looms
large in the novel, was created in 1099 by the Knights Templar.
- Rebuttal: The Priory of Sion was created
out of whole cloth in 1956 by a French anti-Semite con man, Pierre Plantard.
In 1975, documents were found in the Biblioteque Nationale in Paris that
allegedly proved the Priory is as old as 1099, and that Leonardo da Vinci
and Isaac Newton and other luminaries secretly presided over it. These
documents were proved to be fakes.
- Error: Christianity was based on pagan
religions such as the mystery religions. Specifically, Dan Brown
states: "Nothing in Christianity is original. The pre-Christian God
Mithras called the Son of God and the Light of the World was
born on Dec. 25, died, was buried in a rock tomb, and then resurrected
in three days."
- Rebuttal: Dan Brown has it exactly the
opposite. The mystery religions more often borrowed from Christian themes
including the ones that Brown mentions. In ancient cultures, there
was always the myth of the dying and resurrecting god essentially
"winter" and "spring." However, these are never alleged
to have been real history. In contrast, on such and such a day (some scholars,
including Dr. Alan Whanger, retired professor of Duke Medical Center
believe April 7, A.D. 30) Jesus Christ was crucified and laid in a tomb
in Jerusalem. He came out alive with a resurrected body in three days (as
Jews count it two days as we would count it).
- Going further on the mystery religions,
note what authors Carl Olson and Sandra Miesel write in their book, "The
Da Vinci Hoax":
- Unfortunately for Brown and the authors
of "Holy Blood, Holy Grail," there is little or no evidence that
most pagan mystery religions, such as the Egyptian cult of Isis and Osiris
or the cult of Mithras, existed in the forms described in their books prior
to the mid-first century. This is a significant point, for much of the
existing evidence indicates that the third- and fourth-century beliefs
and practices of certain pagan mystery religions are read back into the
first-century beliefs of Christians without support for such a presumptive
- Was there any fact-checking?
- There are so many errors among the alleged
"accurate depictions" of "The Da Vinci Code" that historian
and first-rate scholar Paul Maier just has to shake his head. He notes,
"Detailing all the errors, misinterpretations, deceptions, distortions,
and outright falsehoods in "The Da Vinci Code" makes one wonder
whether Brown's manuscript ever underwent editorial scrutiny or fact-checking."
- Amazingly, we live in the Information
Age, yet we live in an age of massive disinformation. The Bible says Satan
is the "the prince of the power of the air" (Ephesians 2:2).
The Bible also says that in the end times, "men will not endure sound
doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers,
having itching ears" (2 Timothy 4:3). Is that not happening in our
- I trust that out of all of this, God,
who is able to turn all things to our good, will use it to give opportunities
for us to share the true Gospel of the true Savior, who gave His life and
shed His blood that we might be forgiven and redeemed and saved by His
grace through faith.
- I don't know what all the hooplah is about, it's only
a fiction! These people need to get a life!
- We received literally dozens of emails saying "It's
just a fiction."
- If the Da vinci code is only a fiction, why does the
book and the author claim certain "facts" to be true, when in
reality they are not? Had Brown said "This is just a fiction..."
there would be no issue. But his book and he himself -- in hundreds of
interviews -- has claimed the elements featured throughout the book to
be based on "facts" which are here exposed as absolute, verifiable
error, if not outright lies - both historical and theological.
- The Catholic Church has had to hire special teams
of people to stand along a "route" of various sites being visited
by people who believed Brown's "fiction" to be quite true (as
he claimed it was) in order to inform them that what the book purports
is entirely untrue, inaccurate or in many cases, a complete invention.
Not issues of faith... issues of historical fact Brown distorted or invented
out of thin air. That's a pretty pathetic situation. Thankfully there are
people out there estute enough to do descent research and prove what is
truth and what is untruth.
- "But because Dan Brown claims that all descriptions
of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in his novel are
accurate, many readers greet even the book's dubious historical assertions
with less skepticism than they otherwise might" - Rense.com
- I've seen Dan Brown on several programs and it's clear
he has a distinct agenda; knows he is fabricating history and twisting
facts, knows he is attempting to plant disinformation in the minds of millions
and ultimately level a blow against historic Christandom. I don't know
if his beef is with the Catholic Church alone, as he seems to have a desire
to tear down the faith altogether, and doesn't appear to hide his animosity
toward faith and people of faith. It's one thing to counter Christianity
or even the Catholic Church regarding issues of faith, but it's another
to deliberately distort historic facts and claim them to be truths. It's
abundantly evident that without the lies and disinfo, Brown wouldn't have
much of a novel. He could have produced the Da Vinci Code and not made
these outrageous claims of fact, but he did because he knew the only way
such a crappy novel could get any attention was to upset the biggest apple
cart possible. Unfortunately, millions of under-educated people will walk
away from his idiotic book with certain completely erroneous ideas settled
in their minds as legitimate 'history.' It is a cowardly way to attack
the Church and Christianity. He clearly does not have the intellect to
do it without petty lies.