Breaking the Da Vinci Code

Rating:
Summary: A Clear and Logical Approach to History
Review: Dr. Bock's book engages the early history of the church brought up in Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code in a clear and logical manner. It allows the reader to analyze the fundamental claims that Brown's book makes about Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and early Christianity from a scholarly and historical perspective. Dr. Bock lays the facts before the reader and guides them through the debates surrounding these subjects as the arly church was being formed. He has been able to break down the political and religious arguments in a way that the reader can easily follow.

The facts contained in the pages of this criticism are not restricted to the The Bible and accepted Christian dogma, but also include a detailed investigation of the Secret Gospels and other extrabiblical material. This analysis is not the argument of only conservative biblical scholars, but also extends into the realm of liberal historical Jesus followers. It is an analysis that focuses on history and not interpretaton.

The bottom line is after Dr. Bock is through with his investigation, the "historical" basis for The Da Vinci Code is debunked, and the rest of the story,
including Da Vinci and his artwork, is a novel construct for an author to tell a good tale and nothing more.

Rating:
Summary: People Hear What They Want to Hear
Review: I've read some of the Amazon reviews of Bock's "Breaking the Da Vinci Code" and I'm shocked. I think they all miss the point entirely.

The main point that Darrel Bock makes, (and I happen to completely agree with), is that Dan Brown has a very clear political agenda behind his famous novel "The Da Vinci Code". I have no doubt of that. The great irony is that Dan Brown attacks orthodox Christianity for having an agenda, when in reality, it is Dan Brown who is distorting historical fact for a political agenda.

Dan Brown's "theory" (if one can call it thus), is utterly meaningless and unprovable unless one thing should happen: and that's if someone discovered the Holy Grail (or Sangreal). There never has been any proof that a Holy Grail exists, or if it ever did, and there isn't even any agreement on what the Holy Grail would be if it did indeed exist. Until that day comes, Dan Brown's book is pure speculation at best, or revisionist history at worst.

Darrell Bock explains in simple language what happened in the 1st through early 4th centuries and clearly shows where Dan Brown has his "facts" wrong in several cases. The flimsiest case is made by Dan Brown that the historical Jesus must have been married because he was "a Jew". Read Darrell Bock's insightful book and you'll agree how weak Brown's argument is, and how little biblical research actually went into such claims.

I found Brown's claim that Constantine the Great was a sun worshipper to be completely unfounded by any knowledge we have of the man. Typically, oponents of Christianity accuse St Paul of deifying the "historical" Jesus of Nazereth throughout history. Now, Dan Brown claims it happened in the early 4th Century by Constantine as a political ploy, when clearly the letters of St Paul speak of Jesus as a divinity of sorts. So when was Jesus of Nazereth diefied, with St Paul or centuries later with Constantine? Clearly Dan Brown's case is weak at best.

Maybe Darell Bock's criticism is non-conclusive, but at least he is a scholar who understands Gnosticism and has read and studied the ancient world's works and its many diverse religious sects, whereas I am doubtful that Dan Brown has. If Darrell Bock makes assumptions then Dan Brown makes preposterous assumptions with no basis on historical or scientific research.

Rating:
Summary: meaningless...
Review: Nothing in this book proves anything... If Da Vinci Code is wrong about Magdalene and the conspiracy, this book is not right either... faith is very hard to argue and everybody believes what they wanted to believe...

Rating:
Summary: Minimal, hurried, shallow, and not very convincing!
Review: The arguments the Author presents are so air-tight that he feels compelled to repeatedly tell the reader that the code is broken. Its intended audience is obviously the Sunday head-nodder with little interest of any serious discussion. The book gives you the feeling that the author felt a real need to hurrieldy puplish this work as if to address a serious threat to the faithful. Just imagine what may happen if Christians start reading the history of their own church for a change.
Although the Author selectively references ancient documents, he mainly uses the N.T. to prove his arguments. It is as if you are listening to a Republican quoting Bush to prove a Republican point. My favorite was quoting Acts 1:15-26, listing the qualifications of an Apostle (male, be with Jesus, & a witness to the ressurection) to prove the Biblical limitaions of the role of women. The very same text can be used to prove that the men who gave us this text meant to limit the role of women for no other reason than being a woman. Twelve men casting lots to pick a replacement for a man that betrayed Jesus, stipulating that the replacement has to be a man. The very same point that the Da Vinci code tried to make.

Rating:
Summary: Dismissing The Da Vinci Code
Review: This book is a hoax, it has nothing to do with breaking the Da Vinci Code. The name was simply used to tie it to Dan Brown's book so that this shallow attack on Dan Brown would sell more copies. The book dismisses everything contained in the Da Vinci Code - in most instances simply stating that the views contained therein cannot be proven and must therefore be wrong, even though there is no proof to the contrary. Bock is more concerned with protecting the status quo than he is with exploring the issues brought up by Dan Brown. Why doesn't he address why Da Vinci placed Mary Magdalene on the right hand of Jesus at the Last Supper? My guess is that he can't explain it - and thereby would be promoting the mystique he is trying to suppress. Dan Brown's book is fiction and I never accepted it as fact, but Bock is about as convincing in defense of his views as the Inquisition was in condemning Galeleo's view that the Earth revolves around the Sun. In the end, I was left wondering if there is more to the Da Vinci Code than I had previously believed. My advise is to skip this book and buy "Holy Blood, Holy Grail."