Rating: 
Summary: Tedious
Review: If I had but one word to describe this book, that word would have to be "tedious". Despite the highly provocative and controversial subject matter promised by the authors, wading through all of the disparate story lines, historical minutiae and random Biblical quotations / interpretations soon became a chore which I grew to dread more and more with each passing page. At 496 pages, the book is probably twice as long as it needs to be in order to adequately convey the authors' premise. Do yourself a favor - read the introduction and then skip ahead to the last 100 pages or so.Ultimately, this book doesn't really provide proof that Jesus escaped death on the cross to father children so much as it merely establishes that certain persons and secret societies down through the years MAY have subscribed to such beliefs. There's actually little in the way of objective, verifiable proof to be found in these pages. Instead, we're treated primarily to rank conjecture and inferential leaps of faith and logic that would make even the most dedicated conspiracy theorist blush. As one other reviewer below noted, most of the authors' arguments are based upon "ifs" founded upon "ifs" resting upon yet more "ifs". Entertaining at times, perhaps, but rarely convincing.
Rating: 
Summary: Fact or Fiction??
Review: This book is an interesting peice of work. It appears to be very well researched and presents some very interesting arguements against established historical beleifs. It challenges the premise that the scriptures are exacts accounts of events that took place over 2000 years ago and that they have a literal application in modern language and society. If nothing after reading this book you will be encouraged to question the validity of prescribed religous doctrine and hopefully make your own educated assumptions and decisions.
Rating: 
Summary: An interesting read although difficult to prove
Review: If you're into alternative Christianity, supposed Catholic-Church suppression conspiracies, and secret and/or semi-secret societies of both the past and present then this book is right up your alley. If in particular Jesus perhaps surviving the crucifixion and secret and/or suppressed books regarding early sects of alternate Christianty also fascinates you, then I highly recommend "Mystical Life of Jesus" and the "Secret Doctrines of Jesus" both by H. Spencer Lewis, former Imperator of the AMORC Rosicrucian Order. Regardless of the accuracy, truth or falsehood of the canonical vs apocrypha as well as the relatively recently disovered "lost books of the Bible, Dead Sea Scrolls, etc., always keep the following in mind: Once the ecumenical councils decided what Catholicism would be centuries after the death of Jesus, the apostles, disciples and up to this very day, they had zero tolerance for anything that deviated from it. Just because some theological overlearned egghead nowadays can parrot such dogma chapter and verse doesn't necessarily mean that it's all true. You can be the most learned person in the world, but if your books are skewed to favor a revisionist history to whatever degree then you're still ignorant to that very same degree. Indeed the Cathar sect of Christianity (rumored to have possessed the Holy Grail) taught "horrible" things like women are equal to men and that women may preach the gospels. For that "heresy" the Pope's army put them to the sword, burned many of them alive and razed the Cathar fortress to the ground in their greed and zeal to acquire the Grail. The Gnostic sect of early Christianity taught that we were to emulate Jesus rather than merely worship him as the son of God--not that dissimilar to the mystical branch of Judaism, Kabbalah; and the mystical branch of Islam, Sufism and naturally similar to many Eastern philosophies and Western mystical organizations like the AMORC Rosicrucians. Reincarnation was well-known in the region and lifetime of Jesus, and indeed the Hassidic Jewish sect as sell as the mystical Sufis (mystical branch of Judaism) still believe it to this day. It's funny how the "inner circle" mystical branches of the world religions all seem to get along swimmingly. Yet the "outer circle" relgious/churchianity establishment and members are often the most heinous examples of intolerance and self-righteousness. The Templars had some interesting alternative views on Christianity, and if some are right they may be alive and well but now known as the AMORC Rosicrucians. So what's the point? The point is that someone once said that "might makes right." All that can be said with absolute certainty is that the present version of Christianity that ultimately prevailed had more might to annihilate all other alternate sects of Christianity and all other systems of spirituality it encountered in the Holy Land and abroad. Accordingly might made "right," and then those same individuals burned those books which offended them and then wrote history in in accordance with their dogmatic sensibilities. It doesn't necessarily make what they decreed historically accurate. It only means that they had more swords to swing and more fire pits for a heretic barbecue and the blood lust to use them. Indeed, if the Cathars, for example, had prevailed, just imagine how much better things would have been for women all of these centuries. If the Gnostics had prevailed, perhaps we wouldn't have this, subtle, yet undeniable philosophy of "learned helplessness" whenever it comes to matters of organized religion vs personal spirituality and indeed even things like allopathic health care vs. alternative medicine and personal empowerment vs big governement. Would Galileo have been accused of heresy for merely using a telescope to describe the moon? The Catholic church finally "forgave" Galileo back in the 1980's. Mighty "magnanimous" of them, don't you think? You control a society either through hope or through fear. And Constantine et al. did marvelous job of establishing a monopoly on both. There's no profit in a mystical Christian sect like Gnosicism, for example, that places the power squarely in the lap of each aspirant. No, you have to convince the populace first that they're helpless. Second you have to convince them that only your religion has the keys to hope and fear and when you can do that you can sell hope and the avoidance of fear at whatever price the market will bear.
Rating: 
Summary: Dry, Dry, Dry!!
Review: Never did like "history"...And this book is a good example why!
Boring, boring, dry, dry...Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Rating: 
Summary: Don't be so dramatic!!
Review: I love to read all the other reviews of this book. These people can be so dramatic. Come on! I read this book long before I read the Da Vinci Code along with some others from the same authors (i.e. Mr. Lincoln). Believe me, it isn't such a big deal!
FIRST AND FOREMOST, this book has the entertainment value of a relative's funeral. It is a "history" book and is drentched with tedious depth, dates, and connections. So, if your looking for a good time, look elsewhere.
Now, if this book is true, which the authors themselves can only speculate it is, which speculation they ask us to espouse, then so what? It is not the end of the Western Civilization or Christianity. Anti-religionists look to anything, any source, to somehow gain strength in their minority poised cause. This book is as flimsy a backbone for any cause, as one can create.
So, how factual is this book? Depends. First, the author himself states that he is an athiest in the first few chapters. Can a self-professed athiest approach the subject of God, or Christ, without allowing biased assumptions to be made? The answer is no. Don't believe me? Read this book then. You'll see it all the time.
The authors ask us, over and over, to make connections and assumptions when history, or the available record, is vacant. Usually... actually always, these assumptions and connections are in their favor. This book allows for a good stretch.
As for the book's style, it is really extensive and packed with information. The book presents itself as a very over-zealous date and name recorder. It is a maze of information. This maze makes it difficult to stay interested and excited. It is almost on the level with a dull text book, in its tone and presentation. This, however, was probably done on purpose. IT sells the product, if you know what I mean.
It is, however, to be applauded for the effort and apparent "research" that it employs. This book was not written over night.
The whole crux of the conclusions and assumptions, made in this book, as in the Da Vinci Code, rely upon the facts surrounding the life of Berenger Sauniere. If his story of wealth and mystery can be attributed to some unknown discovery and Catholic conspiracy, then this book may be something; but, pull out from underneath it this story of Berenger, then you have a mess and loss of the "first cause." There exists documents, actual documents, that explain a lot of what this book proports to be the case with Berenger. So, in my mind, the foundation is made of sand and is washed away through the waves of true inspection.
Read the book, then ask yourself, "If this story about Berenger is not true, but can be explained away, what does that do to the whole story?" The answer is, it destroys the rest of the story. If not, why is Berenger's story the first chapter of every book these authors write? It is because it is our take-off point. So, if his story is explainable and not a mystery, or conspiracy, then the issue is dead. And, as I said earlier, there are in existance a lot of old documents that (search for them online if you like) tell us how and where he got his money. Oddly, is was from the Church but not in the from of a pay-offs.
Rating:
Summary: Anything that flies in the face of blind-faith...
Review: There's certainly as much evidence--if not more--to support the authors' hypotheses as there is to discount them... the only arguments against that statement being variations on "that's not what the Bible says." That is I believe one of their main and most salient points. I do wish they had spent less time equivocating, vacillating and otherwise pointing out the gaps in their theories but considering the subject matter I can understand the pre-emptive assumption of a defensive posture. The consistency of citations, source identification and contextual analysis makes the journey far more compelling, especially in light of recent works of fiction drawn from the theories. There is no question as you read this work that it is an historical analysis and not a simple attempt to sell books based on controversy. It may anger those of faith but one must consider that if their faith can be angered so-how strong is that faith?
Rating:
Summary: Huh, no!
Review: I decided to read this "book" after reading the wildly popular THE DA VINCI CODE, wondering what the fuss was all about. I'm open to all sorts of ideas and concepts, no matter how wild they are. But I'm not open to badly researched and written books. And HOLY BLOOD HOLY GRAIL is one of the worst excuses for a book that I have ever read in my entire life. It's hard to believe it became such a bestseller 20 years ago.
Let me just quote a few lines from the book:
From page 114: "This, of course, was only speculative hypothesis, with no documentary confirmation."
From page 115: " This cannot be proved, but neither can it be dismissed out of hand."
From page 116: "On the basis of these connections we had formulated a tentative hypothesis."
I gave up on the book after reading those three lines on three successive pages. The pattern of this book is totally infuriating. The authors keep writing about this and that and have absolutely no proof for anything. They even keep on repeating that they have no concrete proof for anything but, like the quote from page 115, that even though all of this can't be proven, they keep on delving in their fanciful theories because those theories cannot be dismissed outright. Well, with such a flimsy raison d'etre for a book, I could easily write a book on the existence of Santa Claus, not based on actual proof that Santa Claus exists but because no one has proof that Santa Claus DOESN'T exist.
I wish I didn't spend money on this "book". I'm giving 2 stars only because part of the background history they write about is interesting stuff but once they start imagining that "this and that" is like "this and that" because of their "this and that" minds, well, the whole book becomes a pointless, meandering fantasy. I have better things to do than waste my time on this "book". Like clipping my toenails.
Rating:
Summary: Interesting to non bible thumpers
Review: I guess if you believe everything written in the bible you shouldn't read this. However I don't believe everything in the bible so this book was interesting to me.
Rating:
Summary: Assumptions based on weak connections
Review: This is an interesting speculation, and rather fun in that regard, but somewhat tenuous in it's logical assumptions. Many of the "connections" presented don't necessarily follow from the evidence presented. Rather, they only "MIGHT" be possible. No "maybe" ever made anything a "definite," and the leap from the fact that Leonardo Da Vinci's name was found on an old list of names does not prove that it must logically follow that the list was comprised of heads of a group dedicated to preserving a secret about Christ: That Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married and had offspring.
Then the book makes or implies additional similar leaps of reason based on the assumption that if concepts can be imagined from evidences found, then the those concepts must be true. This is an obvious logical fallacy.
As a Christian I'm supposed to be offended by this sort of reading, but I'm not. Even in the REMOTE possibility that the premise is true, I have one question: SO WHAT? Nothing herein would demonstrate that Jesus Christ was not the Messiah, only the "possibility" that Jesus the Christ occupied some human attributes that were not recorded heretofore. But Christians have long known that Christ demonstrated a few occasional human frailties as a result of assuming human form. (I.e.: Praying to the Father and requesting to be released from His duties in the Garden of Gethsemene just hours prior to his arrest.)
My inclination is to think Baigent, Leigh, and Lincoln fell victim to the "group think" phenomena, and were each drawn to support speculations that didn't necessarily follow from the evidence at hand. As a serious scientific or historic study, I give this book zero stars. But as a fun "speculation" I have to give it at least two. So I've compromised and given it one.
Rating:
Summary: Reminds us of the origins of Christianity
Review: We sometimes forget a few things about established organized religion.
1. The Bible is not complete. A few guys who were the upper eschelon of their "cult" got together (with their own agenda) and decided which scriptures could be included. These books and letters supported their own view of what they thought "Christianity" should be. They put more importance on the words of Paul (who, by the way, NEVER met the Christ and had his own issues boiling over into his ministry) than they did on purported witnesses and words of the actual disciples! This became the "Early Church" which then branched off into Catholicism and the Greek Orthodox Church.
2. The Bible was changed several times before today's version. Scholars have noted that Mary Magdalene in the original scriptures was NOT a prostitute, but a merely wealthy woman who was the most mentioned female disciple. What kind of insecure and unholy individuals would slander the Beloved Disciple?
Even if you wholeheartedly disagree with this book, it makes you think long and hard (at least it should) about what kind of things the "church" is telling you to believe. Read Holy Blood, Holy Grail and the Bible, including the Gnostic Gospels, for yourself. The TRUTH is out there...
|
