Rating: 
Summary: interesting, but quite a reach.
Review: At first I found this book too interesting to put down. It presents as supported facts many things which I had wondered about to begin with. Unfortunately, as I got deeper into the book, I became increasingly more disappointed at the authors' way of making their points and drawing their conclusions. In my circle of friends, we have a term called "reaching." It is used to describe someone who "streches" things a bit too far to be believable. This book does this repeatedly. They present a handful of facts, them present several theories that appear to be presnted objectively, but then they have an annoying tendency to turn around and presnt the theory that they hold as correct as though it were fact. The phrase "as we have seen" is far overused in this book. For example, they present the facts, suggest a variety of ideas based on these facts (or lack of facts), and then continue to draw more conclusions on the basis that these ideas are facts. By the time you reach the end of a section, the conclusions drawn are so far-fatched in lilght of the presented facts that it is obvious that the authors are "reaching" as far as they can. I have to say that I did find the book a good read, and that if the data was not stretched so far this book would've received 5 stars. But anyone reading the book should definitely go into it with an open mind and pay close attention to semantics. You can stop reading my review here, because following will be only examples of how they reach their final conclusions. In the first chapter of the book, they present Leonardo da Vinci and the "secret code" that they beleive him to use in his artwork. They, for example, describe his rendering of the Last Supper, and give and interesting interpretation of this work. But the reader must bear in mind that a person's interpretation of something is just that: one interpretation. In fact, they state themselves that their own interpretation goes contrary to da Vinci's own notes on the painting. They point out that the figure which is supposed to be St John appears to be a woman. They draw the conclusion that the distance between this "female" figure and Jesus represents something, but they do not elaborate on what it is supposed to represent. They then allege that there is the letter "M" in the picture made by the bodies and clothing of Jesus and this figure, and they obviously beleive that this implies that da Vinci wanted to identify the figure as Mary Magdalene, and not St. John. The appearance of this "M" is debatable, and the conclusion, if there is an M, that it is meant to identify Mary is "reaching," and this is the only interpretation the present. They also state that in several of da Vinci's paintings he depicts himself. In each of these paintings that picture both Leonardo da Vinci and Jesus, da Vinci portarys himself with his back turned on Jesus. The authors present this as evidence that da Vinci belonged to another "underground" version of Christianity that did not hold Jesus in such high esteem. Their failure to point out that this portrayal of himself could merely be an indication of his self- proclaimed atheism is puzzling. They go on later in the book to give more theories in this manner based on a lack of facts rather than on facts. They then present these theories as though they were facts in order to substantiate their next conclusion. To further complicate matters, they use verses from the bible to support their arguments, but when I have checked the references, I do not find the wording they use in any translation of the bible that I have come across. (and I looked in several) This gives the appearance of misquoting their sources, and it only serves to discredit more of the book. I truly wish I knew what translation of the bible they used. I must add, however, that their conclusions may not be completely bogus, for some of the conclusions that they have draw have much in common with conclusions that I have drawn myself in my own (rather extensive) studies.
Rating:
Summary: Engaging, yet not very convincing
Review: I totally enjoyed reading this book. It provides an engaging and interesting perspective on Christianity and, as other reviewers have pointed out, turns our culture today upside down. While it is interesting however to imagine the world if that theory was true, the book definitely does not have the authority to do that. Poor research, unattributed STRONG statements, sources that are as valid as "a secret newsletter distributed on the streets of Paris in 1890." At some passages of teh book I felt insulted by the authors for failing to support their conclusionms by evidence or by using their own assumptions as evidence.
Rating: 
Summary: What is the Truth?
Review: I have recently finished reading Templar Revelation, and would reccomend this book to anyone seeking the Truth. Some of the theories and suggestions put forth by Picknett and Prince are far fetched and difficult to substantiate, but I was impressed by their willingness to say as much. This book will shatter some people's preconceptions of long held 'truths', and will anger others, further hardening a belief system that has always been fragile. As a reformed Catholic, many of the historical events presented here confirmed many suspicions and solidified an idea of corruption and the lust for power. For all those that read the synopsis and reject this book on the grounds that it is heretical and/or blasphemous, I say only this - Why is it so blasphemous? Who is the authority on Truth? The Church and all its self serving dogmatic principles? The Church is a man made entity. Created and organized by men, who are just as vulnerable to the imperfect state of human nature, as the rest of us. If you want to find the Truth, and accept its reality, open your mind and consider the facts as presented by all sides. Erase the conditioning and begin to see the Truth as the victim she has been for over 2000 years. NAMASTE.
Rating: 
Summary: Fiction 1; Scholarship 0
Review: A fine example of the growing illiteracy in this land, Picknett and Prince declaim at length with neither proof nor documentation. We are expected to take their word about numerous events and accept their interpretations of various actions. They provide much interesting fiction, but present it as possible fact. This book is a complete waste of time and money. In a sensible age, this trash would be published at the authors' expense. To paraphrase the great Jon Carroll, this is the sort of tripe you read if you read this sort of tripe. I tried to give it zero stars, but the imbecile programmer won't let me.
Rating: 
Summary: Pagans and Christians alike
Review: should buy, and read this book! It's a must read, entertaining, informative, and very well written, once you get past the first chapter it's almost impossible to put down. Loved it cover to cover. It may not be the whole truth, but it's getting closer... after it, read The Jesus Mysteries : Was the 'Original Jesus' a Pagan God? by Timothy Freke... the two works dovetail nicely.
Rating: 
Summary: possible bias
Review: Although I am the antichrist, yes the one of prophecy and myth, and thus have an inherent bias toward the subject matter of this book, I still feel an urge to comment upon it. Overall, it was a good read -- not great mind you, but good. The scholarship was sorely lacking, but this was partly made up for by the imaginative ideas of the writer. Anyway, as scion of the Merengovian line, I will soon be uniting Europe as well as all the major religions. Then I shall destroy the world. With such a pressing agenda I needed something to take me away -- this book was just the ticket. I, yes I, recommend it.
Rating:
Summary: An enigma........and recommendation
Review: I give this book five stars because I could not put it down. Now, that doesn't mean its true, some books are so addictive for their silliness. But this book, like many others similar to it (the hiram key), presented thesises that seem to have some substance to them somewhere internally, however usually unlikely parallel to the author's conclusion. However the scholarship on this book is much better than say, The Hiram Key, and the research done much better, relying on some scholars who are reliable (Golb, Crossan) though some who are anything but that.(Thiering, Schonfield) Obviously, this book's conclusions are certainly heretical to Christianity, though some of its statements even "heretical" to the paradigms of history. I mean by this notions that Jesus' religion was not Judaism, but an Egyptian mystery school. Overall, this book presents many convincing arguments that make you reconsider some conceptions (Again I reluctantly put down the Hiram Key in juxtaposition...none of the Hiram Key worried me at all, I was impressed by its theory and authors, but not scholarship and research..sadly, it really was a good book..) One strong argument for the historical implications was the modern existance of a religion venerating John the Baptizer of Jesus, not only that but going as far as enmity between the Christ and their sect. All in all it is without a doubt in my mind worth further research, because they certainly have made connections between subjects, but any of the conclusions of the connections are speculative, perhaps biased. But, some of the information was new news and revelation to me, so I must admit it remains the best book I've read recently and you should take a look into its claims as well. You'll also find some cool things hidden in "The Last Supper."
Rating:
Summary: Another Piece of the Puzzle
Review: After reading all of the other reviews on this book, I am forced to write my own. I have read this book twice: once for the gist of it and a second time to study it and check the research of the authors against their sources for interpretation purposes. As a student of religion and Christianity for almost 40 years, I read many books of this sort. What I've found is none of them have the complete picture. The authors are like the blind men trying to describe an elephant. Each one has his own knowledge and theories, which they seem to guard with great tenacity and jealousy. I find this same attitude to exist among Christian clergy. "My belief is correct, and all the others are wrong." They're like the old joke about the minister of one denomination going to heaven and as St. Peter is showing him around, he's told to be quiet as they pass a certain mansion. The minister asks St. Peter why he had to be quiet, and St. Peter says, "Those are the (fill in the denomination of your choice). They think they're the only ones up here." THE TEMPLAR REVELATION is an interesting title with a lot of information between its covers. Good information. The theories put forth and conclusions drawn by the authors are also very interesting. These authors like so many others have their feet firmly planted in reality instead of mythology as closed-minded Christians do. These authors have no problem with the premise that Jesus was a man and not God incarnate. They have a better than fair understanding of confirmed history, which so-called true Christians either fail to see or refuse to see because history paints a picture of Jesus different from that of their religious belief. If you are a so-called Christian - born again or otherwise - this book is not for you. It will only make you angry and fill you with hate (not exactly a Christian tenet) for the authors and anybody else, including me, who has an open mind and who can accept Jesus as a man who lived in the Middle East about 2,000 years ago and who had a wife and children. Yes, children. See below. Just for thought: What does the "name" Barabbas mean? I am offering a reward to anybody who can tell me where else besides in the Christian Bible this "name" appears in history.
Rating:
Summary: what a pile of drivel
Review: I can only say that the title is nothing like the book... I am sadly disappointed in the point of this book . Freemasonry has always taken a hit as being something than what it is... Freemasonry is an orginazation that has promoted free thought and freedom for all men. I wish people would stop try to make money on Freemasonry.
Rating:
Summary: The Templar Revelation
Review: This book started off great. The research was thorough, and the authors presented extremely good evidence of the beliefs of followers of the Priory of Sion (including the Templar Knights), the Freemasons and the Rosicrucians. This from a Fundamentalist Christian who, by the way, laughs at the nonsensical and ignorant slams by some of the "intellectual and enlightened" reviewers of this book. The disappointing part comes when the authors try to convince us that Jesus and Mary Magdalene had a sexual relationship, based on the Isis religion from Egypt that had similarities in its teachings and rituals that Jesus used. I don't blame them for wondering if Jesus and Mary Magdalene had that kind of a relationship. It's a fair question. But they ask the question, speculate "what if....", and then later on they say, "now that it has been established that Jesus and Mary Magdalene had a sexual relationship," or "Now that we've shown that Jesus was an initiate in the sex rite ceremonies" or whatever the wording was. But what a leap of faith, from pure speculation to "this is a fact." No proof whatsoever. What I personally saw in the authors' findings is the fact that if Jesus was who he claimed to be, then it would only make sense that he would be aware of and have studied all of the old religions; because what he did with the Old Testament faith was to tell the people that they were misinterpreting it and/or misusing it. And he came to correct that. Why not the same thing with the ancient Egyption religion? What stood out for me was that they understood the "marriage" of the masculine and feminine in all things, physical, mental/emotional and spiritual. They realized that God had the attributes of both, and would be incomplete without one or the other. HOWEVER, Jesus would not have endorsed promiscuity with something as sacred as the sexual union between a man and his wife, who in effect join with God in becoming co-creators when they produce a child. Furthermore, I am completely unconvinced that it would have been thought improper for Jesus to have chosen to live a celibate life himself. They stated that as fact, and presented absolutely no evidence. The other thing that was completely unconvincing was their contention that John the Baptist and Jesus had a rivalry. Their disciples had a rivalry; and both John and Jesus corrected them on that at one time or another. Jesus and John were obviously not interested in competing. When John asked his question after being thrown into jail, that was normal. He'd believed Jesus to be the prophesied messiah, but now that he was about to die, he wanted to know for sure. How can the authors state unequivocably that this meant that John had changed his mind, and was replacing Jesus, or had turned against him? Ridiculous conclusion. All in all, I must say that the book was extremely interesting, and I recommend that people read it; just remember to think for yourselves.
|
