Truth and Fiction in the Da Vinci Code: A Historian Reveals What We Really Know about Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and Constantine

Rating:
Summary: Eureka! A follow-up to DVC that's actually readable
Review: As a result of Dan Brown's DVC (which I loved, despite its inaccuracies), there have been a real plethora of follow-ups, many of which I've bought or browsed, but none of which was satisfying:

Group A: Books that were actually written *before* DVC(!) but publishers, in a logical attempt to cash in, have added a new jazzy cover and hidden the "originally published in 1926" on page 23 in font size 3. Most of these are titled "The Truth About..." (Jesus, Mary Magdalene, Chocolate Cup Cakes, etc.).

Group B: Extreme knee-jerk reactions from Christians whose only goal is to rubbish Dan Brown. Personally, I find these books unpalatable. (Abanes' book is a good example of going over the top, though he does make some very good and valid points).

Group C: Intelligent balanced UNangry NON-personal POSITIVE "criticism" whose only aim is to inform. Thus far, of all the hundreds of books floating around on this subject, Bart Ehrman's is the ONLY one that I've truly enjoyed and would indeed recommend to anybody who needs to know more but doesn't want to rubbish Dan Brown's novel in the process.

In brief: a MUST-HAVE, thoroughly readable, eminently informed and, as I say, not written by hysterical Christians.

Mike
(A Christian, incidentally, but NOT to the extent that I can't distinguish fact from GOOD fiction)




Rating:
Summary: Ripping Good "Hysterical Fiction"
Review: Dan Brown's "Da Vinci Code" really was an engrossing read. But much of its power for me and for many readers lay in how compellingly it steered us toward belief in yet another "vast conspiracy." We live, after all, in an era defined for many by a dangerous blurring between imagined great conspiracies and equally colossal but bona fide deception and cover-ups by the institutions of power. Because of its immense success, Brown's book has spawned a parasitical industry of silly, imitative pseudo-history and shallowly reactive analysis. Bart Ehrman's "Truth and Fiction..." is neither of these.

When you read first-rate Science Fiction you probably find yourself thinking, "could it be?" - the distant future becomes tangible. If you read first-class Historical Fiction you've probably felt more of an, "I knew it!" - the dim past becomes peopled and coherent. I experienced a powerful combination of both reactions when I read "The Da Vinci Code". Maybe you did too. It was not just a ripping, good yarn; it tied together millennia-old histories that were as unknown to me as the 30th or 40th centuries are unknowable.

Ah. But the future really is fiction! It doesn't exist and is therefore subject to speculation, while the past was once someone's reality and is subject to the scrutiny of its actual artifacts. We tend to associate becoming too engrossed in futures with the tinfoil-helmet crowd, but we acknowledge the study of the past to be a legitimate field of professional study. Or do we?

Bart Ehrman is clearly one of those professionals - an historian of the Biblical and Early Christian eras. Dan Brown is a yarn-spinner. In this book Ehrman reminds us to remember that there is a difference.

Could it be? Is "The Da Vinci Code" is mostly imagined, made-up, invented. I knew it... so did you.

In this thorough but very readable and not overly pedantic book, Bart Ehrman methodically takes apart the invented histories of DVC and assembles the more likely realities for us. He does not do so in a hostile or antagonistic way; in fact he repeatedly mentions how much he enjoyed reading DVC. But he is systematic in dismantling the fundamental pseudo-history at the core of Brown's book. By dissecting out the fabrications, Ehrman helps us to see what's left: believable personalities and credible institutional motives for sure. But any good Sci-Fi writer will do the same. Brown has merely avoided the tinfoil-hat association by claiming something presumed more real for his base - the past.

Ehrman's book is also an excellent commentary upon how history is actually done. He reminds us how honest historians, especially those of the barely-documented, distant past, can only approach the "more likely" at best. But approach it they do. He does a fine job of showing how such history is accomplished when done well; of how he and his colleagues have spent lifetimes building careful layer upon careful layer of the likely. But he demonstrates why "likely" has to be enough, and how it must be contrasted with the merely "imagined." Ehrman makes it clear that one starts with the knowledge that history, even so presumably certain a past as our own "remembered" history, is always viewed through filters and passed forward to the present through distorting lenses of personality and culture. He gives a good sense of how working through this sort of fog is challenging enough not to be further burdened with reacting to fiction.

Now fiction is fiction, after all. But good Historical Fiction generally fleshes-out real events with a cultural matrix and people and personalities that are plausible. We think: "so that's why that happened." Good Science Fiction populates a future with equally-believable peoples and motives and a credible path from our "now" to their "then." We think "so that's how it's going to be." In Sci-Fi, the more distant the future, the wilder the fiction can be - but we read it as imagination and smile and enjoy. It seems that Dan Brown has created a new, more hysterical genre, call it Hy-Fi, which leaps an equal distance in the other direction to a past in which he can erect fabrications that only a clucking small crowd of historians will object to. But Ehrman is no chicken! This is clearly a David & Goliath mismatch, but Bart Ehrman has not backed down from the challenge. Good for him.

Rating:
Summary: Biassed: Vanitas Vanitatum et omnia Vanitas
Review: Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code is such a success that many are trying to get a piece of the cake. It is so disquieting about the rule and power of the Christian churches, and first of all the Catholic Church, that some professional intellectuals who have dedicated their entire life to scrutinizing the Christian religion have to protest and act against such heretic - sorry we say false or fictional today - assertions about Jesus, Mary Magdalene, the Apostles, and many other things. Since Ehrman does not really need a piece of the cake, he must be getting on the move for ideological reasons. And this book is an essential book. It tries to reestablish the « truth » about Jesus and Christian history without - how could they dare - denying the right to any author to use any historical reference in his fiction and imagination. Yet the book is outstanding, not for that « truth » that probably does not exist, but by the intellectual method used to discredit the book at the religious level. Ehrman disagrees with the assertion that the feminine principle was essential in religion before the patriarchalization of Christianity that is finally achieved and triumphant with Constantine, that Jesus was in love with Mary Magdalene (Ehrman concedes that she is in no way a prostitute), married to her and the father of her child. His arguments are purely historical, though all the documents (and they are few, and yet many) we have are too scarce and too distant from the time of events to be sufficient to apply any historical method reliably. We should use an anthropological method, the only way to reconstruct a puzzle when too many pieces are missing (the main rule is that when something is forbidden it exists, and when something is not forbidden, hence not spoken of, it may exist and be accepted, or it may not exist). The second mistake is that he hardly takes into account the problem of the language, except to his advantage. All these documents we have started as a direct oral tradition in a fundamentally oral society. This means that it is not a modern boy's game whispering some message to his neighbor for him to whisper it then to the next neighbour, and so on. Memory in such a society is paramount and absolute. What is important then is not what is common but what is different : Ehrman only works on what is common. He accepts the fact that the four canonical gospels are written in Greek, though they were in Aramaic in the oral tradition (some catholic research workers have noticed that these gospels can be easily sliced in verses that were originally in Aramaic and originally in Greek, which explains all the double statements that come over and over) but he refuses to take into acount that some of the similar testimonies from noncanonincal apostles were transmitted orally in their various travels and missions to other areas where Aramaic was not the standard language and that these oral traditions were then transferred into Coptic for example and kept in that language : for him if it is in Coptic it is recent, hence unacceptable, but this conclusion is absurd in any scientific approach of an oral civilization. But worse of all, Ehrman does not analyze some essential documents we have today, such as Mark's Secret Gospel revealed in a letter by Clement of Alexandria dealing with Carpocrates, or analyzes some of them skimpily whereas he hammers some quotations from the canonical gospels over and over again. Even worse : he quotes the canonical Gospels and cuts the quotes short to draw conclusions that have nothing to do with the full quotations. He declares Jesus to be « a male Jewish apocalypticist », which is at least debatable if we consider the whole life of Jesus, and does not say a word about John's Apocalypse that would have revealed that the feminine principle is fundamental in the vision since the Jerusalem of the future is the Bride to which the Lamb will be married, unifying thus the male principle and the female principle into two images that represent the divine. So, this book is essential for you to discover how institutionalized research workers in the field of the Christian faith and history are reluctant at discussing anything that may disturb their personal, and supposedly dominant (among them), vision of who Jesus was, and the whole thing is clothed in an extremely condescendant and over-repeated attitude towards « independent researchers » (i.e. not institutionalized) and other fiction writers. Read it, but not with a handful of salt as the author would say, but with a full cartful of salt, and the help of a good Jerusalem Bible and many apocrypha and pseudepigrapha.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU



Rating:
Summary: Not just for The DaVinci Code...
Review: Dr. Ehrman is absolutely my favorite author and scholar of historical Christianity and the New Testament and this book reinforces this opinion. Dr. Ehrman's writing style is extremely clear, so even an individual with no background in the study of the New Testament will have a clear understanding of what Dr. Ehrman is writing about.
One does not need to have read The DaVinci Code in order to get a great deal out of this book. Dr. Ehrman includes the passages he is discussing in the book and then refutes/agrees with them. In this way, he covers a broad range of topics in early Christianity from the historical Jesus, Gnosticism, the formation of the canon, Constantine's role, etc. Even if you have read a great deal on these topics, this book is a great refresher. I do recommend this book for people just getting into the study as it covers so much and does such a wonderful job of it. However, don't get the wrong idea, this is by no means an exhaustive study of those topics, but a great start or overview of them. Highly recommended!

Rating:
Summary: Entertainment vs. Accuracy
Review: Ehrman proceeds with grace and generosity regarding the fictional work `The Da Vinci Code' - readily reminding readers that it is a novel, which Brown intended as a novel. However, regarding the historical claims from the book Ehrman proceeds with clarity and precision as he focuses on 10 areas of concern.

I didn't see that Ehrman is not concerned with theology. His 10 areas of concern all have significant theological implications. That is, if Ehrman is concerned with truth, which he obviously is, then his New Testament scholarship has theological consequences. The difference is, he appears to limit his bias in his historical analysis.

In short, while Ehrman is quick to give the `story' of the Da Vinci Code high marks he is quick to point out numerous factual errors as he systematically debunks the books claims. He points out that...

1. The Dead Sea Scrolls were not early `Christian' documents - but were rather copies of Old Testament books by a Jewish fringe group.
2. Not all of the Jewish men in the first century were married, but rather many chose to remain celebate.
3. Gnostic gospels were late documents which didn't have an enormous impact on Christian thought.
4. The role of women in the early church was distinct from the cultural norms.
5. Constantine didn't choose the four canonical gospels from a vast number of competing `gospels'.
6. There is not a strand of historical evidence suggesting Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene.
7. Nor did the church suppress `gospels' that told of a secret marriage.
8. Jesus was considered divine from the earliest stages of Christianity - far earlier than the fourth century.
9. There are not thousands or even hundreds or even dozens of documents, which suggest the New Testament isn't historically reliable. Thos documents simply don't exist.
10. The New Testament documents which do exist have withstood intense scholarly scrutiny.

I don't mean to imply that Ehrman only focuses on the errors of Brown's book. Ehrman also includes much captivating analysis on how good scholarship of early Christian writings proceeds with caution in order to ensure clarity, reliability, and exactness.



Rating:
Summary: Excellent analysis
Review: I have a number of Ehrman's books on my shelves as he has long been considered a scholar of serious weight in the field of primitive Christianity. But I was not prepared for how well he would handle a "book review" format. I am impressed. Again.

I enjoyed the Da Vinci Code even though I knew, from the outset, that it was factually flawed. But it was still quite fun to read a novel in a setting where I am usually reading exegetical tracts. One of the fun things about Brown's book is the romp through early Christian history -- which is quite fascinating. But the actual history can be just as fascinating and fun. Ehrman delivers the actual history (or the best consensus on the actual history) in a fun and informative way.

The other book reviews here on Amazon are very good. I find the self-avowed "hardcore athiest" review very funny. He accuses "believers" of being conditioned and labels himself educated. But then he claims that there is "NO" (caps in original) historical evidence for the figure Jesus and if there were, it would be in the Dead Sea scrolls. He He. Who is betraying ignorance and conditioning here??

Of course the dead sea scrolls would not have anything on Jesus or christianity as they were kept and maintained by a group of devout Jews (Essenes) who were separatists. And, also, there are historical evidences of Jesus such as in the writings of Josephus (a Jewish historian and contemporary) who loathed Christians but, nonetheless, referred to Jesus as a "wonder worker" whose followers (Christians) caused nothing but trouble.

Anyway, enough fun. Ehrman's book is very good.




Rating:
Summary: Taking Issue With The Da Vinci Code
Review: If you are one of the millions who enjoyed The Da Vinci Code, you may want to reconsider Dan Brown's narrative in the light of its historical claims, after you read Bart Ehrman's Truth and Fiction In The Da Vinci Code.

Ehrman is a well-known critical historian, who chairs the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He is an authority on the early Church and the life of Jesus.
He is also the author of Lost Christianities and Lost Scriptures.

Although he admits he enjoyed reading Dan Brown's work of fiction and has even recommended it to many of his friends, he takes issue with some of the historical claims Brown makes about Jesus, Mary, and the Gospels that readers were expected to accept as factual and not fictional.
Ehrman points out: "Dan Brown states as a fact that all descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate."
As the author is an expert on historic Christian documents, it is here where his arguments are focused.

Throughout the book, Ehrman insists that one of the cardinal ingredients to weigh, when arriving at any historical conclusion, is the sources of information forming the foundation of the conclusion. Misreading or misinterpreting these sources is as dangerous as if they were omitted.
According to the author, if Brown had only done a little more research, he would have been able to more accurately portray the historical account, without even compromising the story.

Immediately in the introduction to the book, Ehrman sets the tone of his arguments by pointing out ten factual errors in Brown's book. These are more fully fleshed out and assessed in the book.

The author points out that contrary to what was mentioned in Brown's book, Jesus' life was not recorded by thousands of followers across the land; it is not true there were eighty Gospels considered for the New Testament; it is false to state that Jesus was considered divine until the Council of Nicea; Constantine did not commission a "new Bible" that omitted references to Jesus' human traits; the Dead Sea Scrolls were found in 1947 and not in the 1950s, and furthermore, they were not among "the earliest Christian records." In fact, they are Jewish, and contain nothing Christian in them. The Nag Hammadi documents do not narrate the Grail story, nor do they underline Jesus' human traits. On the contrary, they do just the reverse. It is leading astray when we assert that Jewish decorum forbade a Jewish man to be unmarried, and in fact most of the individuals behind the Dead Sea Scrolls were male unmarried celibates. There is nothing to tell us about the lineage of Mary Magdalene, and there is no evidence that she belonged to the House of Benjamin.
Moreover, what evidence exists that she was pregnant at the crucifixion, as Brown suggests in his book. As for the Q document being hid by the Vatican, where is the proof, and how do we know it is a book allegedly written by Jesus?

In addition to exploring the above misleading assertions in Brown's story, Ehrman addresses such queries as to how did it happen that the four Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John came were admitted into the New Testament, while others were omitted.

If you are wondering why anyone would tackle the thorny question as to how much of The Da Vinci Code is based on valid documents and how much is pure fiction, Ehrman explains that books of historical fiction are one of the ways people come to learn and think about the past. Would it not have been more enlightening and instructive, if historical facts were presented more accurately?

Norm Goldman Editor Bookpleasures



Rating:
Summary: All That Its Supposed To Be
Review: This book was precisely what I was looking for and had begun to think would not be created. That would be a critical response to the claims of the fictional Da Vinci Code that while "critical" was not a reaction against Dan Brown's book. Simply put if you are curious about the claims made about items related to church history in the Da Vinci Code, this is your book. Ehrman clearly states what was proposed in the book and compares it to what history can actually tell us about what happened. As he so clearly and correctly states, history comes from one of two sources...it is either 1) from sources or 2) made up. As the Da Vinci Code is a WORK OF FICTION the author can write whatever he chooses that will further the storytelling process. If one has had their curiousity piqued and would like to learn more about what we really know about the early days of the church and the New Testament set aside the really excellent work of fiction and turn to this fine work by a historian.

Rating:
Summary: really well written, not biased
Review: This is the first and, as far as I know, the only one of the debunking DavinciCode books that is really well written and doesn't have some sort of church-related bias.

In the process of explaining the massive misstatements in Brown's book, I learned a lot about the New Testament and about what can historically be said about the man,. jesus.

Rating:
Summary: Clearly delineates the errors in the Da Vinci Code
Review: With The Da Vinci Code at the center of a controversy over how much of it is based on fact and how much is fiction a strong historian who specializes in this time period would be of tremendous help. Bart D. Ehrman comes forward to fill this role. Professor Ehrman is chairman of the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and has made several appearances on the History Channel, CNN, A&E, and other programs as a widely recognized expert on the early Church. While he recognizes that The Da Vinci Code is a well written book and "a real page turner" he also takes exception with author Dan Brown's claim that it is based on historical fact. Since this is an area of particular expertise for Mr. Ehrman he took a particular interest in the book and its claims. For example, at several points in The Da Vinci Code the author has the characters refer to the writings of the early Christian church that were not put into the canon and what they contained. Fortunately, this is an area in which Mr. Ehrman has written two books and produced a lecture series on those "lost" scriptures and their contents. So he speaks with authority about what was in those manuscripts as well as what was not. While Mr. Ehrman does not step outside the areas of his expertise and comment on the information about Da Vinci and other art works mentioned in the book, he does provide a lucent and thoroughly well researched commentary on the historical aspects of the book as related to the early Church. Needless to say, the multiple errors and outright fantasies in this area leads the reader to question the credibility of the rest of The Da Vinci Code. Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code is a highly recommended book and should be read by anyone who has read or intends to read The Da Vinci Code.