Breaking the Da Vinci Code: Answers to the Questions Everyones Asking

I have read a couple of books on the Da Vinci code, as well as the novel (a definite page turner). While the facts are correct in this book, it seems a bit rushed to press and falls short on many issues. In trying to prove Dan Brown wrong, the author commits many of the same logical errors. The Da Vinci Code is held up by a couple of pillars: 1. The Priory of Sion: Bock completely ignores the Priory in his treatise. As this is a central thread throughout Dan Browns book, it is rather strange that a rebuttal author would ignore this material, especially when it can easily be shown that the Priory is the creation of one Pierre Plantard (1993 court testimony, 1956 incorporation documents). 2. The Nag Hammadi library: The Gnostic gospels, which have been elevated to a very high status by some theological scholars, like Crosson, Spong, Pagels and Funk. Bock does a better job here, but does not delve deep enough to present a full rebuttal argument. Although he declares a win over the code, he has really done very little to dispute the Gnostic gospels or their supporters. I agree with Bock that Dan Browns scholarship is lacking. I also agree with Bocks major points on the subject. But, Dan Brown is a novelist, while Bock is writing a critique or an apology (depending on how you view his work). While Bock presents some very good factual material, all of it seems to fall short on truly nailing the coffin shut on the subject and often raises more questions than it answers. Of course, this seems to be the rule with Da Vinci Code critiques. While not perfect itself, I prefer Cracking Da Vincis Code by Garlow and Jones over this work.

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 Browns 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 doesnt he address why Da Vinci placed Mary Magdalene on the right hand of Jesus at the Last Supper? My guess is that he cant explain it - and thereby would be promoting the mystique he is trying to suppress. Dan Browns 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 Galeleos 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.

Despite the overwhelmingly negative response to this book taking into consideration of the negative votes against positive reviews, I am obliged to recommend it to those serious christians who had read the Bible a number of times and understand the meaning of the death of Jesus and thus Christianity the religion well. In my opinion, the author had delivered multi-dimensional arguments (of time, culture, history, politics from many respected academics) against the suspicions raised by Dan Browns book, that Jesus had lived to marry Mary of Magdalene, Constantine had overhauled the Bible in A.D. 325 and so on. Of course, nobody can perfectly win the case unless we can travel in a time machine or Jesus suddenly shows up before us and tells it himself. However, I think this book can help christian readers to apply good probabilistic thinking to judge for themselves what truths we should really believe. I can understand that many readers dislike the book for the very strong or passionate poise the author took to defend his faith against the popularity of Dan Browns book as an authentic history and not a fiction. As a non christian colleague of mine who borrowed it from me said, The harder the author tries, the less trustworthy he seems. What a pity that my colleague knows very little and has no interest at all about the conflicts amongst the early christians for the orthodox beliefs (well documented before A.D. 325), the unsolvable discrepancies between the maintream gospels and those gnostic gospels (Its impossible to accept different personalities of the disciples amongst different gospels), the cultural background and the history of Jews (Jews, the Middle East people, and the Romans in those days never cared nor respected the role of women like the way we do in the 21st century as opposed to what Dan Brown wrote), and most importantly, what Jesus death and his subsequent rise to heaven means. Such knowledge will largely enhance his appreciation of the whole picture and that he may not judge the book primarily with the style of the author. (If his rise did not happen, hes not the one which the prophets in the Old Testaments told about the coming Messiah and Christianity is no more than a fiction). Perhaps if the author had not picked an over confident title, the receptance of the book could be much improved. Anyway, I do respect the authors effort and moral courage to take side instead of standing in the middle or being politically correct, a way which many christian academics prefer to live.

I rarely review books unless I recommend them. However, Dr. Bocks style of religious paranoia is growing very tiresome, so comment is needed. It is certainly OK to have deeply-held religious beliefs, and Bock is entitled to his. It is also OK to defend those beliefs, and Bock clearly intends to do so. There are many wonderful people in this world who are devout Christians. On the other hand, it is intellectually shoddy to accuse people of pernicious agendas just because they believe differently than you. That is where Bock abuses the credentials of his PhD and contributes to the bad reputation of Texas-style fundamentalism. (Bock is a professor at Dallas Theological Seminary and past president of the Evangelical Theological Society.) To Bock, Dan Brown had sinister motives for writing The Da Vinci Code: one can spot an agenda expressed through the novels key characters. For some mysterious reason, he also feels a need to go after an unrelated author, Elaine Pagels, because she takes the Nag Hammadi documents seriously by darkly hinting about her, There is an agenda here. The only agenda these people have is a desire to express religious and historical ideas that they find interesting or compelling. Dr. Bock is quite welcome to state where he differs in opinion and why, but it is very unscholarly of him to accuse people he disagrees with of being influenced by evil motives. If you are interested in separating fact from fiction in The Da Vinci Code, a much better book is Bart Ehrmans Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code.

This book povides good analysis on who Mary Magdalene was and logically looking at the possibility of Jesus being married. It deals with the Gnostic documents reasonably, and gives a clear and fair account on how actually the Christian Bible came into being. This book answers key questions which could cloud the readers of The Da Vinci Code. A fair piece of work which gives an objective critique on the fascinating but misleading novel. Anyone who reads with rational mind (especially those who know Textual Criticism, History and Literature) would enjoy this intelligent work.

I bought this book because I thought it was further research into the subjects covered by the original Da Vinci Code Book. The book is a rip-off on the name and contains some of the worst religious hypocrisy and dogma I have read. The Catholic Church demeans women by not allowing them any position of authority and relegates them to minor helper roles, i.e., the mother or helpmate of someone. This book attempts to refutes this accusation by claiming the church does look up to women and cites two examples: 1) Martin Luthers MOTHER who was a great influence on him. Martin Luther could not have started the religion he did without her influence. 2) The woman, who in CONJUNCTION with her husband started the Salvation Army. A mother and a help-mate. These look like helper roles to me. And yet according to these authors these examples absolve the church of their demeaning treatment of women. What about Joan of Arc, Saint Margaret of Scotland, or Eleanor of Acquitaine? Eleanor was one of the wealthiest women alive and barely 20 years old. She supported the Crusades financially and she and her other female friends marched onto the battlefield as nurses during the crusades. After that the Pope no longer allowed women to participate in the Crusades under any circumstances and in any role. If the authors have their way the status quo will continue. Women will be relegated to helper roles and allowed only minimal and non-authoritative participation. This is not what Jesus intended. According to the early Bible (the Bible we know was not formed until the third century A.D.) Christ allowed women to preach the gospel and to be fully involved in the church in any way they chose. It was not until 300 years after Christ died that women were relegated to mothers and help-mates. The authors of this book would like to continue this shameful policy. Truth means little to these authors. They are more concerned with maintaining the status quo of third century religious dogma.

In response to J.E. Stolls review. Dan Brown is quoted as saying that if he was asked to wirte a piece of non-fiction on these things, he would change nothing about what he claimed in the novel. This was in the first few pages of Bocks book which you REVIEWED! Fiction or not people want facts! Great book!

Notice that those who have written critical reviews of the book either say dont waste your time or they attack Bock (the author). They call him a Texas fundamentalist or criticize him for criticizing the Da Vinci Code. What they dont do is give you any reasons why Bock is wrong. Maybe they cant come up with anything. This is too important a subject not to figure out who is right and who is wrong. Spend the $15 and make up your own mind.

Bock focuses on the first 325 years after the death of Christ because that is Bocks expertise. He slowly and deliberately breaks what he calls codes of the Da Vinci Codes. He covers Who was Mary Magdalene, Was Jesus married, How were the New Testament Documents assembled, and other similar topics. He does a very credible job. However, the whole code theme was a little confusing. In the later chapters, he refered back to arguments in the earlier codes, for example, As we stated in Code 6. However, the codes were not really codes and they were not really memorable or breakable. The codes are just topics that he discussed and argued against Dan Browns assertions. Bock is really arguing against the scholars who study the Gnostic gospels and are proposing their own version of Christianity. Bock is arguing against that school of thought rather than the Da Vinci code in particular. His arguments are strong, but not that exciting. Although he proves his point, I dont think Dan Browns fans would be convinced. They would just say thats your version of history. I would think destroying all the bizarre myths Dan Brown spins around the Templars would be more convincing. The whole Priory of Sion is so ridiculous and based on such flimsy evidence I cant see how even Oliver Stone would believe it. In conclusion, the book presents reasoned arguments against many of the themes of the Da Vinci Code. The arguments are sound. The history is interesting to learn, but I dont think it is the best book to go to battle with in an argument with a Dan Brown enthusiast. The arguments are too subtle and I think they are better books out there for debunking The DaVinci Code.

Anyone who has read Dan Browns novel knows that he is presenting more than just well written fiction. In fact, I believe that The Da Vinci Code may be one of the biggest attacks on modern Christianity ever. But its also one of the weakest. Dan Browns arguments are absurd beyond belief. But because he has sold over 40 million copies, evangelical Christians and even some liberal scholars (i.e. Bart Ehrman) have felt compelled to refute Dan Browns erroneous claims. When I began to look into Dan Browns claims, I went to the nearest Christian bookstore to find scholarly material that refuted his novel. I was shocked to find literally 10 books refuting The Da Vinci Code. Which was I to choose? I had already read Hanegraaffs work and was somewhat disappointed at the lack of depth presented. And some of the other authors didnt seem to have the right credentials to answer Browns claims. It was then that stumbled across Darrell Bocks masterful work, Breaking the Da Vinci Code. He had impeccable credentials as well a lot of experience in writing on these issues. First, Ill start with the good. I enjoyed each and every chapter by Dr. Bock. My favorite chapter dealt with the Gnostic Gospels. I was surprised to find that most of Bocks arguments were historical rather than theological. This was a good thing as someone reading Bocks book might suspect a bias on his part. Not so with this work. Bock examined the Gnostic works in great detail, showing how little they had to do with historic Christianity. Now with the bad. I didnt think that Bock dealt with the truly important issues. While he thoroughly refuted Browns claims on Jesus marriage, the conspiracy at the council of Nicaea, and the canon of Scripture, I dont feel that Bock refuted Brown as well as he could have. What are the important issues? 1. Is the Bible corrupt? 2. Did Christians believe in the deity of Christ before Constantine? While Bock touched on these subjects, he should have written entire chapters dealing with textual critical issues and things of that nature. Perhaps Bock wanted to focus on the main topics of the Da Vinci Code? I do not know. But if that if that is your primary concern; whether or not Jesus was married, then Bocks work is the perfect choice. But if your primary concern is Biblical inerrancy and things of that sort, then look elsewhere. Overall, I enjoyed the historical nature of Breaking the Da Vinci Code and look forward to reading more of his books in the future.