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

Bock does a very good job in both explanation and simplification of the arguments, so the lay reader could understand this historical revisionism for what it is. He did good research in a field he is accomplished in, the early church. He also exposes how terms such as secret and conspiracy are misapplied into known , rejected works of the early church and debunks the Nicea conspiracy. This is a subject that churches should cover prior to the release of the film, so less than biblically literate members will not be caught up in distortions and revisionism. I strongly recommend this readable book for churches to make available to their members.

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.

This book is really an essential. It covers everything from the theory of Jesus being married to Mary Magdalene, to the Canonization of the Bible, to the Secret Gnostic Gospels. A must read for those who have read the Da Vinci Code

Bock is partly correct in his title - he does give answers, but not to the questions that everyone is asking about The Da Vinci Code. I found Bocks book to be an arduous read, not in the level of thinking, but rather in its presentation of the facts that counter the claims of Dan Browns worldwide best-seller The Da Vinci Code. Bock walks through seven identified codes that are, in essence, the key assumptions put forth by Brown in his book; and Bock systematically presents evidence to counter the claims of Brown and others who have questioned the divinity of Christ and the authenticity of the Scriptures. Bock is honest in his assessment of the churchs dismal failure to properly address a central figure in the conspiracy theory of Brown and others - Mary Magdalene was, indeed, a victim of a very poor smear campaign at the hands of the Catholic Church under Pope Gregory the Great in A.D. 591 who first taught that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute. Bock demonstrates that his area of expertise is truly New Testament scholarship and presents a dizzying array of texts and historical persons to bolster this position that Mary Magdalene was not the lover or wife of Jesus Christ. Bock then walks through dozens of other proofs countering each code until he arrives at his conclusion - that the challenge to Christianity that The Da Vinci Code presents is the same, tired, old and easily-refuted claims of the Gnostics from two thousand years ago only packaged in a best-selling murder mystery this time around! Breaking The Da Vinci Code is an informative book, but not necessarily an easy read. You can tell that Dr. Bock is a New Testament seminary professor - you honestly feel that you are ready for an exam by the end of the book. The problem with the book is that, I dont believe, it prepares a Christian to really engage in a conversation with the average person who has either read the book or will see the movie and has questions - the book is almost too much information and it presents it in a way that makes the reader work too hard to understand it. I think there are better books for the average lay Christian looking to prepare himself to engage in a friendly conversation; but the book is well researched and at least under 200 pages, unlike several of the anti-Da Vinci books on the market.

Dan Browns The DaVinci Code is arguably one of the best sellers of modern time. The movie is soon to be released. And the anti-Christian conspiracy loonies are lining up, dozens deep, with their exposés of Dan Browns book. Breaking the DaVinci Code, Cracking the DaVinci Code, etc. are all attempts to capitalize on the success of Mr. Browns work. I bought and read Breaking the code because it was cheap; I have read it, cover to cover, twice. The only thing one can only say to Dr. (Ph.D.) Bock, Professor Moloney (who writes the foreword) from C.U., and others of their ilk, is get a life. Your religion is NOT under attack here; the pagans are NOT at the gate. The DaVinci Code is F-I-C-T-I-O-N!!! Fiction, by definition is not truth, nor is it dogma or theology. What Dr. Bock and others of his ilk fail to acknowledge it that ALL religious belief, Hebrew, Catholic, Christian, Islamic, Hindu, Daoits, Shiite, Buddhist, nativist beliefs, and all the subsets of these and other beliefs are based on Faith. One either believes or does not believe based on faith, not empirical evidence because the empirical evidence is shaky. Further, the early histories of all religions are suspect because their proponents all have an agenda -- the propagation of their specific belief system. There is much room for error and disputation when one challenges beliefs. The Trinity, the Virgin Birth (which is found in several religions more ancient than Christianity), the Resurrection (again, in ancient religions), the Ascension of Christ, the Assumption of Mary, The Eucharist (again in other more ancient religious beliefs) are all subject to interpretation. Various versions of various apostles, the gospels (of which there are more than four), the epistles, etc. all became written records centuries after the time of Christ (whose exact tenure on this earth has still not been affirmatively fixed to any dates) are subject to interpretation and misinterpretation. Going back to the more ancient Hebrew texts of the Old Testament continues the uncertainty and increases the tension or stress on the necessity of Faith as the fundamental keystone to any religion. Although some of the events chronicled in these texts can be documented, others can not so easily be proved. Again, one believes or one does not believe, and again, based on Faith. The Davinci Code is a novel and although Dan Brown uses history and theology as the backdrop for his story, it is still a novel. Despite the certainty of Mr. Brown (who makes no pretense of being a theologian) concerning the accuracy of his backdrop, it is in no way, an attack on Catholicism or Christianity. If novels were history, then you might as well believe in Scarlet OHara and Uncle Toms Cabin. I read The Davinci Code knowing it is, fiction and a suspenseful story. Reading the book no more changes nor challenges my fundamental religious beliefs. As for Mr. Bocks theses in Breaking, his heavily footnoted and multiples sources are in themselves suspect, because there is no complete historical record that can empirically and chronologically support any belief system. Lots of footnotes may appear to add gravitas to Breaking, but they do not add clarity or certainty. Gaps in ancient written religious texts, have had to be filled by translators and theologians, much like filling in the blanks. As any high school student can tell you, anything goes when you fill in the blanks. Ask their teachers who have to grade their exams. Breaking the DaVinci Code is an interesting read, but no more authoritative than the novel; in some cases, it is equally imaginative. It neither proves Mr. Bocks set of beliefs nor does it prove a conspiracy against Christianity. It is not the serious and scholarly inquiry it purports to be. One need only read the rear dust cover and the six pages of Praise for Breaking the DaVinci Code printed at the front of the book to see that even Mr. Bock has an agenda. This book was only worth the purchase price because I got it at a reduced price at Sams. Thank you.

In spite of the impression one might get from popular discussions, shooting holes in the scholarship behind The Da Vinci Code is not a difficult task. The target is too big. Bocks book is not my favorite, but is near the top of the books I have read on this subject. THE BOOKS STRONG POINTS Bock stays on target. He actually addresses questions that are being asked and doesnt stray as far as others. Bock is from Dallas Theological Seminary. His foreword was written by Francis J. Moloney from The Catholic University of America (not exactly bunk mates in the dormitory of theology). This shows an attempt to speak from a broad perspective. Although he doesnt exactly pull off the attempt as well as he could. The book is easy to read. THE BOOKS WEAK POINT It isnt very exciting. After reading the exciting The Da Vinci Code this is a little like sitting down for a lecture. A BETTER BOOK I think this is probably the best first book one can read on the subject. IF one is intrigued enough to dig a little deeper I suggest Cracking Da Vincis Code by James L. Garlow and Peter Jones. But if you do, read it after this book.

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.

In Breaking the Da Vinci Code, New Testament scholar Darrell Bock describes and refutes the codes behind The Da Vinci Code, which could better be understood to be the presuppositions of author Dan Brown, and those who subscribe to his Gnostic view of Christianity. Sadly, in our day and age, very few Christians, much less the general population, have any knowledge of the literature of the Early Church, except perhaps for the New Testament itself. It is because of this general ignorance that so many seem to readily buy into Dan Browns code behind the code. As I read The Da Vinci Code nearly a year ago, I was totally engrossed in the mystery, but as the story progressed, I was increasingly appalled at the history. As an amateur student of Church history, I couldnt help but wish for a single volume I could recommend to help counteract the erroneous views of Christian development that Brown promotes. Breaking the Da Vinci Code is one such volume. While each code could have a scholarly work written about it (and indeed many have been), Bock does a good job of addressing popular misconceptions about Mary Magdalene, whether or not Jesus was married, the Gnostic gospels, the development of the New Testament, and other related issues. It is significant that this book is endorsed by well respected Protestant, Catholic and Orthodox Christian scholars. Personally, as an Orthodox Christian, I found Bocks statements to be, for the most part, thoroughly orthodox (small o), in the sense of C.S. Lewis Mere Christianity (another book I would also heartily recommend). For further reading, I would strongly urge readers to take a look at Ecclesiastical History (also published as Church History), written by Eusebius in the 4th century. As I stated in my Amazon review of this work, it should be required reading for all thinking Christians. Other Early Church writings should be considered, such as The Apostolic Fathers, edited by Jack Sparks; or any of the volumes in Ante-Nicene Fathers and Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers set of 38 volumes, edited by Philip Schaff; or many of the volumes in the Ancient Christian Writers series from Paulist Press. I listened to the audio recording of Breaking the Da Vinci Code, read by Chris Fabry, as I followed along in the book. While Fabry has a clear, pleasant and convincing voice for this work, I noticed that his mispronunciation of the occasional word slightly shifted the meaning of the authors intent. Not a big deal, but worthy of note. An advantage of the book over the recording is the inclusion of a selected bibliography and a helpful, simple glossary.

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.

On a rainy May morning of 2005, a large gathering of people convened at Blackhawk Free Evangelical church in Madison to hear one of the foremost New Testament scholars, Ben Witherington III, give a talk about Dan Browns book The Da Vinci Code. Many including myself turned up to listen to the arguments against the claims being made in Browns fictional bestseller. Witheringtons delivery of the facts was superb as he proceeded to systematically destroy the supposedly factual claims made by Brown. Later on that morning, spurred on by Witheringtons brilliant refutation of Browns historical inaccuracies, I picked up a copy of Breaking The Da Vinci Code by New Testament scholar Darrell Bock. Eager as I was to find out what I could about Mary Magdalenes true identity, particularly in regards to the claim that she was married to Jesus, and to discover whether there really had been a major suppression by the church of other books outside of the canonical biblical Gospels and the Pauline letters, I began to read Bocks account. Bock begins his discussion of the facts by revealing to us the real identity of Mary and her relationship to Jesus. Otherwise known as Mary of Magdala (her name still contains her town of origin rather than a marital affiliation suggesting that she was not married), Mary was part of a larger group of women who followed Jesus during His ministry. In Luke (Chapter 8) we see her specifically mentioned as one of the female followers of Christ, the others being Susana and Joanna, the wife of Herods business manager. While it is admittedly odd that women would have been traveling with a man outside of wedlock, the argument that he must have been married because He was a rabbi is unsupported. As Bock points out Jesus was not technically-speaking a rabbi. Jesus disciples called him by this title because he was a teacher to them. But he was certainly not recognized as a rabbi by the Jewish authorities. In fact we see in the Gospel of Mark (Chapter 11, vs 27) how Jesus authority was severely challenged by the leaders of religious law. No specific link is made to an exclusive relationship between Mary and Jesus. In fact a passage in the Gospel of John (Chapter 20, vs 11-18) provides the only documented encounter of Jesus and Mary alone. Marys expression of surprise on seeing the resurrected Jesus is understandable given that she is not expecting him to be in any way alive. But what we do see here is Mary as a witness to the cross and resurrection- an apostle to the apostles as Bock refers to her, who was sent to reveal the resurrected Christ to the twelve disciples. Would it have been in any way un-Jewish for Jesus to remain single? There is some evidence for celibacy in some parts of the Jewish community during Jesus time. We now know for example that an ancient Jewish group of men called the Essenes thought of marriage as a way through which the sins of lust and adultery could set in. They therefore preferred not to be married, remaining pious to God through celibacy. Jesus even said that in certain cases it was better not to marry (Mathew Chapter 19, vs 10-12). It was therefore not un-Jewish not to be married. In one particular circumstance we even see Paul encouraging people to remain unmarried, as he himself was (1 Corinthians, Chapter 7, vs 8). There is no biblical or extra-biblical evidence that Jesus had a wife. There is no mention, for example, of a wife in the crucifixion accounts in any of the canonical Gospels. We also know that Jesus related to women in a way that fell outside the expected norms of the culture (John Chapter 12, vs 1-8; Luke Chapter 7, vs 36-50). Since He did not fall into these expected norms, why would He necessarily be married? Those eager to assert that Jesus was married to Mary bring their own evidence to bear. As Bock notes, the broken ancient texts of the Gospel of Phillip- a Gospel written a full 200 years after the time of Jesus- mention Jesus kissing Mary, although the location of kissing is never made clear. The same passage mentions Mary as companion (translated from the Greek word Koinonos) although this can either mean wife or religious companion. There is also a passage in the later Gospel of Mary that indicates that Mary was privy to special revelations from Jesus. But no indication of a familial relationship can be concluded. Since Mary, Jesus mother, was so heavily revered by the Catholic church, it seems unlikely that had Jesus been married, His wife could have disappeared without a historical trace. In short, there is every reason to believe that Jesus was single. So what about the claim made in The Da Vinci Code that there were over 80 Gospels, outside of the four in the Bible, that were conveniently discarded by the early church? Browns evidence in favor of this claim is based on the books contained in the Nag Hammadi library- a collection that, together with Gnostic scriptures, includes more than eighty texts. But Bock makes some very strong points against Brown noting in particular that most of the books in the Nag Hammadi collection are not Gospels at all. The dates of these books range from 2nd to 3rd century AD- a few generations removed from the, foundations of the Christian faith. Importantly, there were major differences between the Gnostic teachings and those of traditional Christianity. Gnostics believed, for example, that they had some special access to mysterious revelations about God- revelations that were only available to a select group of insiders. For the Gnostics, only those insiders- intellectuals with a special knosis or understanding of God- could be saved. In contrast the biblical Gospels told of no such special select group. Gnostics also had a dual existence interpretation of God claiming that in addition to the supreme spiritual father of the heavens, there existed an evil maker of the physical world called the Demiurge. Gnostics saw God as, too transcendent to get his hands dirty with humanity. God did not mix with the material existence. Even for Jesus the Gnostic teachings made a distinction between the earthly and spiritual Jesus. Gnosticism claimed that the real Jesus could not have suffered on the cross; that in fact the real Jesus was too pure to suffer. Biblical scripture, in contrast, tells of God becoming flesh and blood to suffer for humanity. The images of Mary Magdalene clinging onto Jesus after His resurrection, His later appearance to the disciples and then to Thomas (John Chapter 20) reveal the physical nature of the biblical Jesus. Today there is a move by some to reconcile the Gnostic teachings with Christianity. Yet as already noted, both Gnosticism and Christianity are sufficiently different that they cannot be brought together under one faith. The church fathers were of the position that the canonical Gospels of Mathew, Mark, Luke and John, with their teaching of sin, were the true Gospels because they preceded the Gnostic texts by at least one century. Because Gnosticism did not acknowledge the existence of God in the physical world, the Gnostic teachings were considered heretical by the early church. Recent reviews of this tension cite the early church as being an oppressor, afflicting believers with rigid creeds. Bock notes however that modern texts in support of the reconciliation of Gnosticism and traditional Christianity tend to be selective about the evidence they cite leaving out much of what is incompatible between them. In fact neither the church fathers nor the early Gnostics wanted to come together. They both recognized their differences in beliefs and did not desire a shared faith. Bock makes a very strong case against one of the other key claims of The Da Vinci Code- that the emperor Constantine assembled and commissioned a new Bible that embellished Christs Godly traits and omitted His human traits. One of Browns principle characters Teabing for example specified how it was. to promote the divinity of Jesus that specific books in the Bible were chosen. The claim is made that the emperor Constantine and the council of Nicea ignored an entire swath of documents by giving Jesus His greater divinity. In fact Constantine and the Nicene creed only affirmed what had already been the established view for centuries before Nicea. The four Gospels were part of that view. Jesus was considered as divine four centuries before the Nicene council convened. Even though the Gospels of Mark and Luke were not written by any of the twelve apostles they, together with Mathew and John, were written by authors who had direct contact with the apostles if not with Jesus. They were therefore considered more accurate representations of the Christian faith. But there were other reasons for choosing just four biblical Gospels. The 2nd Century church father Irenaeus, for example, saw it fitting that there should be only four Gospels so as to match up with the four cherubim on the ark of the covenant. The number four also corresponded to the number of covenants given by God to humanity- to Adam, to Noah after the flood, to Moses and to man for spiritual renovation. Reviewing the claims of The Da Vinci Code, we know that Jesus was not the feminist that the book portrays but the son of God who saw the value in every human being. Mary Magdalene was not, the Holy Grail with a trail of royal descendants from Jesus but an apostle to the apostles who had seen the resurrected Christ. There is no reason to think that the church was trying to give women a lower status since Jesus appearance to women affirms the value of women to God. Luke (Chapter 10, vs 38-42; Chapter 8, vs 1-3), Acts (Chapter 18, vs 24-26) and 1 Timothy (Chapter 3, vs11), all show women playing important discipleship roles in the church. Moreover these texts show no reluctance to document such roles. Bock has done a tremendous job of exposing the historical inaccuracies of The Da Vinci Code in the eight chapters of his book corroborating much of the discussion that Ben Witherington III set out on that rainy May day. He has systematically discredited the contentious material of Browns fictional best seller.