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

I dont see why people didnt like this book. I thought it was well written and to the point. People seem to think that since it did not go into exhaustive detail, that the book is worthless. I think the book does exactly what it is supposed to do. It shows the fallacies of The Da Vinci Code. This is a gateway book. If you are really looking for more answers, you will have to do more research. But had this book been much longer, it would have lost its effectiveness.

All one need do is read the blurbs at the beginning of the book to realize that this book isnt so much about refuting anything presented in The Da Vinci Code so much as is its about doing damage control for what they perceive to be an attack upon the validity of their faith. One cannot refute the accuracy, or lack thereof, of any historical reference by summing it all up with faith, as I feel this book does by way of the last chapter. The mere mentioning of the word faith in a book claiming to deal with historical accuracies, quite frankly, removes all threads of credibility.

Is that the title is misleading. Several of the questions that everyone is asking are not even addressed in this book. The art issues are virtually ignored...Rosslyn Chapel... In addition, the perspective is distinctly evangelical, so, for example, in regard to issues of the spiritual feminine, Bock, presumably in order not to anger his evangelical audience (and CBA booksellers who are touchy about such things) misses the chance to drill Browns deliberate ignoring of the place of the Virgin Mary in Christian history, devotion and spirituality.

Dr. Bocks book engages the early history of the church brought up in Dan Browns The Da Vinci Code in a clear and logical manner. It allows the reader to analyze the fundamental claims that Browns book makes about Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and early Christianity from a scholarly and historical perspective. Dr. Bock lays the facts before the reader and guides them through the debates surrounding these subjects as the arly church was being formed. He has been able to break down the political and religious arguments in a way that the reader can easily follow. The facts contained in the pages of this criticism are not restricted to the The Bible and accepted Christian dogma, but also include a detailed investigation of the Secret Gospels and other extrabiblical material. This analysis is not the argument of only conservative biblical scholars, but also extends into the realm of liberal historical Jesus followers. It is an analysis that focuses on history and not interpretaton. The bottom line is after Dr. Bock is through with his investigation, the historical basis for The Da Vinci Code is debunked, and the rest of the story, including Da Vinci and his artwork, is a novel construct for an author to tell a good tale and nothing more.

Breaking the Da Vinci Code is an attempt by a Christian professor of religion, Darrell L. Bock, to refute the information provided in the popular novel, The Da Vinci Code, by Dan Brown. Bock justifies this effort by saying that not only has the novel been highly popular, it proclaims as true some concepts that are contrary to traditional Christianity. The book is divided into eight codes, or chapters. The first three of these deal with Mary Magdalene. Was she, as Brown’s book claims, the wife of Jesus, an apostle and a key figure in the early church? Bock provides evidence from the gospels and other writings that she was not. He says that Jesus was single and never married. Mary Magdalene was a devoted follower of him, but no more. Brown’s book further claims that Christian leaders have tried to diminish her in order to preserve their authority, a claim that Bock also rejects. He points to evidence in the gospels that show a positive role for women, given the culture of the times. He also says that the gnostic gospels, discovered in 1945, do not help us understand Christianity. Brown’s book says that people who had a political agenda assembled the New Testament gospels and Jesus was not upgraded to the status of God until the Emperor Constantine and the adoption of the Nicene Creed in 325. But Bock points out that Paul said Jesus was God in the first century. Bock also disagrees with two Harvard professors on various matters. Brown’s book, Bock says, essentially states that the Church, in order to defend itself, made Mary Magdalene out to be a prostitute and hid her marriage to Jesus. His conclusion is, “We have examined this claim and found it to be wanting historically at every key point.” The last code asks who was Jesus? The Resurrection is the real code that shows he truly was God. Professor Bock represents the Christian establishment and thus is defending it against what he sees as an attack on its beliefs. The life of Jesus Christ and the formation of the Catholic/Christian church are shrouded in mystery and there have been many interpretations. A number of scholarly books have pointed out that the bible is not historically accurate and many of its events may be myths or parables. We are now quite certain, for example, that the biblical account of the events surrounding the birth of Jesus is largely inaccurate. The Resurrection may be one such myth. Jesus may not have actually come back to life; rather the message might be that if you follow his preachings you will be resurrected after your death and reside with God. We just do not know and one either believes or disbelieves as a matter of faith, not fact. For this reason, then, Bock’s book fails in its mission. He tries to use “facts” to disprove other “facts,” neither of which may be true in reality. In any case it would be a good idea to read Brown’s book first so that you can have the background for what Professor Bock is trying to refute.

Breaking the Da Vinci Code was a wonderful read. Enlightens the soul that the truth is always in the Holy Scripture, and never in the mind of man. Have recommended to my friends. Robert C. Frank

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.

Dan Browns DaVinci Code is one of the best selling novels in the country. It is also poorly written, with 1 dimensional characters and dialog, and a barely believable story line. So why does it sell so well? The answer is that it attacks Jesus Christ and the church. Attacking the church is one of our countrys favorite pastimes, but this is nothing new. What is new is this wonderful and scholarly book by Dr. Bock. I have read much of the anti DaVinci code literature. This book is by far the best one written from a protestant perspective. This author is a scholar of serious weight, and he has produced a popular and accessible book that is well researched and fair minded. Dr. Bock is a serious Christian, and thus, he does not hate. This book is far better than the truly awful Cracking Da Vincis Code by Garlow and Jones. (stay away from this one... its just as much a pathetic anti-Catholic diatribe as the Da Vinci code itself) I must admit that I found The Da Vinci Hoax by Olson and Miesel to be the best of the bunch in terms of its research and excellence. (However, this one is from a Catholic perspective and I may be biased... I am a Catholic) This book is strongly recommended as a gift for anyone you know, especially protestants, who have been entrapped by Dan Browns propaganda, and for yourself so you can understand why the Browns facts are so very untrue. Dr. Bock has given all of us a great gift with this book. God Bless

This book was very informative. If you go to this book looking for an easy answer to all the questions rought up in the Da Vinci Code, you will be let down. The book is riddled with quotes from early church fathers and ancient Gnostic gospels. I really enjoyed this but it contains a lot of info and can be boring if you are not too interested in the topic. This is the best book that talks of the Davinci Code!

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.