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

With over 40 million copies sold into 44 languages (as of May 2006), the Brown blockbuster has certainly made an impact. And the May 2006 film version simply adds to the books success. But the book is as controversial as it is popular. Indeed, while the book is a work of fiction, Brown claims it is based on fact. And given the importance of the subject matter - who Jesus was, what he taught, and how the church presented that - if his book is in fact riddled with errors and misinformation, then it deserves closer inspection. And that has happened. There have been a number of good critiques of The Da Vinci Code written by both Catholics and Protestants. Over a dozen book-length treatments come to mind. One of the earliest, and best, Protestant treatments is this book. Darrell Bock is a leading New Testament scholar and is well qualified to address this topic. He has written extensively elsewhere on some of the issues raised by Dan Brown. Thus this volume is a first-rate assessment of the many theological and historical errors found in Browns best-seller. Meaty chapters cover the key points of controversy: Did Jesus marry and have a child? Just who was Mary Magdalene? Are the Gnostic gospels on a par with the four canonical gospels? Did the early church suppress certain truths and writings about Jesus? Was the divinity of Jesus a later church construct? These and related questions are carefully answered by Bock. The nearly 200 pages of argument found here make a solid case that Brown has got it wrong big time. Moreover, Bock demonstrates that the central claims of Christianity remain trustwothy. Everyone who has read Brown should also read Bock. The falsehoods and foolishness of Brown are more than adequately dealt with by the intelligent and irenic pen of Bock. Five stars.

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.

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.

Mr. Bocks writing style is not the greatest but he does do a good job of explaining very clearly why Dan Browns book is a fictional novel based on a fictional theory. You can call me many things, Actively Religious is not one of them. I read Mr. Bocks book because Dan Browns book was simply too incredible to believe. If you would like a better understanding of what historians and biblical scholars understand about the beginnings of Christianity, I recommend you read it. If by the end of the book, you still believe the Da Vinci Code gives an accurate historical depiction then you probably also believe a vast right wing conspiracy forced Bill Clinton to have sex with Monica.

Bock, a past president of the Evangelical Theological Society and a faculty member at Dallas Theological Seminary, can always be depended on as a world class theologian. In this book he does an accurate job of conveying what Scripture and non-canonical writings say about Jesus. He is also aware of modern anti-Christian movements and how the publishing of TheDaVinci Code fits into their schemes to put down Christianity. I cannot recommend The DaVinci Code, but for those who have read it, this book is an excellent source to help them separate fact from fiction.

Darell Bock keeps going off topic and repeating himself. While this is nice in the sense that he gives a LOT of evidence supporting his claims, its no use if you are just a casual reader wanting to find out more. Thus, this book might interest you if youre an amateur in the field, but stay away if youre just an interested reader.

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.

First of all, Im not one of the people who asked the questions Dr. Bock answers in this book. I read The Da Vinci Code for what it was: an entertaining whodunnit with a religious conspiracy twist, one of my favorite subgenres of thriller. And I am utterly amazed that some certain segment of the population took seriously the outlandish conspiracy theory on which Dan Brown based his novel. Read that again. NOVEL. N-O-V-E-L. Meaning, its fiction. F-I-C-T-I-O-N. Meaning, its not true. *takes a deep breath* Relax, avanta. *chants a mantra* Okay. Better now. However (she resumed in a calmer fashion), not too long ago I overheard several of my colleagues, women who I otherwise thought had a grain of sense, discussing the NOVEL and its basis with all seriousness. I mean, they truly believed the story contained a thinly disguised version of the truth. This shocked me. Does it make a difference that these women are for the most part either unchurched or followers of a non-Christian religion? Possibly. I dont know any Christian serious about his faith who takes the theories presented in The Da Vinci Code as anything other than sheer entertainment. I wanted to jump in their conversation and point out the fallacies; unfortunately, I did not have adequate information. I knew they were wrong but didnt have data to make my points. This book provides the data. Dr. Bock sets up each code and knocks it down again with a satisfactory thunk. He quotes Scripture and scholarly research; he provides historical and sociological background; he explains the Gnostic heresy; he discusses the Council of Nicea and what led to its stamp of approval on the Biblical Canon; and generally applies logic, reason, and critical thinking to each aspect of the so-called conspiracy, thereby debunking it in total. A short fast read, overflowing with information, and worth every minute of the readers time. If The Da Vinci Code raised questions in your mind, or if you want to answer someone elses questions, this is the book you need.

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 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.