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

Im a conservative Christian and a student of early church history. I read the Da Vinci Code. As entertainment, I found it puerile (see my review); as history, I found it mostly laughable. That said, Darrell Bocks book is a surprisingly weak and shallow attempt at refutation (I hesitate even to use the word refutation, so feckless is this effort). First, Bock ignores some of the more obvious historical untruths in Dan Browns book, such as the claim that Constantines conversion to Christianity was at best a deathbed decision, if it occurred at all. Second, his reasoning is often amazing shallow. I found in most instances that he simply introduces his position, cites minimal evidence in support of it, and then pronounces the case closed, in his favor of course. At times, its hard to tell whether hes agreeing or disputing some of the writers he cites in defending his positions. Talk about vacillating! This is shoddy work, and hardly that of a scholar. If youre looking for a lucid and logically constructed refutation of The DaVinci Code, look elsewhere, cuz this sure aint it!

Nothing in this book proves anything... If Da Vinci Code is wrong about Magdalene and the conspiracy, this book is not right either... faith is very hard to argue and everybody believes what they wanted to believe...

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.

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.

This book goes step by step addressing many of the issues raised in the Da Vinci Code. Using logic, biblical and nonbiblical text, and a scholarly knowledge of early christian history Dr. Bock makes a convincing case and keeps the book easily readable. He looks at many of the issues from multiple angles and addresses possible counter-arguments to his claims. The book doesnt come across like a sermon and doesnt require that the reader be a christian, only that the reader be openminded.

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.

hough The Da Vinci Code is a fictional novel, many scholars are concerned about the historical inaccuracies it depends upon. One of these scholars is Darrell Bock. This is not merely any piece of fiction. The scope of what it claims as fast, the impression it leaves making those claims under the cover of fiction, and the fact that it addresses a significant subject for our cultures own self understanding make it important that its claims be assessed and/or appreciated. (6) In Breaking the Da Vinci Code, Dr. Bock seeks to break several of the underlying premises of the novel. Beginning with a study on who was Mary Magdalane, the book has eight chapters examining the various claims of the novel. Dr. Bock draws from biblical texts, as well as non-biblical texts, to make his arguments. The book also deals with questions about whether Jesus was married, if his being single might make him un-Jewish, if the Gnostic gospels help us understand Jesus, how the New Testament assembled, and whether recent scholarly work accurately reflect the historical record. Dr. Bock concludes that only two historical claims of the novel stand: (1) women were elevated by what Jesus taught (although probably not as much as some would suggest), and (2) Mary Magdalene was not a prostitue. The remaining foundation of the novel is made of sand. (154) The final chapter provides the Real Jesus Code, the gospel that Jesus taught and Mary Magdalane experienced. There is a brief appendix by an art professor, Robert Baldwin, which points out some of the art flaws in the novel. A glossary is found at the back of the book describing important themes and figures. This book deals with most of the important questions raised by The Da Vinci Code. For the most part, responds with compelling academically backed arguments that are expressed in an accessible form. Despite having a great glossary, however, there is not much offered for additional resources outside of the book. Though Dr. Bock addresses Gnosticism, the explanation of it was somewhat lacking. Further lacking is an analysis of the sacred feminine that was so prevalent in the novel. Breaking the Da Vinci Code is a noteworthy response to the popular novel. Though the analysis could have been expanded, Darrell Bock offers a devastating critique of the faulty historical foundation of Dan Browns book.

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.

This is NOT a breaking of Da Vincis codes. This is NOT a book that answers the questions everybodys asking. Instead, Bock just presents a treatise that defends Christianity as a religion, beginning with Constantines era around 325 A.D. As other reviewers have commented, this is a most shocking display of false advertising in that Bock steers clear of making any attempt to address what Dan Brown has said about hidden codes in Leonardos Da Vincis works of art-terrible. Bock also ignores other important aspects of Browns book: for example, goddess worship, ancient religions, symbology. Bock seems completely out of touch with what people are really asking. Dont waste your money fellow readers.

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