‘The Da Vinci Code’: a Review

What Itching Ears Desire to Hear: The Untruth of The Da Vinci Code

By Michael Gryboski

[Note: I originally wrote this essay several years ago. Since I only recently got an account with Substack, I thought “why not?” and decided to post the essay, with a few revisions here and there.]

Introduction

In 2003, Dan Brown had a novel released titled The Da Vinci Code. The book made several claims that go against the Bible and the Church. Just before the prologue, Brown states “The Priory of Sion — a European secret society founded in 1099 — is a real organization.”1 In addition, he notes “All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate.”2 These remarks and a few others are labeled “FACT” in big bold letters.

Any work that claims to be “FACT” should be investigated. Regarding the Gnostic Gospels, the life of Jesus, the Council of Nicaea, transmogrification, certain aspects of church history and Leonardo Da Vinci, Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code is continually and consistently inaccurate. Even many non-trivial claims tend to be false.

I. “Teabing located a huge book and it toward him across the table. The leather bound edition was poster size, like a huge atlas. The cover read: The Gnostic Gospels.”3

The Da Vinci Code considers a collection of extra-biblical works known as the Gnostic Gospels as the authoritative sources on Jesus Christ. As explained through the character Teabing, “These are photocopies of the Nag Hammadi, and the Dead Sea Scrolls, which I mentioned earlier…The earliest Christian records.”4

There are two basic problems with this claim. First, the Gnostic Gospels are not the earliest resources we have on the life of Jesus and are also factually dubious. Second, the beliefs of the Gnostics are not as friendly to the “Sacred Feminine” as the novel alleges.

The Gnostic Gospels were discovered in 1945 near an Egyptian town named Nag Hammadi.5 They are a collection of works written by a mysterious heretical Christian sect from the last centuries of the Roman Empire. The Gnostic works present are nowhere near the “earliest Christian records.” The overall library of Gnostic works found at Nag Hammadi only dates as far back as the fifth century.6

Some counter that these are copies of works and therefore could possibly date back further. For example, amongst the Gnostic writers whose works are present at the library is Valentinus. Works both confirmed as written by Valentinus and attributed to Valentinus were amongst the many scripts found, including “The Gospel of Truth, The Prayer of the Apostle Paul, The Treatise on the Resurrection, The Tripartite Tractate, The Gospel of Philip, The Interpretation of Knowledge, and A Valentinian Exposition.”7 Another half-dozen works found are also attributed to either Valentinus or his followers depending on the scholar. However, even these works at their oldest come from the second century.8

This is important because the Four Canonical Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are dated to the first century, typically around AD 49 to AD 90.9 This would make all four gospels, as well as the epistles of Paul and the rest of the New Testament, appear in the historical record within the lifetimes of the first generation of Christians, unlike the Gnostic works.

Some speculate that a few of the works at Nag Hammadi go as far back as the first century, but this is mere speculation. The Gospel of Philip, a work the novel draws on heavily, cannot be traced farther back than the late second century.10 The Gospel of Thomas, another favorite of the novel, cannot be put earlier than the second century.11

Even if the Gnostic Gospels were from the same time as (or earlier than) the Canonical Gospels, the texts themselves contradict the novel’s claims. Take the “Sacred Feminine” concept, as described in The Da Vinci Code. Protagonist Robert Langdon describes it to his students in one of the scenes, “The next time you find yourself with a woman, look in your heart and see if you cannot approach sex as a mystical, spiritual act. Challenge yourself to find that spark of divinity that man can only achieve through union with the sacred feminine.”12

This elevation of women could not have come from the Gospel of Thomas. The concluding dialogue on salvation says this: “Jesus said, ‘Look I shall guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter heaven’s kingdom.’”13

The novel speaks of a practice named Hieros Gamos, or sacred marriage. The context was that of sexual intercourse as a spiritual act. Sophie, another protagonist, described part of this ritual to Langdon, “The women were in white gossamer gowns…with golden shoes. They held golden orbs. The men wore black tunics and black shoes.”14

The notion of a condoned public display of sexual intercourse could not have come from the Gospel of Philip, which states that “If marriage is exposed, it has become prostitution, and the bride plays the harlot not only if she is impregnated by another man but even if she slips out of her bedchamber and is seen.”15

In addition to Nag Hammadi, the novel attempts to attach a Gnostic-Sacred Feminine relevance to the find of the Dead Sea Scrolls. The novel claims that the Dead Sea Scrolls were part of the collection of works undermining the Roman Catholic Church. However, the Dead Sea Scrolls are not related to the Gnostics.16

II. “As I said earlier, the marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene is part of the historical record.”17

This was one of the most controversial claims. There are other claims made about Jesus Christ by the novel, such as His Divinity being approved by a narrow vote by the Council of Nicaea and Constantine padding the life of Jesus with pagan-inspired myths. Outside the Four Canonical Gospels, first century accounts of Jesus of Nazareth are sparse (a fact that actually contradicts a statement made by Teabing in the book).18 Nevertheless, the framework for the claims on Jesus of Nazareth is a faulty one.

The novel’s claim of Jesus being married and having a child stirred up enormous controversy even though it technically should not have. After all, Jesus having a family would not contradict the Virgin Birth, Bodily Resurrection, or eventual Second Coming.

That said, the arguments put forth to support this idea are poorly reasoned. Teabing offered one reason for Jesus being married to Sophie and Langdon: “If Jesus was not married, at least one of the Bible’s gospels would have mentioned it and offered some explanation for His unnatural state of bachelorhood.”19

By this logic, Jesus must have owned a laptop; after all, none of the Gospels ever say He didn’t. Although not mentioned in the Four Canonical Gospels, First Corinthians 9:5 alludes to the celibacy of Jesus. In that passage, Paul defends his right to marry and gave examples of other men of God who were married. He does not mention Jesus. If Jesus was indeed married, Paul could have proven his point by citing Him.

Not even the novel’s own authoritative works acknowledge the marriage. The Gnostic Gospels that the novel relies on so heavily do not mention a marriage either. If one is to interpret the Gnostics literally, most of them only speak of Mary Magdalene being Jesus’ closest disciple, not His spouse.

His state of bachelorhood was not unnatural. In Jesus’ time and place there was a Jewish sect called the Essenes. One theory is that the Essenes created the ideological foundation for Christianity.20 These are the people who inhabited the Dead Sea community of Qumran, location of the Dead Sea Scrolls. And they were celibate, only allowing men to join their community.21 This means that it was possible for Jesus to be unmarried for religious reasons.

According to the revised history, Jesus was never considered Divine, much less the Son of God, until the Council of Nicaea and the decision of Constantine. As Brown wrote, “By officially endorsing Jesus as the Son of God, Constantine turned Jesus into a deity.”22 This goes under the assumption that no works existed before Constantine that referred to Jesus Christ as Divine. But the first century Canonical Gospels say different:

”And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.” (Luke 24:46–47)

”And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God!” (John 1:36)

”Now when all the people were baptized, it came to pass, that Jesus also being baptized, and praying, the heaven was opened. And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove above him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.” (Luke 3:21–22)

These and other verses show that, at the least, a population living centuries before Constantine believed Jesus was Divine. Now some argue that the four accepted Gospels were embellished with deity references, but that is an argument of convenience. Besides, the Gnostic Gospels also consider Jesus divine. The Gospel of Philip has this passage:

”Christ came to purchase some, to save some, to redeem some. He purchased strangers and made them his own, and he brought back his own whom he had laid down of his own will as a deposit. Not only when he appeared did he lay the soul of his own will as a deposit, but from the beginning of the world he laid down the soul, for the proper moment, according to his will.”23

Another example of the Gnostics claiming that Jesus was divine can be seen in the Gospel of Thomas: ”Jesus said, ‘I am the light that is over all things. I am all: from me all has come forth, and to me all has reached. Split a piece of wood; I am there. Lift up the stone, and you will find me there.’”24

The novel has not only forsaken factual evidence, but also the very statements of the sources it deems authoritative.

III. “Constantine decided something had to be done. In 325 A.D., he decided to unify Rome under a single religion. Christianity.”25

According to the novel, the Council of Nicaea is the consolidation of the power of the Roman Catholic Church over the “Sacred Feminine.” From this event came the divinity of Christ, the rejection of the “Sacred Feminine” and its Gnostic supporters, and end of a peaceful age of masculine-feminine equality.

Problem is, Nicaea had nothing to do with the “Sacred Feminine,” but instead centered on a heresy called Arianism. Named after Arius, it “held that Christ had not co-existed eternally with the Father This implied a denial of Christ’s equality with God the Father and undermined the entire theology of the Incarnation and Redemption.”26

The Council led to an attack on heresy, but not the one the novel claims. “The majority of bishops voted to crack down on Arianism: they banished Arius to Illyria, a rough Balkan region, and declared that the Father and the Son were indeed ‘of one substance’ and co-eternal.”27 So where does the “Sacred Feminine” fit into all this? Nowhere. Ironically, Constantine was believed to be sympathetic to the Arians.28

Details on the Council of Nicaea as provided by the novel are continually false. Going through them point by point is the simplest way:

“The fundamental irony of Christianity! The Bible, as we know it today, was collated by the pagan Roman emperor Constantine the Great.”29

No historian is fully certain as to when Constantine converted, but it was not on his deathbed. In AD 312, or thirteen years before the Council of Nicaea, Constantine defeated his rival Maxentius at the battle of Milvian Bridge. “Constantine let it be known to Christians that he considered that he had owed his victory outside Rome to a specific and unique sign from the One God which they worshipped.”30

“Constantine commissioned and financed a new Bible, which omitted those gospels that spoke of Christ’s human traits and…earlier gospels were outlawed, gathered up, and burned.”31

Under Constantine, paganism was not persecuted. “After his conversion, Constantine did not outlaw polytheism or make Christianity the official religion. Instead, he decreed religious toleration.”32 It was not until the end of the 300s, after Constantine died, that Christianity was established as the state religion and state-sponsored repression against polytheism began.

“Anyone who chose the forbidden gospels over Constantine’s version was deemed a heretic. The word heretic derives from that moment in history.”33

The word heretic existed well before the Council of Nicaea. For example, in the third century, the Christian apologist Tertullian wrote a polemic titled “Prescriptions Against Heretics.”34

“’Hold on. You’re saying Jesus’ divinity was the result of a vote?’ ‘A relatively close one at that.’” 35

The final vote at the Council of Nicaea on the divinity of Jesus was 300 to 2.36 Not exactly close. This is expected given that the Council of Nicaea was in regards to Christian orthodoxy, not interreligious dialogue as alleged by the novel. From the falsehoods contrived about the Council comes a whole host of accusations that are a section unto themselves.

IV. “By fusing pagan symbols, dates, and rituals into the growing Christian tradition, he created a kind of hybrid religion that was acceptable to both parties.”37

Brown claims that the Council of Nicaea formed a new religion, stealing the original Jesus of Nazareth and deifying him via the incorporation of various pagan myths as well as the destruction of heretical gospels.

As has already been shown, the Council of Nicaea had nothing to do with the “Sacred Feminine” and Jesus’ divinity was acknowledged even in the Gnostic works. Now we shall look at another claim against Christianity in the novel.

The character Teabing lists several things that Christianity supposedly stole from paganism, including various clothing items like the miter, pictograms of Isis with child which became the design for the Virgin Mary nursing the Christ-child, and others.

Many scholars agree, but so what? Images are not doctrines. Images are images. Even if the image of Isis nursing Horus had a major influence on Virgin Mary with Christ-Child iconography, does that prove that the doctrines of Christianity are nothing more than plagiarism from Egyptian cults? Well, the novel sure makes it sound that way by describing Horus as being “miraculously conceived,”38 implying that the Immaculate Conception was stolen from Egyptian paganism.

Yet events in mythology can be described with similar terms to Christian theology, but that does not mean they are exactly the same. In this case, no evidence exists that Ancient Egyptians believed that Horus was born of a virgin, let alone true God and true man.

If one wants to use images as proof of ideological theft, one will find plenty of problems. Think of all the non-profit organizations in the United States of America that have the American flag as part of their logo, despite holding diverse political views.

Teabing lists examples of supposed doctrinal theft, but the claims are baseless. For example, Teabing tells Langdon and Sophie that Christianity stole beliefs from the Cult of Mithras: “The pre-Christian God Mithras — called the Son of God and the Light of the World — was born on December 25th, died, was buried in a rock tomb, and then resurrected in three days.”39

Yet, according to scholars, “The only domain in which we can ascertain in detail the extent to which Christianity imitated Mithraism is that of art.”40 If the scholars can only ascertain scant evidence about the Mithras religion, how can this novel claim anything more? Dead religions are not the only ones that the novel uses to claim that Christianity stole doctrines from other sects.

“The newborn Krishna was presented with gold, frankincense, and myrrh.”41 This is another inaccurate statement, as descriptions of the birth of Krishna in the Hindustan Times42 and elsewhere make no mention of such gifts being offered.

V. “I was just thinking that Sauniere shared a lot of spiritual ideologies with Da Vinci, including a concern over the Church’s elimination of the sacred feminine from modern religion.”43

If the novel’s claim of early Christians stealing pagan imagery was the most accurate part of the book, then the novel’s interpretation of church history from Nicaea to the birth of Leonardo Da Vinci has to be least accurate. The best way to handle this shall be point-by-point.

“The Priory of Sion believed that it was this obliteration of the sacred feminine in modern life that had caused what the Hopi Native Americans called koyanisquatsi — ‘life out of balance’ — an unstable situation marked by testosterone-fueled wars, a plethora of misogynistic societies, and a growing disrespect for Mother Earth.”44

Most certainly by whatever standard one defines “testosterone-fueled wars,” blaming it on Nicene Christianity one leaves out a lot of examples. The conquests of Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar, the chronic warfare initiated by Persia, Assyria, and Babylonia in the Ancient Near East could all qualify as “testosterone-fueled,” but they were all fought before Jesus was born. Misogynistic societies have always existed, occurring long before the Church was created. That does not stop the novel from blaming Christianity, even though acts like female genital mutilation, suti, and barring women from testifying in court all originated in non-Christian cultures. If one looks at the rise of Christianity, one sees the status of women rising with it, as noted by many historians:

Writes Lynn Hunt et al., “Women could sometimes be leaders in the movement, but not without arousing controversy; many people believed that men should teach and women only listen. Still, early Christianity was diverse enough that the first head of a congregation named in the New Testament was a woman.”45

Peter Brown (presumably unrelated to The Da Vinci Code author), described the typical early Christian congregation thusly: “High and low, men and women met as equals because equally subject, now, to the overruling law of one God.”46

“Those deemed ‘witches’ by the Church included all female scholars, priestesses, gypsies, mystics, nature lovers, herb gatherers, and any women ‘suspiciously attuned to the natural world.”47

During the witch hunts of the Medieval and Renaissance eras, men were also accused and found guilty and executed. “Before 1400, when witchcraft trials were rare, nearly half of those accused had been men.”48 To emphasize, during the Medieval era, witchcraft trails were rare and often involved men being accused. Yet Brown maintained that “During the three hundred years of witch hunts, the Church burned at the stake an astounding five million women.”49 However, historians place the actual number as being about 40,000 to 60,000.

As one modern pagan website notes:

“Estimates in the 19th century were often around one million. By the 1950’s, they dropped to hundreds of thousands. Then, after the trial evidence became widely available, estimates fell to between 40,000 and 60,000. There they’ve stayed, and there’s now little academic debate over them.”50

Furthermore:

“Between 1300 and 1500, approximately 35%-40% of all Witches were men … Several of the Scandinavian countries, however, killed approximately equal numbers of men and women, or slightly more men. Iceland is the most anomalous. There, a type of magick called ‘galdur’ became associated with Witchcraft. Since galdur was primarily practiced by men, an astonishing 95% of Icelandic Witches were male.”51

“[the Church intentionally targeted midwives] for their heretical practice of using medical knowledge to ease the pain of childbirth — a suffering, the Church claimed, that was God’s rightful punishment for Eve’s partaking of the Apple of Knowledge, thus giving birth to the idea of original sin.”52

Although it is true that midwives were special targets for the witch hunts, it was based on a completely different reasoning: “Another commonly accused woman was the midwife, who was a prime target for suspicion when a baby or mother died in childbirth.”53

“In fact, so strong was the Church’s fear of those who lived in the rural villes that the once innocuous word for ‘villager’ — vilan — came to mean a wicked soul.”54

Christianity started out in urban areas, thriving in trading centers across the Roman Empire as it spread. Cities were some of the first places to become thoroughly Christianized, with rural areas often being the last bulwarks of the old paganisms. However, the Church did not create the word villain. According to Webster’s, the word “villain” originated in thirteenth century Middle English.55 Granted, its purpose was most likely to marginalize rural inhabitants, but by then they would have been largely if not completely Christian.

“Not even the feminine association with the left-hand side could escape the Church’s defamation. In France and Italy, the words for ‘left’ — gauche and sinistra — came to have deeply negative overtones…”56

Left has always had a negative context. For example, in Ancient Greece to have someone sneeze on another’s right hand was seen as a good omen, but if a sneeze hit a left hand it was seen as a misfortunate.57

The novel’s interpretation of history is completely bogus. Still, it should come as no surprise that many may actually believe this segment of the novel more than the others, since popular American culture has painted the time period between the Fall of the Roman Empire and the Renaissance as the “Dark Ages,” in spite of the many intellectual, artistic, cultural, technological, and political advancements that took place in Christendom.

The novel’s brutally false retelling of history continues with the Knight’s Templar, the Priory of Sion, and Leonardo Da Vinci.

VI. “Langdon thoughts of the notorious Templar round-up in 1307 — un-lucky Friday the thirteenth — when Pope Clement killed and interred hundreds of Knights Templar.”58

After distorting the history behind the Council of Nicaea, the Middle Ages, and the Gnostic gospels, the novel continues its violation of history by claiming the Knights Templar as part of the effort to protect the “Sacred Feminine.”

Claims put forth for the Knights Templar simply lack evidence. Given that the Knights, when rounded up, admitted to things under torture and given the complex political situation, it is very hard to confirm anything with them regarding whether or not they practiced heresy. Although, there are points made by the novel that can be refuted with certainty.

“The Templars honored Baphomet by encircling a stone replica of his head and chanting prayers.”59

Once again, there is scant evidence confirming this in the historical record. Furthermore, the name Baphomet is a Medieval French name for Mohammed.60

The idol was part of the things confessed by various Templars after being tortured,61 though its connection to the “Sacred Feminine” has never been confirmed.

“The architecture is pagan to the core…The church is round. The Templars ignored the traditional Christian cruciform layout and built a perfectly circular church in honor of the sun.”62

Round churches are not inherently pagan. Ruined temples found in Rome and Greece are rectangular. Furthermore, some churches found in Ethiopia and Scandinavia are designed with concentric circles.63 This is not a way to defy Christianity, but rather to emulate what some believed to be the shape of the Temple of Solomon. Said Temple was built by a culture whose population was noted for its violent stamping out of pagan practices (including goddess worship).

Connected to the Knights Templar is the Priory of Sion. This secret society is said to be the protectors of the “Sacred Feminine,” a constant opponent of the Church, and comprised of many great minds, including Galileo, Newton, and Da Vinci. What about Da Vinci? Is there any merit to the notion that he was active in this secret war, preserving the “Sacred Feminine” via his paintings, including most notably The Last Supper? Well, not exactly.

“Despite the visionary’s genius, he was a flamboyant homosexual and worshipper of nature’s order divine order, both of which placed him in a perpetual state of sin against God.”64

The accusation that Da Vinci was a homosexual is nothing new; it apparently was even alleged in his time. Evidence exists that Da Vinci was very close to some of his male pupils, possibly romantically. But, as one biographer wrote, “It is all, in the end, a matter of interpretation. Like most students of Leonardo today, I interpret him as homosexual — though there is some piquant evidence…that he was not exclusively so. The allegation laid against him in 1476 is plausible enough, though this is not the same as saying it was true.”65

Then there are the interpretations of the paintings of Da Vinci. The novel claims that Da Vinci’s works were meant to stick it to the Church while appearing to be reverent. The problem is historical context. Da Vinci’s work came during the Classical Renaissance. As described by Hayes et al., Da Vinci was under no obligation to serve only the Church on an artistic level:

“The art of [the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries], while still largely religious in subject matter, was no longer fostered exclusively by the church. It was now patronized also by individual lay princes and wealthy townsmen, and was notably influenced by contemporary secularism, classicism, and humanism. Along with representations of Madonnas, saints, and biblical scenes, it became fashionable to depict characters from pagan mythology and scenes from classical Greece and Rome.”66

If Da Vinci believed in the “Sacred Feminine,” why not paint images overtly referencing it? Other non-Christian works were being painted or sculpted during that era, including many pagan deities. Yet he still painted biblical scenes. The novel would still claim that these were vehicles to hide innuendos to the marriage of Mary Magdalene and Jesus.

As any Renaissance art scholar can attest to, if Da Vinci hid these references in his works he must have done a really good job, since no one with a substantial art history background has written a peer-reviewed work concluding that these innuendos exist.

“The Virgin on the Rocks” can serve as an example. The novel interprets the work as alluding to the Da Vinci’s anti-Catholic beliefs and tacit support for the Priory of Sion. Yet the allusions identified in the painting by scholars have a Christian meaning:

“To the right of the Virgin’s head is the columbine (Aquilegia vulgaris), whose popular name suggests the dove (columba) of the Holy Ghost, and just above her right hand is a species of gallium known in English as Our Lady’s Bedstraw and traditionally associated with the manger.”67

Why would Da Vinci, if so committed to preserving the “Sacred Feminine” via encoded symbols in his paintings, have symbols and images representing Christianity’s worldview instead?

The novel claims the figure to the left of Jesus in “The Last Supper” is Mary Magdalene rather than John due to its more feminine appearance. However, younger males painted by Da Vinci tended to look feminine. For example, it is widely agreed that in his painting “St. John the Baptist,” the saint looks very feminine.68

What about Da Vinci’s association with the Priory of Sion? What about the long list of Grand Masters the secret organization had up until the present day that the novel mentions? Well, the list provided in the novel is a hoax.69

While the Priory of Sion is technically a real group, its history cannot be traced back farther in time than the 1950s.70

VII. “Sophie, the historical evidence supporting this is substantial.”71

Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code holds a great many errors. More comprehensive rebuttals have noted geographical errors and additional historical errors. Below are a few more factual errors in the novel that could not be effectively placed in the previous sections.

“The Dead Sea Scrolls were found in the 1950s hidden in a cave near Qumran in the Judean desert.”72

The Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered in 1947.73

“The Jewish tetragrammation YHWH — the sacred name for God — in fact derived from Jehovah, an androgynous physical union between the masculine Jah and pre-Hebraic name for Eve, Havah.”74

According to Dictionary.com, the name “Jehovah” comes from Medieval Latin, and is itself derived from YHWH (or YHVH), not the other way around.75

“He wondered if Fache had any idea that this pyramid at President Mitterrand’s explicit demand had been constructed of exactly 666 panes of glass.”76

The Louvre Pyramid has 673 panes of glass, not 666.77

“Originally, Tarot had been designed as a secret means to pass along ideologies banned by the Church.”78

The original Tarot cards were playing cards. As clarified by a Tarot site,

”Tarot cards (or taroc cards, or tarocchi cards) were originally used for playing a card game called tarocchi, and had no more (or less) to do with foretelling the future than did other types of playing cards…Tarot cards have not specifically been known as ‘cards of the devil.’ That title was given to all playing cards by early churchmen — and had nothing to do with fortune-telling. These protectors of the faith were condemning playing cards because they were used for gambling.”79

Conclusion

“Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O Wretched mortals, open your eyes!”80

Even on the matters that were not trivial, Dan Brown’s very popular and very inaccurate novel The Da Vinci Code consistently got things wrong. Unfortunately, there are still people out there who believe the core ideas of the novel. Even as mainstream media has churned out several programs exposing the erroneous nature of Brown’s bestseller, some maybe many still believe its claims.

The only explanation for this must be the strong level of preexisting hatred for Christianity, either on a moral or spiritual level, as encouraged by popular culture. Modern American culture is very gullible when it comes to malicious accusations against Christianity and its followers, making works like this novel have a lasting appeal.

This even though on matters regarding the Gnostic gospels, the life of Jesus, the Council of Nicaea, church history, Leonardo Da Vinci and other claims, Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code is continually and consistently inaccurate.

References:

1. Brown, Dan, The Da Vinci Code, (New York: Doubleday, 2003) 1.

2. Ibid.

3.Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 245.

4.Ibid.

5. King, Karen L., What Is Gnosticism? (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press) 2003, 1.

6.Grant, R.M., Gnosticism and Early Christianity (2nd ed.) (London: Columbia University Press) 1966, 5.

7.King, What Is Gnosticism?, 154.

8.Grant, Gnosticism and Early Christianity, 5; King, What Is Gnosticism?, 154.

9. http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_ntb1.htm#mary, accessed July 20th, AD 2008.

10. https://www.nasscal.com/e-clavis-christian-apocrypha/gospel-of-philip/, accessed June 4, AD 2022.

11. Meyer, Marvin, The Gnostic Gospels of Jesus (HarperSanFrancisco, 2005), 5.

12.Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 310.

13.Meyer, The Gnostic Gospels of Jesus, 25.

14.Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 308.

15.Meyer, The Gnostic Gospels of Jesus, 83.

16. An article on the Gnostic Society Library mentions no examples of Gnostic works among the Dead Sea Scrolls, and added that “there is probably nothing in the Scrolls collection directly reflecting events or personages known to early Christian history.” http://gnosis.org/library/dss/dss.htm, accessed June 4, AD 2022.

17.Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 245.

18. “Understandably, [Jesus’] life was recorded by thousands of followers across the land.” (Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 231.)

19. Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 245.

20. Grant, Gnosticism and Early Christianity, 2.

21. Romer, John, Testament: The Bible and History, (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1988), 138.

22.Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 233.

23. Meyer, The Gnostic Gospels of Jesus, 50.

24.Ibid, 20.

25. Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 232.

26.Hayes et al., History of Europe, (New York: MacMillan Company) 1956, 60.

27.Hunt et al., The Making of the West, (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s ) 2003, 228.

28.Ibid.

29. Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 231.

30. Brown, Peter, The Rise of Western Christendom (2nd ed.) (Blackwell Publishing, 2003) 60.

31. Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 234.

32.Hunt et al., The Making of the West, 221.

33. Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 234.

34. King, What Is Gnosticism?, 27.

35. Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 233.

36. http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:KqGeebI3IzAJ:www.religionandpluralism.org/GranteeArticles/KarenKing_DaVinciCodeQuestionsObjections_AJC021504.pdf+%22300-2%22+vote+Brown&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us, accessed July 20th, AD 2008.

37. Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 232.

38.Ibid.

39.Ibid.

40. Mithraic Studies: Proceedings of the First International Congress of Mithraic Studies, (Manchester Univeristy Press: 1975), 508n.

41. Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 232.

42. https://www.hindustantimes.com/more-lifestyle/krishna-janmashtami-2019-the-story-of-lord-krishna-s-birth/story-4E62vFF3DszD9fwLMR7oPJ.html, accessed June 4, AD 2022

43. Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 46.

44. Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 125–126.

45.Hunt et al., The Making of the West, 199.

46. P. Brown, The Rise of Western Christendom, p.64.

47.Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 125.

48. Hunt et al., The Making of the West, 522.

49. Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 125.

50. http://www.summerlands.com/crossroads/remembrance/impactof.htm, accessed June 4, AD 2022.

51. http://www.summerlands.com/crossroads/remembrance/_remembrance/00000083.htm, accessed June 4, AD 2022.

52. Brown, The Da Vinci Code,125.

53. Hunt et al., The Making of the West, 523.

54. Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 36.

55. Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language, (Random House, Inc., USA, 2001), 2122.

56. Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 125.

57. http://www.sacred-texts.com/etc/mhs/mhs43.htm, accessed June 4, AD 2022.

58. Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 338.

59.Ibid, 316.

60. Walsh, Michael, Warriors of the Lord, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company) 2003, 190.

61.Ibid, 172.

62. Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 339.

63. http://www.exploreafrica.net/trips/eth_heart.php, accessed July 26th, AD 2008.

64. Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 45.

65.Nicholl, Charles, Leonardo Da Vinci: Flights of the Mind, (New York: Viking Penguin) 2004, p.116.

66.Hayes et al., History of Europe, 413–414.

67.Nicholl, Leonardo Da Vinci, 201.

68.http://www.leonardo-da-vinci-biography.com/leonardo-da-vinci-painting.html, accessed July 26th, AD 2008.

69.http://www.livescience.com/history/050524_davinci_code.html, accessed July 26th, AD 2008.

70. Ibid.

71. Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 254.

72. Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 234.

73. http://www.usc.edu/dept/LAS/wsrp/educational_site/dead_sea_scrolls/discovery.shtml, accessed July 20th, AD 2008.

74. Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 309.

75. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/jehovah, accessed June 4, AD 2022.

76. Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 21.

77. http://www.louvre.or.jp/louvre/presse/en/activites/archives/anniv.htm, accessed May 20th, AD 2008.

78. Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 92.

79. http://www.tarot-decks.com/tarotarticle.htm, accessed July 20th, AD 2008.

80. Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 231.