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

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.

Professor Bock has written a fascinating historical analysis of the early Christian era, focusing on the seven codes found in the best-selling thriller by Dan Brown, The DaVinci Codes. His explanation of the theological view of the Gnostics is perhaps the most enlightening. The Gnostics were a now-forgotten early Christian group, that postulated the road to Heaven was through intense study, knowledge, and enlightment, which were only achieved by a select group of intellectuals. They also generally viewed Jesus and Christ as two entities, seeing a separation between the Savior and the man. Clearly these Gnostic views are almost unrecognizable to orthodox Christians of our era, where salvation is based on belief and forgiveness of sin, and God had one Son who suffered on the cross. However, Browns characters lean heavily on them. Professor Bock also delves deeply into the code that says Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and had a blood line that extends to modern France. These are not new theories. The French descendants have been talking about this for centuries. Many other books in the last 20 years have expressed this. Even the 1970s musical Jesus Christ Superstar, now endorsed by the Vatican, hints at a relationship beyond that of teacher and apostle. However, Bock analyzes carefully all Biblical and non-Biblical sources and finds no evidence whatsoever that Jesus was married or had descendants. This seems to be the one fact that all Biblical scholars agree upon. The other DaVinci codes are similarly dissected in great historical perspective, involving every known source, and all are found to be lacking. Dan Brown has written an interesting thriller, but it has no basis in history, as the Vatican is now proclaiming as well. For example, Browns characters claim the church is anti-women, when in fact, Jesus included women in his ministry, delivered much revelation to them, and had them observe the crucifixion and the resurrection. Mary Magdalene and the other women were the apostles to the apostles with respect to the resurrection. The DaVinci codes also claim that the early church fathers rewrote history as late as 400 years after Christ, to suit their purposes. This area seems to be Bocks real specialty, as he quotes many sources to confirm that the four gospels were established and Jesus was the saviour long before any secretive 4th century gathering. He also gives a fascinating account of how the four gospels came to be written and the relationships between their writers and the early Christians and apostles. There seems to be zero historical basis for one of Browns characters claiming that the 4 known gospels were selected from 80 potential gospels. In sum, I recommend that all who want to understand how Christianity evolved, and also enjoy a good popular thriller, take the opportunity to pick up a lesson in history and theology from Professor Bock. I read many parts of this text several times, and thoroughly enjoyed the experience. The DaVinci Codes are like the Umberto Eco novels in that one needs some outside historical context to really enjoy the work. By the way, Eco has also studied the DaVinci codes and reached the same conclusions as Professor Bock.

I guess that we all went a little crazy in college in one way or another. Instead of radical partying, I took to reading gnostic gospels and other non-canonical early Christian writings. Thus, when I worked through The DaVinci Code, I found the history to be laughable. With the approach of the movie and surrounding hype, I started looking for a good book to recommend to my church members who had questions. Darrell Bocks book, Breaking the DaVinci Code, filled the bill nicely. While backed by comprehensive scholarship and a thorough understanding of early Christian literature, Bock made his discussion in such a way that any reasonably intelegent person should be able to grasp the relevant concepts. He includes a comprehensive glossary of relevant terms and a fairly good bibliography. His treatment of complex topics neither ignores the complexity nor assumes the complexity beyond the grasp of the reader. The only weakness of the book is that Bock narrowly focused on the issues raised by Brown, making it less useful once Brown has faded from public discussion. For now, it is a book that every Christian that is serious about appologetics should read.

Its amazing to me how The Da Vinci Code has swept across America to confuse so many people. Apparently Dan Brown thinks that his information supersedes all of the historical research that clearly denies his incredible theories. Thanks to the media, his out-there theories have somehow become quasi-factual. In Breaking the Code, Bock--a New Testament theologian--definitively exposes Dan Brown for what he really is: naked with nothing to cover up his backside. There are so many readers, though, who are so ignorant on accurate ancient history and the truth that they are becoming confused about the Bible and whether or not Christianity is true. My advice is to pick up Bocks book and catch yourself up with the facts. Then you will be able to see what The Da Vinci Code is all about: a fictional work with no resemblance to truth.

This is just another book in a long line of Christain apologetics trying to squash The Da Vinci Code message. The only Da Vinci Code Guide Ive found that actually supports the theories in Browns novel is Da Vinci Code Decoded by Lunn.

Bock focuses on the first 325 years after the death of Christ because that is Bocks expertise. He slowly and deliberately breaks what he calls codes of the Da Vinci Codes. He covers Who was Mary Magdalene, Was Jesus married, How were the New Testament Documents assembled, and other similar topics. He does a very credible job. However, the whole code theme was a little confusing. In the later chapters, he refered back to arguments in the earlier codes, for example, As we stated in Code 6. However, the codes were not really codes and they were not really memorable or breakable. The codes are just topics that he discussed and argued against Dan Browns assertions. Bock is really arguing against the scholars who study the Gnostic gospels and are proposing their own version of Christianity. Bock is arguing against that school of thought rather than the Da Vinci code in particular. His arguments are strong, but not that exciting. Although he proves his point, I dont think Dan Browns fans would be convinced. They would just say thats your version of history. I would think destroying all the bizarre myths Dan Brown spins around the Templars would be more convincing. The whole Priory of Sion is so ridiculous and based on such flimsy evidence I cant see how even Oliver Stone would believe it. In conclusion, the book presents reasoned arguments against many of the themes of the Da Vinci Code. The arguments are sound. The history is interesting to learn, but I dont think it is the best book to go to battle with in an argument with a Dan Brown enthusiast. The arguments are too subtle and I think they are better books out there for debunking The DaVinci Code.

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

Obvious agenda Any time a book gets written to debunk another book, one must be on guard. When the subject is religion and the author holds a doctorate in theological studies, one already knows what his agenda is. He will defend the party line, of course, and use all the cliches, like using Christ (annointed one) as a synonym or even as a sirname for Jesus. The authors interchancing of Christ, Lord and Savior shows his bias. He spends a lot of words trying to disprove the DaVinci code, but in the main, his arguments are, for the most part, ipse dixit, with little reference material outside of cannonical text. Having thoroughly read Bloodline of the Holy Grail, Holy Blood, Holy Grail the Mary Magdaline Gospel, The Mystery and Meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls, The Way of the Essenes, The teachings of the Essenes From Enoch to the Dead Sea Scrolls, The Hiram Key, The Second Messiah and more, I can say with some conviction that Professor Maloneys book does little to debunk the DaVinci Code and is largely a sermon reflecting his conservative religious opinion and little more. Read it if you want another opinion, but remember that he is strongly biased. For a better researched discussion with more facts and references I suggest The Templar Revelation by Picket and Prince (ISBN 0-684-84891-0) as a better way to spend your money.

Dont buy the reviews that complain about this book on the grounds of too much scripture or why doesnt he explain why Da Vinci painted such and such. If anyone out there is interested in the actual history, dont ask why Da Vinci painted things a certain way. Realize that the ONLY biographical information we have on Christ written by eyewitnesses are the canonical gospels. Whatever second or third century gnostic writings say, or whatever medieval relic-crazy communities thought, should be subjected to the question, Why should I believe that? First say goes to the New Testament, written by Jesus first century, persecuted community of followers (as opposed to power-hungry misogynists). Dan Brown doesnt even get his etymological trivia correct (e.g., one of many, heretic-check out Gal 5:20). I feel much more comfortable sitting under the consel of a New Testament scholar, such as Darrell Bock, whose credentials are doctoral and postdoctoral work at Aberdeen and Tubingen make him more qualified by far to answer these questions than someone whose research included Holy Blood, Holy Grail, and other such conspiracy theory works, which dont even get their facts straight (e.g. gnostic writings found in the Dead Sea Scrolls).

Ive read some of the Amazon reviews of Bocks Breaking the Da Vinci Code and Im shocked. I think they all miss the point entirely. The main point that Darrel Bock makes, (and I happen to completely agree with), is that Dan Brown has a very clear political agenda behind his famous novel The Da Vinci Code. I have no doubt of that. The great irony is that Dan Brown attacks orthodox Christianity for having an agenda, when in reality, it is Dan Brown who is distorting historical fact for a political agenda. Dan Browns theory (if one can call it thus), is utterly meaningless and unprovable unless one thing should happen: and thats if someone discovered the Holy Grail (or Sangreal). There never has been any proof that a Holy Grail exists, or if it ever did, and there isnt even any agreement on what the Holy Grail would be if it did indeed exist. Until that day comes, Dan Browns book is pure speculation at best, or revisionist history at worst. Darrell Bock explains in simple language what happened in the 1st through early 4th centuries and clearly shows where Dan Brown has his facts wrong in several cases. The flimsiest case is made by Dan Brown that the historical Jesus must have been married because he was a Jew. Read Darrell Bocks insightful book and youll agree how weak Browns argument is, and how little biblical research actually went into such claims. I found Browns claim that Constantine the Great was a sun worshipper to be completely unfounded by any knowledge we have of the man. Typically, oponents of Christianity accuse St Paul of deifying the historical Jesus of Nazereth throughout history. Now, Dan Brown claims it happened in the early 4th Century by Constantine as a political ploy, when clearly the letters of St Paul speak of Jesus as a divinity of sorts. So when was Jesus of Nazereth diefied, with St Paul or centuries later with Constantine? Clearly Dan Browns case is weak at best. Maybe Darell Bocks criticism is non-conclusive, but at least he is a scholar who understands Gnosticism and has read and studied the ancient worlds works and its many diverse religious sects, whereas I am doubtful that Dan Brown has. If Darrell Bock makes assumptions then Dan Brown makes preposterous assumptions with no basis on historical or scientific research.