| List Price: | |
| Price: | $21.00 & eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25. Details... |
| You Save: | $0.00(0.00%) |
| Binding: | Kindle Edition |
| EAN: | |
| Feature: | |
| Label: | Oxford University Press, USA |
| Publisher: | Oxford University Press, USA |
| Studio: | Oxford University Press, USA |
| Tags: | truth fiction vinci code historian reveals really know about jesus mary magdalene constantine |
Editorial Reviews
A staggeringly popular work of fiction, Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code has stood atop The New York Times Bestseller List for well over a year, with millions of copies in print. But this fast-paced mystery is unusual in that the author states up front that the historical information in the book is all factually accurate. But is this claim true?
As historian Bart D. Ehrman shows in this informative and witty book, The Da Vinci Code is filled with numerous historical mistakes. Did the ancient church engage in a cover-up to make the man Jesus into a divine figure? Did Emperor Constantine select for the New Testament--from some 80 contending Gospels--the only four Gospels that stressed that Jesus was divine? Was Jesus Christ married to Mary Magdalene? Did the Church suppress Gospels that told the secret of their marriage? Bart Ehrman thoroughly debunks all of these claims. But the book is not merely a laundry list of Brown's misreading of history. Throughout, Ehrman offers a wealth of fascinating background information--all historically accurate--on early Christianity. He describes, for instance, the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls (which are not Christian in content, contrary to The Da Vinci Code); outlines in simple terms how scholars of early Christianity determine which sources are most reliable; and explores the many other Gospels that have been found in the last half century.
Ehrman separates fact from fiction, the historical realities from the flights of literary fancy. Readers of The Da Vinci Code who would like to know the truth about the beginnings of Christianity and the life of Jesus will find this book riveting.
As historian Bart D. Ehrman shows in this informative and witty book, The Da Vinci Code is filled with numerous historical mistakes. Did the ancient church engage in a cover-up to make the man Jesus into a divine figure? Did Emperor Constantine select for the New Testament--from some 80 contending Gospels--the only four Gospels that stressed that Jesus was divine? Was Jesus Christ married to Mary Magdalene? Did the Church suppress Gospels that told the secret of their marriage? Bart Ehrman thoroughly debunks all of these claims. But the book is not merely a laundry list of Brown's misreading of history. Throughout, Ehrman offers a wealth of fascinating background information--all historically accurate--on early Christianity. He describes, for instance, the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls (which are not Christian in content, contrary to The Da Vinci Code); outlines in simple terms how scholars of early Christianity determine which sources are most reliable; and explores the many other Gospels that have been found in the last half century.
Ehrman separates fact from fiction, the historical realities from the flights of literary fancy. Readers of The Da Vinci Code who would like to know the truth about the beginnings of Christianity and the life of Jesus will find this book riveting.
Related Reviews
Absolutely must reading for readers of "The Da Vinci Code"
Bart Ehrman is one of the most lucid scholars around on the New Testament. He is very good at making the events of the first and second century AD both intelligible and interesting. If you've read other Ehrman books much of what this book says is recycled -- and somewhat simplified -- from his other writings.
I didn't like Dan Brown's novel, "The Da Vinci Code." It was too far-fetched, too anti-Catholic (and I'm not a Catholic), and the plot was too mechanical. Notions of 2000 years old conspiracies are just too far outside the bounds of reality. But "Da Vinci" did inspire in me a desire to learn more about early Christianity.
Ehrman debunks 10 errors which Brown makes as they relate to the New Testament. Ehrman is persuasive. For example, he says there is no assertion in any ancient source -- of which there are quite a number in addition to the books of the New Testament -- that Jesus was married and had children. Ehrman opines that Jesus was probably single and celibate, as were many Jewish mystics in his day. Ehrman doesn't attempt to go outside his area of expertise to discuss the medieval and modern day conspiracies described in "The Da Vinci Code." Thus there is little in this book about "Sion" and "Knight Templars" and the "Grail" and other people and organizations that figure in the Brown book.
So, if you choose to read "The Da Vinci Code" don't swallow it whole, but also read this book to get a more accurate picture of Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and early Christianity. Truth, or at least the informed speculation of Ehrman, is more interesting than the fiction of Dan Brown.
Smallchief
I didn't like Dan Brown's novel, "The Da Vinci Code." It was too far-fetched, too anti-Catholic (and I'm not a Catholic), and the plot was too mechanical. Notions of 2000 years old conspiracies are just too far outside the bounds of reality. But "Da Vinci" did inspire in me a desire to learn more about early Christianity.
Ehrman debunks 10 errors which Brown makes as they relate to the New Testament. Ehrman is persuasive. For example, he says there is no assertion in any ancient source -- of which there are quite a number in addition to the books of the New Testament -- that Jesus was married and had children. Ehrman opines that Jesus was probably single and celibate, as were many Jewish mystics in his day. Ehrman doesn't attempt to go outside his area of expertise to discuss the medieval and modern day conspiracies described in "The Da Vinci Code." Thus there is little in this book about "Sion" and "Knight Templars" and the "Grail" and other people and organizations that figure in the Brown book.
So, if you choose to read "The Da Vinci Code" don't swallow it whole, but also read this book to get a more accurate picture of Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and early Christianity. Truth, or at least the informed speculation of Ehrman, is more interesting than the fiction of Dan Brown.
Smallchief
Typical Ehrman balance and persuasiveness
As with his other histories of the time periods that were crucial for the development of the New Testament, Bart Ehrman gives us a balanced and persuasive analysis of the historical facts. Some might question why such a book is needed. After all, the Da Vinci Code was meant to be fiction. Are we just beating up on a fiction author who takes "poetic license" with history? Few people were particularly concerned that some of the charcters in "Braveheart" actually lived years apart. In the case of the Da Vinci Code, though, it is necessary. The popularity of the Da Vinci Code or The Passion of Christ (ironically, another Mel Gibson project), make these works more than mere pieces of fiction. Such a calm consideration of actual history should be required reading for anyone who will base their religious opinions upon the fictional works. While we're at it, someone also please send copies of all Dr. Ehrman's work to Mr. Gibson.
The author, Bart Ehrman, acknowledges right at the beginning of his book that he liked Dan Brown's thriller, describing it as "a terrific page-turner". And he has not been alone in his praise. The book has everything - good guys, bad guys, murder, police pursuits, even a hint of romance - that a mystery thriller requires, including a surprise ending that reveals the identity of an unlikely villain.
Still, Ehrman, the Chair of the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina, felt that he should separate fact from fiction in Brown's book and present what is known about early Christianity from an intellectual and historical perspective.
Ehrman's book requires more concentration than the escapist fiction of The Da Vinci Code. However, it presents a fascinating account of what historians have compiled about the early Church. It covers a wide range of subjects, including the Dead Sea Scrolls, the role of the Emperor Constantine (much different from Brown's account), the sources of various gospels and the role of women in the earliest days of Christianity.
Ehrman points out that "people who read a book like The Da Vinci Code have no way of separating the historical fact from the literary fiction. The author himself won't help you out by telling you which historical claims are just as fictional as the characters and the plot of the novel. And in many places, he himself may not know. He's a novelist, not a scholar of history".
Ehrman's hugely informative book is no "terrific page-turner". But it puts the Da Vinci Code in perspective
Still, Ehrman, the Chair of the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina, felt that he should separate fact from fiction in Brown's book and present what is known about early Christianity from an intellectual and historical perspective.
Ehrman's book requires more concentration than the escapist fiction of The Da Vinci Code. However, it presents a fascinating account of what historians have compiled about the early Church. It covers a wide range of subjects, including the Dead Sea Scrolls, the role of the Emperor Constantine (much different from Brown's account), the sources of various gospels and the role of women in the earliest days of Christianity.
Ehrman points out that "people who read a book like The Da Vinci Code have no way of separating the historical fact from the literary fiction. The author himself won't help you out by telling you which historical claims are just as fictional as the characters and the plot of the novel. And in many places, he himself may not know. He's a novelist, not a scholar of history".
Ehrman's hugely informative book is no "terrific page-turner". But it puts the Da Vinci Code in perspective
Taking Issue With The Da Vinci Code
If you are one of the millions who enjoyed The Da Vinci Code, you may want to reconsider Dan Brown's narrative in the light of its historical claims, after you read Bart Ehrman's Truth and Fiction In The Da Vinci Code.
Ehrman is a well-known critical historian, who chairs the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He is an authority on the early Church and the life of Jesus.
He is also the author of Lost Christianities and Lost Scriptures.
Although he admits he enjoyed reading Dan Brown's work of fiction and has even recommended it to many of his friends, he takes issue with some of the historical claims Brown makes about Jesus, Mary, and the Gospels that readers were expected to accept as factual and not fictional.
Ehrman points out: "Dan Brown states as a fact that all descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate."
As the author is an expert on historic Christian documents, it is here where his arguments are focused.
Throughout the book, Ehrman insists that one of the cardinal ingredients to weigh, when arriving at any historical conclusion, is the sources of information forming the foundation of the conclusion. Misreading or misinterpreting these sources is as dangerous as if they were omitted.
According to the author, if Brown had only done a little more research, he would have been able to more accurately portray the historical account, without even compromising the story.
Immediately in the introduction to the book, Ehrman sets the tone of his arguments by pointing out ten factual errors in Brown's book. These are more fully fleshed out and assessed in the book.
The author points out that contrary to what was mentioned in Brown's book, Jesus' life was not recorded by thousands of followers across the land; it is not true there were eighty Gospels considered for the New Testament; it is false to state that Jesus was considered divine until the Council of Nicea; Constantine did not commission a "new Bible" that omitted references to Jesus' human traits; the Dead Sea Scrolls were found in 1947 and not in the 1950s, and furthermore, they were not among "the earliest Christian records." In fact, they are Jewish, and contain nothing Christian in them. The Nag Hammadi documents do not narrate the Grail story, nor do they underline Jesus' human traits. On the contrary, they do just the reverse. It is leading astray when we assert that Jewish decorum forbade a Jewish man to be unmarried, and in fact most of the individuals behind the Dead Sea Scrolls were male unmarried celibates. There is nothing to tell us about the lineage of Mary Magdalene, and there is no evidence that she belonged to the House of Benjamin.
Moreover, what evidence exists that she was pregnant at the crucifixion, as Brown suggests in his book. As for the Q document being hid by the Vatican, where is the proof, and how do we know it is a book allegedly written by Jesus?
In addition to exploring the above misleading assertions in Brown's story, Ehrman addresses such queries as to how did it happen that the four Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John came were admitted into the New Testament, while others were omitted.
If you are wondering why anyone would tackle the thorny question as to how much of The Da Vinci Code is based on valid documents and how much is pure fiction, Ehrman explains that books of historical fiction are one of the ways people come to learn and think about the past. Would it not have been more enlightening and instructive, if historical facts were presented more accurately?
Norm Goldman Editor Bookpleasures
Ehrman is a well-known critical historian, who chairs the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He is an authority on the early Church and the life of Jesus.
He is also the author of Lost Christianities and Lost Scriptures.
Although he admits he enjoyed reading Dan Brown's work of fiction and has even recommended it to many of his friends, he takes issue with some of the historical claims Brown makes about Jesus, Mary, and the Gospels that readers were expected to accept as factual and not fictional.
Ehrman points out: "Dan Brown states as a fact that all descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate."
As the author is an expert on historic Christian documents, it is here where his arguments are focused.
Throughout the book, Ehrman insists that one of the cardinal ingredients to weigh, when arriving at any historical conclusion, is the sources of information forming the foundation of the conclusion. Misreading or misinterpreting these sources is as dangerous as if they were omitted.
According to the author, if Brown had only done a little more research, he would have been able to more accurately portray the historical account, without even compromising the story.
Immediately in the introduction to the book, Ehrman sets the tone of his arguments by pointing out ten factual errors in Brown's book. These are more fully fleshed out and assessed in the book.
The author points out that contrary to what was mentioned in Brown's book, Jesus' life was not recorded by thousands of followers across the land; it is not true there were eighty Gospels considered for the New Testament; it is false to state that Jesus was considered divine until the Council of Nicea; Constantine did not commission a "new Bible" that omitted references to Jesus' human traits; the Dead Sea Scrolls were found in 1947 and not in the 1950s, and furthermore, they were not among "the earliest Christian records." In fact, they are Jewish, and contain nothing Christian in them. The Nag Hammadi documents do not narrate the Grail story, nor do they underline Jesus' human traits. On the contrary, they do just the reverse. It is leading astray when we assert that Jewish decorum forbade a Jewish man to be unmarried, and in fact most of the individuals behind the Dead Sea Scrolls were male unmarried celibates. There is nothing to tell us about the lineage of Mary Magdalene, and there is no evidence that she belonged to the House of Benjamin.
Moreover, what evidence exists that she was pregnant at the crucifixion, as Brown suggests in his book. As for the Q document being hid by the Vatican, where is the proof, and how do we know it is a book allegedly written by Jesus?
In addition to exploring the above misleading assertions in Brown's story, Ehrman addresses such queries as to how did it happen that the four Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John came were admitted into the New Testament, while others were omitted.
If you are wondering why anyone would tackle the thorny question as to how much of The Da Vinci Code is based on valid documents and how much is pure fiction, Ehrman explains that books of historical fiction are one of the ways people come to learn and think about the past. Would it not have been more enlightening and instructive, if historical facts were presented more accurately?
Norm Goldman Editor Bookpleasures
I enjoyed the Da Vinci code. But the amateur Bible historian in me didn't buy into the so-called historical truths proffered by Dan Brown. I was certain that Dan Brown got a lot wrong, particular his assertions on how the books for the Bible were chosen. On other assertions derived from the Gnostic Gospels such as the marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene, I doubted he got it right. But I was not familiar with the source material from which he claimed to have gotten those facts.
The historical assertions in the Da Vinci code have proven to be sensitive for many Christians. Bart Ehrman's approach is straightforward, concise, and in-offensive. He applies his impartial and experienced eye to an analysis that unravels the mess Dan Brown made of history. Proceeding with academic rigor, Ehrman presents each of Dan Brown's assertions and aligns the historical record and documents to make sense of it all. Erhman's analysis and conclusions never step beyond what can be supported by objective research.
Bart Ehrman is never boring and always informative. I recommend this book, particularly if you plan on seeing the movie. Many people are bound to accept what they see on the big screen as fact. It might be nice to have the facts right.
The historical assertions in the Da Vinci code have proven to be sensitive for many Christians. Bart Ehrman's approach is straightforward, concise, and in-offensive. He applies his impartial and experienced eye to an analysis that unravels the mess Dan Brown made of history. Proceeding with academic rigor, Ehrman presents each of Dan Brown's assertions and aligns the historical record and documents to make sense of it all. Erhman's analysis and conclusions never step beyond what can be supported by objective research.
Bart Ehrman is never boring and always informative. I recommend this book, particularly if you plan on seeing the movie. Many people are bound to accept what they see on the big screen as fact. It might be nice to have the facts right.
This is a clear, sensible analysis refuting the sensational claims of the DaVinci Code. This book is not geared toward Biblical scholars. It is geared toward the layman who wants a better understanding of how our modern Bible came to exist in its present form. It tells how the different books that constitute the Bible were selected for inclusion, and the criteria used to exclude certain writings.
The book also discusses the Dead Sea Scrolls and more recent text discoveries. The author examines what light these new texts shed on the intentions of the original selection process, as well as their relevance to Brown's contentions in The DaVinci Code.
Ehrman sometimes seems to repeat and review previous chapters of his book a little too much. But actually, this isn't bad because it makes for easy reading. If you forget what he said earlier about the implications of one text or another, about different authors' motives and affiliations - you will find a summary of those previous chapters coming handily at the turn of the next page.
This is an effective, reasoned counterpoint to the conspiracy theories of DaVinci Code adherents. It will take you out of the swirling clouds of conjecture and put you back on solid ground.
The book also discusses the Dead Sea Scrolls and more recent text discoveries. The author examines what light these new texts shed on the intentions of the original selection process, as well as their relevance to Brown's contentions in The DaVinci Code.
Ehrman sometimes seems to repeat and review previous chapters of his book a little too much. But actually, this isn't bad because it makes for easy reading. If you forget what he said earlier about the implications of one text or another, about different authors' motives and affiliations - you will find a summary of those previous chapters coming handily at the turn of the next page.
This is an effective, reasoned counterpoint to the conspiracy theories of DaVinci Code adherents. It will take you out of the swirling clouds of conjecture and put you back on solid ground.
Ehrman proceeds with grace and generosity regarding the fictional work `The Da Vinci Code' - readily reminding readers that it is a novel, which Brown intended as a novel. However, regarding the historical claims from the book Ehrman proceeds with clarity and precision as he focuses on 10 areas of concern.
I didn't see that Ehrman is not concerned with theology. His 10 areas of concern all have significant theological implications. That is, if Ehrman is concerned with truth, which he obviously is, then his New Testament scholarship has theological consequences. The difference is, he appears to limit his bias in his historical analysis.
In short, while Ehrman is quick to give the `story' of the Da Vinci Code high marks he is quick to point out numerous factual errors as he systematically debunks the books claims. He points out that...
1. The Dead Sea Scrolls were not early `Christian' documents - but were rather copies of Old Testament books by a Jewish fringe group.
2. Not all of the Jewish men in the first century were married, but rather many chose to remain celebate.
3. Gnostic gospels were late documents which didn't have an enormous impact on Christian thought.
4. The role of women in the early church was distinct from the cultural norms.
5. Constantine didn't choose the four canonical gospels from a vast number of competing `gospels'.
6. There is not a strand of historical evidence suggesting Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene.
7. Nor did the church suppress `gospels' that told of a secret marriage.
8. Jesus was considered divine from the earliest stages of Christianity - far earlier than the fourth century.
9. There are not thousands or even hundreds or even dozens of documents, which suggest the New Testament isn't historically reliable. Thos documents simply don't exist.
10. The New Testament documents which do exist have withstood intense scholarly scrutiny.
I don't mean to imply that Ehrman only focuses on the errors of Brown's book. Ehrman also includes much captivating analysis on how good scholarship of early Christian writings proceeds with caution in order to ensure clarity, reliability, and exactness.
I didn't see that Ehrman is not concerned with theology. His 10 areas of concern all have significant theological implications. That is, if Ehrman is concerned with truth, which he obviously is, then his New Testament scholarship has theological consequences. The difference is, he appears to limit his bias in his historical analysis.
In short, while Ehrman is quick to give the `story' of the Da Vinci Code high marks he is quick to point out numerous factual errors as he systematically debunks the books claims. He points out that...
1. The Dead Sea Scrolls were not early `Christian' documents - but were rather copies of Old Testament books by a Jewish fringe group.
2. Not all of the Jewish men in the first century were married, but rather many chose to remain celebate.
3. Gnostic gospels were late documents which didn't have an enormous impact on Christian thought.
4. The role of women in the early church was distinct from the cultural norms.
5. Constantine didn't choose the four canonical gospels from a vast number of competing `gospels'.
6. There is not a strand of historical evidence suggesting Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene.
7. Nor did the church suppress `gospels' that told of a secret marriage.
8. Jesus was considered divine from the earliest stages of Christianity - far earlier than the fourth century.
9. There are not thousands or even hundreds or even dozens of documents, which suggest the New Testament isn't historically reliable. Thos documents simply don't exist.
10. The New Testament documents which do exist have withstood intense scholarly scrutiny.
I don't mean to imply that Ehrman only focuses on the errors of Brown's book. Ehrman also includes much captivating analysis on how good scholarship of early Christian writings proceeds with caution in order to ensure clarity, reliability, and exactness.
A rerun of Ehrman, but great for the historically challenged.
This book by a noted historian of early Christianity summarizes historical material in Dan Brown's book "The Da Vinci Code" that is misleading or incorrect. It draws heavily on Bart Ehrman's previous publications "Lost Scriptures" and "Lost Christianities". Much of the historical material and summaries of early Christian writings are directly from these previous works. There is little new for the reader with considerable knowledge of early Christian history, but this book is a gold mine for those who would read "The Da Vinci Code" without such knowledge and would be mislead by Brown's mischaracterization of early Christian history which is presented in "Da Vinci Code" as fact. I recommend this book (an easy and pleasant read) for those who haven't read "Da Vinci Code" and want to enjoy it as fiction without it contaminating their view of Christian history. Warning: If you don't want to know the plot of "The Da Vinci Code" before you read it, skip the section of Ehrman's book that summarizes it in the introduction section to "Truth and Fiction"
This book was precisely what I was looking for and had begun to think would not be created. That would be a critical response to the claims of the fictional Da Vinci Code that while "critical" was not a reaction against Dan Brown's book. Simply put if you are curious about the claims made about items related to church history in the Da Vinci Code, this is your book. Ehrman clearly states what was proposed in the book and compares it to what history can actually tell us about what happened. As he so clearly and correctly states, history comes from one of two sources...it is either 1) from sources or 2) made up. As the Da Vinci Code is a WORK OF FICTION the author can write whatever he chooses that will further the storytelling process. If one has had their curiousity piqued and would like to learn more about what we really know about the early days of the church and the New Testament set aside the really excellent work of fiction and turn to this fine work by a historian.
When I read the Da Vinci Code, I found its short chapters and fast-moving, interwoven plot kept me tuning the pages. The story was vividly entertaining. Too bad, however, it fell far short of its promise to be a great book.
In the prologue of the book, Dan Brown (the author) stated that all of the historical facts presented by the characters in the book were true. Then, Brown seemingly goes on a campaign to test the naiveté and ignorance of his readers. I found this insulting, and it detracted from my enjoyment of the book.
This is where Ehrman's book comes in. As someone who's read previous work by Ehrman, I was curious to see what he had to say. I was hoping Ehrman would once again provide his rock-solid analysis, rather than be one of the shrill voices we readers contend with so often. I was not disappointed: Ehrman delivered.
As I read The Da Vinci Code, a question began to gnaw at me. Was Brown merely playing a prank by stating several historical "facts" a reasonably well-read person would know to be false, or was there more to it than that?
Ehrman answered that question in his own admirable way--and he presented much more answer than I expected. It was, in classic Ehrman style, a complete answer that leaves no doubt. The key to that answer is in another book--one that The Da Vinci Code draws heavily from.
When you read an Ehrman piece, you have to understand something about this author. What he writes is devoid of personal opinion. He writes with authority. He backs everything he says--with logic and the actual evidence. Ehrman is the consummate scholar, whose only interest is the truth. He has no axe to grind with Dan Brown, and he makes that clear--he's recommended The Da Vinci Code to others. And, he stays within his scope of expertise (something else other authors would do well to emulate). He doesn't analyze the whole book, doesn't go into a religious rant, doesn't defend or advocate any particular viewpoint, doesn't and doesn't get emotional. He simply writes what is. And he does so in a clear and compelling manner.
In this book, Ehrman counters the "facts" Dan Brown's characters gave us on Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and Constantine. But, he doesn't throw a laundry list of errors at the reader. Instead, Ehrman first explains how historians look at information sources and how they determine which ones are accurate. He fully explains the methodology, so you--as the reader--can follow along and draw your own conclusions as the evidence is presented. And then he walks you through the various statements presented as "fact" by the characters in the book. I found it a rather pleasant walk, myself.
My suggestion is to read The Da Vinci Code, if you like a well-crafted thriller. But, keep in mind that Dan Brown is no Tom Clancy or James Michener. Consequently, this is not an historical novel (a novel that correctly conveys historical fact). Rather, it is completely a work of fiction. It's great for entertainment, but not for education. If you do read it, get a "knowledge correction" afterwards, courtesy of Bart D. Ehrman.
In the prologue of the book, Dan Brown (the author) stated that all of the historical facts presented by the characters in the book were true. Then, Brown seemingly goes on a campaign to test the naiveté and ignorance of his readers. I found this insulting, and it detracted from my enjoyment of the book.
This is where Ehrman's book comes in. As someone who's read previous work by Ehrman, I was curious to see what he had to say. I was hoping Ehrman would once again provide his rock-solid analysis, rather than be one of the shrill voices we readers contend with so often. I was not disappointed: Ehrman delivered.
As I read The Da Vinci Code, a question began to gnaw at me. Was Brown merely playing a prank by stating several historical "facts" a reasonably well-read person would know to be false, or was there more to it than that?
Ehrman answered that question in his own admirable way--and he presented much more answer than I expected. It was, in classic Ehrman style, a complete answer that leaves no doubt. The key to that answer is in another book--one that The Da Vinci Code draws heavily from.
When you read an Ehrman piece, you have to understand something about this author. What he writes is devoid of personal opinion. He writes with authority. He backs everything he says--with logic and the actual evidence. Ehrman is the consummate scholar, whose only interest is the truth. He has no axe to grind with Dan Brown, and he makes that clear--he's recommended The Da Vinci Code to others. And, he stays within his scope of expertise (something else other authors would do well to emulate). He doesn't analyze the whole book, doesn't go into a religious rant, doesn't defend or advocate any particular viewpoint, doesn't and doesn't get emotional. He simply writes what is. And he does so in a clear and compelling manner.
In this book, Ehrman counters the "facts" Dan Brown's characters gave us on Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and Constantine. But, he doesn't throw a laundry list of errors at the reader. Instead, Ehrman first explains how historians look at information sources and how they determine which ones are accurate. He fully explains the methodology, so you--as the reader--can follow along and draw your own conclusions as the evidence is presented. And then he walks you through the various statements presented as "fact" by the characters in the book. I found it a rather pleasant walk, myself.
My suggestion is to read The Da Vinci Code, if you like a well-crafted thriller. But, keep in mind that Dan Brown is no Tom Clancy or James Michener. Consequently, this is not an historical novel (a novel that correctly conveys historical fact). Rather, it is completely a work of fiction. It's great for entertainment, but not for education. If you do read it, get a "knowledge correction" afterwards, courtesy of Bart D. Ehrman.
The Truth and Fiction shall set you free
Like most everyone who will read this book, I came to it because I enjoyed The Da Vinci Code and was intrigued by many of the theories it proffered. I found this book to be an excellent addition to the novel, as it doesn't detract from Dan Brown's creation, but simply clarifies where Brown stuck to the facts and where he embellished.
One of the great strengths of Ehrman's book is its accessibility. The author presents his points and historical accounts in a straightforward, concise manner. In fact, it's amazing how much information he's packed into such a short book. Another factor in Ehrman's favor is that he strives for complete objectivity. He is interested neither in debunking nor promoting Christianity, but in simply offering up what historians know (or guess at) from documented evidence.
I recommend this book for anyone, whether you've read The Da Vinci Code or not. It is a thought provoking work that may well lead you to further investigations.
One of the great strengths of Ehrman's book is its accessibility. The author presents his points and historical accounts in a straightforward, concise manner. In fact, it's amazing how much information he's packed into such a short book. Another factor in Ehrman's favor is that he strives for complete objectivity. He is interested neither in debunking nor promoting Christianity, but in simply offering up what historians know (or guess at) from documented evidence.
I recommend this book for anyone, whether you've read The Da Vinci Code or not. It is a thought provoking work that may well lead you to further investigations.
An Essential Tool for Critiquing Brown's Book
As a Christian who has read "The Da Vinci Code," is re-reading it, and looks forward to seeing the movie, I appreciate Ehrman's scholarship and very readable explanation of where Dan Brown's research falls short of grasping historical reality. One thing I did NOT want was one of those Da Vinci Code-bashing books written by someone with an axe to grind. Most authors of books responding to this novel are "preaching to the choir," seeking to appeal to those who without even reading the book have decided it is an attack on Jesus, the New Testament, and the Christian faith. "Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code" explains in a level-headed, non-condemning way that we must be very careful not to swallow everything this book puts forth as "truth" and "fact." Ehrman does not deserve to lose points for not addressing certain topics that are beyond his scholarly scope, i.e. the art of Da Vinci, the Priory of Sion, etc. For those and other aspects of "The Da Vinci Code," I recommend "Secrets of the Code" by Dan Burstein. In this "Information Age" we live in, it is no longer acceptable for Christians to be ignorant of how our Bible was canonized, why certain books were selected and others rejected, who really wrote the books of the Bible, and what place women held in the ministry of Jesus Christ (and his personal life). As to the "thorny question" of whether or not Jesus and Mary Magdalene MIGHT have been married and had a child, I am unconvinced. Ehrman seriously doubts it because of a lack of historical evidence to support it. No one is completely capable of knowing the real nature of their relationship, but it was unquestionably a special one. My one great hope is that all Christians will come to understand that for Jesus to have been married would certainly not have been a disgrace, nor would it have detracted one bit from his divinity and holiness. We should be thankful that Dan Brown and those who respond in an intelligent manner to his writing have left us with no more excuses to be ignorant of the origins of our own Scriptures and deeply held beliefs. To quote Jesus Christ Himself, "You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."
Ripping Good "Hysterical Fiction"
Dan Brown's "Da Vinci Code" really was an engrossing read. But much of its power for me and for many readers lay in how compellingly it steered us toward belief in yet another "vast conspiracy." We live, after all, in an era defined for many by a dangerous blurring between imagined great conspiracies and equally colossal but bona fide deception and cover-ups by the institutions of power. Because of its immense success, Brown's book has spawned a parasitical industry of silly, imitative pseudo-history and shallowly reactive analysis. Bart Ehrman's "Truth and Fiction..." is neither of these.
When you read first-rate Science Fiction you probably find yourself thinking, "could it be?" - the distant future becomes tangible. If you read first-class Historical Fiction you've probably felt more of an, "I knew it!" - the dim past becomes peopled and coherent. I experienced a powerful combination of both reactions when I read "The Da Vinci Code". Maybe you did too. It was not just a ripping, good yarn; it tied together millennia-old histories that were as unknown to me as the 30th or 40th centuries are unknowable.
Ah. But the future really is fiction! It doesn't exist and is therefore subject to speculation, while the past was once someone's reality and is subject to the scrutiny of its actual artifacts. We tend to associate becoming too engrossed in futures with the tinfoil-helmet crowd, but we acknowledge the study of the past to be a legitimate field of professional study. Or do we?
Bart Ehrman is clearly one of those professionals - an historian of the Biblical and Early Christian eras. Dan Brown is a yarn-spinner. In this book Ehrman reminds us to remember that there is a difference.
Could it be? Is "The Da Vinci Code" is mostly imagined, made-up, invented. I knew it... so did you.
In this thorough but very readable and not overly pedantic book, Bart Ehrman methodically takes apart the invented histories of DVC and assembles the more likely realities for us. He does not do so in a hostile or antagonistic way; in fact he repeatedly mentions how much he enjoyed reading DVC. But he is systematic in dismantling the fundamental pseudo-history at the core of Brown's book. By dissecting out the fabrications, Ehrman helps us to see what's left: believable personalities and credible institutional motives for sure. But any good Sci-Fi writer will do the same. Brown has merely avoided the tinfoil-hat association by claiming something presumed more real for his base - the past.
Ehrman's book is also an excellent commentary upon how history is actually done. He reminds us how honest historians, especially those of the barely-documented, distant past, can only approach the "more likely" at best. But approach it they do. He does a fine job of showing how such history is accomplished when done well; of how he and his colleagues have spent lifetimes building careful layer upon careful layer of the likely. But he demonstrates why "likely" has to be enough, and how it must be contrasted with the merely "imagined." Ehrman makes it clear that one starts with the knowledge that history, even so presumably certain a past as our own "remembered" history, is always viewed through filters and passed forward to the present through distorting lenses of personality and culture. He gives a good sense of how working through this sort of fog is challenging enough not to be further burdened with reacting to fiction.
Now fiction is fiction, after all. But good Historical Fiction generally fleshes-out real events with a cultural matrix and people and personalities that are plausible. We think: "so that's why that happened." Good Science Fiction populates a future with equally-believable peoples and motives and a credible path from our "now" to their "then." We think "so that's how it's going to be." In Sci-Fi, the more distant the future, the wilder the fiction can be - but we read it as imagination and smile and enjoy. It seems that Dan Brown has created a new, more hysterical genre, call it Hy-Fi, which leaps an equal distance in the other direction to a past in which he can erect fabrications that only a clucking small crowd of historians will object to. But Ehrman is no chicken! This is clearly a David & Goliath mismatch, but Bart Ehrman has not backed down from the challenge. Good for him.
When you read first-rate Science Fiction you probably find yourself thinking, "could it be?" - the distant future becomes tangible. If you read first-class Historical Fiction you've probably felt more of an, "I knew it!" - the dim past becomes peopled and coherent. I experienced a powerful combination of both reactions when I read "The Da Vinci Code". Maybe you did too. It was not just a ripping, good yarn; it tied together millennia-old histories that were as unknown to me as the 30th or 40th centuries are unknowable.
Ah. But the future really is fiction! It doesn't exist and is therefore subject to speculation, while the past was once someone's reality and is subject to the scrutiny of its actual artifacts. We tend to associate becoming too engrossed in futures with the tinfoil-helmet crowd, but we acknowledge the study of the past to be a legitimate field of professional study. Or do we?
Bart Ehrman is clearly one of those professionals - an historian of the Biblical and Early Christian eras. Dan Brown is a yarn-spinner. In this book Ehrman reminds us to remember that there is a difference.
Could it be? Is "The Da Vinci Code" is mostly imagined, made-up, invented. I knew it... so did you.
In this thorough but very readable and not overly pedantic book, Bart Ehrman methodically takes apart the invented histories of DVC and assembles the more likely realities for us. He does not do so in a hostile or antagonistic way; in fact he repeatedly mentions how much he enjoyed reading DVC. But he is systematic in dismantling the fundamental pseudo-history at the core of Brown's book. By dissecting out the fabrications, Ehrman helps us to see what's left: believable personalities and credible institutional motives for sure. But any good Sci-Fi writer will do the same. Brown has merely avoided the tinfoil-hat association by claiming something presumed more real for his base - the past.
Ehrman's book is also an excellent commentary upon how history is actually done. He reminds us how honest historians, especially those of the barely-documented, distant past, can only approach the "more likely" at best. But approach it they do. He does a fine job of showing how such history is accomplished when done well; of how he and his colleagues have spent lifetimes building careful layer upon careful layer of the likely. But he demonstrates why "likely" has to be enough, and how it must be contrasted with the merely "imagined." Ehrman makes it clear that one starts with the knowledge that history, even so presumably certain a past as our own "remembered" history, is always viewed through filters and passed forward to the present through distorting lenses of personality and culture. He gives a good sense of how working through this sort of fog is challenging enough not to be further burdened with reacting to fiction.
Now fiction is fiction, after all. But good Historical Fiction generally fleshes-out real events with a cultural matrix and people and personalities that are plausible. We think: "so that's why that happened." Good Science Fiction populates a future with equally-believable peoples and motives and a credible path from our "now" to their "then." We think "so that's how it's going to be." In Sci-Fi, the more distant the future, the wilder the fiction can be - but we read it as imagination and smile and enjoy. It seems that Dan Brown has created a new, more hysterical genre, call it Hy-Fi, which leaps an equal distance in the other direction to a past in which he can erect fabrications that only a clucking small crowd of historians will object to. But Ehrman is no chicken! This is clearly a David & Goliath mismatch, but Bart Ehrman has not backed down from the challenge. Good for him.
Arabs Appreciate Dr Ehrman immensely too!
Friends wrote me all the way from the Middle East seeking help and advice on what to do with the confusion of the Da Vinci code. As a Christian believer, I didn't know who to read for or to trust. But a man like Ehrman does his homework with true integrity. Sound scholarship will always gain our utmost hearting, even if we hear some things which might make us uncomfortable for some reason or another. Even though English is not my first langauge but it is Arabic, I read through the book with such enjoyment and wished to translated whole passages to my friends in the Middle East since we don't have another Ehrman there; he is one of a kind! I read with great enjoyment as I could see his personal touches of humor mixing with the verdict of a historian who knows what he is talking about simply because he demands less than an "evidence" and since we can't do history without "sources" as he says. I commend this book to all Christian believers. You can just learn from him how he draws his arguments as a historian and learn the "method". Excellent book and I wish it were available in Arabic!
JesusVictr@aol.com
JesusVictr@aol.com
If you're curious about the "facts" presented in Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code," and you don't want a serving of theology on the side, this is the book for you. Ehrman is a historian who's written other mainstream books on early Christianity. In this book, he gives an overview of the historian's method, then dives into the record regarding early Christianity, the influence of Constantine, and the gradual emergence of the documents now know as the New Testament.
All this is delivered in a brisk, readable style, without any discussion of the thornier theological issues raised by Brown's book. Ehrman liked the book as a piece of fiction and says so. But after reading Ehrman's book you'll come to the sad conclusion that Dan Brown didn't do any "research" for "The Da Vinci Code"; he read one or two pulpy paperbacks.
All this is delivered in a brisk, readable style, without any discussion of the thornier theological issues raised by Brown's book. Ehrman liked the book as a piece of fiction and says so. But after reading Ehrman's book you'll come to the sad conclusion that Dan Brown didn't do any "research" for "The Da Vinci Code"; he read one or two pulpy paperbacks.
Puts "The Da Vinci Code" Into Perspective
In the past year, several books have been published rebutting many of the historical claims of "The Da Vinci Code." This book - by prominent New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman - is among the best. I say "among the best," because Ehrman's book is not as comprehensive as some of the other critiques. Ehrman sticks to his area of expertise and does not venture into art history or an analysis of Da Vinci's painting, "The Last Supper."
But Ehrman is on solid ground when he discusses early Christianity, the role of women in the early church, Mary Magdalene, and other components of the "The Da Vinci Code" mythology. We find, in the end, that much of what Dan Brown has put forth as fact is actually highly speculative and - in some cases - demonstrably false.
As I indicated, there are are books whose debunking of "The Da Vinci Code" is more thorough than Ehrman's, but these other books are generally written either from a traditional Roman Catholic or evangelical Protestant point of view, and are intended to defend their respective faiths. For those who do not share those theological viewpoints, the more secular approach of Ehrman will perhaps be the most credible alternative.
But Ehrman is on solid ground when he discusses early Christianity, the role of women in the early church, Mary Magdalene, and other components of the "The Da Vinci Code" mythology. We find, in the end, that much of what Dan Brown has put forth as fact is actually highly speculative and - in some cases - demonstrably false.
As I indicated, there are are books whose debunking of "The Da Vinci Code" is more thorough than Ehrman's, but these other books are generally written either from a traditional Roman Catholic or evangelical Protestant point of view, and are intended to defend their respective faiths. For those who do not share those theological viewpoints, the more secular approach of Ehrman will perhaps be the most credible alternative.
I Learned About The History of the Bible
When I read the Da Vinci Code (DVC) my curiosity ran high. That, of course, was the fun of the book. Brown's style of writing and weaving of mystery and history was marvelous. After reading it, like many people, I wanted to know how much was fact and how much fiction. Bart Ehrman treats that very subject in his book called Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code. He also does much more. I learned much more about the bibles and became more interested in scripture than I would have imagined. Ehrman is an authority and try as I might I was unable to find logical fallacies or apparent bias on his part.
He admits that Dan Brown was writing a fiction novel, but he takes exception to the fact that Brown didn't get all of the history correct, especially when it would not have impacted on the story Brown was telling.
In the introduction Ehrman lists ten "factual errors" in the Da Vinci Code and much of the book is devoted to exposing these "errors".
Ehrman says that there is a natural tendency for some people to want to question what is generally accepted, but historians need to determine what is most probable.
He admits that historians have only the written record to go on, and can never "prove" anything. History is only what we read and if we compare various historical documents from various sources and they are consistent we must consider that the best evidence available. He also points out how the Hebrew bible and the Christian bible have changed over the years since originally written. Only some original writings have been incorporated into what we now see published as the bible, and many of the gospel stories have been significantly changed. There were many factions that produced lots of documents about Christ in early times and some were at odds with each other.
I especially liked reading about the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Q document, The Gnostic bible, and Constantine's role in changing the bible.
Ehrman spends some time in the introduction explaining his motivation. He says he wants to set the record straight so people are not mislead by Brown's book.
My conclusion is that Erman's book is good. Since the DVC was obviously a fiction to begin with, I think it was interesting, but not very important that Ehrman exposed the "factual errors" in the DVC. What I liked most is Ehrman's description of how historians work and what we know and don't know about how the bible was compiled.
He admits that Dan Brown was writing a fiction novel, but he takes exception to the fact that Brown didn't get all of the history correct, especially when it would not have impacted on the story Brown was telling.
In the introduction Ehrman lists ten "factual errors" in the Da Vinci Code and much of the book is devoted to exposing these "errors".
Ehrman says that there is a natural tendency for some people to want to question what is generally accepted, but historians need to determine what is most probable.
He admits that historians have only the written record to go on, and can never "prove" anything. History is only what we read and if we compare various historical documents from various sources and they are consistent we must consider that the best evidence available. He also points out how the Hebrew bible and the Christian bible have changed over the years since originally written. Only some original writings have been incorporated into what we now see published as the bible, and many of the gospel stories have been significantly changed. There were many factions that produced lots of documents about Christ in early times and some were at odds with each other.
I especially liked reading about the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Q document, The Gnostic bible, and Constantine's role in changing the bible.
Ehrman spends some time in the introduction explaining his motivation. He says he wants to set the record straight so people are not mislead by Brown's book.
My conclusion is that Erman's book is good. Since the DVC was obviously a fiction to begin with, I think it was interesting, but not very important that Ehrman exposed the "factual errors" in the DVC. What I liked most is Ehrman's description of how historians work and what we know and don't know about how the bible was compiled.
A Clear, Readable History of the Early Church
In a thorough, comprehensive manner, Bart D. Ehrman's _Truth and Fiction in the Da Vinci_ examines the historical claims made in Dan Brown's bestselling novel _The Da Vinci Code_. Since Dan Brown himself asserts in his preface that the historical information concerning documents in _The Da Vinci Code_ is factually correct, Erhman's project is one that Brown's novel invites. Under the scrutiny of a dispassionate scholar versed in the scholarship of the ancient texts, the historical foundations of _The Da Vinci Code_ prove to be specious, at best, and, at worst, completely inaccurate. Ehrman's critique is gracefully written. He is not concerned, as he says, "to give Dan Brown a grade on how well he did" but rather to help the reader in "separating the historical fact from the literary fiction." Ehrman, in fact, credits works like _The Da Vinci Code_ and films like _The Passion of Christ_ and _The Last Temptation of Christ_, despite their inaccuracies, with inspiring people to explore history and religion deeper. His caveat, however, is that readers not accept these works as history.
In his introduction, Ehrman discusses what critical history is: namely, a systematic study of the known available sources with an eye toward assessing their credibility. Ehrman points out that just because a source exists that makes a specific claim this does not mean that the claim is historically accurate. Instead, the evidence must be evaluated carefully in its own right and in terms of what other sources say. Ehrman notes that history, unlike an empirical science, is "a matter of probabilities." Weighing the claims made by characters in _The Da Vinci Code_ with the existing evidence, Ehrman proceeds to dissect the novel. His deeply informative approach highlights the painstaking work of the historian in piecing together the distant past.
One of Ehrman's most important conclusions is that, contrary to the claims made in _The Da Vinci Code_, the four gospels in the New Testament are the most reliable, oldest sources for understanding the historical Jesus. Ehrman also evalautes the non-canonical gospels and explains his criteria for assessing their historical accuracy in terms of four categories: "the earlier the better"; "piling on the testimonies"; "cutting against the grain"; and "context is (almost) everything." Throughout, Ehrman paints a vivid picture of how critical history is written and, specifically, how he arrives at the conclusions he does. He considers pagan sources, Jewish sources, Christian sources, and the canonical tradition (namely, the Bible as it appears to us today). In addition, he provides an overview of the role of women in the early Church, acknowledging that women likely played a significant role in the early Church, but that early Christianity was not, as Dan Brown's characters' claim, a matriarchal church.
Ehrman confines himself to the early church and the historical Jesus, understood through a critical study of the known sources. He does not discuss Dan Brown's treatment of Opus Dei, the Templars, or the Priory of Scion, nor does he explore the novel's claims about architecture, art, or Leonardo Da Vinci. These topics are left to other specialists. Instead, drawing in large measure from his own scholarship, including _Lost Christianities_, Ehrman offers a probing critique of Brown's novel as well as an engaging historical study.
For the reader intrigued by the ideas in _The Da Vinci Code_ or interested in early Christianity in general, Ehrman's book is a logical and rewarding place to begin.
In his introduction, Ehrman discusses what critical history is: namely, a systematic study of the known available sources with an eye toward assessing their credibility. Ehrman points out that just because a source exists that makes a specific claim this does not mean that the claim is historically accurate. Instead, the evidence must be evaluated carefully in its own right and in terms of what other sources say. Ehrman notes that history, unlike an empirical science, is "a matter of probabilities." Weighing the claims made by characters in _The Da Vinci Code_ with the existing evidence, Ehrman proceeds to dissect the novel. His deeply informative approach highlights the painstaking work of the historian in piecing together the distant past.
One of Ehrman's most important conclusions is that, contrary to the claims made in _The Da Vinci Code_, the four gospels in the New Testament are the most reliable, oldest sources for understanding the historical Jesus. Ehrman also evalautes the non-canonical gospels and explains his criteria for assessing their historical accuracy in terms of four categories: "the earlier the better"; "piling on the testimonies"; "cutting against the grain"; and "context is (almost) everything." Throughout, Ehrman paints a vivid picture of how critical history is written and, specifically, how he arrives at the conclusions he does. He considers pagan sources, Jewish sources, Christian sources, and the canonical tradition (namely, the Bible as it appears to us today). In addition, he provides an overview of the role of women in the early Church, acknowledging that women likely played a significant role in the early Church, but that early Christianity was not, as Dan Brown's characters' claim, a matriarchal church.
Ehrman confines himself to the early church and the historical Jesus, understood through a critical study of the known sources. He does not discuss Dan Brown's treatment of Opus Dei, the Templars, or the Priory of Scion, nor does he explore the novel's claims about architecture, art, or Leonardo Da Vinci. These topics are left to other specialists. Instead, drawing in large measure from his own scholarship, including _Lost Christianities_, Ehrman offers a probing critique of Brown's novel as well as an engaging historical study.
For the reader intrigued by the ideas in _The Da Vinci Code_ or interested in early Christianity in general, Ehrman's book is a logical and rewarding place to begin.
Scholarly yet Readable Rebuttal to "Da Vinci" Claims
I first read Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code after a friend asked me about the accuracy of the book's claims about Jesus, The New Testament, and the overall conspiracy to silence certain "heretical" movements within the early church. Let me say right off that I really liked the novel as a page-turning thriller. While he may be a good novelist, however, Dan Brown is no historical scholar, certainly no expert of the historic Christian church and its documents. That's what I told my friend, "Good book, but don't take his "history" too seriously."
That's the basic thesis of this book by respected scholar Bart Ehrman. It is a balanced, scholarly and yet very readable (especially for non-specialists) examination of Brown's claims, particularly in reference to the early Christian church (this is not the place for examinations of art history-Ehrman limits his scope to the historic Jesus and the first few centuries of the Christian movement). Pastors and others who have taken basic New Testament and Early Christian Era history, will find nothing new or earth shattering here-this is review of many things scholars have known for some time. The benefit, however, is the book's concise, systematic examination of the supposed "truths" that Dan Brown claims are not fiction but historically accurate. This is a great book to have in a church or school library, on a pastor's shelves, or in the hands of interested readers who are either intrigued or confused by some parts of The Da Vinci Code, but don't know where to turn to check the facts.
That's the basic thesis of this book by respected scholar Bart Ehrman. It is a balanced, scholarly and yet very readable (especially for non-specialists) examination of Brown's claims, particularly in reference to the early Christian church (this is not the place for examinations of art history-Ehrman limits his scope to the historic Jesus and the first few centuries of the Christian movement). Pastors and others who have taken basic New Testament and Early Christian Era history, will find nothing new or earth shattering here-this is review of many things scholars have known for some time. The benefit, however, is the book's concise, systematic examination of the supposed "truths" that Dan Brown claims are not fiction but historically accurate. This is a great book to have in a church or school library, on a pastor's shelves, or in the hands of interested readers who are either intrigued or confused by some parts of The Da Vinci Code, but don't know where to turn to check the facts.
An extremely informative read on early Christianity
Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code is packed full of information presented mostly in question/answer format. Ehrman is an extremely talented instructor with an uncanny ability for anticipating my questions and answering them to my satisfaction without breaking stride as he works through his analysis of the historical basis for The Da Vinci Code.
In the interest of reviewing the book's value I'll break it up into three sections.
The first section (pg. 3-97) covers the Emperor Constantine. It takes an in-depth look at both what we know about Constantine the man and what we know of the scripture which he is alleged to have influenced in The Da Vinci Code. This portion of the book was a near flawless presentation.
The second section (97-162) deals with Mary Magdalene, historical sources for Jesus and what those sources seem to imply. This portion of the novel contained many redundancies where Ehrman repeated earlier points, perhaps it was for emphasis but I got tired of rereading earlier statements over and over. This section still contained much interesting information and stayed on topic but I think it could have been trimmed way down.
The third section (162-184:chapter 8) deals with The Feminine in early Christianity and does an admirable job at explaining what we know of the rolls of women in the earlier church and how different groups regarded those rolls.
All-in-all I had a hard time putting this book down and would recommend it to anyone who has read The Da Vinci Code and is interested in learning more about the historical documentation used as a basis for many claims Dan Brown makes.
In the interest of reviewing the book's value I'll break it up into three sections.
The first section (pg. 3-97) covers the Emperor Constantine. It takes an in-depth look at both what we know about Constantine the man and what we know of the scripture which he is alleged to have influenced in The Da Vinci Code. This portion of the book was a near flawless presentation.
The second section (97-162) deals with Mary Magdalene, historical sources for Jesus and what those sources seem to imply. This portion of the novel contained many redundancies where Ehrman repeated earlier points, perhaps it was for emphasis but I got tired of rereading earlier statements over and over. This section still contained much interesting information and stayed on topic but I think it could have been trimmed way down.
The third section (162-184:chapter 8) deals with The Feminine in early Christianity and does an admirable job at explaining what we know of the rolls of women in the earlier church and how different groups regarded those rolls.
All-in-all I had a hard time putting this book down and would recommend it to anyone who has read The Da Vinci Code and is interested in learning more about the historical documentation used as a basis for many claims Dan Brown makes.
Destroys DaVinci Code as History
Yes, it's fiction. But there is a fact page and it does present 'experts' of history presenting the 'truth' of Christianity. So how is one to find out if Brown is in any way correct in the assertions made by his characters in the book? Well, reading Ehrman's book is a good start though I think most will want to dig deeper after your interest is whetted further.
Ehrman, with ease, explains the true picture of Constantine (much less of the bogeyman that Brown and others want us to think). He expains the history of how the Bible got put togethor. He explains the whole marriage to mary and feminine fiasco. And in all cases, Brown's characters are terribly wrong and unjustified in what they say.
Now, I take it that Ehrman is not a Christian and hence his language and premises may irk some readers. Since his view is supposedly the historical view, he only uses certain gospel passages as historical (ones that can be independanly verified). He goes on to say that some passages were deliberatly altered for the times but does not give examples of how or why. He does not outrightly deny the miracle passages but from the tone of his voice it sounds like he wants beg the question that since these miracles are outrageous stories, they could not have possibly been written down at the time they happened by their witnesses. In any case, the book should motivate a person to study more into this fascinating area of history. I for one, will be reading more on the conception of Christianity and the New Testament. This is a secular account of the time, now it would be interesting to see a Christian account for it.
I think many Christians will feel vindicated by some Ehrman's history and disturbed by other parts of his claims. However, all the more reason to look into these question further. Ehrman wanted people to be interested in history and I think he achieved that goal.
Ehrman, with ease, explains the true picture of Constantine (much less of the bogeyman that Brown and others want us to think). He expains the history of how the Bible got put togethor. He explains the whole marriage to mary and feminine fiasco. And in all cases, Brown's characters are terribly wrong and unjustified in what they say.
Now, I take it that Ehrman is not a Christian and hence his language and premises may irk some readers. Since his view is supposedly the historical view, he only uses certain gospel passages as historical (ones that can be independanly verified). He goes on to say that some passages were deliberatly altered for the times but does not give examples of how or why. He does not outrightly deny the miracle passages but from the tone of his voice it sounds like he wants beg the question that since these miracles are outrageous stories, they could not have possibly been written down at the time they happened by their witnesses. In any case, the book should motivate a person to study more into this fascinating area of history. I for one, will be reading more on the conception of Christianity and the New Testament. This is a secular account of the time, now it would be interesting to see a Christian account for it.
I think many Christians will feel vindicated by some Ehrman's history and disturbed by other parts of his claims. However, all the more reason to look into these question further. Ehrman wanted people to be interested in history and I think he achieved that goal.
Excellent book for the non-expert
Bart Ehrman is a widely respected Biblical scholar with particular expertise on early Christianity and with a gift for popularizing his field, and so he is perhaps the perfect person to write this book. This is his least academic and most "popular" book to date, which fits in with the none-too-serious attitude that he takes towards Dan Brown's bestselling novel. Like most of us, Erhman thinks that the Da Vinci Code was an engaging murder mystery, but some people have taken Brown's historical assertions as if they were historical fact. Just as a matter of professional interest, Erhman would like to set the record straight. In the process of this good-natured debunking, Ehrman actually does an excellent job of teaching the reader not only about early Christianity, but also about the methods and reasoning used by professional historians to try to uncover the truth about the distant past.
A word need to be said about what this book is not. Ehrman is a religious scholar, and so that is his focus. He does not talk about art history or Templar conspiracies or Vatican politics or the Opus Dei. These he leaves to other people.
What he does do, convincingly, is show that orthodox Christianity is not a patriarchal conspiracy hatched by Emperor Constantine to suppress an original and authentic feminine Christianity, that rival Gnostic forms of Christianity did not believe in a fully human Christ (quite the opposite), and that there is good reason to reject any idea of a marriage between Jesus and Mary Magdalene. As Ehrman says, none of this is a surprise to people knowledgeable in the field.
The true value of this book, I think, is not that it sets the record straight on Dan Brown's fictional bestseller. Rather, this book does an outstanding job of demonstrating the methods and reasoning that historians use to try to use potentially unreliable texts to reveal the historical facts behind those texts. He does so by continually asking probing questions and then indicating the ways in which credible answers can be found for those questions. Along the way, Ehrman provides a fine introduction to early Christianity and to the historical Jesus. Not bad for a quick read.
My only criticism of the book is that Ehrman quotes over and over from the same few passages from Brown's book. The repetition gets a bit tiresome and almost smacks of text-padding. I suppose he's just drawing from his long experience as a teacher: it never hurts to repeat yourself. Recommended!
A word need to be said about what this book is not. Ehrman is a religious scholar, and so that is his focus. He does not talk about art history or Templar conspiracies or Vatican politics or the Opus Dei. These he leaves to other people.
What he does do, convincingly, is show that orthodox Christianity is not a patriarchal conspiracy hatched by Emperor Constantine to suppress an original and authentic feminine Christianity, that rival Gnostic forms of Christianity did not believe in a fully human Christ (quite the opposite), and that there is good reason to reject any idea of a marriage between Jesus and Mary Magdalene. As Ehrman says, none of this is a surprise to people knowledgeable in the field.
The true value of this book, I think, is not that it sets the record straight on Dan Brown's fictional bestseller. Rather, this book does an outstanding job of demonstrating the methods and reasoning that historians use to try to use potentially unreliable texts to reveal the historical facts behind those texts. He does so by continually asking probing questions and then indicating the ways in which credible answers can be found for those questions. Along the way, Ehrman provides a fine introduction to early Christianity and to the historical Jesus. Not bad for a quick read.
My only criticism of the book is that Ehrman quotes over and over from the same few passages from Brown's book. The repetition gets a bit tiresome and almost smacks of text-padding. I suppose he's just drawing from his long experience as a teacher: it never hurts to repeat yourself. Recommended!
Ehrman has written yet another excellent book that makes it easy for the non-professor to grasp the realities of the New Testament. I read and loved the DaVinci Code and was enthralled with the idea that Jesus could have been married, etc. Ehrman's work is based on what we know and how we know it. In addition, he deconstructs statements made by characters in the book to show that they are really fiction for the most part, or wishful thinking, in order to sell books. Although the book was in response to an international best seller, it does not fail to educate.
The Best of the Companion Works to The Da Vinci Code
I became a fan of Bart Ehrman's writing after reading his book Lost Christianities. When I saw his Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code, I knew that I had to have it. I was not disappointed. Ehrman takes an even-handed approach to discussing the true history of the early Christian Church. The result is a companion work that ranks as possibly the best available. He discusses the history contained in The Da Vinci Code point-by-point and gives us the information from a scholar's point of view in a highly readable way. What did Constantine really do to Christian teachings? What was the role of the feminine in earliest Christianity? The subject of secret societies is beyond Ehrman's expertise, so some reader will be disappointed that he does not discuss details about the Priory of Sion or Opus Dei. Ehrman concludes his book with a nice epilogue about his personal experiences as a professor of religion, and the reaction of him and his students to media portrayals of Jesus.
I'll make this short, since there are many more people who can write better and more insightful reviews.
This is a balanced book written from a scholarly perspective. It goes on the assumption that non-scholars (those who don't read the ancient languages nor understand the ancient sources) would generally like to know more about the assertions made in Dan Brown's quite entertaining novel "The DaVinci Code."
In my opinion, Bart Ehrman does an outstanding job in going through Brown's book and comparing it against it's own assertions. Since Brown's book clearly asserts in the beginning that the documents quoted from are accurate and scholarly, Ehrman does an excellent job in seeking to see if such is the case.
I agree with Ehrman's findings and conclusions-- that while The DaVinci Code is an entertaining work of fiction, that's all it is. Fiction. I further conclude that Brown is wrong to so clearly assert accuracy when his so-called "sources" are the exact opposite of what is outlined in his book.
While I'm a believer in Jesus and a Christian, I'm of the variety that seeks to have an open mind where arguments such as Dan Brown's are concerned. And I must say that I found Brown's book to be biased, sensational and not balanced at all, while Bart Ehrman's book (which I'm reviewing here) was unbiased, well-written and very balanced. Very thoughtful and most insightful.
So read "The DaVinci Code" and then read "Truth and Fiction in The DaVinci Code" and decide for yourself.
This is a balanced book written from a scholarly perspective. It goes on the assumption that non-scholars (those who don't read the ancient languages nor understand the ancient sources) would generally like to know more about the assertions made in Dan Brown's quite entertaining novel "The DaVinci Code."
In my opinion, Bart Ehrman does an outstanding job in going through Brown's book and comparing it against it's own assertions. Since Brown's book clearly asserts in the beginning that the documents quoted from are accurate and scholarly, Ehrman does an excellent job in seeking to see if such is the case.
I agree with Ehrman's findings and conclusions-- that while The DaVinci Code is an entertaining work of fiction, that's all it is. Fiction. I further conclude that Brown is wrong to so clearly assert accuracy when his so-called "sources" are the exact opposite of what is outlined in his book.
While I'm a believer in Jesus and a Christian, I'm of the variety that seeks to have an open mind where arguments such as Dan Brown's are concerned. And I must say that I found Brown's book to be biased, sensational and not balanced at all, while Bart Ehrman's book (which I'm reviewing here) was unbiased, well-written and very balanced. Very thoughtful and most insightful.
So read "The DaVinci Code" and then read "Truth and Fiction in The DaVinci Code" and decide for yourself.
Interesting, Informed, but also lacking.
"Truth and Fiction in the Da Vinci Code" by Bart D. Ehrman is exactly what is claims to be in the subtitle; what a historian really knows about Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and Constantine. If you get this book expecting to find facts about Opus Dei, The Priory of Zion, or Da Vinci and his masterpieces, you will be sorely disappointed. In fact, this entire book pertains almost exclusively to Chapters 55-58 of "The Da Vinci Code" in which Teabing claims that Emperor Constantine attempted to cover up the truth about Jesus and Mary Magdalene.
That being said, Ehrman's book is still full of interesting facts, and worth a read if you're interested in early Christianity (1st-4th century). It will undoubtedly shed some light on the orgins of the Bible, and would an excellent read for any Christian who has an open mind and would like to know more about their religion. However, "Truth and Fiction" is by no means a comprehensive response to Dan Brown's novel, and will likely leave "Da Vinci Code" readers with unanswered questions.
That being said, Ehrman's book is still full of interesting facts, and worth a read if you're interested in early Christianity (1st-4th century). It will undoubtedly shed some light on the orgins of the Bible, and would an excellent read for any Christian who has an open mind and would like to know more about their religion. However, "Truth and Fiction" is by no means a comprehensive response to Dan Brown's novel, and will likely leave "Da Vinci Code" readers with unanswered questions.
Essential for DaVinci Code fans
Bart Ehrman is a specialist on ancient Christian documents (orthodox and gnostic) and correctly understands Jesus to have been a mistaken apocalyptic prophet. He was made to write a book like this. Most responses to The DaVinci Code have come from defensive evangelicals, but this is a refreshing analysis by an expert.
It's sad that a critique like this is even necessary. Are people so gullible that they can't recognize sensationalism when they see it? Apparently not, especially when Dan Brown misleads them by claiming that "all descriptions of documents" in his novel "are accurate" (page 1 of The DaVinci Code). Ehrman sets the record straight: (1) Q is not a scandalous document concealed by the Vatican (?!); it's a hypothetical source which many scholars believe contained material common to Matthew and Luke. (2) The Dead Sea Scrolls are not Christian documents; they are Essene. (3) Gnostic gospels like Thomas do not present a more human Jesus than the gospels of the New Testament; just the opposite, they present a more divine Jesus. (4) Indeed: "The oldest and best documents we have for knowing the life of Jesus are the four gospels of the New Testament. This is not simply the view of Christian historians; it is the view of serious historians of antiquity of every kind, from committed Christians to hard-core atheists." (Ehrman, p 102)
But this book is more than just a catalog of Dan Brown's stupidities (the word is not too strong). It's an elegant tour through ancient sources and teaches us about the historical Jesus, the historical Mary, apocalyptic Christianity, gnostic Christianity, various Christian views of women and the "divine feminine", and what really happened at the Council of Nicea. (As any student of Christian history knows, the gathering at Nicea was not, contra Brown, to decide whether or not Jesus was divine; everyone believed that, and had believed it for centuries!)
People like to learn history through entertainment, and this is a good thing. We should rejoice at the attempts of novelists and film directors to bridge us with the past. Parke Godwin's Sherwood is a superb novel penetrating through the myths of Robin Hood -- fiction, to be sure, but based on plausibility and accurate depictions of figures like William the Conqueror. The same is true of Jack Whyte's Camulod Chronicles (about King Arthur). And I even liked Mel Gibson's Passion, despite its own historical problems. But Dan Brown's DaVinci Code is silly beyond measure -- as silly as it is popular. It isn't based on anything remotely plausible. It owes to fantasy, a misrepresentation of ancient documents, and a crackpot theory (Jesus married Mary Magdalene and sired a "Holy Grail" lineage) discredited back in the '80s.
Ehrman's book is accessible, fun to read, and part of a growing trend in scholarly responses to religious novels and films. It's sure to interest people further in a subject they would otherwise have never thought to pursue. For that reason alone we can thank Dan Brown for writing such a laughable novel.
It's sad that a critique like this is even necessary. Are people so gullible that they can't recognize sensationalism when they see it? Apparently not, especially when Dan Brown misleads them by claiming that "all descriptions of documents" in his novel "are accurate" (page 1 of The DaVinci Code). Ehrman sets the record straight: (1) Q is not a scandalous document concealed by the Vatican (?!); it's a hypothetical source which many scholars believe contained material common to Matthew and Luke. (2) The Dead Sea Scrolls are not Christian documents; they are Essene. (3) Gnostic gospels like Thomas do not present a more human Jesus than the gospels of the New Testament; just the opposite, they present a more divine Jesus. (4) Indeed: "The oldest and best documents we have for knowing the life of Jesus are the four gospels of the New Testament. This is not simply the view of Christian historians; it is the view of serious historians of antiquity of every kind, from committed Christians to hard-core atheists." (Ehrman, p 102)
But this book is more than just a catalog of Dan Brown's stupidities (the word is not too strong). It's an elegant tour through ancient sources and teaches us about the historical Jesus, the historical Mary, apocalyptic Christianity, gnostic Christianity, various Christian views of women and the "divine feminine", and what really happened at the Council of Nicea. (As any student of Christian history knows, the gathering at Nicea was not, contra Brown, to decide whether or not Jesus was divine; everyone believed that, and had believed it for centuries!)
People like to learn history through entertainment, and this is a good thing. We should rejoice at the attempts of novelists and film directors to bridge us with the past. Parke Godwin's Sherwood is a superb novel penetrating through the myths of Robin Hood -- fiction, to be sure, but based on plausibility and accurate depictions of figures like William the Conqueror. The same is true of Jack Whyte's Camulod Chronicles (about King Arthur). And I even liked Mel Gibson's Passion, despite its own historical problems. But Dan Brown's DaVinci Code is silly beyond measure -- as silly as it is popular. It isn't based on anything remotely plausible. It owes to fantasy, a misrepresentation of ancient documents, and a crackpot theory (Jesus married Mary Magdalene and sired a "Holy Grail" lineage) discredited back in the '80s.
Ehrman's book is accessible, fun to read, and part of a growing trend in scholarly responses to religious novels and films. It's sure to interest people further in a subject they would otherwise have never thought to pursue. For that reason alone we can thank Dan Brown for writing such a laughable novel.
The book is excellent if you want to know what is true about the religious parts of DaVinci code - it appears to be the best book out there now. It does not deal with the art aspect, tho.
Bart Erhman's book good, but has its own problems
Bart Errman carefully and in precise academic thoroughness exposes as false the historical claims made in Dan Brown's excellent mystery thriller. The one drawback in Bart Erhman's argument are his own biases about the reliability and dating of many of the New Testament documents, for example the Pastoral epistles, 2 Peter and the Gospel of John. He also resorts to a dan brown type of statements such as "Scholars now agree that . . ." But many reputable New Testament scholars don't agree with the doubts Bart Ehrman has about the NT sources. Anyone wanting a more reliable guide to the authenticity of the NT documents could do no better than read the late F F Bruce's little book "The New Testament Documents Are They Reliable?"
Not just for The DaVinci Code...
Dr. Ehrman is absolutely my favorite author and scholar of historical Christianity and the New Testament and this book reinforces this opinion. Dr. Ehrman's writing style is extremely clear, so even an individual with no background in the study of the New Testament will have a clear understanding of what Dr. Ehrman is writing about.
One does not need to have read The DaVinci Code in order to get a great deal out of this book. Dr. Ehrman includes the passages he is discussing in the book and then refutes/agrees with them. In this way, he covers a broad range of topics in early Christianity from the historical Jesus, Gnosticism, the formation of the canon, Constantine's role, etc. Even if you have read a great deal on these topics, this book is a great refresher. I do recommend this book for people just getting into the study as it covers so much and does such a wonderful job of it. However, don't get the wrong idea, this is by no means an exhaustive study of those topics, but a great start or overview of them. Highly recommended!
One does not need to have read The DaVinci Code in order to get a great deal out of this book. Dr. Ehrman includes the passages he is discussing in the book and then refutes/agrees with them. In this way, he covers a broad range of topics in early Christianity from the historical Jesus, Gnosticism, the formation of the canon, Constantine's role, etc. Even if you have read a great deal on these topics, this book is a great refresher. I do recommend this book for people just getting into the study as it covers so much and does such a wonderful job of it. However, don't get the wrong idea, this is by no means an exhaustive study of those topics, but a great start or overview of them. Highly recommended!
As pastor of a community church, I have been astonished at how many people, including some Christians, are so completely ignorant of early church history that they can be taken in by Dan Brown's version of events and documents. Having attended a seminar taught by Dr. Erhman, I have been using both this book and his lecture materials to help debunk "The DaVinci Code" for my parishioners. While I am not one of those who reacted to "The DaVinci Code" with hysterical outrage or feel that I need to "defend" Jesus or the Christian faith against Brown's work of fiction, I do believe that, since Brown claims that his book is based on historical fact, we need to take a careful look at the historical evidence that is available to us to see what the truth is. Dr. Ehrman's book is an invaluable tool to help us do just exactly that, and is therefore much appreciated.
Well Written, Clear and Very Informative
This book attempts to set the record straight regarding what is historical fact and what is literary fiction in Dan Brown's best selling novel "The Da Vinci Code". Dr. Ehrman, a historian and an authority on the early Church and the life of Jesus, very clearly and objectively explains what we do know or can reasonably surmise and what we do not know about the birth and early history of Christianity and the life of Jesus. The book is very well written in very clear and engaging prose. One does not need to have read the novel "The Da Vinci Code" (I didn't) to benefit from the wealth of information provided in this book. Naturally, I recommend this book to anyone who has read the novel and wants to get the facts straight. But, I also recommend it to history buffs - of whatever religious conviction (if any) - as well as those interested in the methods used by professional historians to reconstruct events of the past.
really well written, not biased
This is the first and, as far as I know, the only one of the debunking DavinciCode books that is really well written and doesn't have some sort of church-related bias.
In the process of explaining the massive misstatements in Brown's book, I learned a lot about the New Testament and about what can historically be said about the man,. jesus.
In the process of explaining the massive misstatements in Brown's book, I learned a lot about the New Testament and about what can historically be said about the man,. jesus.
I have a number of Ehrman's books on my shelves as he has long been considered a scholar of serious weight in the field of primitive Christianity. But I was not prepared for how well he would handle a "book review" format. I am impressed. Again.
I enjoyed the Da Vinci Code even though I knew, from the outset, that it was factually flawed. But it was still quite fun to read a novel in a setting where I am usually reading exegetical tracts. One of the fun things about Brown's book is the romp through early Christian history -- which is quite fascinating. But the actual history can be just as fascinating and fun. Ehrman delivers the actual history (or the best consensus on the actual history) in a fun and informative way.
The other book reviews here on Amazon are very good. I find the self-avowed "hardcore athiest" review very funny. He accuses "believers" of being conditioned and labels himself educated. But then he claims that there is "NO" (caps in original) historical evidence for the figure Jesus and if there were, it would be in the Dead Sea scrolls. He He. Who is betraying ignorance and conditioning here??
Of course the dead sea scrolls would not have anything on Jesus or christianity as they were kept and maintained by a group of devout Jews (Essenes) who were separatists. And, also, there are historical evidences of Jesus such as in the writings of Josephus (a Jewish historian and contemporary) who loathed Christians but, nonetheless, referred to Jesus as a "wonder worker" whose followers (Christians) caused nothing but trouble.
Anyway, enough fun. Ehrman's book is very good.
I enjoyed the Da Vinci Code even though I knew, from the outset, that it was factually flawed. But it was still quite fun to read a novel in a setting where I am usually reading exegetical tracts. One of the fun things about Brown's book is the romp through early Christian history -- which is quite fascinating. But the actual history can be just as fascinating and fun. Ehrman delivers the actual history (or the best consensus on the actual history) in a fun and informative way.
The other book reviews here on Amazon are very good. I find the self-avowed "hardcore athiest" review very funny. He accuses "believers" of being conditioned and labels himself educated. But then he claims that there is "NO" (caps in original) historical evidence for the figure Jesus and if there were, it would be in the Dead Sea scrolls. He He. Who is betraying ignorance and conditioning here??
Of course the dead sea scrolls would not have anything on Jesus or christianity as they were kept and maintained by a group of devout Jews (Essenes) who were separatists. And, also, there are historical evidences of Jesus such as in the writings of Josephus (a Jewish historian and contemporary) who loathed Christians but, nonetheless, referred to Jesus as a "wonder worker" whose followers (Christians) caused nothing but trouble.
Anyway, enough fun. Ehrman's book is very good.
It's not a Conspiracy after All!
Bart Ehrman's "Truth and Fiction in the Da Vinci Code" is yet another addition to the library of secondary works on the so called Da Vinci Code. What separates this one however is it is rather good and academically engaging (it is poublished by Oxford University Press after all).
Ehrman's book does not focus on the wider conspiracy claims of Dan Brown's (fictional) creaation such as the the Priory of Sion or Da Vinci's artwork but on the concrete charges it makes on Christian Origins. In particular he focusses on:
1: Did early Christianity a "Mortal Prophet" who was only deemed divine after Constantine's Manipulation of the Church.
2: Did the Church/Constantine Suppress early Gospels that contradicted this view but are really more faithful to the historical Jesus
3: Did Jesus marry/have sex with Mary Magdalene
4: Did the Church suppress the divine feminine.
Ehrman shows discussing all these aspects that to greater or lesser degrees the answer in each case is, contrary to the claims of the Da Vinci Code, answered in the negative. He does so with careful regard to the evidence. His most thorough point is that fundamentally synoptic gospels in particular (Matthew, Mark, Luke) show Jesus as more human than all the gnostic gospels referred to in Brown's book and, given the nature of gnosticism this is as should be expected.
This book will not be useful for those interested in the claims of the Da Vinci Code but also for those seeking an introduction to the development of "Christian orthodoxy" as it contains good surveys of key issues. For example, the discussion of the formation of the accepted canon is excellent. I am in the progress of reading other books by the author and it is clear that to a significant extent the material in this book is copied from these. This is not a criticism as it is presented more accessible here but if you have read anything else by the author the interest of this book is likely to be limited.
While debunking the claims of the Da Vinci Code this book will also raise questions on key issues of Christian belief which aside from showing it is not a reactionary whitewash is always a good thing. Definitely recommended.
Ehrman's book does not focus on the wider conspiracy claims of Dan Brown's (fictional) creaation such as the the Priory of Sion or Da Vinci's artwork but on the concrete charges it makes on Christian Origins. In particular he focusses on:
1: Did early Christianity a "Mortal Prophet" who was only deemed divine after Constantine's Manipulation of the Church.
2: Did the Church/Constantine Suppress early Gospels that contradicted this view but are really more faithful to the historical Jesus
3: Did Jesus marry/have sex with Mary Magdalene
4: Did the Church suppress the divine feminine.
Ehrman shows discussing all these aspects that to greater or lesser degrees the answer in each case is, contrary to the claims of the Da Vinci Code, answered in the negative. He does so with careful regard to the evidence. His most thorough point is that fundamentally synoptic gospels in particular (Matthew, Mark, Luke) show Jesus as more human than all the gnostic gospels referred to in Brown's book and, given the nature of gnosticism this is as should be expected.
This book will not be useful for those interested in the claims of the Da Vinci Code but also for those seeking an introduction to the development of "Christian orthodoxy" as it contains good surveys of key issues. For example, the discussion of the formation of the accepted canon is excellent. I am in the progress of reading other books by the author and it is clear that to a significant extent the material in this book is copied from these. This is not a criticism as it is presented more accessible here but if you have read anything else by the author the interest of this book is likely to be limited.
While debunking the claims of the Da Vinci Code this book will also raise questions on key issues of Christian belief which aside from showing it is not a reactionary whitewash is always a good thing. Definitely recommended.
Before reading the DaVinci Code, I have to admit, somewhat ashamedly that I was rather ignorant about the Bible, and Jesus and his followers. I loved the DaVinci Code, but after hearing all the issues the book had with the actual historical facts, I decided to find out the truth for myself. This book was great introduction to the facts without being over my head. As a matter of fact, I lent it to a friend who hadn't read the DaVinci Code, but after I told her about the book she wanted to read it anyway. You don't have to read the DaVinci Code to get a great wealth of info from this book. As a matter of fact, I wish I had read this book first. Now that I have I am going to go back and re-read the DaVinci Code. There are a great number of books out there about "the facts" and I have read many of them. This is the first book I would recommend.
IF YOU WANT THE EDUCATED, OBJECTIVE TRUTH---THIS IS IT!
I could not put this book down. It is written by an astute, highly credible and objective biblical scholar who has no axe to grind one way or the other on this topic. You get the facts, simply the facts. How refreshing! This book was a life saver, as I struggled with whom and what to believe about Jesus, the Gospels and the history of the early church. If you can get only one book on this topic, this should be the one.
Finally, I found a book written by a real historical expert. This is a scholarly book written in a fashion that is accessible to everyone. I highly recommended it for anyone interested in knowing the true history behind The Da Vinci Code.
Further Evidence Against Dan Brown
It's rather obvious what Christians think of The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown, particularly in light of the mass of books coming out against it. However, what does a well-established, self-proclaimed agnostic think of it? New Testament scholar Bart D. Ehrman voices his appraisal in Truth and Fiction in the Da Vinci Code.
The books eight chapters are divided into two parts: Constantine and the New Testament, and Jesus and Mary Magdalene. Dr. Ehrman makes it clear in the Introduction that while he found the novel to be "a terrific page-turner" (xix), he found many historical inaccuracies that needed to be dealt with.
In part one, Dr. Ehrman expounds on the role of Constantine in early Christianity, the Dead Sea Scrolls and Nag Hammadi Library, the non-canonical gospels, and the formation of the New Testament Canon. Part two investigates our sources for the historical Jesus and what they say about him, his relationship with Mary Magdalene, and the view of women in early Christianity.
Dr. Ehrman sums it up quite nicely: "The problem is that people who read a book like this have no way of separating the historical fact from the literary fiction... [The author's] a novelist, not a scholar of history." (189) I was surprised to find myself agreeing with the author throughout the book, and even enjoyed some of his quips. In speaking of the Gnostic gospels he notes, "the Jesus portrayed here is not merely human; he is a superhuman wunderkind." (52)
There were however significant points where I disagreed, such as: "In fact, we don't have any document written by a single eyewitness to the life of Jesus." (103). Even if Dr. Ehrman believes the evidence for Matthew and John having written their respective Gospels is weak, there's still a reasonable chance they actually did write them. On pages 116 to 117, he rants a lengthy list of differences between the Gospels. Some that he offers do (initially) appear to be serious challenges to agreement between the Gospels, but some are also very easily resolved.
From a literary perspective, Bart Ehrman did a good job of bringing academic discussions to a layman level. Even having studied the Dead Sea Scrolls in college, I found his discussion of them and the Nag Hammadi Library intriguing. In some cases, I think, he waters things down a bit too much in that he becomes very repetitive with his points- as if a non-academic reader could not keep up with his line of reasoning. Overall, Truth and Fiction in the Da Vinci Code is a great read for those looking to find out what a non-Christian thinks of Dan Brown's novel. Though it has its weaknesses, it stands together well with other critical works that show the problems with The Da Vinci Code.
The books eight chapters are divided into two parts: Constantine and the New Testament, and Jesus and Mary Magdalene. Dr. Ehrman makes it clear in the Introduction that while he found the novel to be "a terrific page-turner" (xix), he found many historical inaccuracies that needed to be dealt with.
In part one, Dr. Ehrman expounds on the role of Constantine in early Christianity, the Dead Sea Scrolls and Nag Hammadi Library, the non-canonical gospels, and the formation of the New Testament Canon. Part two investigates our sources for the historical Jesus and what they say about him, his relationship with Mary Magdalene, and the view of women in early Christianity.
Dr. Ehrman sums it up quite nicely: "The problem is that people who read a book like this have no way of separating the historical fact from the literary fiction... [The author's] a novelist, not a scholar of history." (189) I was surprised to find myself agreeing with the author throughout the book, and even enjoyed some of his quips. In speaking of the Gnostic gospels he notes, "the Jesus portrayed here is not merely human; he is a superhuman wunderkind." (52)
There were however significant points where I disagreed, such as: "In fact, we don't have any document written by a single eyewitness to the life of Jesus." (103). Even if Dr. Ehrman believes the evidence for Matthew and John having written their respective Gospels is weak, there's still a reasonable chance they actually did write them. On pages 116 to 117, he rants a lengthy list of differences between the Gospels. Some that he offers do (initially) appear to be serious challenges to agreement between the Gospels, but some are also very easily resolved.
From a literary perspective, Bart Ehrman did a good job of bringing academic discussions to a layman level. Even having studied the Dead Sea Scrolls in college, I found his discussion of them and the Nag Hammadi Library intriguing. In some cases, I think, he waters things down a bit too much in that he becomes very repetitive with his points- as if a non-academic reader could not keep up with his line of reasoning. Overall, Truth and Fiction in the Da Vinci Code is a great read for those looking to find out what a non-Christian thinks of Dan Brown's novel. Though it has its weaknesses, it stands together well with other critical works that show the problems with The Da Vinci Code.
Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code by Bart Ehrmam is one of many recent works discussing the theological and historic assertions made in Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code. Ehrmam is a well-known liberal New Testament scholar.
The Da Vinci Code purports to be based on range suppressed historic information, (e.g. secret societies, secret messages and suppressed manuscripts). These sensational claims make for good fiction; however, do they have any basis in fact? In addressing this question Ehrman's focuses on the historic religious aspect of these claims. He does not delve into other sensational aspects of the story such as the Priory of Sion, Opus Dei, and Leonardo Da Vinci. From my perspective this narrow focus has both benefits and drawbacks. On the one hand, it provides a relatively tight focus and allows the book to remain a quick read (less than 200 pages). On the other hand, however, in not addressing many of Brown's other assertions it may leave some readers less than fully satisfied.
Although I do not normally find myself in agreement with Ehrmam, I thought his approach was generally solid given his intended audience. General agreement on most of Brown's claims is not difficult to achieve. Ehrmam himself notes that these assertions are so silly that most serious students of the New Testament (NT) find them ridiculous regardless of their worldview (atheistic, Christian or Jewish). Some of the flimsiest of these that Ehrmam debunks include
- Jesus had a child with Mary Magdalene
- Constantine was responsible for the selection of material for the NT
- Prior to the fourth century Christians did not view Jesus as divine
- The purpose of the Council of Nicea was to deify Jesus
- That historically reliable accounts of Jesus life were suppressed
Readers new to this area seeking further information on NT sources and its construction can see many of the excellent works in this area by the likes of Metzger, Bruce, Blomberg etc.
Although it does not impact Ehrman's primary objective, I found that the author himself occasionally tries to off pass speculation as fact (a bit ironic). For example he asserts that the canonical Gospels were not authored by the apostles or their associates. This claim is of course difficult to disprove however, it is clearly at variance with traditional and mainstream NT scholarship. Readers seeking a more classical protestant view can see the excellent Jesus Under Fire (the on-line Catholic Encyclopaedia is also helpful in this regard). Ehrman also makes bold assertions about significant conflicts between the Gospels - this is also overstated. Although it is apparent that the authors of the Gospels felt free to paraphrase Jesus to a degree the vast majority of these supposed conflicts become insignificant on closer examination. I think that these arguments are interesting, if largely unwarranted, but probably out of place in a popular-level work with little reference made to mainstream scholarship. Again Jesus Under Fire is a good starting point on this issue (Raymond Brown is good for more advanced study).
Overall, the book is adequate in answering some of the silly historic and religious assertions made by Dan Brown. It does not, however, make a good entry point into NT scholarship.
The Da Vinci Code purports to be based on range suppressed historic information, (e.g. secret societies, secret messages and suppressed manuscripts). These sensational claims make for good fiction; however, do they have any basis in fact? In addressing this question Ehrman's focuses on the historic religious aspect of these claims. He does not delve into other sensational aspects of the story such as the Priory of Sion, Opus Dei, and Leonardo Da Vinci. From my perspective this narrow focus has both benefits and drawbacks. On the one hand, it provides a relatively tight focus and allows the book to remain a quick read (less than 200 pages). On the other hand, however, in not addressing many of Brown's other assertions it may leave some readers less than fully satisfied.
Although I do not normally find myself in agreement with Ehrmam, I thought his approach was generally solid given his intended audience. General agreement on most of Brown's claims is not difficult to achieve. Ehrmam himself notes that these assertions are so silly that most serious students of the New Testament (NT) find them ridiculous regardless of their worldview (atheistic, Christian or Jewish). Some of the flimsiest of these that Ehrmam debunks include
- Jesus had a child with Mary Magdalene
- Constantine was responsible for the selection of material for the NT
- Prior to the fourth century Christians did not view Jesus as divine
- The purpose of the Council of Nicea was to deify Jesus
- That historically reliable accounts of Jesus life were suppressed
Readers new to this area seeking further information on NT sources and its construction can see many of the excellent works in this area by the likes of Metzger, Bruce, Blomberg etc.
Although it does not impact Ehrman's primary objective, I found that the author himself occasionally tries to off pass speculation as fact (a bit ironic). For example he asserts that the canonical Gospels were not authored by the apostles or their associates. This claim is of course difficult to disprove however, it is clearly at variance with traditional and mainstream NT scholarship. Readers seeking a more classical protestant view can see the excellent Jesus Under Fire (the on-line Catholic Encyclopaedia is also helpful in this regard). Ehrman also makes bold assertions about significant conflicts between the Gospels - this is also overstated. Although it is apparent that the authors of the Gospels felt free to paraphrase Jesus to a degree the vast majority of these supposed conflicts become insignificant on closer examination. I think that these arguments are interesting, if largely unwarranted, but probably out of place in a popular-level work with little reference made to mainstream scholarship. Again Jesus Under Fire is a good starting point on this issue (Raymond Brown is good for more advanced study).
Overall, the book is adequate in answering some of the silly historic and religious assertions made by Dan Brown. It does not, however, make a good entry point into NT scholarship.
To Icon O'Clast, a "hard-core atheist,"
In response to your complaint about another review, read (again) what Ehrman says: "The oldest and best documents we have for knowing the life of Jesus are the four gospels of the New Testament. This is not simply the view of Christian historians; it is the view of serious historians of antiquity of every kind, from committed Christians to hard-core atheists." (Ehrman, p 102) Ehrman's point is not that "the four gospels can be used as history" but that, of all the sources we've got, these are the best (as opposed to some of the documents that Dan Brown prefers in his novel). Of course no text, canonical or extracanonical, can prove Christian *beliefs* about Jesus - and
Ehrman does not say otherwise. One reason why folks like Ehrman (and many others) are writing books against Brown is that Brown says "all" (not "some") of it was based on historical fact: Ehrman's book shows that Brown's claim cannot stand.
You speak of Jesus' "alleged existence" - The *existence* of Jesus (*not* the same thing as the Christians' claims about him) is more securely established than that of many other figures from antiquity. The gospels were written later, to be sure, but "way after"? Relatively speaking, the gospels were written quite soon after Jesus' life.
Is your atheism also the result of conditioning?
In response to your complaint about another review, read (again) what Ehrman says: "The oldest and best documents we have for knowing the life of Jesus are the four gospels of the New Testament. This is not simply the view of Christian historians; it is the view of serious historians of antiquity of every kind, from committed Christians to hard-core atheists." (Ehrman, p 102) Ehrman's point is not that "the four gospels can be used as history" but that, of all the sources we've got, these are the best (as opposed to some of the documents that Dan Brown prefers in his novel). Of course no text, canonical or extracanonical, can prove Christian *beliefs* about Jesus - and
Ehrman does not say otherwise. One reason why folks like Ehrman (and many others) are writing books against Brown is that Brown says "all" (not "some") of it was based on historical fact: Ehrman's book shows that Brown's claim cannot stand.
You speak of Jesus' "alleged existence" - The *existence* of Jesus (*not* the same thing as the Christians' claims about him) is more securely established than that of many other figures from antiquity. The gospels were written later, to be sure, but "way after"? Relatively speaking, the gospels were written quite soon after Jesus' life.
Is your atheism also the result of conditioning?
The lie and be(lie)f of Da Vinci Code
It is enjoyable to read this book to learn from Prof. Ehrman, a scholar on the development history of Christianity.
Prof. Ehrman traced the historical sources for Jesus who started the Jewish movement against the powerful Roman Empire and paid for with his own life. It was a heroic saga `by the Jew, for the Jew and of the Jew'. However, it was a Jewish cult picked up by Paul to gentiles and developed into the powerful and influential Western (Cult)ture through Emperor Constantine who chose to rule by theocracy.
Prof. Ehrman briefed on the discovery of Dead Sea Scrolls and Nag Hammadi Library and their significance in understanding the early development and struggle of the diverse sects of this new faith. He discussed the other Gospels that were not available in regular Sunday sermon or school and showed how and why the 27 books were authorized into the collection known as New Testament Canon.
He discussed Part 2 and commented on the speculation of the marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene. He pointed out the importance of women in early Christianity days. It was women who stood by Jesus till the end and proclaimed the empty tomb. However, over the two millenniums, women still are not allowed to fulfill their proper role as seen and demanded in Roman Catholic Church. The Promise Keepers also demand women subject to their same ancient role of the Bible.
The Da Vinci Code caused world wide sensation in facts and fiction. As a history scholar, Prof. Ehrman points out which is which so that readers will have a better informative understanding.
The well layout chapters enable readers to follow easily. The Holy Blood, Holy Grail and Da Vinci Code lead pilgrimage to France for the divine family tree. Prof. Ehrman guides readers in the lie and be(lie)f in Da Vince Code.
Prof. Ehrman traced the historical sources for Jesus who started the Jewish movement against the powerful Roman Empire and paid for with his own life. It was a heroic saga `by the Jew, for the Jew and of the Jew'. However, it was a Jewish cult picked up by Paul to gentiles and developed into the powerful and influential Western (Cult)ture through Emperor Constantine who chose to rule by theocracy.
Prof. Ehrman briefed on the discovery of Dead Sea Scrolls and Nag Hammadi Library and their significance in understanding the early development and struggle of the diverse sects of this new faith. He discussed the other Gospels that were not available in regular Sunday sermon or school and showed how and why the 27 books were authorized into the collection known as New Testament Canon.
He discussed Part 2 and commented on the speculation of the marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene. He pointed out the importance of women in early Christianity days. It was women who stood by Jesus till the end and proclaimed the empty tomb. However, over the two millenniums, women still are not allowed to fulfill their proper role as seen and demanded in Roman Catholic Church. The Promise Keepers also demand women subject to their same ancient role of the Bible.
The Da Vinci Code caused world wide sensation in facts and fiction. As a history scholar, Prof. Ehrman points out which is which so that readers will have a better informative understanding.
The well layout chapters enable readers to follow easily. The Holy Blood, Holy Grail and Da Vinci Code lead pilgrimage to France for the divine family tree. Prof. Ehrman guides readers in the lie and be(lie)f in Da Vince Code.
This is, perhaps, Dr. Ehrman's most entertaining popular work. Dr. Ehrman is not a Christian but does not let his own bias interfere with expressing the truth about the _Da Vinci Code_ theories. He clearly explains what we know and what we do not know about the early church, the formation of the canon, the marital status of Jesus, and virtually every other topic touched in _The Da Vinci Code_. Little is left for the "believers" of that entertaining but purely fictional story. A must read for those curious about the topic. Should be at the top of the reading list of Christians and non-Christians alike.
Ehrman's book is an excellent examination of the historical fantasies of "The Da Vinci Code." As Ehrman reminds us frequently, authentic historians (unlike the authors Brown most heavily relies upon) have long ago arrived at consensus conclusions about issues related to the canon of the New Testament, the development of the doctrine of the person of Christ in the early Church, the conversion of Constantine and its affects upon Church and State, etc. Ehrman is quite good on clearly and directly relating this history in language that the average lay person can grasp. He is also very good in his discussion of Gnosticism and the dating and theology of the Gnostic Gospels that mention Mary Magdalene. The fantasies of both Brown and his "experts" unravel.
Ehrman is also quite good in clearly and simply relating to the average lay person just what it is historians and New Testament critics do when they assess the historical sources for Jesus and Mary Magadalene. This book is not only a refutation of the manifest absurdities of "The Da Vinci Code," but a good introduction to historical reasoning. Anyone who has read Brown's book and is curious about what the real story might be should start here.
The weakness of the book is that Ehrman does not address the history of the Knights Templar, the legends of the grail, or the story behind Leonardo's paintings. This would have made his book a complete treatment of Brown's nonsense. To his credit, Ehrman sticks with his strength. He is a scholar of the history of Early Christianity and he uses his expertise to dismantle one of the great literary frauds of our time.
Ehrman is also quite good in clearly and simply relating to the average lay person just what it is historians and New Testament critics do when they assess the historical sources for Jesus and Mary Magadalene. This book is not only a refutation of the manifest absurdities of "The Da Vinci Code," but a good introduction to historical reasoning. Anyone who has read Brown's book and is curious about what the real story might be should start here.
The weakness of the book is that Ehrman does not address the history of the Knights Templar, the legends of the grail, or the story behind Leonardo's paintings. This would have made his book a complete treatment of Brown's nonsense. To his credit, Ehrman sticks with his strength. He is a scholar of the history of Early Christianity and he uses his expertise to dismantle one of the great literary frauds of our time.
Morons on both sides of the Da Vinci Code controversy have dissed the book. The fact is, if you're a born-again Christian or a New Ager, you have no respect for the kind of rigorous, dispassionate research that a scholar of Bart Ehrman's caliber performs. You'd be better off reading a work by some idiot that reinforces your preconceived notions rather than reading a book that illuminates the truth about this popular phenomena.
Ehrman states flat out that he will not deal with Leonardo, the Priory of Sion, etc. So it's absurd to fault him for doing so.
Having said that, Ehrman's book is an EXCELLENT presentation of the issues that scholars deal with in studying the life of Jesus. To readers unfamiliar with such things as the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Nag Hammadi Library and the Apocrypha, there is much sound information here. More important, Ehrman explains WHY scholars believe this or that about Jesus, Mary Magdalene, etc. I learned a great deal about the methodology scholars use to study these ancient texts, and the difficulties they encounter. Ehrman states that a Biblical scholar must know Hebrew, Latin, Greek, Aramaic and Coptic - quite a daunting task! - in order to accurately ascertain what these ancient authors meant
Someone has dismissed Ehrman is a "liberal", whatever that means. This is not accurate, as Ehrman is solely interested in truth, not in defending an inadequate point of view.
Ehrman states flat out that he will not deal with Leonardo, the Priory of Sion, etc. So it's absurd to fault him for doing so.
Having said that, Ehrman's book is an EXCELLENT presentation of the issues that scholars deal with in studying the life of Jesus. To readers unfamiliar with such things as the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Nag Hammadi Library and the Apocrypha, there is much sound information here. More important, Ehrman explains WHY scholars believe this or that about Jesus, Mary Magdalene, etc. I learned a great deal about the methodology scholars use to study these ancient texts, and the difficulties they encounter. Ehrman states that a Biblical scholar must know Hebrew, Latin, Greek, Aramaic and Coptic - quite a daunting task! - in order to accurately ascertain what these ancient authors meant
Someone has dismissed Ehrman is a "liberal", whatever that means. This is not accurate, as Ehrman is solely interested in truth, not in defending an inadequate point of view.
It is refreshing to get what I perceive as an unbiased view of the controversy brought out in Dan Browns book. With all of the Christian fundamentalists up in arms over literalizing Mr. Browns work which is "FICTION" it is nice to see someone take time to give the reality behind some of the myths and legends.
Since prior books critiquing the historical claims put forth in Dan Brown's novel The Da Vinci Code come from those within the Church, one might get the impression that it is only "matters of faith" that are at stake here. However, Bart D. Ehrman, a noted scholar of early Christianity who himself is not a believer, quickly puts that to rest. Ehrman notes how because of his expertise in the early Church he was being inundated with questions concerning the Da Vinci Code and its claims. After reading the book, he decided a critical scholarly examination of Brown's complete misrepresentations of early Christianity was in order from the point of view of modern Biblical and patristic scholarship. In so doing he focuses his concern to the fields of his expertise and ignores questions of art and architecture that also come into play in the book. However, it is the claims about early Christianity that are the crux of Brown's claims and without them there is no controversy but just odd claims about later historical figures.
The result of Ehrman's work, Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code, is a masterful disection of Brown's odd soup cooked up from historical ignorance, conspiracy theories, and outright frauds. Retaining his focus on the key issues and placing Brown's claims under the scholarly microscope, he leaves the whole thesis exposed as a total fabrication not worthy of serious consideration. At times he seems like the professor taking a lazy thinking freshman to task for a poorly researched term paper and when it is over Brown's whole thesis lay in ruins.
Eherman divides the book into two parts. The first covers the Emperor Constantine, the New Testament, and other Gospels and gives the actual results of scholarly research on these topics as opposed to the fabrications to which Brown assers are accepted facts. Constantine was certainly a key figure in the history of the Church but had nothing to do with the selection of the Gospels included in the New Testament. The four we now have were all accepted universally in the Church centuries before the Council of Nicea as any examination of the patristic writings can attest. In particular, the Gospels that Brown seeks to put forth as evidence were written centuries later. The section as a whole demonstrates that Brown really has no clue of the results of contemporary scholarship and is relying almost entirely on crackpot theorists whose work no one in the field takes seriously.
The second part of the work deals with the alleged relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene. Ehrman thoroughly demonstates Brown's claims are totally without merit and even the contrived evidence he puts forth doesn't support his thesis. Again, Brown is found to rely on poor sources with no expertise in the field. In the end, he comes across as another misguided conspiracy theorist who speaks on subjects of which he has no knowledge.
It ends up being a complete rout of The Da Vinci Code and its crackpot ideas. In the future, we will look back and wonder who could believe such nonsense and Brown will be relegated to the dustbin of crank ideas that took hold of the public imagination for a time. Like Roswell, the Bermuda Triangle, the Loch Ness monster, and other such hokum, this too shall pass. While, it is unfortunate that scholars need to take time to refute this brand of nonsense, but let us be thankful that some do.
Oddly enough, Ehrman has angered many conservative Christians on his thesis of alterations to the Gospel over time to eliminate unwanted interpretations. Reading this should at least let them see he is not merely a secular antagonist. With Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code being written by an expert scholar without an axe to grind, the result for promoters of this crank thesis is devastating. As a demonstration of the complete inanity of Browns' ideas, it is essential reading.
The result of Ehrman's work, Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code, is a masterful disection of Brown's odd soup cooked up from historical ignorance, conspiracy theories, and outright frauds. Retaining his focus on the key issues and placing Brown's claims under the scholarly microscope, he leaves the whole thesis exposed as a total fabrication not worthy of serious consideration. At times he seems like the professor taking a lazy thinking freshman to task for a poorly researched term paper and when it is over Brown's whole thesis lay in ruins.
Eherman divides the book into two parts. The first covers the Emperor Constantine, the New Testament, and other Gospels and gives the actual results of scholarly research on these topics as opposed to the fabrications to which Brown assers are accepted facts. Constantine was certainly a key figure in the history of the Church but had nothing to do with the selection of the Gospels included in the New Testament. The four we now have were all accepted universally in the Church centuries before the Council of Nicea as any examination of the patristic writings can attest. In particular, the Gospels that Brown seeks to put forth as evidence were written centuries later. The section as a whole demonstrates that Brown really has no clue of the results of contemporary scholarship and is relying almost entirely on crackpot theorists whose work no one in the field takes seriously.
The second part of the work deals with the alleged relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene. Ehrman thoroughly demonstates Brown's claims are totally without merit and even the contrived evidence he puts forth doesn't support his thesis. Again, Brown is found to rely on poor sources with no expertise in the field. In the end, he comes across as another misguided conspiracy theorist who speaks on subjects of which he has no knowledge.
It ends up being a complete rout of The Da Vinci Code and its crackpot ideas. In the future, we will look back and wonder who could believe such nonsense and Brown will be relegated to the dustbin of crank ideas that took hold of the public imagination for a time. Like Roswell, the Bermuda Triangle, the Loch Ness monster, and other such hokum, this too shall pass. While, it is unfortunate that scholars need to take time to refute this brand of nonsense, but let us be thankful that some do.
Oddly enough, Ehrman has angered many conservative Christians on his thesis of alterations to the Gospel over time to eliminate unwanted interpretations. Reading this should at least let them see he is not merely a secular antagonist. With Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code being written by an expert scholar without an axe to grind, the result for promoters of this crank thesis is devastating. As a demonstration of the complete inanity of Browns' ideas, it is essential reading.
Handy to have when reading the book or seeing the movie
I appreciate Dr. Erhman giving us a scholarly view of the DaVinci Code book. I was aware that the book took liberties, but Dr. Erhman puts it all together and it is an easy read. Thanks for all your book, I love them.
Ruth Baker
Ruth Baker
Affable, well-informed and devastating
Almost as amazing as the explosive phenomenon that was "The Da Vinci Code," is the explosion of books attacking its premises and conclusions. Bart Ehrman's book, "Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code" is an able addition to the list.
Ehrman is a historian, a Protestant, with a mainstream viewpoint. His book examines 6 "codes" that appear in TDVC. These touch on the persons of Jesus and Mary Magdalene, the process of defining the canon or list of accepted books, the role of women in the early church and other topics germane to the discussion. Ehrman's examination and conclusions are logical, based on the evidence and (I thought) quite convincing. For instance, he discusses the supposed "fact" that since all rabbis had to be married, then Jesus (often called "Rabbi" by his disciples) must have been married as well. Ehrman demolishes this notion with easily-accessible facts. The apostle Paul himself was unmarried, as evidenced by his own letters. And the 1st-century Jewish historian Josephus speaks glowingly of the Essenes, noting that they do not marry. The term "rabbi" means "teacher," and can be applied to those who have undergone and official process as well as those (like Jesus) for whom the term is used as an honorific. And, unconvincingly to skeptics, the Gospels do not mention a married Jesus. Having made the case, Ehrman states that he has broken the code (that a married Jesus was probable) and moves on.
By far, Ehrman spends the most time with the so-called gnostic gospels, upon which the hopes of so many who attack the Church are based. These works of the early centuries of the current era were known mostly through the attacks upon them made by early Church Fathers like Irenaeus. Since the 1940s, with the discover of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Nag Hammadi library, historians have had a field day studying the primary texts of the first, second and third centuries. Ehrman examines the texts themselves as well as the cosmology and theology they espouse. This section is long, confusing and hard to follow, not least because the texts themselves are contradictory and plain weird. Ehrman pays special attention to details that moderns have given special importance. There is, for instance the section in the Gospel of Phillip in which Jesus is said to have kissed Mary Magdalene often on the mouth. Ehrman shows how this text is a reconstruction, with key words missing, and that it is embedded in sections that have purely spiritual and symbolic significance. Those who see it as an example of a flesh-and-blood relationship often neglect these key aspects of the work. Not to mention that the text post-dates the canonical gospels by many decades.
"Truth and Fiction" is a careful and dispassionate critique of the fuzzy thinking of TDVC partisans. It is also an good-natured attack on best-selling authors like Elaine Pagels ("The Gnostic Gospels") who have gained prominence by championing the vision of the gnostics. But the book's ultimate attack is on the "code behind the codes" -- the attempt to make the doctrine of the gnostics equivalent to the orthodox view taught in the gospels. Ehrman's great contribution is in making clear that two gospels -- one that preaches a suffering, crucified and risen Lord, and another that preaches a Lord who did not suffer and die -- can not merely be considered alternatives of one another. They preach different realities and have different consequences for believers. One is a gospel for all, the other a gospel for the elite. One opposes the world, the other revels in it. One was passed down by those close the Jesus, the other was invented decades or centuries after his life.
Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code" was more than a work of fiction. It was an attack on the truth and on the hard-won and hard-kept beliefs of Christians over the last 2000 years. Ehrman's book is an educated, entertaining and accessible rebuttal that is well worth the read.
Ehrman is a historian, a Protestant, with a mainstream viewpoint. His book examines 6 "codes" that appear in TDVC. These touch on the persons of Jesus and Mary Magdalene, the process of defining the canon or list of accepted books, the role of women in the early church and other topics germane to the discussion. Ehrman's examination and conclusions are logical, based on the evidence and (I thought) quite convincing. For instance, he discusses the supposed "fact" that since all rabbis had to be married, then Jesus (often called "Rabbi" by his disciples) must have been married as well. Ehrman demolishes this notion with easily-accessible facts. The apostle Paul himself was unmarried, as evidenced by his own letters. And the 1st-century Jewish historian Josephus speaks glowingly of the Essenes, noting that they do not marry. The term "rabbi" means "teacher," and can be applied to those who have undergone and official process as well as those (like Jesus) for whom the term is used as an honorific. And, unconvincingly to skeptics, the Gospels do not mention a married Jesus. Having made the case, Ehrman states that he has broken the code (that a married Jesus was probable) and moves on.
By far, Ehrman spends the most time with the so-called gnostic gospels, upon which the hopes of so many who attack the Church are based. These works of the early centuries of the current era were known mostly through the attacks upon them made by early Church Fathers like Irenaeus. Since the 1940s, with the discover of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Nag Hammadi library, historians have had a field day studying the primary texts of the first, second and third centuries. Ehrman examines the texts themselves as well as the cosmology and theology they espouse. This section is long, confusing and hard to follow, not least because the texts themselves are contradictory and plain weird. Ehrman pays special attention to details that moderns have given special importance. There is, for instance the section in the Gospel of Phillip in which Jesus is said to have kissed Mary Magdalene often on the mouth. Ehrman shows how this text is a reconstruction, with key words missing, and that it is embedded in sections that have purely spiritual and symbolic significance. Those who see it as an example of a flesh-and-blood relationship often neglect these key aspects of the work. Not to mention that the text post-dates the canonical gospels by many decades.
"Truth and Fiction" is a careful and dispassionate critique of the fuzzy thinking of TDVC partisans. It is also an good-natured attack on best-selling authors like Elaine Pagels ("The Gnostic Gospels") who have gained prominence by championing the vision of the gnostics. But the book's ultimate attack is on the "code behind the codes" -- the attempt to make the doctrine of the gnostics equivalent to the orthodox view taught in the gospels. Ehrman's great contribution is in making clear that two gospels -- one that preaches a suffering, crucified and risen Lord, and another that preaches a Lord who did not suffer and die -- can not merely be considered alternatives of one another. They preach different realities and have different consequences for believers. One is a gospel for all, the other a gospel for the elite. One opposes the world, the other revels in it. One was passed down by those close the Jesus, the other was invented decades or centuries after his life.
Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code" was more than a work of fiction. It was an attack on the truth and on the hard-won and hard-kept beliefs of Christians over the last 2000 years. Ehrman's book is an educated, entertaining and accessible rebuttal that is well worth the read.
Share your thoughts with other customers
Create your own review
Create your own review
In the interest of full disclosure and in case some reader may be critical of this review, let me make the following declarations. Yes, I have read Dan Brown's novel and, being an aficionado of mystery thrillers, I thoroughly enjoyed it and, like Professor Ehrman, found it to be a real page-turner and I would recommend it to all who enjoy this genre. Yes, I have read "Holy Blood, Holy Grail," by Michael Baigent, et al, the book which Brown seems to have used for much of his "historical" information, and I was fascinated with the theory presented there about Jesus and Mary Magdalene and the existence of a secret society, the Priory of Sion, which has allegedly protected the secret of the Holy Grail down through the centuries. Furthermore, I formally studied Christian theology and history for four years as an undergraduate at a religious college and know at least something about early Christianity and the beliefs and practices of the various Christian sects in existence at the time. I have also taken Professor Ehrman's course in "Lost Christianities: Christian Scriptures and the Battles over Authentication" and had the pleasure of reading and reviewing his recent book entitled "Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew" (see it here on Amazon.com). And I have done extensive research on my own into the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Nag Hammadi documents. So I was in a position to read Brown's controversial novel without any problem, simply as a piece of exciting fiction to be enjoyed for its own sake, while dismissing the author's historical claims as the invention of an imaginative novelist.
It is all too true, unfortunately, that most people get their knowledge of historical events from motion pictures, television, and, of course, fictional books. But when it comes to novels which have a religious theme, particularly a novel which claims to be historically accurate but isn't, the misinformation generated can be particularly deadly, both intellectually and emotionally. Understandably, many traditional Christians will be upset with the allegations put forth by Brown's novel. Professor Ehrman's book addresses the historical inaccuracies in Brown's novel directly, providing the facts and insights of scholarship without demeaning the novel itself as a source of leisure enjoyment for those of us who like to read fictional works of mystery and international intrigue. Dan Brown's primary mistake, in my opinion, was to make the claim at the outset that his novel was based on historical fact. Had he not done that, I suspect there would be no problem or controversy over the content of his work. I have read a number of his novels and enjoyed them immensely. I certainly won't desert him as a reader just because of this single faux pas.
The basic questions that Professor Ehrman answers in his analysis of "The Da Vinci Code" include: What role did the emperor Constantine play in early Christianity and was he responsible for the formation of the New Testament canon?; What role did women play in the development of and practices of early Christianity and was there a feminine factor which was suppressed in later Christianity?; Were the Dead Sea Scrolls a collection of Christian documents (which Brown claims)?; Was Jesus married and were Jewish men in antiquity "condemned" for being celibate?; Was Jesus married to Mary Magdalene?; Did they have a child which was born after Jesus was crucified?; Is there a royal line of descent from Jesus and Mary Magdalene, perpetuated by the birth of their daughter, which has come down to us after almost two thousand years and still exists today?; Is Mary Magdalene indeed the real "Holy Grail," being the font of the seed of Jesus?; Has a secret society, called the Priory of Sion, created in antiquity and still in existence today, fought to protect this secret of the "Holy Grail? These are merely a few examples of the many questions that Professor Ehrman deals with in his book.
If you have read or intend to read Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code" or "Holy Blood, Holy Grail," by Michael Baigent, et al, I really suggest that you have a copy of Bart Ehrman's "Truth and Fiction in the Da Vinci Code" by your side. Its presentation of the real historical truth will not detract from your enjoyment of Brown's novel or Baigent's historical "speculation." It will, I guarantee, allow you to evaluate properly the "facts" offered in both Brown and Baigent and help you to place the historical realities about early Christianity and attitudes within early Christianity in the appropriate context to which they are entitled. This book is highly recommended!