You are here:   Reputations >  Overrated > Overrated: Dan Brown
You can't request more than 20 challenges without solving them. Your previous challenges were flushed.
 

It was only at the Council of Nicaea in AD 325, wrote Brown, that Jesus was said to be divine. Not quite. Jesus is called "God" seven times in the New Testament and is referred to as being divine on dozens of occasions. He was crucified not for being a prophet or an ethicist, or for that matter a champion of social justice, but for claiming to be the Son of God. 

There are numerous letters from pagan and thus objective writers from the first and second centuries, long before Nicaea, describing how Christians believe Jesus to be divine, including one written to the Emperor Marcus Aurelius, who died in AD 180. All the Council of Nicaea did was to affirm that Jesus was in fact the Son of God.

But Brown didn't stop there. The Dead Sea Scrolls are the earliest Christian writings in existence, opined our boy, and the Gnostic Gospels frequently mention Mary Magdalene and her marriage to Jesus. Actually the Dead Sea Scrolls are Jewish writings and have no direct connection with Christianity at all, and as for those much-discussed Gnostic Gospels, they at no time mention Jesus as being married to Mary.

But here's the point, and one that applies equally to the latest book. Dan Brown doesn't expect his readers actually to read the Gnostic Gospels or Dante, any more than he worries that they will know that there are no monks — albino or otherwise — in the largely lay Catholic organisation Opus Dei, or that the Emperor Constantine did not write any of the Gospels. He knows that if you say these things with apparent authority, and also imply that it's esoteric and dangerous knowledge, some of the more credulous out there will drink the unholy blood from the unholy grail. In other words, Brown condescends and relies on mass ignorance, and in the contemporary world there's a lot of it about.

View Full Article
 
Share/Save
 
 
 
 
Barbara Mathews
July 10th, 2013
10:07 PM
I am a cradle born Catholic and have recently gone back to the Church. I read the "Da Vinci Code" and last September I retired with 30 years from profession as a librarian. I picked up Brown's anti-catholic leanings in the book, but I dismissed them and put the book where it properly belongs, in the Fiction section. It's alright to mention his facts are inaccurate, but I would think the Church should stress Brown is a fiction writer and not a theologian. There are number of good non-fiction resources that can be referred to give accurate information regarding the history of Christianity and the Roman Catholic Church, including our warts.

Angelic by nature
July 10th, 2013
10:07 PM
Both of his movies were long, boring and with predictable endings. I wanted to see them because of the hipe but then after half way through of both movies I realized that the people who love his stuff are stupid. I guess garbage sells doesn't it?

Eljunia
July 10th, 2013
8:07 PM
I finished reading Inferno, I don't take Dan Brown seriously and the plot of this book read more like a tourist guide book than anything else. For me Angels and Demons has the most exciting plot.

Anonymous
July 4th, 2013
12:07 PM
I would agree with all this save for the claim that Jesus was crucified for claiming to be the Son of God. Crucifixion was a Roman punishment and the sign Pilate ordered to be placed on the cross referred to Jesus as King of The Jews.Pilate seemed to be concerned with Jesus as making a claim to Earthly power and possibly a threat to civil order at the tense time of Passover. The Temple authorities may have had different motives for accusing him and handing him over to Pilate.

Post your comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.