Book Reviews

---

Negative Review:

"Yet it’s Brown’s Christology that’s false—and blindingly so. He requires the present New Testament to be a post-Constantinian fabrication that displaced true accounts now represented only by surviving Gnostic texts. He claims that Christ wasn’t considered divine until the Council of Nicea voted him so in 325 at the behest of the emperor. Then Constantine—a lifelong sun worshipper—ordered all older scriptural texts destroyed, which is why no complete set of Gospels predates the fourth century. Christians somehow failed to notice the sudden and drastic change in their doctrine."

"But by Brown’s specious reasoning, the Old Testament can’t be authentic either because complete Hebrew Scriptures are no more than a thousand years old. And yet the texts were transmitted so accurately that they do match well with the Dead Sea Scrolls from a thousand years earlier. Analysis of textual families, comparison with fragments and quotations, plus historical correlations securely date the orthodox Gospels to the first century and indicate that they’re earlier than the Gnostic forgeries. (The Epistles of St. Paul are, of course, even earlier than the Gospels.)"

"Primitive Church documents and the testimony of the ante-Nicean Fathers confirm that Christians have always believed Jesus to be Lord, God, and Savior—even when that faith meant death. The earliest partial canon of Scripture dates from the late second century and already rejected Gnostic writings. For Brown, it isn’t enough to credit Constantine with the divinization of Jesus. The emperor’s old adherence to the cult of the Invincible Sun also meant repackaging sun worship as the new faith. Brown drags out old (and long-discredited) charges by virulent anti-Catholics like Alexander Hislop who accused the Church of perpetuating Babylonian mysteries, as well as 19th-century rationalists who regarded Christ as just another dying savior-god."

Brown uses two Gnostic documents, the Gospel of Philip and the Gospel of Mary, to prove that the Magdalene was Christ’s “companion,” meaning sexual partner. The apostles were jealous that Jesus used to “kiss her on the mouth” and favored her over them. He cites exactly the same passages quoted in Holy Blood, Holy Grail and The Templar Revelation and even picks up the latter’s reference to The Last Temptation of Christ. What these books neglect to mention is the infamous final verse of the Gospel of Thomas. When Peter sneers that “women are not worthy of Life,” Jesus responds, “I myself shall lead her in order to make her male.... For every woman who will make herself male will enter the Kingdom of Heaven.”

This review was written by Sandra Miesel. She is a veteran Catholic journalist. Her review appears on the Crisis Magazine website. She seems very credible, for her review appears on many credible sites. Sandra Miesel has a lot of knowledge on the Catholic background. She has also written many short works as well as a novel.

In her review, Sandra Miesel, analyzes everything about Dan Brown's assertions. She writes how he has false information in his book about certain topics, where he gets his informationfrom and she also mentions things that Dan Brown left out about the topics he talks about. For example the Gnostic Gospels, although she agrees with Brown that the passage he used from the Gospel of Philip is the correct passage, she states that he neglected to mention the verse from another Gnostic Gospel, the Gospel of Thomas. Miesel also talks about Brown's assertions on the New Testament. Brown says that no complete set of Gospels predates the fourth century, but she points out that the orthodox Gospels do date back to the first century. Sandra Miesel has many facts that oppose Brown's assertions and points out many false claims that were made by Dan Brown about other topics like the Knight Templar.

After reading this review, I was in shock on how many points Sandra Miesel had against Dan Brown. Everything she mentioned was correct after doing further research and thoroughly looking at Brown's novel. Sandra Miesel's review is a very credible.

To read the whole review by Sandra Miesel click on the link below.

http://www.crisismagazine.com/september2003/feature1.htm

Positive Review

"The Da Vinci Code is going to make publishing history. Trust me. There are already tables at the local Barnes & Nobles featuring books about the Freemasons, biographies of Leonardo Da Vinci, guidebooks to the Louvre and Renaissance art, all centered around Brown's book. And the book has been out less than two weeks."

"It's good, damn good. The Da Vinci Code has all the right ingredients to create a massive market share of the fiction sold during the next year. The characters are believable, the fictional premise intriguing, and it has two major components to insure sales -- the Knights Templar and the search for the Holy Grail."

"You all deserve a quick plot summary. Know that there can't be one here -- the book is a thriller and details will destroy it for you. I just had to delete the next 250 or more words I'd written, because I realized it would destroy the suspense in the book. I'd defined the Holy Grail in terms of Celtic, Moor (pick your pagan) traditions. Then I wrote about the myths surrounding the Knights Templar, the persecution of Jews, the relationship between Jesus and his love, Mary Magdalene, and more. What I can tell you without ruining the book, is that Brown's book takes myth and reality and combines it in just the right way. He appears to be right on target with his many of his conclusions, and while the book is "fiction", one can't help but believe much of it. Brown doesn't insist you believe him, in fact, he's almost apologetic about how strange and unusual his conclusions may sound. In a subtle way, he warns the reader that everyone is allowed their own belief system and whatever gives someone spiritual comfort should be respected. But Using Will and Ariel Durant's The History of Civilization, Francis and Joseph Gies' Women in the Middle Ages, and Barbara Walker's The Women's Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets to confirm Brown's facts, I learned that when he puts two and two together, it's amazing what he comes up with."

This review was written by Valerie MacEwan, who is a book editor for popmatters. The site where this review was derived from is credible because many other book are also reviewed by other credible reviewers like, MacEwan.

Valerie MacEwan, unlike, Sandra Miesel, thought that The Da Vinci Code was a very great book. She wrote, "It's good, damn good." Valerie thought that this novel had all the right ingredients to create a massive market share. She also felt that the characters were believable and the fictional premise was intriguing. Valerie was expecting The Da Vinci Code to be another novel that would lose her interest and that lacked substance, but it turned out to be the opposite for her. She in fact put The Da Vinci Code on the New York Times Best Seller Times list. Valerie mentions that Brown's book takes myth and reality and combines it in just the right way. Valerie MacEwan completely thought that Dan Brown's book was a great one, she no negative opinion toward it all.

This review did not mention nothing at all about the New Testament, our topic.

While reading this review I understood how Valerie felt about the book. After reading The Da Vinci Code I also thought that the book was really great. I felt that it was very suspenseful and a book that one can just not put down.

To view Valerie's MacEwan full review on the Da Vinci Code, click below

http://www.popmatters.com/books/reviews/d/da-vinci-code.shtml

Page made by Gaby Barrios