In the case of the Da Vinci Code, I think it is interesting, both protagonists see the debate to be truth verses fiction. It is really a debate between two fictions: Both the Da Vinci Code and The Bible effectively set their fictions against known histories to introduce the delusion of accuracy. Brown (in real life) admits to the smoke and mirrors. The Christian Church does not.

I would take it Brown would admit that the Merovingian dynasty commenced in the early fifth century and the so called keystone refers to a missing corner stone in the Jewish Temple. The Merovingian so-called divine bloodline legend involves a second (dual) impregnation of the dynasty’s pregnant founding mother by a representation of Neptune, while she was swimming.

My family built Rosslyn (Roslin) Chapel. My g-g-g-great father lived in Rosslyn (not the Chapel), as late as 1830s. While having minor links to the Merovingians, the primary Rosslyn Sinclair line is from the Viking King Rollo. His descendants invaded Normandy in 911 and later the England in 1066.

Sinclair (Saint Clair) links to the Masons and Templars are true. One interesting thing is Oliver Cromwell would not allow General Monk to destroy the Chapel, but our family castle was nearly levelled. Possibly, Masonic links, so the Chapel remained. There were underground templar/masonic links deeper than the Catholic-Potestant conflict... true.

On the other hand, the Christian Church would no longer walk on the water, if popular interest is heightened in the Council of Nicea, where The Bible was complied, as a “selected” works of gospels. The many gospels were written by Jesus sects, before Constantine and not by the named disciples.

And three hundred years before then, several Messianic characters went about their missions. Moreover, compromises had to be made by the Jews to meld with the gentile Romans. The Church must avoid attention in these areas, otherwise it does not exit.

Given that Jesus was a direct descendent of King David, in the Jewish law of the time he was expected to produce an heir to this line. There are many references to this. Why is it then postulated that Jesus was not married?
Be wary of the bible interperations of Jewish law. Re the trial of Jesus. The Sanhedrim court did NOT meet at night, nor on a Sabbath, and did not condone unanimous verdicts. Three strikes and you start to worry.

john-tassie,
Jesus was crucified on Thursday morning, and died on thursday evening, was buried early friday; as he rose on the third period of daylight after his death i.e. Friday day 1, Saturday day 2, resurrected first light Sunday morning day 3. He said he would rise on the third day.

Where are your many references to the fact that Jesus was to produce an heir? Could we please have them? It is nothing more than postulative nonsence. If such were the case then Matthew would have said something about it, as he followed the Davidic line. Kings in Israel were not strictly heireditary Monarchs. Jesus had family links with David of the tribe of Judah but he was not the eldest or only son in the line of David. In fact Zecharias called in many young men of David's line to see who would be a suiter for Mary. Zecharias chose Joseph because he already had two elder sons. A baby in that setting would not cause suspicion of being the natural king and heir.

Quote, "Given that Jesus was a direct descendent of King David, in the Jewish law of the time he was expected to produce an heir to this line. There are many references to this."

Oliver....CRAP!

Francis,
You are a looser. Rather than just expressing you emotions I suggest you educate yourself in debate and defence of truth. Do not waste the capacity of 700 words where you could defend your position with anger. I suggest you evaluate your life and relationship to the God who loves and forgives his opponents.

What I love about true Christians is that these "based on truth" kind of stories (DVC) are like flies on their back. I like the quiet confidence as opposed to the hysterical carry on of those who don't really believe that the Teachings will stand up to the onslaught.

They (true Christians) casually break a twig off an old spotted gum and swoosh - no flies on old mate's back. Intrinsic truth should not be swayed by extrinsic half-truths. Pssst - Delusion -who said that? Have to think about that. Nevertheless, I think we know certain truths. The Bible can reasure us of those truths. It is when we ignore them that things fall apart. I can see that and I am a lowly Pagan.

For instance, I once read an account of an incident during Hitler's reign. A Nazi car was driving along a street. A Jewish family was walking along it. The car stopped and called the family over. The Nazi officers asked them to clean their car's windscreen. The mother told her daughter to go and sit on some steps nearby and look the other way. She started to clean it with the edge of he blouse. The Nazi officer approached the little girl and ordered her to help her mother. The mother protested. The officer ordered the little girl to remove her panties, dip them in the cold snow and use them to clean the cars windscreen. Nazi then ordered the child to put the freezing undies back on and drove away.

Now hold that feeling. Repulsion, sadness, disgust - your sense of justice offended. You can talk till your blue in the face about divine mystery and all that, and people are doing more good than harm by doing so, however, can someone tell me what it is that causes people like those Nazis to be so unkind? To turn from those feelings? To not do unto others. (Golden Rule)