Title: Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci CodeEditor: Bart D. EhrmanPublisher: Oxford University Press 2006 (First published 2004)ISBN: 978-0-19-530713-9Pages: 190
Dan Brown’s ‘The Da Vinci Code’ was an immensely successful fictional work in 2004. Millions and millions of copies were sold and the public really engrossed themselves in this book of facts and fiction intermingled with historical ideas. The plot is the search for the Holy Grail and which suggests that Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene married and had a child. The book ends with the protagonist, Sophie Neveu turning out to be one of the descendants of the holy bloodline. Brown had asserted that the facts he had furnished in the book are authentic. Bart D Ehrman is the James A Gray Professor of the University of North Carolina and is an authority on the early Church and the life of Jesus. He admits that being a historian, the passing off of half-truths and fiction as historical facts grates on his nerves.
Ehrman summarizes the factual errors in the ‘code’. They are summarized as follows.
- Jesus’ life was decidedly not recorded by thousands of followers across the land.
- It’s not true that eightly Gospels ‘were considered’ for the New Testament.
- It’s absolutely not true that Jesus was not considered divine until the Council of Nicea, that before that he was considered merely as ‘a mortal prophet’.
- Constantine did not commission a ‘new Bible’ that omitted references to Jesus’ human traits.
- The Dead Sea Scrolls were not ‘found in the 1950s’. It was 1947. And the Nag Hammadi documents don’t tell the Grail story at all, nor do they emphasize Jesus’ himan traits. Quite the contrary.
- ‘Jewish decorum’ in no way forbade ‘a Jewish man to be unmarried’. In fact, most of the community behind the Dead Sea scrolls were male unmarried celibates.
- The Dead Sea Scrolls were not among ‘the earliest Christian records’. They are Jewish, with nothing Christian in them.
- We have no idea about the lineage of Mary Magdalene, nothing connects her with the ‘house of Benjamin’. And even if she were, this wouldn’t make her a descendant of David.
- There is no evidence that Mary Magdalene was pregnant at the time of crucifixion
- The Q document is not a surviving source being hid by the Vatican, nor is it a book allegedly written by Jesus himself. It’s a hypothetical document that scholars have posited as having been available to Matthew and Luke, principally a collection of the sayings of Jesus.
Ehrman makes it clear that Constantine was not a vile and authoritative figure as made out to be, in the ‘Da Vinci Code’. The belief systems were in place much before Constantine’s ascendancy to the throne. In fact, the assemblage of canonical documents didn’t end even after some decades of his death. Earlier Roman emperors suppressed Christianity, but Constantine embraced it and to make it uniform so that it is suitable for all classes of subjects, he called the ‘Council of Nicea’ to decide on the documents which are to be included in the Scriptures.
Dan Brown also asserts that there are thousands of references to the historical Jesus during his life time. Ehrman states that this was not the case. On the contrary, there is no evidence that anyone recorded the facts of his life while he was still living because almost all his followers were more likely illiterate, nor did most people in his time kept a chronicle of their lives. This may seem counterintuitive: surely someone who was so significant – someone who had so many followers and allies and enemies, someone who did such spectacular deeds and delivered such spectacular teachings, someone who inspired a great world religion with many millions of followers throughout the course of history – must have been the talk of the Roman empire. But no, unfortunately, we have nothing. (p.103). Jesus’ name is never even mentioned by a pagan source of the first century at all. The first reference to Jesus in a pagan source does not come until the year 112 CE, in the writings of a governor of a Roman province, whose name was Pliny. In a letter he wrote to the emperor Trajan, Pliny indicates that there were ‘Christians’ in his province who were illegally gathering together to ‘worship Christ as a god’. That’s all he says about Jesus himself. (p.105). The Roman procurator Pontius Pilate (who governed Judea from 26 to 36 CE) during the reign of emperor Tiberius never even mention him! The first Jewish reference to Christ is in 93 CE in the encyclopedia of Josephus in which he discusses a very large number of important Jewish fgures, including several from near his own time (including some others named Jesus). And as it turns out, he does mention Jesus of Nazareth twice. In one reference he discusses a man named James, who was the ‘brother of Jesus, who is called the messiah’. That’s all he says about him in this reference. (p.106). The Dead Sea Scrolls, which was a document made in the middle of the first century CE don’t mention him. Even the first Christian documents mentioning Jesus are the gospels which were prepared in the second half of the first century. Even though Ehrman mentions at several places about the rigour and consistency of documentation for accepting historical facts, this paucity of references does not make him suspicious of the existence of Jesus even for a moment.
Contrary to Brown’s arguments, the Gospels which are not included in canon, like the Gospel of Mary, Gospel of Philip, Infancy Gospel of Thomas etc, portrays Jesus are more divine than the canonical four. In fact Mary Magdalene was not a prominent character in the life of Jesus at all, as her name is mentioned in only 13 places in contrast to that of Peter, which is mentioned 90 times. There is no evidence that Jesus married her nor that they had a child. Jesus was a Jewish apocalypticist who maintained the celibacy expected of his creed.
By crystal clear elucidation of historical facts, proofs and intelligent interpolations, Ehrman refutes almost all arguments of Dan Brown, but confesses that he personally likes the ‘Code’ for the ingenious plot and the fast paced narration and would personally recommend the book. This book should be seen as a compendium of the ‘Da Vinci Code’, as something to debrief the reader from the magical influence of Brown. Those who have read Code must read this one also to keep the record straight. Superbly crafted on historical evidence, the only flaw in the logic is that the existence of Jesus is treated as a fait accompli. This book is highly recommended as it describes the growth of early Church and Christianity itself which interests the historical minded readers too.
Rating: 4 Star
