Imagine if they made the "Rushdie Code"

[Xiahou]

Your point about additions and deletions over the years may be apt. However, does this not then invalidate pretty much everything (on a host of subjects, not just the life of Joshua bar Joseph) in the Western canon prior to 1400? If so, what are we left with aside from modern archeological evidence?

It's too late, and Im too lazy to look all of this up again- but I think he's wrong anyway. Afaik, there are a few suspect words in the passage Don quoted, but I believe it's widely accepted by historians. There are passages on Jesus written by Josephus that some suspect were modified significantly- but I don't believe that was one of them.

The thing that really struck me as silly about the DaVinci code was that it contends Jesus was mortal, not divine. So, if that was true, he was just another man with some great ideas. Why the hell would a super-duper secret society go to so much trouble to protect and nurture the bloodline of someone who's no more special than you or I? If he wasnt divine, as the book contends, what's the signifigance?

[Mount Suribachi]

Y'know, if the bible said Jesus married Mary Magdalene and had a child, Dan Brown would write a book saying how its all a lie and he never married and had kids. Thats just the way the world is. Whatever the bible says on any subject, people will try to prove that the opposite is what actually happened.

*shrugs shoulders*

[English assassin]

On topic, we know exactly what happens when you make a Rushdie code, because he did it. Some idiot issues a fatwah and the British taxpayer gets a bill of millions of pounds for 24 hr Special Branch protection.

So far as I know this hasn't happened to Mr Brown, and the worst he needs protecting from is snotty reviews in the London Review of Books.

So to those who say the majority of mulisms would react as do the majority of Christians, I say, yes, but its the minority you need to worry about.

And to DD, I say, and your point is?

[Devastatin Dave]

And to DD, I say, and your point is?

I wanted to know your opinions.

[Brenus]

“If so, what are we left with aside from modern archeological evidence?” You mean apart the fact that Christianity still exist? Well, we depend on texts written after the Christ’s death, and most of the texts we study were written and biased. But we have other authors speaking of Christianity. I can’t remember the names, but one spoke about the “mud of the Euphrates”, and another one complaining about “again a Jew Sect”.
We also know that the conversion didn’t work so well at the beginning, because we have some records in Greece, showing a decline of the few converts in this country. Christianity was in concurrence with the cult of Isis and Mithra.

We also know that Jesus as preacher was part of an intellectual Jewish movement (the Esseinians, first builders of kind of religious community in Qumran) which was unhappy of the Priest of the Temple and their interpretation of the Dogma. They were practising chastity, had the benediction of the bread and the wine, baptised, and didn’t eat any animals except fish, exactly what did the early Christians and then the Catharses.

“I believe it's widely accepted by historians” Not really. This passage is highly suspect, on contrary. It doesn’t match with the rest of the text, in content and style.
Flavius Joseph himself is questionable about his biography. What he pretended to be and studied is hardly believable. Well in fact it can’t be true. More, living under the reign of Nero, it is difficult to imagine he will write such thing about the Christians.

Flavius Josephus wrote first work, the Jewish War, in Aramaic, and presented it to Vespasian between 75 and 79. An assistant translated it into the language of scholars of his days, Greek. So, you can see there is a lot a possibilities to transform and modified the texts, and even more after, during the development of Christianity, when the only people doing that were the one who had a big interest to show that Christ was a reality.

[Xiahou]

“I believe it's widely accepted by historians” Not really. This passage is highly suspect, on contrary. It doesn’t match with the rest of the text, in content and style.
Flavius Joseph himself is questionable about his biography. What he pretended to be and studied is hardly believable. Well in fact it can’t be true. More, living under the reign of Nero, it is difficult to imagine he will write such thing about the Christians.

Flavius Josephus wrote first work, the Jewish War, in Aramaic, and presented it to Vespasian between 75 and 79. An assistant translated it into the language of scholars of his days, Greek. So, you can see there is a lot a possibilities to transform and modified the texts, and even more after, during the development of Christianity, when the only people doing that were the one who had a big interest to show that Christ was a reality.

Allow me to refer to wikipedia:

Over the last century, the consensus seems to have changed, and the subjective nature of many of the arguments used in the 19th century has been recognized. Judging from the 2003 survey of the historiography, it seems that the majority of modern scholars consider that Josephus really did write something here about Jesus, but that the text that has reached us is corrupt to a perhaps quite substantial extent. In the words of the Catholic Encyclopedia entry for Flavius Josephus, "The passage seems to suffer from repeated interpolations." There has been no consensus on which portions are corrupt, or to what degree.

Of course, I dont have access to the survey the author references.

Take from it what you will, but I find it much more likely that a reference to Jesus was embelished in later transcriptions rather than wholly fabricated and arbitrarily inserted.

[Brenus]

As you said: “In the words of the Catholic Encyclopedia”. Hardly an independent body, is it?

My understanding is the text was “wholly fabricated and arbitrarily inserted”. Why Flavius would speak about a obscure preacher, who got the most dishonourable death you can imagine in the Roman world, officially the death to the rebel against Rome, him as a former rebel but now in the way to become a recognised member of the roman society? That should be a death wish under Nero. All this entire work was made to show he is a good Roman Citizen and in the middle of a text, without any link with the rest of the text, in an absolute distinctive style, in he inserted this paragraph… No way. It is a medieval cut and past exercice.

[Xiahou]

As you said: “In the words of the Catholic Encyclopedia”. Hardly an independent body, is it?

You've confused me there... the Encylopedia notes that the passage has suffered from numerous interpolations- Im puzzled on why you seem to be attacking that as biased. The survey mentioned has nothing to do with the Catholic Encyclopedia

My understanding is the text was “wholly fabricated and arbitrarily inserted”. Why Flavius would speak about a obscure preacher, who got the most dishonourable death you can imagine in the Roman world, officially the death to the rebel against Rome, him as a former rebel but now in the way to become a recognised member of the roman society? That should be a death wish under Nero. All this entire work was made to show he is a good Roman Citizen and in the middle of a text, without any link with the rest of the text, in an absolute distinctive style, in he inserted this paragraph… No way. It is a medieval cut and past exercice.

Let's go back to the well again shall we?

The ragged structure of Antiquities involves frequent disruptions to the narrative, not least because it was mainly composed by a number of scribal assistants. Linguistic analysis has not proven conclusive when compared with other passages in Josephus which likewise exhibit unusual features. The supposed confession of Josephus relies on the standard text. But a recent study by Alice Whealey has demonstrated that a variant Greek text of this sentence existed in the 5th century—"He was believed to be the Christ." The standard text, then, has simply become corrupt by the loss of the main verb and a subsequent scribal "correction" of the prolative infinitive. In any event, the audience for the work was Roman, and the Romans always referred to Jesus as "Christus", which would make this merely an identification. Finally, it has been pointed out that every line of the passage can be objected to, or supported, by one argument or another.

You're free to think what you want on the passage's authenticity, but dont claim your view is the one widely accepted by historians without evidence.

[Ja'chyra]

The thing that really struck me as silly about the DaVinci code was that it contends Jesus was mortal, not divine. So, if that was true, he was just another man with some great ideas. Why the hell would a super-duper secret society go to so much trouble to protect and nurture the bloodline of someone who's no more special than you or I? If he wasnt divine, as the book contends, what's the signifigance?

People have nurtured Royal bloodlines to use as a figurehead, think how much better a figurehead would be if people believed it was a descendant from God.

[Xiahou]

People have nurtured Royal bloodlines to use as a figurehead, think how much better a figurehead would be if people believed it was a descendant from God.

The they didn't believe he was God, and they had no intention of ever revealing it.... making it a pretty pointless exercise. Besides, if they had some agenda to use his descendants for some sort of power-grab they'd be just as bad as the Catholics that the priory looks down on with such disdain.

There are just so many silly contradictions in the book. They claim the supression of Mary Magdelane in the Church is a supression of the sacred feminine..... excuse me? I thought Jesus and Mary were supposed to be normal people- what's sacred? They regularly refer to it as the "sacred" or "holy" bloodline when according to their own theories, it's nothing of the sort.

[Reverend Joe]

Just a suggestion, but maybe you should all quit wasting your time with a silly little thriller that will be completely gone in 5-10 years, and try reading "The Last Temptation of Christ." That, or seeing the movie. Slightly better story.

[Louis VI the Fat]

try reading "The Last Temptation of Christ." That, or seeing the movie. Slightly better story.

Indeed. It makes the DVC look like Harry Potter for grown-ups.