The Da Vinci Code - Fiction based on Fiction

[Truth]

Dan Brown’s fictional best seller, The Da Vinci Code, sat at the top of the best seller’s list for weeks. Goddess worshippers and Christian haters around the globe have not only given it rave reviews, but offer it up as proof that Christianity is a lie. You might be wondering how a fiction novel can have such an impact. It can because Brown makes the claim that the book is based on fact. In bold letters in the front of the book Brown alerts the reader that what they are about to read, while being a fictional story, is based on historical fact. Many have argued that we shouldn’t be so concerned about a work of fiction, and in one sense they are right. If people knew their history, their Bibles, and studied their own religion thoroughly, we wouldn’t need to be concerned about this book. However, many of the numerous factual errors and boldface lies in Brown’s books won’t be obvious to the general public. Brown knows that the majority of readers will accept his conspiracy theories and distortions of history, because he knows most people don’t know, for example, what the Gnostic gospels even are. Most people wouldn’t pick up on the fact that Brown can’t even get the date of the Dead Sea Scrolls discovery right. To counter Brown’s attempt to deceive the lost and attack Christianity, I have compiled a list of some of the errors found in the Da Vinci Code. It is by no means an exhaustive list, but it will give you an idea of the poor scholarship and deceitfulness of Dan Brown. Hopefully, it will also equip you with some of the information you will need to battle the revival of paganism that has, no doubt, been helped along by this book.



Error #1: More than once in the book, the protagonist, Teabing, makes the claim that the canonical gospels are not the earliest gospels. Instead, he claims, the suppressed Gnostic gospels are the earliest written gospels and the canonical gospels were selected from among 80 other gospels.



First, there were only less than half that many books written about Jesus life. The two Gnostic gospels Brown relies on most heavily weren’t written until the second century A.D., long after the New Testament gospels were written. It makes sense that the Gnostic gospels came about in the late second century, as this is when Gnostic thought was most prevalent. However, the New Testament was complete before the end of the 1st Century.



As a side note - The Gospel of Peter, one of the very Gospels that Brown claims as an earlier writing, blames the Jews for the crucifixion. Another Gnostic Gospel, the Gospel of Thomas, claims women must become men in order to receive salvation. Apparently Brown’s Gospel is not only anti-Semitic, but also chauvinistic.



Error #2: The Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered in the 1950’s.



This one’s priceless. It seems Brown can’t even get a simple date right. The Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered in 1947, not in the 1950’s.



Error #3: The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Gnostic texts found at Nag Hammadi are the earliest Christian Records.



Another howler. The Dead Sea Scrolls are strictly Jewish documents. They don’t contain any gospels or anything even mentioning Jesus. There is also absolutely no evidence that any of the gnostic documents were written before the late second century AD anyway.



Error #4: Jesus Christ never claimed to be divine and was never worshipped as a deity until the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D.



This is just plain false. Jesus is called God (theos) seven times in the New Testament and is called Lord in the divine sense several times. Everyone knows that the texts of the New Testament predate the Council of Nicea, and that these were first century beliefs.



Error #5: Christianity borrowed its beliefs from the pagan religion of Mithraism. Mithraism worshipped the pre-Christian God Mithras, called the Son of God and Light of the World, who was born on December 25th, died, was buried in a rock tomb, and then resurrected in three days.



Scholars of Mithraism would strongly disagree with Brown on all of these points. Nowhere is Mithras given the title Son of God and the Light of the World. Brown apparently made this up because it sounded good. Mithras was born on December 25th, however this proves nothing. The New Testament never associated December 25th with the birth of Christ. The early Christians chose to celebrate the birth of Christ on this day intentionally to oppose the pagan mid-winter festival of Saturnalia. They never claimed Jesus was actually born on that date. The claim that Mithras died and was buried in a rock tomb is just not true. Scholars will tell you that in Mithraism there is no death of Mithras at all. So, there was no rock tomb and no resurrection.



Error #6: Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene.



The New Testament never mentions Jesus being married or even suggests it, so Brown uses one of the Gnostic gospels, the Gospel of Philip to support this claim. We only have fragments of the text he uses as his support and that text reads as follows:

“And the companion of the…Mary Magdalene…her more than…the disciples…kiss her…on her…” (Philip 63:33-36). Philip 58-59 seems to indicate that the kiss would have been on the lips. In 1 Corinthians 16, Paul mentions this kind of chaste kiss of fellowship, and this is likely what is meant here. However, we need not rest on that argument.



The protagonist in Brown’s book claims that the word “companion” in this verse actually means spouse because that’s what the Aramaic word really means. I kind of feel sorry for Brown here. This document wasn’t written in Aramaic. It was written in Coptic. The word used for companion is koinonos and it means companion, not spouse.



Error #7: Christianity honored the Jewish Sabbath of Saturday, but Constantine changed the day to coincide with the pagan veneration day of the sun.



Once again, Brown is just flat wrong. All available evidence shows that Christians were honoring Sunday as the Sabbath long before Constantine. Brown may be confusing Paul’s trips to the synagogue on the Sabbath to preach to the Jews. If you wanted to preach to the Jews about Jesus, where would you find a large gathering of Jews to preach too? Perhaps the synagogue on the Sabbath? In any case, it is clear from scripture that the Christian Sabbath is on the first day of the week (Acts 20:7, 1 Cor. 16:2).



There are many more errors found in Brown’s book, but this should be sufficient to demonstrate that his scholarship is poor, his theories are not based on fact, and, in my opinion, his intention is to discredit Christianity by promoting goddess worship and paganism based on heretical texts. It’s important that Christians expose these kind of attacks on our faith, and imperative that we educate people on the true history and message of the Word of God. We have an advantage. Because our faith is built on God’s Word and on truth, we can depend on facts to present our case. We don’t have to resort to lies, conspiracy theories, and revisionist history

[seven]

Dan Brown’s fictional best seller, The Da Vinci Code, sat at the top of the best seller’s list for weeks. Goddess worshippers and Christian haters around the globe have not only given it rave reviews, but offer it up as proof that Christianity is a lie. You might be wondering how a fiction novel can have such an impact. It can because Brown makes the claim that the book is based on fact. In bold letters in the front of the book Brown alerts the reader that what they are about to read, while being a fictional story, is based on historical fact.

Brown printed that all though the novel is a fictional story it is based on historical fact is incorrect.

He actually is not vague about which he states as facts at all. The facts that he states is in reference to The Priorty of Sion being a European secret society founded in 1099 and is a real organization.

He also makes reference to Opus Dei, a deeply devote Catholic being the topic of recent controversy due to reports of brainwashing, coercion, and a dangerous practice known as "corporal mortification."

He states a fact that Opus Dei has just completed constuction of a $47 million National Headquarters at 243 Lexington Avenue in New York City.

The last fact that he mentions is that "All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate."

Many have argued that we shouldn’t be so concerned about a work of fiction, and in one sense they are right. If people knew their history, their Bibles, and studied their own religion thoroughly, we wouldn’t need to be concerned about this book.

If Christians believed that God meant, "ask and you shall recieve" and "what is in the darkness shall come to light", than I think, the way you believe, true Christians wouldn't so easily be decieved.

I question any Christians that fear any book or any information that may make anyone question what they have been programmed to believe.

If Christians knew their own history, they would know that the Pagen religon was around long before Jewish religon which in fact we know that was around before Christianity.

Abarham was the earliest known man, from which the 3 main religons are rooted (Jewish, Christianity, and Muslim - in this order), had a father who carved Pagen idols to worship. When he smashed all the idols his father had on his shrine explaining to his father that the idols were fighting among theirselves over the offerings that were left on the shrine, this was the first rebellion known against the Pagen Religon and the idea of One God (A God which is the perfect ONE when his 7 spirits unite mentioned in Revelations.)

Abarham also began the tradition of women accepting their husbands last name as their own, passing them down to their children, so that the family name would be all followed after the husband and the father, giving men more control of their and superior over anything family owned which naturally made the importance of having son's to carry on the family estates encouraging their superiority over women. If a daughter married she would not be entitled to the family estate because her name would not match after she was married. This obviously leaves the role of male and female imbalanced giving only the men the opportunity to inherit wealth and leaving the women depend on another mans wealth through marriage promoting a male dominated society.
Christians would be shocked if they actually made effort to know the history of Christianity and all of the corruption, brainwashing, greed, and blood shed among any competition that threaten their control over it's people. Fear and sruvival is why Christianity survives today, refusing to let anyone have their own teachers and guidances to spirituality seeing it as a threat to their ability to control the masses by threats and violence and not by faith. None of which Jesus promoted as a way to become closer to God.

The Vatican itself, beautifully remodeled durring the Renaissance in the 16th century, with the finest artist, sculptures, and architects was financed by selling sins at a high rated fee to assure that they wouldn't be hold accountable for their sins as long as they bought their way around them.

This is just one example of the many corruptions I'm sure that Christians do not know when ignorant to the history of their own religon. The more famous horrors in history are The Spanish Inquisition and The Salem Witch trials which are not ever discussed so that we may learn our history's or mistakes but are dismissed as if there is no responsibilty associated with it's survival. Not to mention, American History itself, like Inquistion or Witch Trials, lets not forget what the Protastant Christians did to the Native Americans which we also like to pretend was a beautiful time of making friends and feasting by celebrating Thanks Giving. Let's just forget about the massacure that happen to the indians because they weren't worthy daring to have their own relationship and respect for spirituality, so this was an excellent reason to accept they were hethans and justified the genocide of their race because they were not God fearing.

However, many of the numerous factual errors and boldface lies in Brown’s books won’t be obvious to the general public. Brown knows that the majority of readers will accept his conspiracy theories and distortions of history, because he knows most people don’t know, for example, what the Gnostic gospels even are. I happen to know what the Gnostic gospels were before I read this novel and if people didn't have a clue what the Gnostic gospels were, then is it so bad that Brown intoduced it's existance creating curiousity to discover more of some missing truths?

To counter Brown’s attempt to deceive the lost and attack Christianity, I have compiled a list of some of the errors found in the Da Vinci Code. It is by no means an exhaustive list, but it will give you an idea of the poor scholarship and deceitfulness of Dan Brown. Hopefully, it will also equip you with some of the information you will need to battle the revival of paganism that has, no doubt, been helped along by this book.

I've actually seen Dan Brown himself being interviewed. I'm not sure what scholarship you are trying to make fraudulant, but he had no problem at all stating the FACT that he, by all means, was not claiming to be a Historian.

He clearly communicated that he was inspired to write his novel on some doctrines that he had read to which some of the information he found bizzar and had to make a trip to Paris to view and learn even further about artwork that might have had hidden messages of Mary's role in Jesus life.

He made it clear that he was inspired by books he read by well known historians such as Lawernce Garndner (King of Grails, Bloodline of the Holy Grail, and a book he just realeased on Mary Magdelene but I'm not sure of the exact title) and after finding interest in the Gnostic Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls which were hidden away (and in mentioned in the Bible as being commanded to hide them from corruption) such as the Gospel of Mary and the Gospel of Thomas. At Jesus' crucifiction, did he not state to Mary to carry on his teachings? Why do we not see her Gospel in the King James Bible?

I would love to address your following comments further but I will have to return.

Before I go, I want to note that all though it is not mentioned in the Bible that Jesus was married to Mary, it also never stated that he wasn't. There is only 3 years of his adult life that is told in the bible that we know today.

There are many things in the bible that point to clues that she actually was married to him but I will have to address those later.

I am very tired and I'm sure I've mistyped a lot or am not typing clearly. Just wait until I am fully awake and alert!

Believe me, I will.... you just found someone to debate these issues if this is what you were searching for!

[>>Flyboy<<]

As the return of the Messiah is mentioned in the Old Testament, would you think there would of been some mention of his wife and the "Holy Grail?"

[seven]

As the return of the Messiah is mentioned in the Old Testament, would you think there would of been some mention of his wife and the "Holy Grail?"
How much do we hear about our President's wife when it comes to blowing up or taken over the country? No it doesn't suprise me that men fail to mention any of the sort when it comes to telling the end of the world.

How far fetch is it to believe that "The Holy Grail" is in fact his wife? Wouldn't that seem to hold more importance than say > A Cup?
Cups are symbolism for emotions, the feminine side of nature. Protecting the Holy Grail carrying the blood of Jesus....
Protecting the blood of Jesus? His lineage maybe? His children? If Cups represent the feminine energy of emotions and the feminine energy carrying his blood that is so sacrad - it's far easier for me to believe that protecting his wife and unborn child makes a whole world of more sense than a whole army of the Knights Templar protecting a CUP!
The Messiah returning with the Holy Grail, his wife, seems to be more powerful and makes more sense than The Messiah returning with the Holy Grail, a Cup to bring back peace and ever lasting life. Life is created with two energies - when male and female unite - this is how God gave as the power to create and continue his creation.
Again, if people knew the history of their own religon, than they would also look into the symbolism that these things represent.
Why would they mention this as his wife? Was it not a male dominated society, especially back when all the Testaments were written?
The cross itself was used as a devise of torture. It is ironic that this is the symbolism that is used to manipulate the promotion of faith when it's nature is to promote fear. (Not that religon is guilty of promoting fear or anything! Nonsense!)
The Dead Sea Scrolls as well as the Gnostic Gospels shows history that were not manipulated or tainted by government authorities (durring times when the Church was the government authority).
I haven't touched this subject in quite a while, so what I state now, I will return with more details.
I do know that there are letters found by Bishops and Popes making references to leave certain Gospels out and/or certain verses out of the four gospels we know now because it would inconvient the control the Church can hold over it's people (I will be more specific later with an accurate example. I'll have to go find my facts to back them up. It's been a long time!)
I, like I'm sure most others, when hearing the possiblilty of Jesus being wedded to Mary Magdelene, I thought was outragous!
I grew up in Little Rock, AR and at the time The Last Temptation of Christ came along in theaters I was convinced that that this movie was pure evil and disgusted by the fact that someone would communicate that Jesus would ever be married!
I believed the movie was banned in my town, along with Thornbirds (a movie about a Catholic Priest falling inlove) and I remember going to my stepmom's Catholic church as they preached outraged to this evil movie.
Okay, I moving away from my point. My point is, I was programmed to believe that Jesus was perfection. I didn't have a problem with that and still don't today. What I do have a problem with is this, how does having a wife and creating offspring threaten his perfection?
If he was to be born an example of the purpose God created man and to bring man closer to God by helping man understand the reason what the purpose is for being created. Why wouldn't representing being a loving husband and a father of authority not figure into what it is to be a perfect man?
To have a wife is not sin. To have children is not a sin either.
The need to send the message and connect us with God and leave out the major roles of a man and imply that this would prove opposite of perfection.
Well than, for all men to be truly Christ like, will fall short of perfection when taking a wife and reproducing offspring? If all men followed Christ strictly by is actions and question "what would Jesus do?" which would not have a wife (by popular belief) and not produce children....
Well than wouldn't the creation of man no longer exist? I just don't understand how this is the representation of the perfect man.
God created Eve for Adam so that man would not be alone. Why God expect Jesus to not have a wife to care for him?
The symbol for equality is an equal sign, correct? =
The crucifix is the two lines being crossed and the one that crosses it is shorter than the one that stands. This represents the importance of the male energy holding more importance than the one that crosses is, the female energy.
I won't start with the meaning of numbers and the signifigance of 11 because a new thread is necessary for this one. But there is a lot to be said about the equal sign standing is the symbol of the number 11.

[seven]

There are many acts of the Catholic church that are suspicious. But like Truth said, people are famous for believing what they are told and most don't know better to look into what they believe.
Some of the facts that I remember off the top of my head that you can find facts on is the downplaying of the signifigance of Mary Magdelene otherwise known as Mary of Magdelene or Mary of Magdala.
Most my life I associated her as the whore that begged for forgiveness at Jesus feet while the people condemned her and warned Jesus of her uncleanleness. (He who is without sin cast the first stone.)
In fact, this is not true at all. The whore in the Gospel of Luke is a woman that remains unamed.
It was Pope Greogery the First who mispresented Mary as the unamed woman in Luke's Gospel as an attempt to push her importance under the carpet.
After much debate on this, finally the Catholic church officially admitted that this was a mistake and inaccurate and making it's correction 1969.
Mary Magdelene is not the same woman as the woman in Luke. All though the Roman Catholic church withdrew the linkage, they made no effort in correcting it's further teachings and is still going strong in popular Christian folklore today.
It's the year 2005 and I'm still represented with Christians who are active in the church who are shocked when I present this correction and amazed that it proves to be accurate. Many are convinced that there is no information I could have them question after being a devout Christian most of their lives . This is a big one.
This post is bringing me to read the novel again and to rediscover the research and knowledge I have found to debate.
If anything, in comments to TRUTH about Christians not knowing any better than to just blindly believe... Doesnt' the Bible teach that anybody who quotes the bible, before believing the communicator, we need to open our bibles to be sure that we are not being decieved?
I believe this novel has open the door to people investigating to find out what the TRUTH really is and has given back life into discovering who Jesus really is (Jesus is back!). The Divinci Code is not the bible and does not claim to be. It is a novel. Any information that anybody reads, should research facts before accepting anything as truth. If they are easily swayed from your faith by reading this novel, than if reading makes them fall short of salvation, then everything else would! There are far greater temptations that you should concern yourself with besides people reading a book that is promoted as fiction (and does not state that it is based on all facts.... but obviously there are facts in there that are keeping Christians on their toes!
I bet you can count on Dan Brown, The Divinci Code being a best seller, opening a lot more Bibles with the interest to rediscover the truth! You should be praising him for opening the interest to researching the Truth unless of course there is some kind of threat by doing so.
Being that I was already interested into getting into the truths further than what I was programmed to believe, this brought more people to discuss this interest I have had long before The Divinci Code became a best seller.
Dan Brown didn't deliever anything new about the stragically manipulated truth we are taught to believe in blindly or suffer the rath of Hell.
This knowledge has been out there, there just wasn't any popular interest to investigate it until information was slipped into a mystery novel.
I myself was already researching and discovering many of these truths that were being hidden from us and discovered even more interesting facts that open the door for me to research upon reading this novel.
It's just a book. An amazing book.
A book that does not challenge to anyone that it is fiction.
The great fear is, that it will spark readers into questioning what the truth really is.
This novel does infact, provide a world of facts that people have never been exposed to or have never thought to consider. (Like the Gnostic Gospels and the Dead Sea Scrolls)
I don't think there is ever any wrong to be said about that. This encourages seeking the Truth. Does our God not want us to know the Truth? Is this not the way we have corrected many wrongs throughout history?
This book does not support Christian Haters and is not Anti-Christian.
It is Anti-Dogmatic, Anti-Corruption, and Anti-Manipulation.

"Always Question Your Authority"

"The Truth Will Set You Free"

[seven]

It is specifically based on John’s gospel where the risen Christ commissions Mary of Magdala: “Go instead to my brothers and sisters and tell them I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.” The gospel goes on to tell us “Mary of Magdala went to the disciples with the news ‘I have seen the Lord!’ and she told them that He had said these things to her.” (John 20:17-18). Here she is represented carrying out her mission, preaching with the authority conferred on her by the Risen Christ, preparing the disciples for His Ascension into heaven.
There is much to uncover and many questions to ask on why so much information has been influenced against the important role that God has created women for.
Abarham is the inspiration for starting the 3 major religons that are worshipped today. They would not however have made it this far without Sara, his wife, being the one to influence and communicate all that Abarham needed for his people to understand.
Every great man in history has been greatly influence by another woman. Be it his wife, or his mother..... Or both.

[seven]

Error #6: Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene.

The New Testament never mentions Jesus being married or even suggests it, so Brown uses one of the Gnostic gospels, the Gospel of Philip to support this claim. We only have fragments of the text he uses as his support and that text reads as follows:

“And the companion of the…Mary Magdalene…her more than…the disciples…kiss her…on her…” (Philip 63:33-36). Philip 58-59 seems to indicate that the kiss would have been on the lips. In 1 Corinthians 16, Paul mentions this kind of chaste kiss of fellowship, and this is likely what is meant here. However, we need not rest on that argument.
The protagonist in Brown’s book claims that the word “companion” in this verse actually means spouse because that’s what the Aramaic word really means. I kind of feel sorry for Brown here. This document wasn’t written in Aramaic. It was written in Coptic. The word used for companion is koinonos and it means companion, not spouse.
Perhaps the strongest, piece of evidence is the anointing of Jesus with the sacred oil, an event which (uncharacteristically) was recorded in all four New Testament Gospels, pointing to its significance. The anointing of the Jesus' head with oil (as described in Mark 14:3-4) is an unmistakable symbol of The Sacred Marriage, a ceremony performed by temple priestesses.

Mary Magdalen was said to have been the Bride of Christ. Many of the Gnostic Gospels (revered early on in the Christian Anointing the head with oil had Biblical precedent in announcing kingship and was well known to be symbolic of the Sacred Marriage ceremony . When Mary anointed Jesus head with sacred oil, he foretold his own death: "She has come beforehand to anoint my body for burial. .
. What this woman has done will be told as a memorial to her" (Mark 14:8-9). Immediately afterwards, Judas Iscariot (whose name means "zealot") went out to betray him, for he understood that Jesus was going to sacrifice his life, not rule as king .
Mary Magdalen was said to have been the Bride of Christ. Many of the Gnostic Gospels (revered early on in the Christian Church and later thrown out of the cannon) portray Mary Magdalen as Christ's Most Beloved Disciple, reporting that Jesus often kissed her on the mouth and called her "Woman Who Knows All." Other disciples went to her for Christ's teachings after he died. She is portrayed as sitting at Jesus' feet to listen to his teachings (Luke 10:38-42) and also as anointing his feet with oil and drying them with her hair (John 11:2, 12:3).
Three of the New Testament Gospels report that Mary Magdalen was at the foot of the cross, and all four Gospels note she was present at the tomb.
The Gospel of John notes that after the resurrection, Christ appeared to Mary Magdalen first. Mary Magdalen is mentioned in the New Testament more often by far than Mother Mary.

A French legend recorded in the 4th Century CE says that Mary Magdalen (along with Lazarus and Martha) fled to the South of France (via Egypt) bearing "the earthen vessel that held the blood of Christ." While legends of the Holy Grail took on a life of their own centuries later, merging with other legends, many believe that Mary Magdalen was herself the earthen vessel bearing Christ's child, the sacred bloodline of David. History Documentation provides convincing evidence that this was indeed what many early Christians, including the Cathars, believed. In the South of France, the Cult of the Magdalen flourished until it was all but wiped out in the Albigensian campaigns by the Roman Catholic church in the late 13th Century.


The Song of Songs, the most popular love poem at the time of Christ and for centuries afterwards, was strongly associated with Mary Magdalen, believed to be the bride in the poem, and Jesus as the bride's groom. Attributed to Solomon, the Song of Songs has remained part of the official cannon, despite its unmistakably erotic imagery. The Roman Catholic church traditionally reads from the Song of Songs on Mary Magdalen's feast day .

[seven]

Jesus represents the Holy Trinity

The First Trinity was Adam and Eve and child.

Thus 3 means Manifestation and expansion. Other trinities survive in our world-body, soul, and spirit, and the three divisions of Mind-conscious, subconscious and super-conscious.

[seven]

As a side note - The Gospel of Peter, one of the very Gospels that Brown claims as an earlier writing, blames the Jews for the crucifixion. Another Gnostic Gospel, the Gospel of Thomas, claims women must become men in order to receive salvation. Apparently Brown’s Gospel is not only anti-Semitic, but also chauvinistic.

You could say that this makes Jesus sound like a chauvinistic man... but I disagree. What was claimed was that no one would listen to God's message from a woman so Jesus says that they will make her a man.

Durring these times, which hasn't changed much at all, women were not taking seriously and were not heard. "Those who have ears let them hear."

Jesus stated to Thomas, if they will not listen to a woman than we will make her a man.

This means he will speak for her because he is a man so he will make sure that her message is heard.

[asassycat]

I see nothing wrong with Christ being married, but I am no longer caught in that JUDGMENT trap, that many Christians don't even recognize they are participating in.

This whole marriage symbolism means something else to me. The big question that needs to be answered before you can even begin to speak knowledgeably in a debate like this is:

What do MALE and FEMALE, MAN and WOMAN, MAN and WIFE, MARRIAGE, HOLY MARRIAGE, etc. truly represent in the Bible? We are all male/female polarities, conscious/subconscious, and the two within us need to come together in perfect harmony, union, holy (wholeness) matrimony... This understanding of the male/female marriage within is CRITICAL to the discussion of the DaVinci Code...

I recommend reading the book "Division of Consciousness" by Peter Novak... to better understand the male/female symbolism of the Bible, and in all world religions. Here is some info on Division Theory, as discussed in the book: http://www.prophetsforpeace.com/divisiontheory.htm

This is from "The Book of Tokens" - a meditation on GIMEL (a Hebrew Letter for those that don't know)

L The Hebrew Letter: Gimel (Wisdom, as in "Wisdom is a Woman"... and "SHE was with God in the beginning" - and as in "let US make man in OUR image")

Transcribed as “G”
The number 3
Meaning: Camel (as in it's easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven)
The Uniting Intelligence


"THOU hast seen, 0 Israel,

How, for the sake of creation,
The One Life that I am
Seemeth to divide itself,
Becoming two.
Of these two, I have made known to thee My superior nature, (conscious - male)
the Crown of Primal Will
Wherein I have my supreme abode.

Hearken now,
While I expound the mystery of mine inferior nature, (subconscious - female)
Which standeth in the Tree of Life
As the Sephirah of Wisdom.

Forget not that these two,
Though they be named superior and inferior,
Are in truth of equal rank.
As it is written:
“That which is below is as that which is above,
And that which is above is as that which is below.”

(conscious part of mind male is above / subconscious part of mind female is below)

Be thou not led astray by their false doctrine
Who ascribe to the inferior nature
Somewhat less of power and worth
Than inhereth in the superior.
The two are as the pans of a balance.
Each hath its own peculiar quality.
Each hath its appointed sphere of operation.
One cometh not before the other,
But together they exist
From everlasting to everlasting.

Mine inferior nature is the universal substance,
The divine mirror
Wherein I, who dwell at the heart of all things,
Am reflected to myself.

To the uninstructed, therefore,
Who mistake the reflection for that which is reflected,
My secondary nature seemeth to be more interior
Than the Primal Will.
This error may be likened to the illusion which ariseth
When one seeth a room reflected in a glass,
And thinketh he seeth the room itself.
For though what presenteth itself in the mirror of Wisdom is internal,
The medium of reflection hath its place in the without,
In the realm of secondary and created things.

As the substance whence all forms arise,
The vehicle of my divine essence,
Mine inferior nature is to the superior
As is passive to active,
As woman to man,
As Eve to Adam.
Yet to every Light of Emanation
Proceeding from it on the Tree of Life
Doth this same Wisdom stand as Root and Source.
Hence in the Scripture is Wisdom spoken of as a woman,
And when it is said,
“Wisdom hath builded HER a house”;
But elsewhere to this same Wisdom
The wise assign the title AB, the Father.
Never is the heavenly Wisdom known as Mother,
For She is the virgin substance of all things,
Whose purity naught can defile.

Remember now that I myself am the pure KNOWING
Whence all manifestation ariseth.
Recall to mind that my superior nature
Is the Primal Will, the Eternal Watcher,
Under whose regard the stream of creation floweth.
The substance of the stream is the inferior nature,
Wherin I see innumerable images of myself.
These be all things and creatures, great and small.

Whatever existeth
Is as a ripple on the surface of the stream,
But all are of the one substance.
Thus all share in the peculiar quality
Of the stream itself,
Which is the mirror of myself to myself,
The root of all remembrance.

Creation is the record of mine ever-changing manifestation.
All things bear the imprint of the history of the universe.
Nothing of mine activity escapeth this record.
In it do men share, because they, too,
Are parts of the stream of mine inferior nature.
Thus are they partakers in my perfect recollection,
Which is the source of all memories,
And the root of all the wisdom of mankind.

All wisdom, therefore,
Is summed up in knowledge of me.
To gain this is the aim of all research,
Of all works, of all devotion.
From knowledge of me cometh the lesser knowledge
Of the things which I have brought forth.

Of no avail is this lesser knowledge
Unless it be founded upon the knowledge
Of my superior and inferior natures.
Hence it is written:
“Remember now thy creator in the days of thy youth,
And thy days shall be long.”
To keep me in vivid remembrance is to unite thyself
To the subtle principle of Life Eternal.

Mine inferior nature is the bond of union
Between myself and all created beings.
Hence it is likened to the camel,
Which bringeth a man safe
Through the desert wastes from city to city.
The camel beareth rich and costly merchandise,
And betokeneth Travel and Communication,
Being thus a symbol of change,
And of the flux and mingling of ideas
Borne upon the stream of memory.

Happy is he who bestrideth
This camel of mine inferior nature
Which bringeth them who learn the secret of its mastery
Unto me, their Lord.
A task most difficult and laborious
Is the conquest of the power of recollection.
Strength and courage and patience must they have
Who would gain this victory;
But these shall be as kings and princes in this world,
And even as gods in the world to come.”

[asassycat]

Hidden in Plain Sight
DivisionTheory and The Holy Grail

When Rome took over Christianity, the true faith disappeared from public view in the Empire, and might have died out altogether in the West if not for the Crusades. The First Crusade was launched in 1096 CE, but the Crusaders only held their colonies in the east until 1291. However, during the 200 years Europeans had free reign over the Holy Land, a great mix in cultures occurred between east and west, and many strange new ideas, legends, and religious behaviors swept into Europe. One of these was the legend of the Holy Grail, which seems never to have been mentioned in Europe before the Crusades. The great majority of the Grail romances came into existence between 1180 and 1240, and after the last Crusade, nothing new was added to the legend.

The Holy Grail is generally considered to be the chalice Christ drank from at the Last Supper, which Joseph of Arimathea used later to catch blood from Jesus' spear wound on the cross. At the same time, however, it is also supposed to be something very different, a profoundly sacred and mysterious object credited with miraculous properties. It was thought to provide spiritual and physical sustenance, restore youth, heal the sick, provide immortality, and even raise the dead. It was said to provide the highest knowledge, wisdom, and enlightenment, allowing one to communicate directly with God. Closely associated with the concept of purity, the Grail was considered so profoundly pure that only the most pure and worthy could approach it. If one was not worthy enough, he could not see the Grail even if he was standing right in front of it.

The quest to find the Holy Grail is one of the most enduring myths in Western culture. The Grail was profoundly mysterious, and the search for it was presented as the highest religious mission one could aspire to. The Grail legend presents an elusive mystery, and until now, no single theory has been able to explain all the details of the legend. Some say the Grail is a real physical object, an ancient relic from Christ's era. Others say that the legend is allegorical, and that the Grail is not a real object at all, but just a mystical concept of spiritual enlightenment. However, when the famous Grail hunter Trevor Ravenscroft claimed to have found the Grail in 1962, he mysteriously maintained that the Grail was somehow both a form of knowledge and also a real object.

The legend of the search for the Holy Grail is particularly associated with King Arthur and his court, who were supposed to have lived around 500 -550 AD, just after the Roman Empire outlawed Original Christianity and drove it underground. In order for Original Christianity to survive in this hostile cultural environment, it could no longer openly and publicly declare itself to be an alternate version of Christianity. It could not, for example, use traditional Christian symbols such as the cross or the Ichthys symbol, but had to invent alternate symbols which would pass safely under the cultural radar.

The binary soul doctrine suggests that one of those symbols eventually spawned the entire Grail legend. The Holy Grail, it seems, may have been an underground symbol for Original Christianity. The Grail was, after all, credited with the very same properties ascribed to Christ. The Grail could heal the sick, raise the dead, and provide divine nourishment, knowledge and enlightenment. And like Original Christianity in 500 AD, the Grail was also mysteriously hidden from public view in Arthur's era. One had to diligently search for both the Grail and the Kingdom of Heaven in order to find them, and in each case that search was the highest religious mission, a quest that could provide salvation and eternal life. Like the kingdom of heaven in the Gospel of Thomas, the Grail was something hidden right out in the open, which needed only to be found.

Those still faithful to Original Christianity could no longer publicly present their outlawed ideas as Christian, so they had to search for alternate symbols so believers could identify one another without risk. Prior to the advent of Christianity, many ancient BSD cultures used a combination of masculine and feminine symbols to represent their faiths. Some of the most ancient of these used simple circles and straight lines. On the stela known as the Code of Hammurabi, for example, the Babylonian god Marduk is shown holding two large objects in his one hand — a rod and a circle.

These might have been mankind's first truly abstract symbols; they portray exact opposites — one perfectly straight with a beginning and an end, the other perfectly round with no beginning or end. These symbols seem to reflect the Babylonians' awareness of two fundamental, equal but opposite elements in the universe. They may be the earliest symbolic representation of the male and the female, the yin and the yang, the soul and the spirit, the conscious and the unconscious. Marduk holds both symbols in one hand, suggesting that he possesses and controls both, forming what may have been mankind's very first "the-two-made-one" symbol.

Such cultural portrayals of ancient gods holding both a rod and a circle were once common, and even today seem a natural choice for anyone looking for a way to visually symbolize the tenets of the binary soul doctrine. If those loyal to Original Christianity found themselves suddenly searching for a new symbol for their group, they might well have returned to these sorts of earlier representations. However, Original Christianity declared that while we all possess a whole and healthy conscious spirit, our unconscious soul is damaged and incomplete, and it is that part of ourselves that needs healing. This new insight would have required those ancient BSD symbols to be revised to reflect this incompleteness. While the rod would be whole, the circle would have to be incomplete in order to reflect our souls' need for completion. Thus, the new symbol for Christianity after 500 AD might have been a rod and a half-circle.

These two elements could be visually combined together in any number of arrangements, but if one design seemed to produce a particularly pleasing or meaningful image, it would have become the preferred symbol of the underground movement. And as it turns out, one particular alignment of these two elements does produce an image that might have seemed very evocative and meaningful to those early Christians. If our rod and half circle are arranged as shown in this graphic, they seem to suggest a Grail-like chalice that is half-shrouded in darkness. Even before the legends of the Holy Grail appeared in Europe, Christians would have naturally associated such a chalice symbol with the gospel stories of the last supper, and of Joseph of Arimathea catching Jesus' blood. It would have been a perfect symbol for their hidden faith, an image that simultaneously evoked thoughts of Christ, the Eucharist, and the binary soul doctrine.

Just as the legends declared, such a Grail would have been invisible to the average person. This abstract, stylized symbol only looks like a chalice if one looks at it with that idea already in mind; otherwise, it just looks like a meaningless rod and half-circle. But by looking instead at the empty space and interaction between the rod and circle, the mysterious, half-darkened image of the Holy Grail manifests itself to the viewer's mind. In the same way, the binary soul doctrine declared that neither the soul nor the spirit held the key to salvation, but instead the space and communication between them had to be addressed. And even though the orthodox church had compromised Original Christianity's focus on purity and integrity, the Grail legends had not, maintaining as the ancient Gnostics had done that only the most pure could find this treasure. And just as Original Christianity had gone underground and needed to be sincerely searched for, so too the quest for the Holy Grail became a symbol of the ultimate religious quest.

Was this simple symbol, then, the origin of Europe's legends of the Holy Grail? Those tales mysteriously insisted that the Grail was both a real object and also a source of supernatural knowledge, health, and eternal life. This symbol was indeed all that. As a visual symbol, it was a real object, existing and observable in three-dimensional reality. And yet it also reflected the abstract truths of Original Christianity, which indeed did promise knowledge, enlightenment, and eternal life to its followers.

Was this symbol actually ever used by Christians? We have no evidence that it actually existed during the era of King Arthur. The only historic occurrence of this symbol seems to be in Da Vinci's fifteenth century painting of The Last Supper. However, it stands out like a sore thumb in that painting, the only purely abstract symbol in the whole work.

For centuries, people studying Da Vinci's painting of The Last Supper have been looking in vain for the chalice Christ was supposed to have used at that meal.

Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them,
saying, "Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the covenant,
which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.
- Matthew 2: 27-28

[asassycat]

Although this ceremony was seen as the most important element of the whole supper, Da Vinci seems to have forgotten to include the cup in his painting, a glaring exclusion that seems certain to have been intentional. For centuries, the cup Jesus used at that supper, known later as the Grail, was no where to be seen in the painting. But when the painting was restored in the 20th century, and centuries of touch-ups were removed, the truth was revealed. The Grail was not depicted as a cup sitting on the table, but instead as an abstract symbol on the wall, as if Da Vinci was saying that the true Grail had never been a physical cup at all, but a visual symbol.

I gratefully credit Gary Phillips II with the original insight that this symbol in Da Vinci's "The Last Supper" probably represents the Holy Grail, and agree completely with his observation that once you notice the Grail staring back at you from Da Vinci's masterpiece, it jumps right out at you every time you see the painting. You cannot not see it there. That little ‘ah-ha' moment, that slight shift into greater awareness and consciousness, was at the very heart of Original Christianity. We increase in knowledge, integrity, and perfection through the smallest of steps, inching back closer and closer to ourselves and our Creator with every healthy choice we make. Recognizing the Grail hidden within in Da Vinci's painting is a perfect example of this sort of shift in perspective, and the increase in knowledge, or gnosis, that was once so central to the Christian faith.

Choosing this symbol to represent Original Christianity would have been like saying "Despite what Rome would have you believe, this religion is not merely about faith. It also requires you to stretch your mind, increasing your knowledge and awareness of both yourself and your world. But do not despair, for that goal is not beyond your abilities. In fact, it is as easy and natural as seeing the chalice in this symbol."

all above borrowed from the website of the author of "Division of Consciousness" by Peter Novak.

http://www.geocities.com/~divisiontheory/

[seven]

http://forums.backpage.com/showthread.php?t=2805

[seven]

all above borrowed from the website of the author of "Division of Consciousness" by Peter Novak.

Typed in your guy on www.coasttocoastam.com (http://www.coasttocoastam.com/) . I just absolutely knew he must have been a guest on Coast to Coast. I just wish I could download the entire show... There are a few clips from his interview I'm sure you would be interested in hearing:

Books
The Division of Consciousness (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1571740538/ctoc)
The Lost Secret of Death: Our Divided Souls and the Afterlife (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1571743243/ctoc)

Websites
geocities.com/~divisiontheory (http://www.geocities.com/~divisiontheory/)
Bio Peter Novak http://www.coasttocoastam.com/guests/940.html (http://www.coasttocoastam.com/guests/940.html)

A former psychological counselor, Peter Novak walked away from patient care to devote himself to the full-time study of death and the afterlife. He has since spent more than fifteen years researching mankind’s cultural legends and modern phenomenological reports of life after death.

He is the acclaimed author of the 1997 groundbreaking book The Division of Consciousness, which established him as an authority on soul-duality and binary soul cultures. He has been a popular guest on more than a dozen syndicated TV and radio shows; a featured speaker at conferences and symposiums in America, Canada, and Europe; and has had several major papers published on the psychology of afterlife phenomena.

Binary Soul Doctrine March 12th, 2005 http://www.coasttocoastam.com/shows/2005/03/12.html (http://www.coasttocoastam.com/shows/2005/03/12.html)

Former psychological counselor and author Peter Novak (http://www.geocities.com/~divisiontheory/) talked about evidence for an afterlife and the Binary Soul Doctrine.

According to Novak, this ancient belief held that each person possessed two souls, which would separate at death and go on to different afterlife experiences. Novak believes the Binary Soul Doctrine helps account for reincarnation, and a host of other puzzling afterlife phenomena.

Novak also explained how the interior passages of the Great Pyramid illustrate the Binary Soul Doctrine, as well as discussed 'original' Christianity, which Novak thinks involved a belief in reincarnation.