What do you think?
Rate this book
Breaking the Da Vinci Code Lib/E: Answers to the Questions Everyone's Asking
Was Jesus married? Who was Mary Magdalene? Do the so-called secret, Gnostic gospels help us understand Jesus? Dr. Darrell Bock, New Testament scholar, offers the Christian perspective on the theories regarding the Holy Grail, Mary Magdalene, and the blood of Christ proliferated in the popular novel, The Da Vinci Code. Bock responds to the novel's claims using central ancient texts and research focusing on the 325 years immediately following the birth of Christ, the period on which many of the claims of The Da Vinci Code are based. Distinguishing fictitious entertainment from historical elements of the Christian faith, Breaking the Da Vinci Code will explain why the novel has made such a sensation, and why the issues it raises are worthy of careful study and reflection.
4 pages, Audio CD
First published January 1, 2004
16 people are currently reading
369 people want to read
About the author
Darrell L. Bock
110 books71 followersDarrell L. Bock is a New Testament scholar and research professor of New Testament studies at Dallas Theological Seminary in Dallas, Texas, United States. Bock received his PhD from Scotland's University of Aberdeen.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 38 reviews
Read
June 27, 2011The DaVinci Code is a NOVEL. Treat it as such. It is not fact – enjoy the read. I truly did not like this book and would not recommend it to anyone. The author is condescending and writes as if he was there during biblical times and is so full of himself; plus he talks down to the reader. Bock describes the definition of theory and then complains about folks giving out their theories. But apparently his theories are valid.
Get over yourself. He says one thing then contradicts himself within the book. He is so hung up on Mary Magdalene and women in general. What if women were excluded in the bible writings? His few examples of why he “knows” women were not excluded in the writings are not enough “fact” that women were not.
This book deserves no rating what so ever.
.
Get over yourself. He says one thing then contradicts himself within the book. He is so hung up on Mary Magdalene and women in general. What if women were excluded in the bible writings? His few examples of why he “knows” women were not excluded in the writings are not enough “fact” that women were not.
This book deserves no rating what so ever.
.
September 1, 2025
In case you don’t read through my lengthy review, see this excellent article by Michael Horton: https://www.modernreformation.org/res...
Today, as I was reading the last few pages of this excellent response to the purported “facts” and “history” put forth by Dan Brown in his 2003 novel The Da Vinci Code, a man who attends my church asked me what I was reading. I explained to him the general purpose of this book and that I had put it and The Da Vinci Hoax on my reading list many years ago when The Da Vinci Code had recently been released and was very popular in the culture. I praised both books for accomplishing what they set out to do. His response was, “I thought that The Da Vinci Code was just [a work of] fiction”—meaning that it shouldn’t be subject to analysis of its truth claims, or that it doesn’t make any truth claims at all. That’s exactly why this book and other books and reviews like it are necessary. The final sentence of the first page of the novel says, “All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate.” On NBC’s Today Show, when asked by Matt Lauer, “How much of this is based on reality in terms of things that actually occurred?” Dan Brown replied, “Absolutely all of it. Obviously, there are—Robert Langdon is fictional, but all of the art, architecture, secret rituals, secret societies, all of that is historical fact.”
Much of what I wrote in my review of The Da Vinci Hoax (at https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...), especially regarding why books such as The Da Vinci Hoax and Breaking the Da Vinci Code are necessary, applies here as well. Thus, the first portion of this review will be similar.
People who loosely associate themselves with Christianity, people who are antagonistic toward Christianity, people who are genuinely curious about whether Christianity’s truth claims are believable, and people who attend Bible-believing, Bible-proclaiming Christian churches have been reading and hearing about the book (and the sequels, and the movie, and Dan Brown’s claims) for decades. Many of them dismiss it as harmless entertainment or, conversely, believe without objection its “factual” claims as completely trustworthy. You can find on both Goodreads and elsewhere a persistent tendency among reviewers to dismiss out of hand any book or article that seeks to analyze the claims of The Da Vinci Code, often saying, “It’s just a novel; you’re not supposed to take it so seriously” as if Brown’s presentation were simply light entertainment. It’s ironic—and deeply lamentable, considering the eternal consequences of rejecting the gospel, especially for willfully stopping one’s ears to it in favor of a hoax—that the same reviewers and readers take Brown’s claims very seriously without cross-checking even the most obvious and easily refuted errors. In reality, The Da Vinci Code—both in the text itself and in Dan Brown’s numerous interviews during his promotional book tour—was presented as being based firmly on historical fact. Brown consistently claimed to have researched his material thoroughly, and repeatedly assures viewers on nationally broadcast programs that every detail surrounding art, architecture, secret societies, and religious history was absolutely true. Many people took him at his word and then went on to defend the book and shout down any criticism, no matter how warranted, and no matter how obviously incorrect Brown’s “facts” were. That context is exactly why The Da Vinci Hoax, Breaking the Da Vinci Code, and other such books are crucial to an honest understanding of this bizarre cultural phenomenon surrounding The Da Vinci Code.
Darrell Bock, in Breaking the Da Vinci Code, uses fewer words and a less ambitious approach than The Da Vinci Hoax by confining his investigation and analysis to the 325 years after Christ’s birth. First, this is Bock’s professional specialty. Second, Bock writes, “the claims of the novel rise or fall on the basis of things emerging from this period.” If Brown’s claims about this period are wrong, then his wild assertions about secret societies and medieval architecture and Leonardo da Vinci’s artwork are utterly irrelevant. Bock’s approach is effective and allows him to make his points clearly without bogging the reader down with debunking every spurious claim of Brown’s.
Some of the key points are (1) that there is no evidence, either in the Bible or even in the apocryphal “gospels” that Brown cites, that Mary Magdalene was married to Jesus; (2) that neither the Bible nor the apocryphal works mention Jesus’s wife, even when it would have been logical to do so; (3) that Jesus’s singleness did not make Him “un-Jewish” and would have made sense in His culture; (4) that the so-called “secret” gnostic gospels do not provide any new information or disputes about Jesus and the nature of Christianity; (5) that the four canonical gospels were well established as such, with proper authorial credit, more than a century before Constantine, to the exclusion of other supposed gospels (contrary to Brown’s claim that eighty gospels competed for canonicity at the time of the Council of Nicaea, which voted for the four by a narrow margin with conspiratorial suppression of women and opposing views; in reality, the vote was 305–2, and fewer than a dozen “gospels” were even under consideration); and (6) that Brown’s claims (borrowed from other books and from scholars who espoused his ideas long before) about Mary Magdalene as the preeminent apostle are not supported by the New Testament, while the gnostic writings do not even advocate for the value of women as well as Jesus and the New Testament do.
One minor weakness of Bock’s approach is that, in an attempt to be even-handed or fair to his opponents, he often seems to assume a sort of “neutral” position regarding the canonicity of the gospels and the rest of the New Testament and the canonicity (or lack thereof) of the gnostic works. He could have been just as effective if he had taken more of a presuppositional approach and focused more on the issue of the authority (or lack of authority) of the writings under consideration. Ironically, I’ve read at least one Goodreads reviewer who thought that Bock only spent time analyzing the Bible; this is almost the opposite of what he actually did. Still, Bock did a more than adequate job (though somewhat abbreviated) of analyzing the claims with respect to both the Bible and the apocryphal works.
Bock (or his publisher) made several writing errors that a good editor should have fixed. Page 14 has “there are so little data,” mashing up a plural verb (are) and a singular adjective (little) with data, which can be used as plural or singular, but not both in the same sentence! Page 2 has, “How accurate is this work and its claims?” using the singular is with the compound (and thus plural) subject. Also, a few sentences here and there, usually in the middle of a complex flow of logic, were unnecessarily difficult to parse and thus should have been rewritten more clearly or broken into multiple shorter, clearer sentences. For an analytical work like this, I would have expected an index, but Bock did not provide one.
If you’re seeking—as you should!—a readable, carefully explained, and level-headed analysis of the claims of The Da Vinci Code, Bock’s book is a solid choice. It zeroes in on the crucial period of Christian history, clearing up confusion and correcting the record in a way that’s accessible—even though not exhaustive.
Today, as I was reading the last few pages of this excellent response to the purported “facts” and “history” put forth by Dan Brown in his 2003 novel The Da Vinci Code, a man who attends my church asked me what I was reading. I explained to him the general purpose of this book and that I had put it and The Da Vinci Hoax on my reading list many years ago when The Da Vinci Code had recently been released and was very popular in the culture. I praised both books for accomplishing what they set out to do. His response was, “I thought that The Da Vinci Code was just [a work of] fiction”—meaning that it shouldn’t be subject to analysis of its truth claims, or that it doesn’t make any truth claims at all. That’s exactly why this book and other books and reviews like it are necessary. The final sentence of the first page of the novel says, “All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate.” On NBC’s Today Show, when asked by Matt Lauer, “How much of this is based on reality in terms of things that actually occurred?” Dan Brown replied, “Absolutely all of it. Obviously, there are—Robert Langdon is fictional, but all of the art, architecture, secret rituals, secret societies, all of that is historical fact.”
Much of what I wrote in my review of The Da Vinci Hoax (at https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...), especially regarding why books such as The Da Vinci Hoax and Breaking the Da Vinci Code are necessary, applies here as well. Thus, the first portion of this review will be similar.
People who loosely associate themselves with Christianity, people who are antagonistic toward Christianity, people who are genuinely curious about whether Christianity’s truth claims are believable, and people who attend Bible-believing, Bible-proclaiming Christian churches have been reading and hearing about the book (and the sequels, and the movie, and Dan Brown’s claims) for decades. Many of them dismiss it as harmless entertainment or, conversely, believe without objection its “factual” claims as completely trustworthy. You can find on both Goodreads and elsewhere a persistent tendency among reviewers to dismiss out of hand any book or article that seeks to analyze the claims of The Da Vinci Code, often saying, “It’s just a novel; you’re not supposed to take it so seriously” as if Brown’s presentation were simply light entertainment. It’s ironic—and deeply lamentable, considering the eternal consequences of rejecting the gospel, especially for willfully stopping one’s ears to it in favor of a hoax—that the same reviewers and readers take Brown’s claims very seriously without cross-checking even the most obvious and easily refuted errors. In reality, The Da Vinci Code—both in the text itself and in Dan Brown’s numerous interviews during his promotional book tour—was presented as being based firmly on historical fact. Brown consistently claimed to have researched his material thoroughly, and repeatedly assures viewers on nationally broadcast programs that every detail surrounding art, architecture, secret societies, and religious history was absolutely true. Many people took him at his word and then went on to defend the book and shout down any criticism, no matter how warranted, and no matter how obviously incorrect Brown’s “facts” were. That context is exactly why The Da Vinci Hoax, Breaking the Da Vinci Code, and other such books are crucial to an honest understanding of this bizarre cultural phenomenon surrounding The Da Vinci Code.
Darrell Bock, in Breaking the Da Vinci Code, uses fewer words and a less ambitious approach than The Da Vinci Hoax by confining his investigation and analysis to the 325 years after Christ’s birth. First, this is Bock’s professional specialty. Second, Bock writes, “the claims of the novel rise or fall on the basis of things emerging from this period.” If Brown’s claims about this period are wrong, then his wild assertions about secret societies and medieval architecture and Leonardo da Vinci’s artwork are utterly irrelevant. Bock’s approach is effective and allows him to make his points clearly without bogging the reader down with debunking every spurious claim of Brown’s.
Some of the key points are (1) that there is no evidence, either in the Bible or even in the apocryphal “gospels” that Brown cites, that Mary Magdalene was married to Jesus; (2) that neither the Bible nor the apocryphal works mention Jesus’s wife, even when it would have been logical to do so; (3) that Jesus’s singleness did not make Him “un-Jewish” and would have made sense in His culture; (4) that the so-called “secret” gnostic gospels do not provide any new information or disputes about Jesus and the nature of Christianity; (5) that the four canonical gospels were well established as such, with proper authorial credit, more than a century before Constantine, to the exclusion of other supposed gospels (contrary to Brown’s claim that eighty gospels competed for canonicity at the time of the Council of Nicaea, which voted for the four by a narrow margin with conspiratorial suppression of women and opposing views; in reality, the vote was 305–2, and fewer than a dozen “gospels” were even under consideration); and (6) that Brown’s claims (borrowed from other books and from scholars who espoused his ideas long before) about Mary Magdalene as the preeminent apostle are not supported by the New Testament, while the gnostic writings do not even advocate for the value of women as well as Jesus and the New Testament do.
One minor weakness of Bock’s approach is that, in an attempt to be even-handed or fair to his opponents, he often seems to assume a sort of “neutral” position regarding the canonicity of the gospels and the rest of the New Testament and the canonicity (or lack thereof) of the gnostic works. He could have been just as effective if he had taken more of a presuppositional approach and focused more on the issue of the authority (or lack of authority) of the writings under consideration. Ironically, I’ve read at least one Goodreads reviewer who thought that Bock only spent time analyzing the Bible; this is almost the opposite of what he actually did. Still, Bock did a more than adequate job (though somewhat abbreviated) of analyzing the claims with respect to both the Bible and the apocryphal works.
Bock (or his publisher) made several writing errors that a good editor should have fixed. Page 14 has “there are so little data,” mashing up a plural verb (are) and a singular adjective (little) with data, which can be used as plural or singular, but not both in the same sentence! Page 2 has, “How accurate is this work and its claims?” using the singular is with the compound (and thus plural) subject. Also, a few sentences here and there, usually in the middle of a complex flow of logic, were unnecessarily difficult to parse and thus should have been rewritten more clearly or broken into multiple shorter, clearer sentences. For an analytical work like this, I would have expected an index, but Bock did not provide one.
If you’re seeking—as you should!—a readable, carefully explained, and level-headed analysis of the claims of The Da Vinci Code, Bock’s book is a solid choice. It zeroes in on the crucial period of Christian history, clearing up confusion and correcting the record in a way that’s accessible—even though not exhaustive.
June 17, 2021
I've read most of Dan Brown's novels. And they are just that- novels. But when he wrote The Da Vinci Code it was a new phenomenon in popular fiction- novel that asserted historical facts or perceptions were not what they seemed. And when Brown mixed that with religion religion professors took notice. To help out the biblically illiterate, Bock takes The Da Vinci Code and lines up Christian history with the claims. What is important to remember is that Brown was writing a fictional novel. Just as important to note is that Bock is published by a Christian press. Both books are good reads.
July 12, 2021
I listened to the audiobook for the first 75% of this book and read the physical book for the last 25%.
As someone who has been raised in the Christian church, I had many questions after reading Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code. I enjoyed the novel as a work of fiction but was distressed at the implications it brought up for Christianity.
Darrell Bock does a great job addressing the questions brought up in the Da Vinci Code. He was incredibly thorough in his research, presenting many ancient documents as evidence. As a Christian this book was incredibly helpful for my personal understanding of the idea of the Holy Grail and Jesus' supposed bloodline.
My one issue with Bock's presentation of this study is that he assumes the reader is Christian and already believes in Jesus Christ. I would have liked to see historical proof that wasn't centered on what the Bible already says about the topic so that non-believers could also learn the truth behind the Da Vinci Code.
Great book overall. I highly recommend this book to any Christians who may have also shared in my confusion after reading the Da Vinci Code.
As someone who has been raised in the Christian church, I had many questions after reading Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code. I enjoyed the novel as a work of fiction but was distressed at the implications it brought up for Christianity.
Darrell Bock does a great job addressing the questions brought up in the Da Vinci Code. He was incredibly thorough in his research, presenting many ancient documents as evidence. As a Christian this book was incredibly helpful for my personal understanding of the idea of the Holy Grail and Jesus' supposed bloodline.
My one issue with Bock's presentation of this study is that he assumes the reader is Christian and already believes in Jesus Christ. I would have liked to see historical proof that wasn't centered on what the Bible already says about the topic so that non-believers could also learn the truth behind the Da Vinci Code.
Great book overall. I highly recommend this book to any Christians who may have also shared in my confusion after reading the Da Vinci Code.
August 1, 2022
Twenty years after it was released, Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code is still selling copies. It has spawned a genre of books debunking it for its many historical and theological errors.
Based loosely on Baigent and Leigh's Holy Blood and Holy Grail work, it puts forward to idea that Jesus had a wife (Mary Magdalene) and had a royal lineage that survived him.
I was curious to see how Bock's book has survived despite the years. I was pleasantly surprised that it is still selling, and still refutes the eight "codes" or errors in Brown's book easily.
While the gnostics have been around since shortly after Jesus' death, and are still about, Bock's book still shows their many errors both then and now.
A great book that has stood the test of time. Bock is an academic with qualifications in the area, but has an easy reading style. Definitely recommended!
Based loosely on Baigent and Leigh's Holy Blood and Holy Grail work, it puts forward to idea that Jesus had a wife (Mary Magdalene) and had a royal lineage that survived him.
I was curious to see how Bock's book has survived despite the years. I was pleasantly surprised that it is still selling, and still refutes the eight "codes" or errors in Brown's book easily.
While the gnostics have been around since shortly after Jesus' death, and are still about, Bock's book still shows their many errors both then and now.
A great book that has stood the test of time. Bock is an academic with qualifications in the area, but has an easy reading style. Definitely recommended!
Read
December 20, 2024Pelo nome dá para perceber que o livro fala sobre o outro livro chamado O Código da Vinci, escrito por Dan Brown. Eu não li este ultimo, mas assisti ao filme. Darrell em seus estudos sobre o assunto divide o livro em oito códigos.
Na versão e opinião dele, a associação de Maria Madalena com prostituição é muito improvável (código 1);
Jesus tinha uma vida diferente por causa de sua relação com Deus, de seu acesso ao poder divino e de sua ressurreição. Uma das crenças básicas da fé cristã é que Jesus era humano. Então, se tivesse se casado e fosse pai, sua relação conjugal e sua família teoricamente não diminuiriam sua divindade, mas seriam apenas reflexos de sua completa humanidade. Se Jesus tivesse se casado, não haveria motivos para que tal fato fosse escondido e os argumentos racionais sobre o acobertamento de supostas relações não possuem fundamentos na teologia (código 2);
Era antijudeu o fato de Jesus não ter sido casado, mas o fato de ter sido solteiro podia ser compreendido e respeitado por outros judeus do seu convívio. O casamento não era um passo necessário para que Jesus tivesse credibilidade cultural no contexto judaico de seu ministério. Além do mais, Jesus não seguiu as limitações culturais impostas na época, tanto é que, em relação às mulheres, envolveu varias delas em seu ministério. De tal modo, o romance ficção não é bem fundamentado quanto às suas alegações e conclusões históricas (código 3). Os dois códigos seguintes (4 e 5) falam dos evangelhos gnósticos (secretos) e os quatro evangelhos do Novo Testamento (Mateus, Marcos, Lucas e João), mas não me acrescentaram maiores esclarecimentos sobre o assunto. Posso ressaltar que o dualismo da seita Gnóstica é interessante para principio de esclarecimento, mas suas teorias me pareceram desconexas e incabíveis do meio para o final. Além disso, acho muito hipotético investigar se houve modificação ou omissão dos escritos evangélicos por parte de Constantino e o Concílio de Nicéia. Em seqüência, comprovei que a pintura de Da Vinci tem de fato, embora menos evidente, outro ‘V’ em seu lado direito, com outra mulher pintada, a qual em nenhum momento é mencionada por Dan em seu livro. Conclusivamente, Jesus estava valorizando todos os seres humanos, e não apenas um gênero (código 6); Todas as teorias relacionadas ao Priorado de Sião, aos Templários, à Opus Dei e à linhagem merovíngea ligada à descendência de Jesus podem até ser fascinantes, mas não tem nenhuma relação verdadeira com uma linhagem de Jesus. Quem quer que tenha sido Maria Madalena, ela não é o cálice sagrado com uma linhagem de descendentes reais de Jesus (código 7);
Por fim, Maria Madalena é muito mais importante como discípulo do que como esposa de Jesus (código 8).
Na versão e opinião dele, a associação de Maria Madalena com prostituição é muito improvável (código 1);
Jesus tinha uma vida diferente por causa de sua relação com Deus, de seu acesso ao poder divino e de sua ressurreição. Uma das crenças básicas da fé cristã é que Jesus era humano. Então, se tivesse se casado e fosse pai, sua relação conjugal e sua família teoricamente não diminuiriam sua divindade, mas seriam apenas reflexos de sua completa humanidade. Se Jesus tivesse se casado, não haveria motivos para que tal fato fosse escondido e os argumentos racionais sobre o acobertamento de supostas relações não possuem fundamentos na teologia (código 2);
Era antijudeu o fato de Jesus não ter sido casado, mas o fato de ter sido solteiro podia ser compreendido e respeitado por outros judeus do seu convívio. O casamento não era um passo necessário para que Jesus tivesse credibilidade cultural no contexto judaico de seu ministério. Além do mais, Jesus não seguiu as limitações culturais impostas na época, tanto é que, em relação às mulheres, envolveu varias delas em seu ministério. De tal modo, o romance ficção não é bem fundamentado quanto às suas alegações e conclusões históricas (código 3). Os dois códigos seguintes (4 e 5) falam dos evangelhos gnósticos (secretos) e os quatro evangelhos do Novo Testamento (Mateus, Marcos, Lucas e João), mas não me acrescentaram maiores esclarecimentos sobre o assunto. Posso ressaltar que o dualismo da seita Gnóstica é interessante para principio de esclarecimento, mas suas teorias me pareceram desconexas e incabíveis do meio para o final. Além disso, acho muito hipotético investigar se houve modificação ou omissão dos escritos evangélicos por parte de Constantino e o Concílio de Nicéia. Em seqüência, comprovei que a pintura de Da Vinci tem de fato, embora menos evidente, outro ‘V’ em seu lado direito, com outra mulher pintada, a qual em nenhum momento é mencionada por Dan em seu livro. Conclusivamente, Jesus estava valorizando todos os seres humanos, e não apenas um gênero (código 6); Todas as teorias relacionadas ao Priorado de Sião, aos Templários, à Opus Dei e à linhagem merovíngea ligada à descendência de Jesus podem até ser fascinantes, mas não tem nenhuma relação verdadeira com uma linhagem de Jesus. Quem quer que tenha sido Maria Madalena, ela não é o cálice sagrado com uma linhagem de descendentes reais de Jesus (código 7);
Por fim, Maria Madalena é muito mais importante como discípulo do que como esposa de Jesus (código 8).
March 8, 2020
Some of the information in this book was interesting, but overall I found it dry and repetitive and it didn't hold my interest. It seemed that the author hated The DaVinci Code and set out to prove that it was not historically accurate. Since it's a novel, I didn't expect that it was historically accurate. I thought of it as more of a twist and "what if" scenario of Dan Brown's imagination. I didn't think the ideas presented in the novel were intended to be taken as facts, but I was curious to learn more about the Holy Grail and secret society mentioned in the book. I don't particularly feel that this book covered any of my areas of curiosity besides Mary Magdalene, and even that felt lacking. I think the best part was the glossary, which covered more of what was mentioned in the novel and gave insight into what was truth versus the creation of Dan Brown.
May 20, 2019
I appreciated this short but careful analysis of the claims made by Dan Brown in The Da Vinci Code. I would have liked it to be longer and more in depth, but only because I am interested in things like religious history and theology. The way the "investigation" was laid out - presenting the facts before declaring a conclusion - was respectful and helped readers see that the conclusion was not biased due to preconceived religious beliefs. Bock also uses sources outside of the Bible and the Gnostic texts, such as historians and additional theologians to support the arguments. Respected voices such as Josephus, Hippolytus, and Turtullian are heard. In general, if someone is struggling to come to terms with the lies displayed as truth in The Da Vinci Code, this is a good text to read.
March 11, 2020
This book is really an apologetic for Christianity and an apologetic against the “facts” in The Da Vinci Code, a book by Dan Brown and a movie by the same name.
Darrell Bock is a well respected scholar in New Testament studies and he wrote this book in response to the many fallacies included in The Da Vinci Code.
Who is this book for? I think it would be for anyone who is interested in understanding truth in the face of Christian heresies or anyone who had questions about Christianities foundations after reading Dan Brown’s book. It is probably not for the casual reader. It is definitely not for anyone who is looking for entertainment. I personally enjoyed the book but I definitely don’t think it is for everyone.
Darrell Bock is a well respected scholar in New Testament studies and he wrote this book in response to the many fallacies included in The Da Vinci Code.
Who is this book for? I think it would be for anyone who is interested in understanding truth in the face of Christian heresies or anyone who had questions about Christianities foundations after reading Dan Brown’s book. It is probably not for the casual reader. It is definitely not for anyone who is looking for entertainment. I personally enjoyed the book but I definitely don’t think it is for everyone.
March 5, 2018
This book is entirely biased. Besides the fact that it is written by a New Testament studies professor (and no other scholars), he writes in the most condescending way towards anyone who might question the topics brought up in Brown's novel or the Bible. He comes across as a sexist, Bible belt, Jesus-loving, mysogonistic preacher.
His main "sources" are gospels from the Bible... (um???), and commentary from the New Testament. There is VERY LITTLE citation beyond what he says the Bible says. Awful.
His main "sources" are gospels from the Bible... (um???), and commentary from the New Testament. There is VERY LITTLE citation beyond what he says the Bible says. Awful.
June 26, 2018
The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown was just an entertaining novel. That's it. However, some readers took to heart that his research was factual to a great degree. So Darrell L. Bock, a New Testament scholar, took to task to back up or debunk the Da Vinci Code. There were some interesting takes on how Bock tackles the different codes that were brought up on the D. Brown book, but I found it somewhat redundant. The one good quote that I deemed from this entire short fact finding is: "Understanding who we were and why helps us appreciate who we are and maybe even who we should be."
October 23, 2017
I find this topic/genre very fascinating but this book in particular I found to be very tedious and repeating of information at times. Maybe it was just the style that the book was written but there was just something about it that was droning on and on. Truth by told I was not even able to finish the entire book, I put the book down at about the three quarter mark because the information just felt so repetitive. It was an okay book but not by far the best book I have read on this subject..
April 23, 2019
I have actually never read the Da Vinci Code. A few years back I tried to read Angels and Demons and couldn't make it past all the garbage passing as "fact" in the book. But, having never read the Da Vinci Code, Bock seems to do a good job refuting the premises of the book. I have read most of this material elsewhere but in other contexts. If I encounter someone wrestling through these ideas, this book will probably be most helpful.
October 23, 2014
Some good points, but what the heck!? I realize he is writing to a non-Christian audience as well, but his language is too repetitive, he leaves out crucial biblical points, and contradicts himself a lot! He'll make a few waffling comments, then finally explicitly state the answer or final point.
My notes:
Intro.
Key Points:
• The Da Vinci Code “contains claims that are crucial to culture and need to be assessed”
• “…Issues of faith and relationship to God are too important to be left to the confusing category of “historical” fiction…”
• Breaking the Da Vinci Code’s main purpose, as stated in the introduction, is to “distinguish…between fictitious entertainment and historical elements of Christian faith…”
Ch. 1
• The 7 Marys
• Mary Magdalene:
- Not connected to any male
- Where she was from (Magdala) identified her (pg. 17)
- 11 passages of her: (pg. 19)
o She was a disciple
o Not related to Jesus
o Witness to cross, burial, and resurrection
• (Pg. 21) “suggest Jesus was married this best potential case”
• He says that the thought that Mary was a prostitute resulted from confusion and that she was not, that this is “one mystery we can solve quickly and move on.” Yet, he brings this up again later in the book. No moving on from it.
• “No clear text outside Bible indicating Jesus married/ Mary Magadelene = wife (pg. 27) Why would you need anything besides the Bible? Just for evidence?
• “Only interested in….they do not even…” (pgs. 27-28)
Ch.2
• “almost everyone holds” (pg. 27) Uh, no. Jesus didn’t marry because He was divine. He was born of a virgin so He would not inherit original sin. Yes, He was fully human, but He was also fully God. How could He marry and have children? He is sinless, His wife would be sinful. What would His children be? How does this not undermine His divinity? He does not clarify or expound on this, and I am greatly disturbed by this. He does not provide any other support to this claim!!!
• My second biggest issue: on pg. 37, he makes a comment that Luke 7 may be “inaccurate” and then he comments “I think the text is accurate.” IT’S THE BIBLE! The Bible is infallible and inerrant! Why would he even need to make a comment like that!? I realize he is writing this book to a non-Christian audience as well, but he should say, with full conviction, that the Bible IS accurate. He should not have said “either Luke 7 is inaccurate or…”
• Da Vinci Code: Opus Dei cover up Jesus’ family to protect His deity (pg. 32). “No evidence anywhere” that Jesus married and had a family (pg. 32). Yet then he says “[also] no explicit text declaring Jesus was single” (pg. 33) CONTRADICTION…
• Jesus would not have needed to follow Jewish custom because that’s not what He was there to do. He was there to save people from their sins and He denounced man’s customs, particularly those of the Jewish leaders (pg. 37)
Ch. 3
• He devotes this entire chapter to the question of Jesus being un-Jewish for not marrying…yet he already covered this and said he was not. (pg. 37). But here we are with a whole chapter dedicated to this question.
• Yes, received women because both “male and female” (Galatians 3:28!!) His people…why does he have to act like this is such a big deal. Yes, Jesus went against the cultural “norms” because they were exclusive towards people, while Jesus’ people were to be united in Him/one in Christ. (pg. 56) Is he just mentioning this because he has written this book for non-Christian audience as well?
• Mary Magdalene = not prostitute (pg. 154) He already proved this back on pgs. 28-29 and said we could “move on” from that because that thought was created simply by confusion, which he cleared up.
Criticisms:
1. This text (Gospel of Philip) was written 200 years after Jesus. Readings from First Century World (ch. 6) states these writings useless (?). Why would this even be “potential” evidence of intimacy/marriage between Jesus and Mary? (pg. 21) And then six pages later he states that Mary was NOT married to Jesus (pg. 27).
2. He could be more clear and straightforward in his writing. He seems to go in circles and contradict himself before finally making his explicit point.
Examples:
1. “best potential case” (pg. 21) “far less likely” (pg. 24) “not married” (pg. 27)
2. “I agree, there is no trace” (pg. 27) “utterly unlikely” (pg. 27)
3. “very unlikely” (pg. 29) “not a prostitute” (pg. 29)
3. He makes points then says he will discuss them later in the book.
Examples:
1. “We shall return in Code 6 to this text” (pg. 21)
2. “We will discuss Gnostics in more detail in Code 4 and 5” (pg. 21)
(also pgs. 27, 36, 38)
4. LOTS OF REPEAT.
Examples:
1. “in fact the most pious were willing to steer clear of marriage altogether” (pg. 51) “in fact, some pious Jews tried to avoid [marriage]” (pg. 52)
2. “Essenes…were actually respected by many Jews for the depth of their religious conviction” (pg. 52) “in other words, many Jews admired their [the Essenes’] desire and ability to live in such a disciplined manner”
3. MOST ANNOYING ONE:
“so Jesus’ singleness wasn’t un-Jewish” (pg. 57) “in sum, it was not un-Jewish for Jesus to be single” (pg. 58)
(I have yet to finish my notes for the other chapters)
My notes:
Intro.
Key Points:
• The Da Vinci Code “contains claims that are crucial to culture and need to be assessed”
• “…Issues of faith and relationship to God are too important to be left to the confusing category of “historical” fiction…”
• Breaking the Da Vinci Code’s main purpose, as stated in the introduction, is to “distinguish…between fictitious entertainment and historical elements of Christian faith…”
Ch. 1
• The 7 Marys
• Mary Magdalene:
- Not connected to any male
- Where she was from (Magdala) identified her (pg. 17)
- 11 passages of her: (pg. 19)
o She was a disciple
o Not related to Jesus
o Witness to cross, burial, and resurrection
• (Pg. 21) “suggest Jesus was married this best potential case”
• He says that the thought that Mary was a prostitute resulted from confusion and that she was not, that this is “one mystery we can solve quickly and move on.” Yet, he brings this up again later in the book. No moving on from it.
• “No clear text outside Bible indicating Jesus married/ Mary Magadelene = wife (pg. 27) Why would you need anything besides the Bible? Just for evidence?
• “Only interested in….they do not even…” (pgs. 27-28)
Ch.2
• “almost everyone holds” (pg. 27) Uh, no. Jesus didn’t marry because He was divine. He was born of a virgin so He would not inherit original sin. Yes, He was fully human, but He was also fully God. How could He marry and have children? He is sinless, His wife would be sinful. What would His children be? How does this not undermine His divinity? He does not clarify or expound on this, and I am greatly disturbed by this. He does not provide any other support to this claim!!!
• My second biggest issue: on pg. 37, he makes a comment that Luke 7 may be “inaccurate” and then he comments “I think the text is accurate.” IT’S THE BIBLE! The Bible is infallible and inerrant! Why would he even need to make a comment like that!? I realize he is writing this book to a non-Christian audience as well, but he should say, with full conviction, that the Bible IS accurate. He should not have said “either Luke 7 is inaccurate or…”
• Da Vinci Code: Opus Dei cover up Jesus’ family to protect His deity (pg. 32). “No evidence anywhere” that Jesus married and had a family (pg. 32). Yet then he says “[also] no explicit text declaring Jesus was single” (pg. 33) CONTRADICTION…
• Jesus would not have needed to follow Jewish custom because that’s not what He was there to do. He was there to save people from their sins and He denounced man’s customs, particularly those of the Jewish leaders (pg. 37)
Ch. 3
• He devotes this entire chapter to the question of Jesus being un-Jewish for not marrying…yet he already covered this and said he was not. (pg. 37). But here we are with a whole chapter dedicated to this question.
• Yes, received women because both “male and female” (Galatians 3:28!!) His people…why does he have to act like this is such a big deal. Yes, Jesus went against the cultural “norms” because they were exclusive towards people, while Jesus’ people were to be united in Him/one in Christ. (pg. 56) Is he just mentioning this because he has written this book for non-Christian audience as well?
• Mary Magdalene = not prostitute (pg. 154) He already proved this back on pgs. 28-29 and said we could “move on” from that because that thought was created simply by confusion, which he cleared up.
Criticisms:
1. This text (Gospel of Philip) was written 200 years after Jesus. Readings from First Century World (ch. 6) states these writings useless (?). Why would this even be “potential” evidence of intimacy/marriage between Jesus and Mary? (pg. 21) And then six pages later he states that Mary was NOT married to Jesus (pg. 27).
2. He could be more clear and straightforward in his writing. He seems to go in circles and contradict himself before finally making his explicit point.
Examples:
1. “best potential case” (pg. 21) “far less likely” (pg. 24) “not married” (pg. 27)
2. “I agree, there is no trace” (pg. 27) “utterly unlikely” (pg. 27)
3. “very unlikely” (pg. 29) “not a prostitute” (pg. 29)
3. He makes points then says he will discuss them later in the book.
Examples:
1. “We shall return in Code 6 to this text” (pg. 21)
2. “We will discuss Gnostics in more detail in Code 4 and 5” (pg. 21)
(also pgs. 27, 36, 38)
4. LOTS OF REPEAT.
Examples:
1. “in fact the most pious were willing to steer clear of marriage altogether” (pg. 51) “in fact, some pious Jews tried to avoid [marriage]” (pg. 52)
2. “Essenes…were actually respected by many Jews for the depth of their religious conviction” (pg. 52) “in other words, many Jews admired their [the Essenes’] desire and ability to live in such a disciplined manner”
3. MOST ANNOYING ONE:
“so Jesus’ singleness wasn’t un-Jewish” (pg. 57) “in sum, it was not un-Jewish for Jesus to be single” (pg. 58)
(I have yet to finish my notes for the other chapters)
June 5, 2025
I found this book in a little free library. Since I wasn’t really familiar with the topic, I picked it up to skim out of curiosity. I’m thankful for theologians and teachers of Scripture because I appreciate studying genuine Truths given to us in the Bible.
August 13, 2017
Brings some great clarity to some interesting questions regarding the Date Vinci Code.
June 9, 2020
The Da Vinci Code did puzzle me. But this book did not help at all
November 16, 2020
People love fiction and placebos more than the truth. This book is for people who love truth.
July 8, 2021
las teorías de conspiración son más cheveres
November 8, 2022
Could barely finish it
January 4, 2024
I thought it was just a fan fiction for the Bible.
July 3, 2020
Must-read! With as much influence as the fiction of Dan Brown has had over popular thought, this is a needed and timely resource.
July 2, 2016
Many who have read the New York Times bestseller The Da Vinci Code have questions that arise from seven codes--expressed or implied--in Dan Brown's book. In Breaking the Da Vinci Code: Answers to the Questions Everyone's Asking, Darrell Bock, Ph.D., responds to the novelist's claims using central ancient texts and answers the following questions:
Who was Mary Magdalene?
Was Jesus Married?
Would Jesus Being Single be Un-Jewish?
Do the So-Called Secret Gnostic Gospels Help Us Understand Jesus?
What Is the Remaining Relevance of The Da Vinci Code?
Darrell Bock's research uncovers the origins of these codes by focusing on the 325 years immediately following the birth of Christ, for the claims of The Da Vinci Code rise or fall on the basis of things emerging from this period. Breaking the Da Vinci Code, now available in trade paper, distinguishes fictitious entertainment from historical elements of the Christian faith. For by seeing these differences, one can break the Da Vinci code. (cover blurb)
First of all, I'm not one of the people who asked the questions Dr. Bock answers in this book. I read The Da Vinci Code for what it was: an entertaining whodunnit with a religious conspiracy twist, one of my favorite subgenres of thriller. And I am utterly amazed that some certain segment of the population took seriously the outlandish conspiracy theory on which Dan Brown based his novel.
Read that again. NOVEL. N-O-V-E-L. Meaning, it's fiction. F-I-C-T-I-O-N. Meaning, it's not true.
*takes a deep breath*
Relax, avanta.
*chants a mantra*
Okay. Better now.
However (she resumed in a calmer fashion), not too long ago I overheard several of my colleagues, women who I otherwise thought had a grain of sense, discussing the NOVEL and its basis with all seriousness. I mean, they truly believed the story contained a thinly disguised version of the truth. This shocked me. Does it make a difference that these women are for the most part either unchurched or followers of a non-Christian religion? Possibly. I don't know any Christian serious about his faith who takes the theories presented in The Da Vinci Code as anything other than sheer entertainment. I wanted to jump in their conversation and point out the fallacies; unfortunately, I did not have adequate information. I knew they were wrong but didn't have data to make my points.
This book provides the data.
Dr. Bock sets up each "code" and knocks it down again with a satisfactory "thunk". He quotes Scripture and scholarly research; he provides historical and sociological background; he explains the Gnostic heresy; he discusses the Council of Nicaea and what led to its stamp of approval on the Biblical Canon; and generally applies logic, reason, and critical thinking to each aspect of the so-called conspiracy, thereby debunking it in total.
A short fast read, overflowing with information, and worth every minute of the reader's time. If The Da Vinci Code raised questions in your mind, or if you want to answer someone else's questions, this is the book you need.
Who was Mary Magdalene?
Was Jesus Married?
Would Jesus Being Single be Un-Jewish?
Do the So-Called Secret Gnostic Gospels Help Us Understand Jesus?
What Is the Remaining Relevance of The Da Vinci Code?
Darrell Bock's research uncovers the origins of these codes by focusing on the 325 years immediately following the birth of Christ, for the claims of The Da Vinci Code rise or fall on the basis of things emerging from this period. Breaking the Da Vinci Code, now available in trade paper, distinguishes fictitious entertainment from historical elements of the Christian faith. For by seeing these differences, one can break the Da Vinci code. (cover blurb)
First of all, I'm not one of the people who asked the questions Dr. Bock answers in this book. I read The Da Vinci Code for what it was: an entertaining whodunnit with a religious conspiracy twist, one of my favorite subgenres of thriller. And I am utterly amazed that some certain segment of the population took seriously the outlandish conspiracy theory on which Dan Brown based his novel.
Read that again. NOVEL. N-O-V-E-L. Meaning, it's fiction. F-I-C-T-I-O-N. Meaning, it's not true.
*takes a deep breath*
Relax, avanta.
*chants a mantra*
Okay. Better now.
However (she resumed in a calmer fashion), not too long ago I overheard several of my colleagues, women who I otherwise thought had a grain of sense, discussing the NOVEL and its basis with all seriousness. I mean, they truly believed the story contained a thinly disguised version of the truth. This shocked me. Does it make a difference that these women are for the most part either unchurched or followers of a non-Christian religion? Possibly. I don't know any Christian serious about his faith who takes the theories presented in The Da Vinci Code as anything other than sheer entertainment. I wanted to jump in their conversation and point out the fallacies; unfortunately, I did not have adequate information. I knew they were wrong but didn't have data to make my points.
This book provides the data.
Dr. Bock sets up each "code" and knocks it down again with a satisfactory "thunk". He quotes Scripture and scholarly research; he provides historical and sociological background; he explains the Gnostic heresy; he discusses the Council of Nicaea and what led to its stamp of approval on the Biblical Canon; and generally applies logic, reason, and critical thinking to each aspect of the so-called conspiracy, thereby debunking it in total.
A short fast read, overflowing with information, and worth every minute of the reader's time. If The Da Vinci Code raised questions in your mind, or if you want to answer someone else's questions, this is the book you need.
July 3, 2007
2.5 stars.
I'd say this one falls in the middle of these Da Vinci Code books I'm reading; it's about even with Cracking Da Vinci's Code.
One thing, though--In rejecting the current wave of looking at other texts, such as the Gnostic texts, for how we should live (For instance, looking at the figure of Mary Magdalene and interpreting her life to mean that women were/should be more important in the Church because Jesus trusted her [as this particular claim goes] with his teaching), Bock writes, "Whatever the merits of the case being argued for the way that moderns should live, we cannot overlook that the appeal to ancient history for support is a distortion of that history" (94). But doesn't that also mean that the Bible shouldn't be used to defend same-sex-only marriage? The Bible is ancient history, and you're appealing to it to support your view of the way moderns "should" live.... And later: "We cannot be selective in what to highlight from this material....Picking and choosing snippets from this material and quickly passing over the rest...leave an imbalance in what was being affirmed by this ancient movement." So, isn't that the same with skipping over the parts of the Bible where we're supposed to love each other, and instead only choosing the parts that say something about a man lying with another man? Picking and choosing, and skipping over the ENTIRE MESSAGE of loving your fellow man. hmm.....
Other than that, this is a decent look at the Biblical sources that contradict claims made by Dan Brown in The Da Vinci Code. It's a little light at times in that it doesn't seem to make some of its points quite as hard as it could, but it still does a good job of using Biblical history to show that Brown's claims can't be true.
I'd say this one falls in the middle of these Da Vinci Code books I'm reading; it's about even with Cracking Da Vinci's Code.
One thing, though--In rejecting the current wave of looking at other texts, such as the Gnostic texts, for how we should live (For instance, looking at the figure of Mary Magdalene and interpreting her life to mean that women were/should be more important in the Church because Jesus trusted her [as this particular claim goes] with his teaching), Bock writes, "Whatever the merits of the case being argued for the way that moderns should live, we cannot overlook that the appeal to ancient history for support is a distortion of that history" (94). But doesn't that also mean that the Bible shouldn't be used to defend same-sex-only marriage? The Bible is ancient history, and you're appealing to it to support your view of the way moderns "should" live.... And later: "We cannot be selective in what to highlight from this material....Picking and choosing snippets from this material and quickly passing over the rest...leave an imbalance in what was being affirmed by this ancient movement." So, isn't that the same with skipping over the parts of the Bible where we're supposed to love each other, and instead only choosing the parts that say something about a man lying with another man? Picking and choosing, and skipping over the ENTIRE MESSAGE of loving your fellow man. hmm.....
Other than that, this is a decent look at the Biblical sources that contradict claims made by Dan Brown in The Da Vinci Code. It's a little light at times in that it doesn't seem to make some of its points quite as hard as it could, but it still does a good job of using Biblical history to show that Brown's claims can't be true.
August 19, 2009
It's almost like the DaVinci code was true. I felt there was an attempt to "cover-up" or to divert attention. There was a lot of good arguments, but there was a lot of diversion too. I love the thought that someone thought there was a need to explain away the DaVinci Code. I only read the DaVinci Code for amusement and I must say I did enjoy, even though I knew it was fiction, but now Breaking the Da Vinci Code has opened up more what if's than I had before. All-in-all, it was a good read and it was very enlightening.
February 11, 2008
Book Review: nswers to the Questions Everyone's Asking, Darrell Bock, Ph.D., responds to the novelist's claims using central ancient texts and answers the following questions:
* Who was Mary Magdalene?
* Was Jesus Married?
* Would Jesus Being Single be Un-Jewish?
* Do the So-Called Secret Gnostic Gospels Help Us Understand Jesus?
* What Is the Remaining Relevance of The Da Vinci Code?
My review: Awesome and provacative while thoughtful.
* Who was Mary Magdalene?
* Was Jesus Married?
* Would Jesus Being Single be Un-Jewish?
* Do the So-Called Secret Gnostic Gospels Help Us Understand Jesus?
* What Is the Remaining Relevance of The Da Vinci Code?
My review: Awesome and provacative while thoughtful.
April 3, 2010
Bock's little book is an able response to The Da Vinci Code. I think studying The Da Vinci Code is valuable simply because it enables us to discuss what really happened. Too many Christians simply have no clue where the Bible came from. We need to have a response ready for when we talk to folks who have read the book or think it's true just because Tom Hanks said it.
January 25, 2008
Interesting discussion of the history behind some of the vents addressed in the DaVinci Code. I would recommend this to those who have read Dan Brown's DaVinci Code. It is very well researched and cited and refutes much of Brown's historical assertions.
August 16, 2008
A good overview from the perspective of a Christian historian of sorts; he convincing addresses several of the issues from the novel and lays out historical evidence that clearly disproves some of the assertions in "The DaVinci Code". A great picture of the "other side" of these issues.
May 6, 2009
This is a very interesting, academic view of the ideas brought up in Dan Brown's book the Da Vinci Code. It gives a thorough defense of why the book is fiction and the chapter on the gnostic gospels is especially good. A great tool in defending the Christian faith against the book's claims.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 38 reviews