First of all Ehrman D. Bart, author of Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci legislation does an amazing job arguing about each(prenominal) main point in the Dan chocolate-brown?s bear, The Da Vinci Code. Ehrman has listed ten ?factual Errors in The Da Vinci Code?; they be all interesting, but what struck me the most was this: ?bloody shame Magdalene was great(predicate) at the crucifixion? That?s a good unmatchable (p.255).? I will show Ehrman?s view of twain the strengths and weakness of Brown?s assertions simple is that. Historically, Brown?s evidence is ambiguous and does not appear factual; thus, his book is built on false evidence.
Ehrman knew that Dan?s book was fictional. Ehrman states ?as for many others, it was real page-turner?. He did not like it that Brown?s characters were making historical claims about Jesus, Mary, and the Gospels. The fiction was create on a historical foundation that the reader was to require as factual, not fiction. (xiii) He loved The Da Vinci Code Dan Brown?s book as a slaughter mystery. Although Ehram enjoyed the book, he has opposed to historically relevance.
Let me just produce by asking this question. According to Brown?s book, Mary Magdalene was pregnant at the crucifixion?
Ehrman says that Brown was using information from this best selling book Holy Blood, Holy Grail, which he does not admit as the primary source. What Brown?s tells in his book that Mary was a follower; she was wife of Jesus and also lover and according to his book, she was pregnant at the time of crucifixion. After the crucifixion she went to Gaul, and she gave birth to a missy named Sarah. ?The companion of the Savior is Mary Magdalene.? ?As any Armaic educatee will tell you, the word companion in those days, literally means spouse (p.246).? Teabing...
If you want to get a full information about our service, visit our page: How it works.
No comments:
Post a Comment