PDA

View Full Version : Holy Blood, Holy Grail


phildonnia
8th March 2004, 06:02 PM
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0440136482/qid=1078794139/sr=2-1/ref=sr_2_1/002-7532528-0407250

Anyone read this book? I thumbed through it at a book store and it seemed fascinating. I think I'm gonna buy it on Amazon now.

The amazon reviews are quite mixed even among readers with a skeptical bent, and those calling themselves Christian.

RichardR
8th March 2004, 06:32 PM
Lets just say there are a few holes in the story.

The analysis of the origins of the Gospels and what really happened in Jesus' life, is interesting though.

Giz
9th March 2004, 04:55 AM
It's an enthralling mystery/conspiracy/history/detective story. But i'd put the emphasis on story.

Godd fun, as long as you don't intend to base your understanding of ancient/dark age history on it.

Garrette
9th March 2004, 05:32 AM
I read it years and years ago.

Read as fiction, it's really fun.

Read as fact, it's still fun but requires caution.

Buy it. There's stuff worth following up on in there.

Igopogo
9th March 2004, 09:24 PM
I liked the option:

"I'm a skeptic, book is fascinating, thought-provoking crap."

..as this sums up my exact reaction to reading this book. Lots of fun concepts yet way too wacky to be taken seriously in any way.

Zep
9th March 2004, 09:48 PM
We bought it some years ago and have it at home, and I've read it closely a few times.

Personal comment: Much drawing of the authors' desired conclusions from very small smidgins of evidence, backed up with very little background research. I would have liked to have seen alternative ideas and solutions, and lots more data. Otherwise, not implausible, and I would love to know what Middle Ages historians think of it (I am not a historian by any stretch!).

mickky
9th March 2004, 10:43 PM
I agree with most of the above, having read it almost 15 years ago now, with a much less mature point of view.

At the very least, it makes for fascinating reading. The authors seem to have bitten off more than they could chew at that point, (If you believe only a small part of what they put forward) but their later works-The Dead Sea scrolls Deception and The Temple and the Lodge- come from a somewhat more grounded point of view. From a more historical context, if you will.

The books certainly give a perspective on why Christians might believe what they do, and perhaps why Chistianity came to be the 'Cult that got lucky..'

Make up your own mind...

asthmatic camel
11th March 2004, 10:21 AM
I vaguely remember reading this some 15 to twenty years ago. If it's the same book, it states that Jesus' descendants moved to France and were then known as the Merovingians. Well, draw your own conclusions.



:bs:

jj
1st January 2006, 02:10 PM
Stupid Poll Bug.

Roadtoad
1st January 2006, 02:59 PM
Deleted.

Damn poll bug.

Roadtoad
1st January 2006, 03:19 PM
Read the thread now.

Don't you have better ways to spend your time?

Ian Osborne
1st January 2006, 04:10 PM
Much drawing of the authors' desired conclusions from very small smidgins of evidence, backed up with very little background research.

That's VERY true. They also chain rhetorical questions to disguise the threadbare nature of their evidence, a device used to great effect by that other bastion of scholarly research, Erich Von Daniken...

LibraryLady
1st January 2006, 04:53 PM
You might want to take at look at this (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0460542/) after you finish the book. Tony Robinson, Baldrick to those of us who appreciate wonderful television, pretty much demolishes the arguments in Holy Blood, Holy Grail.

ceo_esq
4th January 2006, 09:57 AM
Just in case it would impact your decision to read this book, I'll mention that it's one of Sylvia Browne's favorites.

Orphia Nay
8th January 2006, 12:05 AM
I too read the book years ago in my woo phase and thought it was fascinating. I don't have any sources, but apparently Plantard, the source of most of the book's 'evidence' fabricated the documents he was supposed to have found. I think he admitted it.
I thought it would be interesting to read again recently to decide how much Dan Brown 'borrowed' from it, but I got bored, I'm afraid.

Edited to add: Plantard spent time in jail for fraud and embezzlement and invented the "Priory of Sion". The "Dossiers Secret" were faked. He admitted this in court in 1993. The authors of HBHG had been fooled by him and the story had a life of its own.
This link is worth a read:
http://petragrail.tripod.com/hoax.html