It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dan Brown and Priory of Sion

page: 3
1
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 15 2006 @ 11:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Omniscient
I don't think you're getting what I'm saying Nygdan; I'm not trying to claim that the Priory existed. I'm saying that based on the documents Brown did his 'research' on, they "existed"; even if those documents have been proven to be fake, the documents still SAY that the Priory existed, whether they are fake or not.

It simply doesn't make sense to say that a fake organization that never existed actually existed. In so far as the secret dossiers, they were made up by a group of recent frauds to give a fake organization that they made up some form of legitimacy. Thus, the priory, as presented in teh secret documents, does not exist, its a falsehood to say that it does, what did exist is a fraudulent organization that claimed to be a 'priory fo sion'. Brown's book doesn't say that, it says that the priory of sion is a real organization that has existed since 1099 or some such.
Thats false. Dan Brown's fictional book says its true. Either brown is a liar, an idiot (for not doing basic research) or......a writer of a great fictional book.


because nobody will actually argue the actual content.

You have been presented with a cogent arugment based upon the text of the documents, their history, and the person's involved. You seem to merley be saying "the jews are evil, therefore, anything saying that they are evil must not be a forgery". Rather poor arguement.


So its not even FACTUAL, its accurate.

It states that the priory is a real organization.

Brown never claimed the novel was to be true.

He claims that the priory exists.

I agree, its a fictional story, its entertaining, and he didn't make up the paintings. The interpretations of the last supper as picturing Mary Magdalene is interpretation, the description of the figure as female is interpretation, etc.

[edit on 15-5-2006 by Nygdan]




posted on May, 16 2006 @ 10:39 PM
link   
Hi all,
I only have a couple of minutes, so please forgive if this has been posted by someone else. Discover ran a show over and over and over again all weekend about all this stuff. The man who forged the documents confessed. So why all the discussion? It was an effort to achieve royal status without the pedigree



posted on May, 16 2006 @ 10:42 PM
link   
Brown isn't even a good author. He's a plagiarist
His ideas are old, he just had a tiny bit of talent and put them as a thriller. Hardly worthy of being given the praise Ive seen. Stephen King does exactly the same- plagiarises W.W. Jacobs, Lovecraft, Arthur Machen, then reaps the dough from the poor suckers who buy his books.



posted on May, 27 2006 @ 01:33 PM
link   
The Priory of Sion did exist; people are confusing the allegedly false history created in the 1950's by Pierre Plantard. Papal bulls from the time period (early 12th century) prove that the group existed, and may actually have a connection to the Knights Templar.

1090 - 1188 The Ordre de Sion

According to the "prieure documents," (presumably written by Plantard), a conclave of Calabrian monks who left from the Belgian Abbey of Orval in 1090 helped secure the election of Godfroi de Bouillion as de facto king of Jerusalem during the First Crusade (but as is well known, he refused the title, accepting only Defender of the Holy Sepulchre), based on their belief that he was a descendant of the Merovingians, and by that fact, according to these documents, also a descendant of King David through Jesus and Merovech. In return, Godfroi secured their installation into an Abbey on Mount Sion. These documents also claim that the Ordre of Sion and the Order of the Temple (officially, the Poor Knights of the Temple of Solomon, later known as the Knights Templar, and officially recognized as such in 1118) were, until 1188, one unified organization with the same leadership.

Is there any basis to these claims? Here is what it is apparently true: there was indeed an Order of Sion based on Mt. Sion, and according to a papal bull of the 12th century, it had monasteries and abbeys elsewhere in Palestine (in particular, Mount Carmel), in southern Italy (Calabria), and in France. There is little in the official histories linking Godfroi to this order, but he is said to have founded the Order of the Holy Sepulchre, whose relationships to these other orders (the Temple and Sion) are unclear. And the official histories do not indicate any overlap between these monks and the soldier-monks of the Knights Templar. The Order seems to have occupied its "mother" abbey, Notre Dame de Sion/St. Mary of Mt. Zion, built on the foundations of the original apostolic Cenacle or Coelaneum, up until around 1291 or so, when like many Crusader holdings, it was overwhelmed by the Moslem onslaught. It actually was in the hands of the Franciscans for several more centuries, until it finally was lost to Christian ownership and was converted to a mosque.



posted on May, 27 2006 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by Omniscient
Hasn't the Priory of Sion been proven to exist?

Its been shown to not exist. A pretender to the french throne, shortly after wwii, made up the documents. The priory never existed.


Whoa Nygdan! Incorrect. The Priory of Sion did exist during the crusades. That is a fact the question is if it still exists...

-- Boat

Post Script: Lock great post, I assume you have read "Holy Blood, Holy Grail", no?


[edit on 27-5-2006 by Boatphone]



posted on May, 28 2006 @ 11:40 AM
link   


The Order seems to have occupied its "mother" abbey, Notre Dame de Sion/St. Mary of Mt. Zion,


actually I think that translates as "Our Lady of Mt Sion. A records as late as
1619 when they were evicted from the Little Priory at Saint- Samson exist.

Perhaps it was with Plantard as it was with Jean de Arc ? And others through history?

Summed up it can be phrased in the same manner as the old MI tv series started.




AS ALWAYS MR. PHELPS, IF YOU OR ANY OF YOUR TEAM ARE CAUGHT OR KILLED. THE DIRECTOR WILL DISAVOW ALL KNOWLEDGE OF YOU AND YOUR TEAM.



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by AryanDan
 


heres what i noticed: in the Da Vinci Code by dan brown, the British scholar, that the main character (Robert Langdon) uses for help finding the Holy Grai, is named Leigh Teabing. Leigh is Richard Leigh's last name, and Teabing is an anagram of Baigent, referring to Michael Baigent. just wanted to throw that out there



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join