Danospano said:
Spoiler!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What's so insane about Jesus possibly having a child? Isn't that what you're talking about? If not, then I'm thinking of something else, but recently Brown professed he'd contemplated adding that twist to the subtext of the story. I don't understand why Jesus couldn't have fathered a child, when he was capable of experiencing everything else (pain, pleasure, etc).
I was commenting on the theory that he *didn't* put into the book.
I guess this could be a spoiler...so, Spoiler Alert. Read no farther.
Brown wanted to include the theory that Jesus survived the cruicifixion and lived for many years. (Apparently, I'm one of the few people on earth who hadn't heard this before. Nothing Brown proposes is new, that's for sure.)
While Google informs me that there are cases of people surviving, I think it would be incredibly difficult from even a strictly medical viewpoint. Since Brown emphasizes (and this is a view I share, too) Jesus' life as a mortal man, one cannot really argue "Well, he was the Son of God and had great healing powers." If he did survive, one would think this miracle (and it really would have been one in my view) would have found it's way in the Bible--I would think it would find its way into other records.
From a theological standpoint, I see it as a moot point since Jesus was resurrected--thus "surviving" anyway.
Of course, Brown would say that the resurrection wasn't literal, that he merely came out of a coma or something and it was interpreted as resurrection from the dead, etc.
Like I've said countless times here, I'm not devoutly religious and nothing Brown says offends me. I just don't find it that remarkable and some of it, like the crucifixion theory, I find more silly than shocking.
.
