"; if(is_file("header.php")) include "header.php"; else include "../header.php"; ?>

Assumptions based on weak connections This is an interesting speculation, and rather fun in that regard, but somewhat tenuous in it's logical assumptions. Many of the "connections" presented don't necessarily follow from the evidence presented. Rather, they only "MIGHT" be possible. No "maybe" ever made anything a "definite," and the leap from the fact that Leonardo Da Vinci's name was found on an old list of names does not prove that it must logically follow that the list was comprised of heads of a group dedicated to preserving a secret about Christ: That Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married and had offspring. Then the book makes or implies additional similar leaps of reason based on the assumption that if concepts can be imagined from evidences found, then the those concepts must be true. This is an obvious logical fallacy. As a Christian I'm supposed to be offended by this sort of reading, but I'm not. Even in the REMOTE possibility that the premise is true, I have one question: SO WHAT? Nothing herein would demonstrate that Jesus Christ was not the Messiah, only the "possibility" that Jesus the Christ occupied some human attributes that were not recorded heretofore. But Christians have long known that Christ demonstrated a few occasional human frailties as a result of assuming human form. (I.e.: Praying to the Father and requesting to be released from His duties in the Garden of Gethsemene just hours prior to his arrest.) My inclination is to think Baigent, Leigh, and Lincoln fell victim to the "group think" phenomena, and were each drawn to support speculations that didn't necessarily follow from the evidence at hand. As a serious scientific or historic study, I give this book zero stars. But as a fun "speculation" I have to give it at least two. So I've compromised and given it one.