The main ideas surrounding The Da Vinci Code are that Jesus was not God, but a mere man, and thereby had, and exercised the ability to produce progeny; that Mary Magdalene had an exalted position above the other disciples as evidenced by the tone of the Gospel of Mary and the painting of the Last Supper by Leonardo da Vinci, and that her body was kept for many years as a revered relic; that Jesus' line of descendants continues until today; that the Church historically reduced the position of superiority held by women and transferred it solely to men - and in the process subjugated the role of women in the church; and that the Church has been responsible for heinous acts over the millennia to maintain the positions taken against women and to hide various truths that have now been revealed in certain documents. Taken at face value, some of these ideas are true to some degree or another, but the majority of them and specifically those that concern the nature of Christ are clearly false, and thus are not worthy of consideration.

While watching the film, the thought crossed the mind of this writer that the main basis of the book and the resultant film was the paintings of the great artist Leonardo da Vinci who is acknowledged as being a man who had no love for Christianity or any other religion. To use him then as the source of some authority is definitely unwise. The position ascribed to Mary Magdalene is obviously a farce, given that the painting of the Last Supper reveals more of an ideal not yet realized, than an actuality. The culture of the day makes it uncertain that she would have been present, but even if Jesus chose to disregard culture there is no evidence on the basis of scripture to support her being there. Many have sought to portray Jesus as a man in more ways than the Church has been able to bear, but this writer would have no qualms whatsoever if there was evidence that Jesus had special feelings towards a woman. In fact, this would definitely enhance the idea of two natures dwelling in one body.

There is no doubt whatsoever that the movie has sought to present some amount of history about Christianity. However, there is a great deal of speculation, and it is this speculation which may cast doubt in the minds of believers and non-adherents alike, and which may constitute a stumbling block to greater appreciation and/or commitment to the faith. This writer is aware that most Jamaicans are very religious, even if they do not have a faith-commitment, and this was evident in the theatre every time a pronouncement was made in the movie that cuts against the grain of standard belief.

The movie's strength lies in the amount of information that is presented in one and a half hours. Additionally, it uses familiar images or institutions, (for example, Knights Templar, or the pentagram) and attaches ideas that are wildly believable about them, and thereby creates room for doubt and/or belief, whichever may apply to a given situation. While many persons who have watched the film or read the book point to the inherent falsehood attached to many of the ideas in the film, and point to the possibility of the film being a source of spreading or perpetuating heretical ideas, it must be noted that all is not bad where the film is concerned. One film has been able to carry a message than any one individual or group has done over the course of two millennia, and that is the message that Jesus Christ came into the world to offer a way to God. For this reason, the film must be accepted as a tool of 'evangelism,' albeit that it does so in a manner that causes current believers to either cringe at its potential ability to cause criticism or loss, or to attack its message militantly before an observant world.