The Da Vinci Code

The Da Vinci Code
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Da Vinci Code is a controversial mystery/detective novel by US author Dan Brown, published in 2003 by Doubleday.
This novel has provoked a popular interest in speculation concerning the Holy Grail legend and the role of Mary Magdalene in the history of Christianity. According to the premise of the novel, the Vatican knows it is perpetuating a lie about Jesus’ bloodline and the role of women in church, but continues to do so to keep itself in power.
Dan Brown’s novel was a major success in 2004 and at times it was outsold only by the highly popular Harry Potter series.[1] It spawned a number of offspring books and drew glowing reviews from the New York Times, People Magazine and the Washington Post.[2] It also re-ignited interest in the history of the Roman Catholic Church. Additionally, The Da Vinci Code, itself preceded by other Grail books such as The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail by Michael Baigent and others, and Umberto Eco’s Foucault’s Pendulum, has inspired a number of novels very similar to it, including Raymond Khoury’s The Last Templar, and The Templar Legacy by Steve Berry.
It is a worldwide bestseller which had 60.5 million copies in print by May 2006 and has been translated into 44 languages. It is thought to be the 19th best-selling book of all time. Combining the detective, thriller and conspiracy fiction genres, the book is the second book by Dan Brown to include the character Robert Langdon, the first being his 2000 novel Angels and Demons. In November 2004 Random House published a “Special Illustrated Edition” with 160 illustrations.
In 2006, a film adaptation, The Da Vinci Code, was released by Columbia Pictures.

Plot summary
The book describes the attempts of Robert Langdon, Professor of Religious Symbology at Harvard University, to solve the murder of renowned curator Jacques Saunière (see Bérenger Saunière) of the Louvre Museum in Paris. The title of the novel refers to, among other things, the fact that Saunière’s body is found in the Denon Wing of the Louvre, naked and posed like Leonardo da Vinci’s famous drawing, the Vitruvian Man, with a cryptic message written beside his body and a Pentacle drawn on his stomach in his own blood.
The interpretation of hidden messages in Leonardo’s famous works, (which relate to the concept of the sacred feminine) including the Mona Lisa and The Last Supper, figure prominently in the solution to the mystery.
The novel has several concurrent subplots interweaving the lives of different characters; eventually all the characters are brought together and the subplots resolved in the denouement. The unraveling of the mystery requires the solution to a series of brain-teasers, including anagrams and number puzzles. The ultimate solution is found to be intimately connected with the possible location of the Holy Grail and to a mysterious society called the Priory of Sion, as well as to the Knights Templar. The story also involves the Roman Catholic organization Opus Dei.
The novel is the second book by Brown in which Robert Langdon is the main character. The previous book, Angels & Demons, took place in Rome and concerned the Illuminati. Although Angels & Demons is centred on the same character, the plots are not dependent upon each other. The next book is tentatively scheduled for release in 2008. Its title is The Solomon Key and it is reported to concern Freemasonry[citation needed].

Characters and their involvement in The Da Vinci Code
These are the principal characters that drive the plot. Some have names that are puns, anagrams or hidden clues:
* Robert Langdon
* Jacques Saunière
* Sophie Neveu
* Bezu Fache
* Silas
* Bishop Manuel Aringarosa
* André Vernet
* Elliott Paffey
* Sir Leigh Teabing
* Rémy Legaludec
* Lieutenant Jérôme Collet
* Guardian of the Rosslyn Trust
* Apparently, the relationship between Langdon and Vittoria Vetra from Angels and Demons has ended.
* The full message Saunière wrote on the floor of the Louvre contained the line “P.S. Find Robert Langdon”, which was the reason Bezu Fache suspected Langdon of being the murderer. Fache had erased this line before Langdon arrived so that Langdon would be unaware that the police suspected him. Sophie Neveu saw the entire text of the message when it was faxed to her office by the police. Sophie realized immediately that the message was meant for her, since her grandfather used to call her “Princess Sophie” (i.e. “PS”). From this, she also knew Langdon to be innocent. She secretly informs him of this when they are in the Louvre by having him call her personal voicemail box and listen to the message that she had left there for him.
* Robert Langdon and Sophie Neveu seem to be falling in love. They arrange to meet in Florence as Robert and Vittoria did in Angels and Demons.
* Jacques Saunière was the Grand Master of the Priory of Sion and therefore knew the hidden location of the “keystone”, which leads to the Holy Grail and documents which would shake the foundation of Christianity and the Church. He was killed in an attempt to extract this information from him as well as eliminating the top members of the Priory of Sion.
* The reason that Sophie Neveu disassociated herself from her grandfather is that she discovered him participating in a pagan sex ritual (Hieros Gamos) at his home in Normandy, when she made a surprise visit there during a break from boarding school. (That she had observed something is mentioned and hinted at several times throughout the complicated story, but what it is that she saw is revealed to no one, including the reader, until near the end when she reveals it to Robert.)
* The other three lines of Saunière’s blood message are anagrams. The first line are the digits of the Fibonacci sequence out of order. The second and third lines (“O, Draconian devil!” and “Oh, lame saint!”) are anagrams respectively for “Leonardo da Vinci” and “The Mona Lisa” (inexplicably written in English). These clues were meant to lead to a second set of clues. On the glass over the Mona Lisa, Saunière wrote the message “So dark the con of Man” with a curator’s pen that can only be read in ultra-violet light. This clue is an anagram for Madonna of the Rocks, another Da Vinci painting hanging nearby. Behind this painting, Saunière hid a key. On the key, written with the curator’s pen, is an address.
* The key opens a safe deposit box at the Paris branch of the Depository Bank of Zurich. Saunière’s account number at the bank is a 10-digit number listing the digits of the first eight Fibonacci numbers: 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21.
* The instructions that Saunière revealed to Silas at gunpoint are actually a well-rehearsed lie, namely that the keystone is buried in the Church of Saint-Sulpice beneath an obelisk that lies exactly along the ancient “Rose Line” (the former Prime Meridian which passed through Paris before it was redesignated to pass through Greenwich). The message beneath the obelisk simply contains a reference to a passage in the Book of Job (38:11a, KJV) which reads in part “Hitherto shalt thou go and no further”. When Silas reads this, he realizes he has been duped.
* The keystone is actually a cryptex, a cylindrical device supposedly invented by Leonardo Da Vinci for transporting secure messages. In order to open it the combination of rotating components must be arranged in the correct order. If the cryptex is forced open an enclosed vial of vinegar ruptures and dissolves the message, which was written on papyrus. The rosewood box containing the cryptex contains clues to the combination of the cryptex, written in backwards script in the same manner as Leonardo’s journals. While fleeing to England aboard Teabing’s plane, Langdon solves the riddle and finds the combination to be “S-O-F-I-A”.
Newton’s grave in Westminster Abbey
Newton’s grave in Westminster Abbey
* The keystone cryptex actually contains a second smaller cryptex with a second riddle that reveals its combination. The riddle, which says to seek the orb that should be on the tomb of “a knight a pope interred”, refers not to a medieval knight, but rather to the tomb of Sir Isaac Newton, who was buried in Westminster Abbey, and was eulogized by Alexander Pope (A. Pope). The missing orb refers to the apple which, in popular legend, fell on Newton and inspired the development of his theory of gravity, therefore the combination to the second cryptex is “A-P-P-L-E”.
* The Teacher is Sir Leigh Teabing. He learns of the identities of the leaders of the Priory of Sion, bugs their offices and has Silas assassinate them. Rémy is his collaborator. It is Teabing who contacted Bishop Aringarosa, hiding his identity, and duped him into financing the plan to find the Grail. He never intended to hand the Grail over to Aringarosa but is taking advantage of Opus Dei’s resolve to find it. Teabing believes that the Priory of Sion has broken its vow to reveal the secret of the Grail to the world at the appointed time. and plans to steal the Grail documents and reveal them to the world himself. It was he who informed Silas that Langdon and Sophie Neveu were at his chateau. He did not seize the keystone from them himself because he did not want to reveal his identity. He summoned Silas to seize the keystone in his house, but himself thwarted Silas, in order to gain Langdon and Sophie’s further help with decoding the cryptex. Subsequently, the police raided the house, having followed the tracking device in the truck Langdon had stolen. Teabing led Neveu and Langdon to the Temple Church in London, knowing full well that it was a dead end, in order to stage the hostage scene with Rémy and thereby obtain the keystone without revealing his real plot to Langdon and Neveu. The call Silas received while riding in the limousine with Rémy is in fact Teabing, surreptitiously calling from the back of the limousine.
* In order to erase all knowledge of his work, Teabing kills Rémy by giving him cognac laced with peanut powder, knowing Rémy has a deadly allergy to peanuts. Thus, Rémy dies of an anaphylactic shock. Teabing also anonymously tells the police that Silas is hiding in the London headquarters of Opus Dei.
* In a showdown with Teabing in Westminster Abbey, Langdon secretly opens the second cryptex and removes its contents before destroying it in front of Teabing. Teabing is arrested and led away while fruitlessly begging Langdon to tell him the contents of the second cryptex and the secret location of the Grail.
* Bishop Aringarosa and Silas believe they are saving the Church, not destroying it.
* Bezu Fache finds out that Neveu and Langdon are innocent after Bishop Aringarosa contacts him privately to confess.
* Silas accidentally shoots Aringarosa outside the London headquarters of Opus Dei while fleeing from the police. Realizing his terrible error and that he has been duped, Aringarosa tells Bezu Fache to give the bearer bonds in his briefcase to the families of the murdered leaders of the Priory of Sion. Silas dies of fatal wounds.
* The final message inside the second keystone actually does not refer to Rosslyn Chapel, although the Grail was indeed once buried there, below the Star of David on the floor (the two interlocking triangles are the “blade” and “chalice”, i.e., male and female symbols).
* The docent in Rosslyn Chapel is Sophie’s long-lost brother.
* The guardian of Rosslyn Chapel, Marie Chauvel, is Sophie’s long-lost grandmother, and the wife of Jacques Saunière. She is the woman who participated in the sex ritual with Jacques Saunière.
* Even though all four of the leaders of the Priory of Sion are killed, the secret is not lost, since there is still a contingency plan (never revealed) which will keep the organization and its secret alive.
* The real meaning of the last message is that the Grail is buried beneath the small pyramid (i.e., the “blade”, a male symbol) directly below the inverted glass pyramid of the Louvre (i.e., the “chalice”, a female symbol, which Langdon and Sophie ironically almost crashed into while making their original escape from Bezu Fache). It also lies beneath the “Rose Line,” which is similar to “Rosslyn.” Langdon figures out this final piece to the puzzle in the last pages of the book, but he does not appear inclined to tell anyone about this. See La Pyramide Inversée for further discussion.

Secret of the Holy Grail
As explained by Leigh Teabing to Sophie Neveu, the figure at the right hand of Jesus is supposedly not the apostle John, but Mary Magdalene. According to the book, Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus Christ and was in fact pregnant with his child when Jesus was crucified. The absence of a chalice in the painting supposedly indicates that Leonardo knew that Mary Magdalene was actually the Holy Grail (the bearer of Jesus’ blood). This is said to be reinforced by the letter “V” that is created with the bodily positions of Jesus and Mary, as “V” is the symbol for the sacred feminine. The apparent absence of the “Apostle John”, under this interpretation, is explained by identifying John as “the Disciple Jesus loved”, allegedly code for Mary Magdalene (see also Second Apocalypse of James). The book also notes that the color scheme of their garments are inverted: Jesus wears a red blouse with royal blue cape; John/Mary wears a royal blue blouse with red cape — perhaps symbolizing two bonded halves of marriage. Also, if you move John/Mary to left of Jesus, you will see his/her head fits perfectly onto Jesus’ shoulder, as if to affectionately lay that head on his shoulder.
According to the novel, the secrets of the Holy Grail, as kept by the Priory of Sion, are as follows:
* Jesus is not the divine son of God, but rather a mere human prophet of God.
* The Holy Grail is not a physical chalice, but a woman, namely Mary Magdalene, who carried the bloodline of Christ.
* The Old French expression for the Holy Grail, San gréal, actually is a play on Sang réal, which literally means “royal blood” in Old French.
* The Grail relics consist of the documents that testify to the bloodline, as well as the actual bones of Mary Magdalene.
* The Grail relics of Mary Magdalene were hidden by the Priory of Sion in a secret crypt, perhaps beneath Rosslyn Chapel.
* The Church has suppressed the truth about Mary Magdalene and the Jesus bloodline for 2000 years. This is principally because they fear the power of the sacred feminine in and of itself and because this would challenge the primacy of Saint Peter as an apostle.
* Mary Magdalene was of royal descent (through the Jewish House of Benjamin) and was the wife of Jesus, of the House of David. That she was a prostitute was slander invented by the Church to obscure their true relationship. At the time of the Crucifixion, she was pregnant. After the Crucifixion, she fled to Gaul, where she was sheltered by the Jews of Marseille. She gave birth to a daughter, named Sarah. The bloodline of Jesus and Mary Magdalene became the Merovingian dynasty of France.
* The existence of the bloodline was the secret that was contained in the documents discovered by the Crusaders after they conquered Jerusalem in 1099 (see Kingdom of Jerusalem). The Priory of Sion and the Knights Templar were organized to keep the secret.
The secrets of the Grail are connected, according to the novel, to Leonardo Da Vinci’s work as follows:
* Leonardo was a member of the Priory of Sion and knew the secret of the Grail. The secret is in fact revealed in The Last Supper, in which no actual chalice is present at the table. The figure seated next to Christ is not a man, but a woman, his wife Mary Magdalene. Most reproductions of the work are from a later alteration that obscured her obvious female characteristics.
* The androgyny of the Mona Lisa reflects the sacred union of male and female which is implied in the holy union of Jesus and Mary Magdalene. Such parity between the cosmic forces of masculine and feminine has long been a deep threat to the established power of the Church. The name Mona Lisa is actually an anagram for “Amon L’Isa”, referring to the father and mother gods of Ancient Egyptian religion (namely Amun and Isis).
A number of different authors also speculate about the possibility of Jesus becoming a father. There are at least three children attributed to him, a daughter Tamar, born before the Crucifixion, and two sons Jesus (the Jesus Justus from the New Testament) and Josephes, both born after the Resurrection. Although their names are now part of the common culture of conspiracy writers, only two decades ago, when The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail was written, the names were not mentioned. The royal descents that lie at the heart of The Da Vinci Code mystery centre on the family of Josephes, who is supposed to be the grandfather of Aminadab del Graal, first of the “Fisher Kings”. However the genealogies that are quoted in Grail lore appear to record too few generations, with children regularly being born to fathers in their 40s.

The mystery within the mystery
Part of the advertising campaign for the novel was that the artwork in the American version of the bookjacket held various codes, and that the reader who solved them via the author’s website would be given a prize. Several thousand people actually solved the codes, and one name was randomly chosen to be the winner, with the name announced on live television, Good Morning America, in early 2004. The prize was a trip to Paris.
The five hidden puzzles reveal
* That the back of the book jacket conceals latitude and longitude coordinates, written in reverse, light red on dark red. Adding one degree to the latitude gives the coordinates of the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency in Northern Virginia, which is the location of a mysterious sculpture called Kryptos. The coordinates were taken from part of the decrypted text of part 2 of the sculpture (part 4 has never been solved). When Brown has been asked why the coordinates are one degree off, his reply has been, “The discrepancy is intentional”.
* Bold letters are present on the book jacket. There is a secret message hidden in the text of the book flaps. The message: Is there no help for the widow’s son (a reference to Freemasonry).
* The words “only WW knows” can be seen on the back cover. It is a phrase printed invertedly, in the torn part of the book cover. This too is a reference to part 2 of the Kryptos sculpture.[3]
* A circle with numbers, between the Doubleday logo and the barcode, reveals a secret message. These are the chapter numbers where the initial letters are arranged in Caesar box format.
* There is reverse writing on the cover of the book, which is the riddle for the first cryptex.
Brown, both via his website and in person, has stated that the puzzles in the bookjacket give hints about the subject of his next novel, The Solomon Key. This repeats a theme from his earlier novels. For example, Deception Point had an encrypted message which, when solved, said, “The Da Vinci Code will surface”.
In the simplified Chinese version of The Da Vinci Code, the cover has a secret text; however, this text can be easily seen. It reads: “13-3-2-1-1-8-5 O, Draconian devil! Oh, Lame Saint! P.S. Find Robert Langdon.” This is the multiply encrypted clue written in invisible ink next to the dead body in the museum which kicks off the plot of the entire novel.

Inspiration and influences
Direct inspiration
The novel is part of the exploration of alternative religious history. Its principal source book is listed as per the court case, Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince’s The Templar Revelation, as well as the books by Margaret Starbird. The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail (which is explicitly named, among several others, at the beginning of chapter 60), was stated by Dan Brown not to be amongst his primary research material for the book. Having paid acknowledgement to the above books as sources of inspiration, Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code contains the overriding salient point in its plot: that the Merovingian kings of France were descendants from the bloodline of Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene. In reference to Richard Leigh and Michael Baigent (two of the authors of The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail), Brown named the principal Grail expert of his story “Leigh Teabing” (an anagram of “Baigent Leigh”). Brown confirmed this during the court case. In reply to the suggestion that Lincoln was also referenced, as he has medical problems resulting in a severe limp, like the character of Leigh Teabing, Brown stated he was unaware of Lincoln’s illness and the correspondence was a coincidence. After losing before the High Court in July 12, 2006, Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh appealed, unsuccessfully, to the Court of Appeal.[4][5] Following the trial, it was found that the publicity had actually significantly boosted UK sales of The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail[6]
Brown has reworked themes and characters from his own earlier novel Angels and Demons, specifically the main character, Robert Langdon.
European readers and critics noted some striking similarities between the “Da Vinci Code” and a Norwegian novel, “Sirkelens ende” (“Circle’s End”) by Tom Egeland, published in 2001 (two years before the Da Vinci code). Like the “Da Vinci Code”, “Circle’s End” involves an ancient mystery and a worldwide conspiracy, the discovery that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, and an albino as one of the central characters. In both novels, the main female character turns out to be a living descendant of Christ and Mary Magdalene, and the daughter/granddaughter of the last grand master of a secret order. Many European readers have speculated that Dan Brown had plagiarized Tom Egeland’s book. Since the Norwegian novel has not been translated into English, it is generally assumed today that the similarities between the two books, although striking, are coincidental. The author himself, Tom Egeland, has in numerous interviews in European media dismissed the claim of Brown’s novel plagiarizing his own novel, stating that the similarities just show that he and Brown more or less have done the same research and found the same sources.

Indirect inspiration
Umberto Eco’s earlier Foucault’s Pendulum similarly concerns itself with the Knights Templar, complex conspiracies, secret codes, the Holy Blood conundrum (if mentioned only in passing) and even includes a chase around the monuments of Paris. It does so, however, from a much more critical perspective: it’s more a satire on the futility of conspiracy theories and those who believe them, rather than an attempt to proliferate such beliefs. Foucault’s Pendulum has been dubbed “the thinking person’s Da Vinci Code”. The former is itself, in turn, highly reminiscent in plot, theme and structure, of the Illuminatus! trilogy by Robert Shea and Robert Anton Wilson, which had appeared 13 years earlier.
Opus Dei was cast in the role of the “evil opposition”, used to destroy the bloodline. Since the bloodline has never been confirmed as real but merely a theory proposed in The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, there is no direct inspiration for this. Opus Dei’s controversial reputation permitted Brown to feature the organisation prominently. On a symbolic level, the Priory of Sion (male and female membership and leadership, “good”) and the Opus Dei (male-only leaders, “bad”) are at opposite sides of the scale. The latter is thus depicted as the attack dog of the Catholic Church, seeking to destroy the former and maintain the status quo. According to the novel, man needs woman for wholeness and, in fact, for experiencing the divine by means of sex (see the Hieros Gamos ritual)–for example, in one’s orgasm, there is a short period of time when a person’s mind is completely empty, when one makes contact with God.

Literary and historical criticism
The book generated criticism when it was first published, due to speculations and misrepresentations of core aspects of Christianity, the history of the Catholic Church, and descriptions of European art, history, and architecture. The book has received mostly negative reviews from Catholic and other Christian communities, as well as historians.
On February 22, 2004, an article titled “The Last Word: The Da Vinci Con” appeared in the New York Times by writer Laura Miller.[7] Miller attacks the Da Vinci Code on multiple levels, referring to it as “based on a notorious hoax”, “rank nonsense”, and “bogus”, as she points out how heavily the book rests on the fabrications of Pierre Plantard (including the Priory of Sion which did not exist until Plantard created it) who in 1953 was arrested and convicted for just such frauds.
Critics accuse Brown of distorting and fabricating history. For example, Marcia Ford wrote:
” Regardless of whether you agree with Brown’s conclusions, it’s clear that his history is largely fanciful, which means he and his publisher have violated a long-held if unspoken agreement with the reader: Fiction that purports to present historical facts should be researched as carefully as a nonfiction book would be.[8] “
Richard Abanes wrote:
” The most flagrant aspect … is not that Dan Brown disagrees with Christianity but that he utterly warps it in order to disagree with it … to the point of completely rewriting a vast number of historical events. And making the matter worse has been Brown’s willingness to pass off his distortions as ‘facts’ with which innumerable scholars and historians agree.[9] “
The book opens with the claim by Dan Brown that “The Priory of Sion — a European secret society founded in 1099 — is a real organization” and that “all descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents … and secret rituals in this novel are accurate”; but this claim is disputed by almost all academic scholars in the fields the book discusses.[10] The Priory of Sion itself was not a real secret society established in 1099 but actually a hoax created in 1956 by a Mr. Pierre Plantard.
As widely noted in the media, there has been substantial confusion among readers about whether the book is factual. Numerous works have been published that explain in detail why any claim to accuracy is difficult to substantiate, while two lawsuits have been brought alleging plagiarism in The Da Vinci Code. The first suit for copyright infringement was filed in February of 2006 in a British court by the authors of The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, a purportedly nonfiction account of Mary Magdalene’s role as the wife of Jesus of Nazareth and the mother of his child, was found in Dan Brown’s favor. No verdict has yet been rendered on a second suit, filed in August of the same year, in the United States by Jack Dunn, the author of The Vatican Boys.
A third author, Lewis Perdue, continues to allege that Brown plagiarized from two of his novels, The Da Vinci Legacy, originally published in 1983, and Daughter of God, originally published in the year 2000. In an unusual twist, Perdue has not yet filed suit against Random House and Brown. Instead, Random House filed suit against Perdue in an attempt to shut down a web site on which Perdue documents his case against Brown. After numerous appeals and countersuits, the Perdue web site is still available online, but there are no signs that Perdue has ever filed an action against Random House.
Dan Brown himself dilutes the suggestion of some of the more controversial aspects being fact on his web site: “The “FACT” page makes no statement whatsoever about any of the ancient theories discussed by fictional characters. Interpreting those ideas is left to the reader”.[11] However, it also says that “these real elements are interpreted and debated by fictional characters”, “it is my belief that some of the theories discussed by these characters may have merit.” and “the secret behind The Da Vinci Code was too well documented and significant for me to dismiss.” It is therefore entirely understandable why there would continue to be confusion as to what is the factual content of the book.
Brown’s earlier statements about the accuracy of the historical information in his book, however, were far more strident. In 2003, while promoting his novel, he was asked in interviews what parts of the history in his novel actually happened. He replied “Absolutely all of it.” In a 2003 interview with CNN’s Martin Savidge he was again asked how much of the historical background was true. He replied, “99% is true … the background is all true”. Asked by Elizabeth Vargas in an ABC News special if the book would have been different if he had written it as non-fiction he replied, “I don’t think it would have.”[12] More recently Brown has avoided interviews and has been rather more circumspect about the accuracy of his claims in his few public statements. He has also, however, never retracted any of his earlier assertions that the history in the novel is accurate, despite substantial academic criticism of his claims.
In 2005, UK TV personality Tony Robinson edited and narrated a detailed rebuttal of the main arguments of Dan Brown and those of Baigent, Leigh and Lincoln, “The Real Da Vinci Code”, shown on British TV Channel 4. The program featured lengthy interviews with many of the main protagonists cited by Brown as “absolute fact” in The Da Vinci Code. Arnaud de Sède, son of Gérard de Sède, stated categorically that his father and Plantard had made up the existence of the Prieuré de Sion, the cornerstone of the Jesus bloodline theory – to quote Arnaud de Sede in the program, “frankly, it was piffle”. The program also cast severe doubt on the Rosslyn Chapel association with the Grail and on other related stories like the alleged landing of Mary Magdalene in France.
US Catholic bishops launched a website[13] rebutting the key claims in the novel. The bishops are concerned about what they perceive as serious mis-statements in The Da Vinci Code.

Portrayal of Gnosticism
According to The Da Vinci Code, the Roman Emperor Constantine I suppressed Gnosticism because it portrayed Jesus as purely human. The novel’s argument is as follows. Constantine wanted Christianity to act as a unifying religion for the Roman Empire. He thought Christianity would appeal to pagans only if it featured a demigod similar to pagan heroes. According to the Gnostic Gospels, Jesus was a merely human prophet, not a demigod. Therefore, to change Jesus’ image, Constantine destroyed the Gnostic Gospels and promoted the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, which portray Jesus as divine or semidivine.[14]
Gnosticism did not portray Jesus as merely human. Some Gnostic writings do depict Jesus interacting with his disciples in a wholly human way, one example being the Gospel of Mary, but the general Gnostic depiction of Jesus is not clear-cut. Other Gnostic writings depict Christ as purely divine, his human body being a mere illusion (see Docetism). (Some Gnostic sects saw Christ this way because they regarded matter as evil, and therefore believed that a divine spirit would never have taken on a material body.[15])

Parodies
In 2007, the book was parodied in the South Park episode “Fantastic Easter Special”.
In 2006 the BBC program Dead Ringers parodied the Da Vinci Code, calling it the Da Rolf Harris Code.
In 2007 a parody of the book was included in the film Epic Movie.
In 2005 the book was parodied by Adam Roberts with The Va Dinci Cod, and by Toby Clements with the Asti Spumante Code.
The book and film are the subject of parody by the Norman Rockwell Code Movie.
In the Family Guy episode Peter’s Got Woods, Lois says that the chapters are short so one would feel really smart getting through a chapter quickly.
In 2006 popular South African political cartoonist Zapiro published a book collection of his strips entitled Da Zuma Code which parodies the former deputy president Jacob Zuma.
In 2007, the book was parodied as “The da Vinci Mole”, this time centering on the belief that Jesus and da Vinci were extraterrestrials. The author was listed as being “Dr. Ian Browne” but in an Author’s Note he repeatedly states it is an editor’s pseudonym for a name that “suffice to say, you would recognize immediately.”
In 2007, the book was parodied by another book called Rudolf-rebusen in Norway, by the 17 year old Mats Ringås. It was published by “Forlaget Norske bøker” The book sold well in Sandnes and Ålgård, the hometown of Mats Ringås.
In 2008 it was parodied in the second series of That Mitchell and Webb Look as “The Numberwang Code”, a trailer for a fictional film based on a recurring sketch on the show.
In 2007 CBBC made Da Basil Code
The BBC radio series, The Museum of Everything parodied the book by having a fan of book dismissing the painting of the The Last Supper and claiming that Mary Magdalene was sat to left of Jesus. He went on to speculate that Mary was ‘She Ra: Princess of Power’ and that her and Jesus had a child and ’settled in Kent’. He also labelled the tour guide a ‘homicidal albino monk’.

Release details
The Da Vinci Code book cover (UK 1st edition)
The Da Vinci Code book cover (UK 1st edition)
US Mass market paperback with “Now a major motion picture” highlight.
US Mass market paperback with “Now a major motion picture” highlight.
The book has been translated into over 40 languages, primarily in hardcover.[16] Alternate formats include audio cassette, CD, and e-book. Most recently, a Trade Paperback edition was released March 2006 in conjunction with the film.
Major English-language (hardcover) editions include:
* (US) The Da Vinci Code, April 2003 (First edition), Doubleday, ISBN 0-385-50420-9.
* The Da Vinci Code, Special Illustrated Edition, November 2, 2004, Doubleday, ISBN 0-385-51375-5 (as of January 2006, has sold 576,000 copies).
* (UK) The Da Vinci Code, April 2004, Corgi Adult. ISBN 0-552-14951-9.
* (UK) The Da Vinci Code: The Illustrated Edition, October 2, 2004, Bantam Press. ISBN 0-593-05425-3.
* (US/Canada) The Da Vinci Code (Trade Paperback edition), March 2006, Anchor Books.
* On March 28, 2006, Anchor Books released 5 million paperback copies of the book, and Broadway Books released 200,000 paperback copies of The Da Vinci Code Special Illustrated Edition.
* On May 19, the day of the film’s release, Doubleday and Broadway Books released The Da Vinci Code Illustrated Screenplay: Behind the Scenes of the Major Motion Picture, by screenwriter Akiva Goldsman, with the introductions by Ron Howard and Dan Brown. It included film stills, behind-the-scenes photos and the full script. There were 25,000 copies of the hardcover, and 200,000 of the paperback version.[17]
Sophie’s access code for her voice mail is 454, the number of pages of the novel in many of its formats. In the Mass Market US Paperback, the page 155 has “SOS” as a page number.

Film
Sony’s Columbia Pictures has adapted the novel to film, with a screenplay written by Akiva Goldsman, and Academy Award winner Ron Howard directing. The film was released on May 19, 2006, and stars Tom Hanks as Robert Langdon, Audrey Tautou as Sophie Neveu, and Sir Ian McKellen as Leigh Teabing. The film had an opening weekend gross of $77,073,388. By the end of 2006, it had grossed about $244 million in the U.S. alone and has done very well in other markets, grossing over $700,000,000 worldwide, making it the second highest grossing movie of 2006. On November 14, 2006 the movie was released on DVD.

Noah

Noah
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Noah (or Noe, Noach; Hebrew: נוֹחַ or נֹחַ, Standard Nóaḥ Tiberian Nōªḥ ; Nūḥ ;Arabic: نوح ; “Rest”[1] ) was, according to the Bible, the tenth and last of the antediluvian Patriarchs. His story is contained in the book of Genesis, chapters 5-9. Noah saves his family and all animals in groups of two or seven from God’s Deluge. He receives a covenant from God, and his sons repopulate the earth.
While the Deluge and Noah’s Ark are the best-known elements of the account of Noah, he is also mentioned as the “first husbandman” and the inventor of wine, as well as in an episode of his drunkenness and the subsequent Curse of Ham. The account of Noah was the subject of much elaboration in the later Abrahamic traditions, and was immensely influential in Western culture. Jewish thinkers have debated the extent of Noah’s righteousness, Christians have likened the Christian Church to Noah’s ark, and in Islam he is revered as a prophet of God.

Summary
According to chapters 5–9 of the book of Genesis, Noah was the son of Lamech, and the ninth generation after Adam. “And Lamech called his name Noah, saying, “Out of the ground which the Lord has cursed this one shall bring us relief from our work and from the toil of our hands.” From Noah’s sons, Shem, Japheth and Ham, all the peoples of the world would be descended.[2]
When Noah was six hundred years old, God, seeing man’s wickedness which had become abundant in the earth, was saddened, and decided to send a great deluge to destroy disobedient mankind. But He saw that Noah was a righteous man, and instructed him to build an ark and gather himself and his family.[3] And God said to Noah, “Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.”[4] And so the Flood came, and all life was extinguished, except for those who were with Noah, “and the waters prevailed upon the earth for one-hundred and fifty days”[5] until the Ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat. There Noah built an altar to God (the first altar mentioned in the Bible) and made an offering. “And when the Lord smelled the pleasing odour, the Lord said in his heart, ‘I will never again curse the ground because of man, for the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth; neither will I ever again destroy every living creature as I have done. While the earth remains, seed-time and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night, shall not cease’.”[6]
Then God made a covenant: Noah and his descendants would henceforth be free to eat meat (“every moving thing that lives shall be food for you, and as I gave you the green plants, I give you everything”), and the animals would fear man; and in return, man was forbidden to eat “flesh with its life, that is, its blood.” And God forbade murder, and gave a commandment: “Be fruitful and multiply, bring forth abundantly on the earth and multiply in it.” And as a sign of His covenant, He set the rainbow in the sky, “the sign of the covenant which I have established between me and all flesh that is upon the earth.”[7]
After the Flood, “Noah was the first tiller of the soil. He planted a vineyard; and he drank of the wine, and became drunk, and lay uncovered in his tent.” Noah’s son Ham saw his father naked and informed his brothers, who covered Noah while averting their eyes. Noah awoke and cursed Ham’s son Canaan with eternal slavery, while giving his blessing to Shem and Japheth: “Blessed by the Lord my God be Shem; and let Canaan be his slave. God enlarge Japheth, and let him dwell in the tents of Shem; and let Canaan be his slave.”[8]
Noah died 350 years after the Flood, at the age of 950,[9] the last of the immensely long-lived antediluvian Patriarchs. The maximum human lifespan, as depicted by the Bible, diminishes rapidly thereafter, from as much as 900 years to the 120 years of Moses within just a few generations. Another few generations later, lifespans were reported to be less than 100 years on average.

Jewish perspectives
The righteousness of Noah is the subject of much discussion among the rabbis.[10] The description of Noah as “righteous in his generation” implied to some that his perfection was only relative: In his generation of wicked people, he could be considered righteous, but in the generation of a tzadik like Abraham, he would not be considered so righteous. They point out that Noah did not pray to God on behalf of those about to be destroyed, as Abraham prayed for the wicked of Sodom and Gomorrah. In fact, Noah is never seen to speak; he simply listens to God and acts on his orders. This led such commentators to offer the figure of Noah as “the man in a fur coat,” who ensured his own comfort while ignoring his neighbour. Others, such as the medieval commentator Rashi, held on the contrary that the building of the Ark was stretched over 120 years, deliberately in order to give sinners time to repent.

Christian perspectives
The Drunkenness of Noah, Michelangelo Buonarroti, ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, the Vatican, Rome, 1509. Michelangelo shows Noah drunk before his sons, and simultaneously, in the background, Noah planting his vineyard.
The Drunkenness of Noah, Michelangelo Buonarroti, ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, the Vatican, Rome, 1509. Michelangelo shows Noah drunk before his sons, and simultaneously, in the background, Noah planting his vineyard.
To the early Christians, the flood was a common analogy to the coming final judgment. In the gospel of Luke 17:26 Jesus is quoted as saying, “Just as it was in the days of Noah, so too it will be in the days of the Son of Man.” Therefore suggesting that the second coming would occur in much the same way as the flood, where a quick and unexpected separation between the saved and condemned would arise. Noah represented those who would be saved and those who drowned were those who did not believe.
Noah is called a “preacher of righteousness” in 2 Peter 2:5, and the First Epistle of Peter equates the saving power of baptism with the Ark saving those who were in it. In later Christian thought, the Ark came to be equated with the Church: salvation was to be found only within Christ and his Lordship. St Augustine of Hippo (354-430), demonstrated in The City of God that the dimensions of the Ark corresponded to the dimensions of the human body, which corresponds to the body of Christ; the equation of Ark and Church is still found in the Anglican rite of baptism, which asks God, “who of thy great mercy didst save Noah,” to receive into the Church the infant about to be baptised.
Noah’s three sons were generally interpreted in medieval Christianity as the founders of the populations of the three known continents, Japheth/Europe, Shem/Asia, and Ham/Africa, although a rarer variation held that they represented the three classes of medieval society – the priests (Shem), the warriors (Japheth), and the peasants (Ham). In the 18th and 19th centuries the view that Ham’s sons in general had been literally “blackened” by sin came to provide a religious justification for slavery.

Gnostic literature
The Apocryphon of John reports that the chief archon caused the flood because he desired to destroy the world he had made, but the First Thought informed Noah of the chief archon’s plans, and Noah informed the remainder of humanity. Unlike the account of Genesis, not only are Noah’s family saved, but many others also heed Noah’s call. There is no ark in this account; instead Noah and the others hide in a “luminous cloud”.

Islamic perspectives
Noah is a prophet in the Qur’an. References to نوح Nūḥ, the Arabic form of Noah, are scattered throughout the Qur’an, but no single narrative account of the entire Deluge is given. The references in the Qur’an are consistent with Genesis, and Islamic tradition generally follows the Genesis account, with one important exception: In the Bible, the deluge is a world-wide event, while in the Qur’an, it directs to a regional event, affecting only the “people of Noah”. The Qur’an emphasizes Noah’s preaching of the monotheism of God, and the ridicule heaped on him by idolators. Noah upon the instruction of God is said to have preached for many years, with only 83 people willing to submit to God, and that eventually brought the wrath of God on the unbelievers.
Below are some verses from Quran about Noah:
“ We sent Noah to his people: He said, “O my people! worship God! Ye have no other god but Him. Will ye not fear (Him)?” ”
“ The chiefs of the Unbelievers among his people said: “He is no more than a man like yourselves: his wish is to assert his superiority over you: if God had wished (to send messengers), He could have sent down angels; never did we hear such a thing (as he says), among our ancestors of old.” ”
“ (And some said): “He is only a man possessed: wait (and have patience) with him for a time.” ”
“ (Noah) said: “O my Lord! help me: for that they accuse me of falsehood!” ”
God later instructed Noah to build the ark:
“ Build the ship under Our eyes and by Our inspiration, and speak not unto Me on behalf of those who do wrong. Lo! they will be drowned.[11][12] ”
The Qur’anic account contains a detail not included in the Biblical account: a reference to another son who chose not to enter the ark:
“ And it sailed with them amid waves like mountains, and Noah cried unto his son – and he was standing aloof – O my son! Come ride with us, and be not with the disbelievers. ”
“ He said: I shall betake me to some mountain that will save me from the water. (Noah) said: This day there is none that saveth from the commandment of God save him on whom He hath had mercy. And the wave came in between them, so he was among the drowned.[13] ”
The Qur’anic account does not include several details of the Genesis account, including the account of Noah’s drunkenness.

Contemporary academic perspectives
According to the documentary hypothesis, the first five books of the Bible, including Genesis, were collated during the 5th century BC from four main sources, which themselves date from no earlier than the 10th century BC. Two of these, the Jahwist, composed in the 10th century BC, and the Priestly source, from the late 7th century BC, make up the chapters of Genesis which concern Noah. The attempt by the 5th century editor to accommodate two independent and sometimes conflicting sources accounts for the confusion over such matters as how many pairs of animals Noah took, and how long the flood lasted.
More broadly, Genesis seems to contain two accounts concerning Noah, the first making him the hero of the Flood, the second representing him as a husbandman who planted a vineyard. This has led some scholars to believe that Noah was originally the inventor of wine, in keeping with the statement at Genesis 5:29 that Lamech “called his name Noah, saying, ‘Out of the ground which the Lord has cursed this one shall bring us relief from our work and from the toil of our hands.’”[14]
The “Curse of Ham” has given rise to much discussion, but seems to express a hope on the part of the 6th century BC compilers of the Torah that the Medes (Japhet) would join with the Jews (Shem) in restoring Jewish rule in the land of Canaan: “Blessed by the Lord my God be Shem, and let Canaan be his slave. God enlarge Japheth, and let him dwell in the tents of Shem, and let Canaan be his slave.”

Mythological connections
Noah’s great grandfather Enoch is the beginning of a web of similarities between the story of Noah and older Mesopotamian myths. According to Genesis 5:24, at the end of his 365 years Enoch “walked with God, and was not, for God took him” – the only one of the ten pre-Flood Patriarchs not reported to have died. Where did Enoch go when God took him? In a late Apocryphal tradition, Methuselah is reported to have visited Enoch at the end of the Earth, where he dwelt with the angels, immortal. The details bring to mind Utnapishtim, a figure from the Mesopotamian Epic of Gilgamesh – the hero Gilgamesh, after long and arduous travel, finds Utnapishtim living in the paradise of Dilmun at the end of the Earth, where he has been granted eternal life by the gods. (Gilgamesh’s reason for seeking out Utnapishtim, incidentally, is to learn the secret of immortality – like Methuselah, he comes close to the gift but fails to achieve it). Utnapishtim then tells how he survived a great flood, and how he was afterwards granted immortality by the gods. It has been suggested that the Flood story may originally have belonged to Enoch.[14]
Lamech’s statement that Noah will be named “rest” because “out of the ground which the Lord has cursed this one shall bring us relief from our work and from the toil of our hands,” has another faint parallel in Babylonian mythology: the gods grew tired of working, digging the channels of the rivers, and so the god Enki created man from clay and blood and spit to do the work for them. Enki fell in love with his creation, and later warned Utnapishtim that the other gods planned to send a flood to destroy all life, and advised him on how to construct his ark.
Noah is also often compared to Deucalion, the son of Prometheus and Pronoia in Greek mythology. Like Noah, Deucalion is a wine maker or wine seller; he is forewarned of the flood (this time by Zeus); he builds an ark and staffs it with creatures – and when he completes his voyage, gives thanks and takes advice from the Gods on how to repopulate the Earth. This and some other examples of apparent comparison between Greek myths and the “key characters” in the Old Testament/Torah have led recent Biblical scholars, particularly those commenting on the Documentary hypothesis to conclude a Hellenistic influence in the composition of the earlier portions of the Hebrew Bible.

Adam (Bible)

Adam (Bible)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Adam (Standard Hebrew: אָדָם, masculine proper noun;[1][2][3] Arabic: آدم) was the first man created by God, according to Book of Genesis, and noted in subsequent Jewish, Christian and Islamic commentary.[4] He is considered a prophet by the Islamic, Mormon, Mandaean and Bahá’í faiths.[citation needed]
Adam’s wife was Eve.

Hebrew Bible
The story is told in the book of Genesis, contained in the Torah and Bible, chapters 2 and 3, with some additional elements in chapters 4 and 5.

Account of creation
Two accounts of the story of creation are told in the book of Genesis. [4]
God created all living creatures human beings on the sixth day of Creation. “Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam…” (Genesis 5:2). “Adam” is a general term, like “Man” and could refer to the whole of humankind. God blessed them to be “fruitful and multiply” and ordained that they should have “dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth” (Gen. 1.26-27, KJV).[4]
God first formed Adam out of “the dust of the ground” and then “breathed into his nostrils the breath of life”, causing him to “become a living soul” (Gen. 2. 7, KJV). God then placed Adam in the Garden of Eden, giving him the commandment that “Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die” (Gen. 2.16-17, KJV).
God then noted that “It is not good that the man should be alone” (Gen. 2.18, KJV). He then brought every “beast of the field and every fowl of the air” (Gen. 2.19, KJV) before Adam and had Adam name all the animals. However, among all the animals, there was not found “a helper suitable for” Adam (Gen. 2.20, NASB), so God caused “a deep sleep to fall upon Adam” and took one of his ribs, and from that rib, formed a woman (Gen. 2.21-22), subsequently named Eve.[4] There is no mention of Adam waking up from his sleep.
Adam and Eve were subsequently expelled from the Garden of Eden, were ceremonially separated from God, and lost their immortality after they broke God’s law about not eating of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. This occurred after the serpent (understood to be Satan in many Christian traditions) told Eve that eating of the tree would result not in death, but in Adam and Eve’s eyes being opened, resulting in them being “as gods, knowing good and evil” (Gen. 3.4-5). Convinced by the serpent’s argument, Eve eats of the tree and has Adam do likewise (Gen. 3.6).
As a result, both immediately become aware of the fact that they are naked, and thus cover themselves with garments made of fig leaves (Gen. 3.7). Then, finding God walking in the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve hide themselves from God’s presence (Gen. 3.8). God calls to Adam “Where art thou?” (Gen. 3.9, KJV) and Adam responds “I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself” (Gen. 3.10, KJV). When God then asks Adam if he had eaten of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam responds that his wife had told him to (Gen. 3.11-12). Herein is the second sin that Adam committed, the first being that he ate from the forbidden tree.
As a result of their breaking God’s law, the couple is removed from the garden (Gen. 3.23) (the Fall of Man) and both receive a curse. Adam’s curse is contained in Gen. 3.17-19: “Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field: In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return” (KJV).
After they were removed from the garden, Adam was forced to work hard for his food for the first time. He and Eve had many children although only three are named in Genesis: Cain, Abel, and Seth. The Book of Jubilees, in addition, names two of his daughters: Azura, who married her brother Seth, and Awan, who married her brother Cain.
According to the Genealogies of Genesis, Adam died at the age of 930. With such numbers, calculations such as those of Archbishop Ussher would suggest that Adam would have died only about 127 years before the birth of Noah, nine generations after Adam. In other words, Adam’s lifespan would have overlapped Lamech (the father of Noah) at least fifty years. Ussher and a group of theologians and scholars in 1630 did the math and created a study that reported the creation of Adam on October 23, 4004 BC at 9:00 am and lived to 3074 BC. The controversy was not the time line but the fact that Ussher believed that the whole creation process occurred on that day.
According to the book of Joshua, the City of Adam was still a recognizable place at the time that the Israelites crossed the Jordan River on entering Canaan.
He appears to an extent in both Eastern and Western Christian liturgies.[5]

Adam in rabbinic literature
Islamic view
In Islam, Adam (آدم) is considered the first Prophet of God and the husband of Eve (Arabic: Hawwa) who was created from Adam by the “will of God”. Satan had lured Adam and Eve into disobeying God by tasting from the forbidden tree (although no reference is necessary as to what he may have tasted). This was the first act of revenge from Satan for being banished from the kingdom of heaven due to mankind. An important point to note here is that the Qur’an does not state or imply that it was Eve who tempted Adam to disobey God. They were both tempted by Satan and therefore equally guilty:
“Then began Satan to whisper suggestions to them, bringing openly before their minds all their shame that was hidden from them (before): he said: “Your Lord only forbade you this tree, lest ye should become angels or such beings as live for ever. And he swore to them both, that he was their sincere adviser. So by deceit he brought about their fall: when they tasted of the tree, their shame became manifest to them, and they began to sew together the leaves of the garden over their bodies. And their Lord called unto them: “Did I not forbid you that tree, and tell you that Satan was an avowed enemy unto you?” [Qur'an 7:20]
The Qu’ran also mentions that Adam was misled by deception and was in fact pardoned by God after much repentance.
“Then Adam received (some) words from his Lord, so He turned to him mercifully; surely He is Oft-returning (to mercy), the Merciful.” [Qur'an 2:37]
Islam indicates that because Adam was the first human, as a prophet he was also the first Muslim (“one who submitted to God”), thus teaching that the “word of God” is the oldest such religion that Islam has represented.

Bahá’í view
In the Bahá’í view, Adam was the first Manifestation of God in recorded history.[6] He is believed by Bahá’ís to have started the Adamic cycle 6000 years ago, which has culminated with Bahá’u'lláh.[7][8] The Biblical story of Adam and Eve, according to Bahá’í belief, is allegorical and is explained by `Abdu’l-Bahá in Some Answered Questions;[8] in the Bahá’í view, in the biblical story Eve represents Adam’s soul and the serpent represents attachment to the material world, and that ever since his fall, the human race has been conscious of good and evil.[9]

Latter Day Saint (LDS) view
Latter Day Saint religion holds that Adam and Michael the archangel are the same individual. Michael the archangel fought against and cast out Satan, “that old serpent”, at the conclusion of the war in heaven during pre-mortal existence (see Book of Revelation 12:7-9). “Michael” was born into this mortal existence as the man “Adam, the father of all, the prince of all, the ancient of days” (see Doctrine and Covenants 27:11 and 107:54). Mormons also consider Adam to be the first among all the prophets on earth.

Druze religion
In the Druze religion, Adam and Eve are seen as dualistic cosmic forces and are complementary to one another. Adam represents the universal mind and Eve, the universal soul.[10]

Etymology
The name Adam is the masculine form of the Hebrew word adamah meaning “ground”. Related words are adom, red (or brown) and dam, blood.
Some say that the word is primarily used in the generic sense of “mankind,” and not as the name of an individual.[11] In Gen. i. its use is wholly generic.[11] In Gen. ii. and iii. the writer weaves together the generic and the personal senses of the word.[11] In all that pertains to the first man as the passive subject of creative and providential action the reference is exclusively generic.[11] Indeed, it is doubtful whether “Adam” as a proper name is used at all before Gen. iv. 25 and v. 3 .[11] Here the same usage is manifest: for in the two opening verses of chap. v. the word is used generically.[11] It may also be observed that the writer in Gen. ii., iii. always says “the man” instead of “Adam”, even when the personal reference is intended, except after a preposition.[11]
Gen. ii. 7 explains the origin of the name thus: “God formed man of the dust of the ground.”[11] That is to say, the man was called “Adam” because he was formed from the ground (adamah).[11] Compare Gen. iii. 19.[11] This association of ideas is more than an explanation of the word: it is also suggestive of the primitive conception of human life in which men not only came from and returned to the earth, but actually partook of its substance.[11] The same notion declares itself in the Latin homo and humanus, as compared with humus and the Greek χαμαί, in the German gam (in Bräutigam), and the English groom (in “bridegroom”); also in the Greek έπιχθόνιος and similar expressions.[11]
However in the case of Adam the usage of the word as personal name appears to predate the generic usage. The name is attested in the Assyrian King List in the form Adamu showing that it was a genuine name from the early history of the Near East [12]. The generic usage in Genesis meaning “mankind” reflects the view that Adam was the ancestor of all men.

Abraham

Abraham
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Abraham (Hebrew: אַבְרָהָם, Standard Avraham Tiberian ʾAḇrāhām Ashkenazi Avrohom or Avruhom ; Arabic: ابراهيم, Ibrāhīm ; Ge’ez: አብርሃም, ʾAbrəham) is a man mentioned in the Hebrew Bible, beginning with the Book of Genesis, the first of the Five Books of Moses, as well as in the Qur’an. His life as narrated in Genesis 11-25 may reflect various traditions. Jewish, Christian and Muslim traditions regard him as the founding patriarch of the Israelites, Ishmaelites and Edomite peoples. In what is thus called Abrahamic religious tradition, Abraham is the forefather of these peoples.
His original name was Abram (Hebrew: אַבְרָם, Standard Avram Tiberian ʾAḇrām) meaning either “exalted father” or “my father is exalted” (compare Abiram). For the later part of his life, he was called Abraham (see retroactive nomenclature), often glossed as av hamon (goyim) “father of many (nations)” per Genesis 17:5, although it does not have any literal meaning in Hebrew.[1]
Abraham was the son of Terah and the grandson of Nahor. Abraham’s brothers were named Nahor and Haran.[2]
According to Genesis, Abraham was brought by God from Mesopotamia to the land of Canaan. This is thought to have occurred around 2000-1700 BCE.[3] There Abraham entered into a covenant: in exchange for sole recognition of YHWH as supreme universal deity and authority, Abraham will be blessed with innumerable progeny.
Judaism, Christianity and Islam are sometimes referred to as the “Abrahamic religions”, because of the progenitor role Abraham plays in their holy books. In the Jewish tradition, he is called Avraham Avinu or “Abraham, our Father”. God promised Abraham that through his offspring, all the nations of the world will come to be blessed (Genesis 12:3), interpreted in Christian tradition as a reference to Christ. Jews, Christians, and Muslims consider him father of the people of Israel through his son Isaac (cf. Exodus 6:3, Exodus 32:13). For Muslims, he is a prophet of Islam and the ancestor of Muhammad through his other son Ishmael – born to him by his wife’s handmaiden, Hagar. Abraham is also a progenitor of the Semitic tribes of the Negev who trace their descent from their common ancestor Sheba (Genesis 10:28).

Holy Bible
Origins and calling
Abraham was born in the Chaldean City of Ur, Mesopotamia, to Terah, his father.
Josephus, Islamic tradition, and Jewish authorities like Maimonides all concur that Ur of the Chaldees was in Northern Mesopotamia — now southeastern Turkey (identified with Urartu, or claiming Abraham was born in Urfa), or the nearby Urkesh, which others identify with “Ur of the Chaldee.”
Abram migrated to Haran, apparently the classical Carrhae, on a branch of the Habor. Thence, after a short stay, he, his wife and half-sister Sarai, Lot (the son of Abram’s brother Haran), and all their followers, departed for Canaan. Moreover, the names of Abram’s forefathers Peleg, Serug, Nahor, and Terah, all appear as names of cities in the region of Haran suggesting that these are eponymous ancestors of these communities. God called Abram to go to “the land I will show you”, and promised to bless him and man. In the Old Testament, when applied, to the patriarch, the name appears as ‘Abhram, up to Genesis 17:5; thereafter always as ‘Abraham. Two other persons are named ‘Abhiram. The identity of this name with ‘Abhram cannot be doubted in view of the variation between ‘Abhiner and ‘Abhner, ‘Abhishalom and ‘Abhshalom, etc. Abraham also appears in the list at Karnak of places conquered by Sheshonk I.

Etymology
‘brm (no. 72) represents ‘abram, with which Spiegelberg (Aegypt. Randglossen zum Altes Testament, 14) proposes to connect the preceding name (so that the whole would read “the field of Abram.”) Outside of Palestine this name (Abiramu) has come to light just where from the Biblical tradition we should expect to find it, namely, in Babylonia (e.g. in a contract of the reign of Apil-Sin, second predecessor of Hammurabi; also for the aunt (!) of Esarhaddon 680-669 BC). Ungnad has recently found it, among documents from Dilbat dating from the Hammurabi dynasty, in the forms A-ba-am-ra-ma, A-ba-am-ra-am, as well as A-ba-ra-ma.
Until this latest discovery of the apparently full, historical form of the Babylonian equivalent, the best that could be done with the etymology was to make the first constituent “father of” (construct -i rather than suffix -i), and the second constituent “Ram,” a proper name or an abbreviation of a name. (Yet observe above its use in Assyria for a woman; compare ABISHAG; ABIGAIL). Some were inclined rather to concede that the second element was a mystery, like the second element in the majority of names beginning with ‘abh and ‘ach, “father” and “brother.” But the full cuneiform writing of the name, with the case-ending am, indicates that the noun “father” is in the accusative, governed by the verb which furnishes the second component, and that this verb therefore is prove him (though hitherto childless) a great nation. Trusting this promise, Abram journeyed down to Shechem, and at the sacred tree (compare Genesis 35:4, Joshua 24:26, Judges 9:6) received a new promise that the land would be given unto his seed (descendant or descendants). Having built an altar to commemorate the theophany, he removed to a spot between Bethel and Ai, where he built another altar and then called upon (i.e. invoked) the name of God (Genesis 12:1-9.

Sarah and Pharaoh
Driven by a famine to take refuge in Egypt (Genesis 26:11, Genesis 41:, Genesis 42:), fearing that his wife’s beauty should arouse evil designs of the Egyptians and thus endanger his own safety, Abraham referred to Sarai as his sister, first to the Philistine king of Gerar and then to the unnamed Pharaoh of Egypt.
One interpretation of the original Hebrew includes Abram’s explanation that Sarai was literally his sister since she was his father’s daughter, but not his mother’s, i.e., a half-sister.[4] However, the kinship pattern of the Semitic chiefs listed in Genesis followed an established protocol that involved betrothal to half-sisters, so Abram may not have lied when he said that Sarai was his sister. On the other hand, there has been ancient tablets recently recovered from the ancient city of Mari that may suggest otherwise. These ancient Semite legal records show that when a woman is married to a man, she is then formally adopted by his father as a full daughter as well[1]. Like Abram, many ancient Semites were Nomads and it was customary for the daughter-in-law to be officially adopted as a full daughter in case her husband is to die while she is traveling with his family. According to Genesis 12:5, Sarai left her family to set out for the land of Canaan, which puts her in this same position as suggested in the ancient tablets of Mari (an ancient Semite city of Abram’s time). It is possible that Sarai may not have Abram’s half-sister, but adopted sister by law. However,marriage to half sisters was common throughout the ancient middle east and inheritance in the nomadic Semitic tribes was matrilineal. This gave a powerful incentive to marry a half sister and thus retain property within the family.
In any case, this did not save her from the Pharaoh, who took her into the royal harem and enriched Abram with herds and servants. But when Yahweh “plagued Pharaoh and his house with great plagues” Abram and Sarai left Egypt. There are two other parallel tales in Genesis of a wife confused for a sister (Genesis 20-21and 27) describing a similar event at Gerar with the Philistine king Abimelech, though the latter attributing it to Isaac not Abram.
When Abram with Sarai and his nephew Lot left Egypt they returned to Ai. Here he dwelt for some time, until strife arose between his herdsmen and those of his nephew, Lot. Abram thereupon proposed to Lot that they should separate, and allowed Lot the first choice. Lot preferred the fertile land lying east of the Jordan River, while Abram moved down to the oaks of Mamre in Hebron. After receiving reaffirmation and clarification of the promise from Yahweh, he built an altar there.

Chedorlaomer and Melchisedek
Some years after this, Lot was taken prisoner by Chedorlaomer and his allies, then warring against the kings of Sodom, and the neighboring places. Abram with his household pursued the conquerors, overtook and defeated them at Dan, near the springs of Jordan and retook the spoil, together with Lot.
At his return, passing near Salem (supposed to be the city afterwards called Jerusalem), Melchisedek, king of that city, and priest of the Most High God, came out and blessed him, and presented him with bread and wine for his own refreshment and that of his army; or as some have thought, offered bread and wine to God, as a sacrifice of thanksgiving on Abram’s behalf.

Ishmael
Main articles: Ishmael and Hagar (biblical)
After this, the Lord renewed his promises to Abram, with fresh assurances that his descendants would possess the land of Canaan and that his posterity should be as numerous as the stars of heaven.
As Sarai continued to be infertile, God’s promise that Abram’s seed would inherit the land seemed incapable of fulfillment. His sole heir was his servant, a certain Eliezer of Damascus (Genesis 15:2). Abram was promised one of his own flesh as heir.
The passage recording the ratification of the promise is remarkably solemn (see Genesis 15).
Sarai, in accordance with custom, gave to Abram her Egyptian handmaid Hagar as his wife (Genesis 16:3). But, Sarai seeing Hagar with child, was unable to endure the reproach of barrenness (cf. the story of Hannah, 1 Samuel 1:6), and dealt harshly with her and forced her to flee (Genesis 16:1-14). God heard Hagar’s sorrow and promised her that her descendants will be too numerous to count, and she returned.
Her son, Ishmael, Abram’s firstborn, was born when Abram was 86 years of age (Genesis 16:15-16). Hagar and Ishmael were eventually driven permanently away from Abram by Sarai (Genesis 21:).

Covenant
Main article: Isaac
God made his covenant with Abram thirteen years after the birth of Ishmael, when Abram was 99 years old (Genesis 17:1-5). Abram’s name was changed to Abraham and Sarai’s to Sarah. The covenant was sealed by Abraham’s circumcision (Genesis 17:11-14) and the first commandment relating to circumcision. Ishmael was also circumcised on that day, at the age of 13, as were the other men of Abraham’s household.
The Lord said to Abraham “ go from the country and your kindred and your fathers house to the land that I will show you.” And I will make of you a great nation and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you. And by you all the families of the earth shall bless themselves. At this time Abraham was promised not only many descendants, but descendants through Sarah specifically, as well as the land where he was living, which was to belong to his descendants. The covenant was to be fulfilled through Isaac, though God promised that Ishmael would become a great nation as well. The covenant of circumcision (unlike the earlier promise) was two-sided and conditional: if Abraham and his descendants fulfilled their part of the covenant, Yahweh would be their God, give them the land, and make a great nation and kings out of Abraham’s line.
The promise of a son to Abraham made Sarah “laugh,” which became the name of the son of promise, Isaac. Sarah herself “laughs” at the idea because of her age, when Yahweh (God) appears to Abraham at Mamre (Genesis 18:1-15, ) and, when the child is born, cries “Yahweh has made me into laughter; every one that hears will laugh at me” (Genesis 21:6).

Sodom and Gomorrah
Main articles: Sodom and Gomorrah and Lot (Biblical)
The enormous sins of Sodom, Gomorrah, and the neighboring cities, being now filled up, three angels were sent to inflict upon them the divine vengeance. After visiting Abraham, they were ready to depart and Abraham accompanied them towards Sodom, whither two of them (who proved to be divine messengers) continued their journey. The third remained with Abraham, and informed him of the approaching destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Abraham interceded, praying that if fifty righteous persons were found therein, the city should be spared; he reduced the numbers gradually to ten; but this number could not be found (or God, in answer to his prayers, would have averted his design). Lot, his wife and their 2 daughters, being the only righteous, were preserved from the disaster. His wife was turned to salt on their escape from the destruction when she disobeyed God’s command not to look back at the destruction.

Sarah and Abimelech
Main article: Abimelech
After Sarah conceived, according to the divine promise, she and Abraham left the plain of Mamre and went south, to Gerar, where Abimelech reigned. Fearing that Sarah might be forced from him, and himself put to death, Abraham again called Sarah ’sister,’ just as he had done in Egypt.
Abimelech took her to his house, with intentions to marry her. According to scripture, God informed Abimelech, through a dream, that Sarah was Abraham’s wife. Abimelech returned Sarah to Abraham with great presents.

Beersheba
Main article: Beersheba
About the same time, Abimelech came with Phicol, his general, to conclude an alliance with Abraham, who made that prince a present of seven ewe-lambs out of his flock, in consideration that a well that he had opened should be his own property; and they called the place Beer-sheba or “the well of swearing”.
Here Abraham resided some time.

Binding of Isaac
Main article: Binding of Isaac
Some time after the birth of Isaac, Abraham was commanded by God to offer his son up as a sacrifice in the land of Moriah. The patriarch traveled three days until he came to the mount that God taught him. He commanded the servant to remain while he and Isaac proceeded alone to the mountain, Isaac carrying the wood upon which he would be sacrificed. Along the way, Isaac repeatedly asked Abraham where the animal for the burnt offering was. Abraham then replied that God would provide one. Just as Abraham was about to sacrifice his son, he was prevented by an angel, and given on that spot a ram which he sacrificed in place of his son. Thus it is said, “On the mountain the Lord provides.” (Genesis 22) As a reward for his obedience he received another promise of a numerous seed and abundant prosperity (22). After this event, Abraham did not return to Hebron, Sarah’s encampment, but instead went to Beersheba, Keturah’s encampment, and it is to Beersheba that Abraham’s servant brought Rebecca, Isaac’s patrilineal parallel cousin who became his wife.
The near sacrifice of Isaac is one of the most challenging, and perhaps ethically troublesome, parts of the Bible. According to Josephus, Isaac was 25 years old at the time of the sacrifice or Akedah, while the Talmudic sages teach that Isaac was 37. In either case, Isaac was a fully grown man, old enough to prevent the elderly Abraham (who was 125 or 137 years old) from tying him up had he wanted to resist. The narrative now turns to Isaac. To his “only son” (22:2, 12) Abraham gave all he had, and dismissed his other sons, as Abraham himself had been dismissed by Terah after Terah had given his territory to Nahor.
In Christian theology this event is sometimes interpreted as a foreshadowing of the crucifixion of Jesus, where Abraham is represented as God, and Isaac as Jesus Christ. Key elements from the stories given as symbols of this foreshadowing include: Both of their births were believed to be miraculous (Isaac to a woman who was far too old to have children, Jesus to a woman believed to be a virgin). According to scripture Abraham was told by God that he would be the father of many nations, and in the Christian faith God is the seen as the father of all people. In both stories Jesus and Isaac had the wood laid upon their backs and were forced to carry it up to the hills where they were to be sacrificed. Although according to scripture Abraham had fathered a son previously, namely Ishmael with Hagar, Isaac was the only son of Abraham through Sarah, as Jesus was the “only begotten son” of God (see John 3:16)(Isaac is also referred to as “his [Abraham's] only begotten son” in Hebrews 11:17). They both made their way up hills to be sacrificed (Isaac up Moriah, and Jesus to Golgotha, which may be located on the same hill, but with Golgotha on the North end). The exact location referred to is currently a matter of some debate. They both were laid on the wood alive, and it was allegedly voluntary on both their parts (this theory would explain why Isaac, possibly a full grown man at the time would not have resisted when his father tied him down). The difference in the stories comes when Abraham was stopped from sacrificing his son, and God provided an alternative to Isaac. For Jesus, there was no “ram caught in the thicket” (Gen. 22:13) and the “sacrifice” was carried out to completion.

Death of Sarah
Sarah died at an old age at about 127, and was buried in the Cave of the Patriarchs near Hebron, which Abraham had purchased from Ephron the Hittite, along with the adjoining field (Genesis 23). Here Abraham himself was buried so they could be with each other forever. Centuries later the tomb became a place of pilgrimage and Muslims later built an Islamic mosque inside the site.

A wife for Isaac
Abraham, being reminded by this occurrence, probably, of his own great age, and the consequent uncertainty of his life, became solicitous to secure an alliance between Isaac and a female branch of his own family.
Eliezer his steward was therefore sent into Mesopotamia, to fetch from the country and kindred of Abraham a wife for his son Isaac. Eliezer went on his commission with prudence, and returned with Rebecca, daughter of Bethuel, granddaughter of Nahor, and, consequently, Abraham’s niece.

Other children of Abraham
Abraham lived a long time after these events. After the death of Sarah, who died when he was 137 years of age[5], and while in bad health (Gen 24:1), he took another wife, a concubine named Keturah and she bore Abraham six sons, Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak, and Shuah. (Genesis 25:1-6)

Abraham’s Death
He died at the age of 175 years. [6] Jewish legend says that he was meant to live to 180 years, but God purposely took his life because he felt that Abraham did not need to go through the pain of seeing Esau’s wicked deeds.
He was buried by his sons Isaac (aged about 76 years) and Ishmael (aged about 89 years), in the Cave of the Patriarchs, where he had deposited the remains of his beloved Sarah.
Sons of Abraham by wife in order of birth
Hagar Ishmael (1)
Sarah Isaac (2)
Keturah Zimran Jokshan Medan Midian Ishbak Shuah

Significance
Biblical narratives represent Abraham as a wealthy, powerful and supremely virtuous man, but humanly flawed, and when afraid for himself, miscalculating, and a sometimes deceiving and an inconsiderate husband. But his central importance in the Book of Genesis, and his portrait as a man favored by God, is unequivocal. Abraham’s generations (Hebrew: toledoth, translated to Greek: “Genesis”) are presented as part of the crowning explanation of how the world has been fashioned by the hand of God, how the boundaries and relationships of peoples were established by Him, and how the Kingdom of God would be established through Abraham.
As the father of Isaac , Abraham is ultimately the common ancestor of the Israelites. As the father of Ishmael, whose twelve sons became desert princes (most prominently, Nebaioth and Kedar), along with Midian, Sheba and other Arabian tribes (25:1-4), the Book of Genesis gives a portrait of Isaac’s descendants as being surrounded by kindred peoples, who are also more often enemies. This is because the clans practiced intermarriage. are in the descending scale, perhaps of purity of blood, or as of purity of relationship, or of connectedness to Sarah: Sarah, her servant, her husband’s other wife. The Bible says of the Hebrew people: “Your father was a wandering Syrian”. Yet to Abraham’s face the Hittites said, “You are a great chief among us. Bury your dead in the choicest of our tombs.” (Genesis 23:4 and 5)
As stated above, Abraham came from Ur in Chaldea to Haran and thence to Canaan. Late tradition supposed that this was to escape Babylonian idolatry (Judith 5, Jubilees 12; cf. Joshua 24:2), and knew of Abraham’s miraculous escape from death (an obscure reference to some act of deliverance in Isaiah 29:22). The route along the banks of the Euphrates from south to north was so frequently taken by migrating tribes that the tradition has nothing improbable in itself. It was thence that Jacob, the father of the tribes of Israel, came, and the route to Shechem and Bethel is precisely the same in both.
Further, there is yet another parallel in the story of the conquest by Joshua, partly implied and partly actually detailed (cf. also Joshua 8:9 with Gen. 12:8, 13:3), whence it would appear that too much importance must not be laid upon any ethnological interpretation which fails to account for the three versions. That similar traditional elements have influenced them is not unlikely; but to recover the true historical foundation is difficult. The invasion or immigration of certain tribes from the east of the Jordan; the presence of Aramean blood among the Israelites; the origin of the sanctity of venerable sites — these and other considerations may readily be found to account for the traditions.
Noteworthy coincidences in the lives of Abraham and Isaac, such as the strong parallels between two tales of a wife confused for a sister, point to the fluctuating state of traditions in the oral stage, or suggest that Abraham’s life has been built up by borrowing from the common stock of popular lore. More original is the parting of Lot and Abraham at Bethel. The district was the scene of contests between Moab and the Hebrews (cf. perhaps Judges 3), and if this explains part of the story, the physical configuration of the Dead Sea may have led to the legend of the destruction of inhospitable and vicious cities.[citation needed]

Christianity
Old Testament
Main article: Book of Genesis
New Testament
In the New Testament Abraham is mentioned prominently as a man of faith (see e.g., Hebrews 11), and the apostle Paul uses him as an example of salvation by faith, as the progenitor of the Christ (or Messiah) (see Galatians 3:16).
Authors of the New Testament report that Jesus cited Abraham to support belief in the resurrection of the dead. “But concerning the dead, that they rise, have you not read in the Book of Moses, in the burning bush passage, how God spoke to him, saying, “I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?” He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living. You are therefore greatly mistaken” (Mark 12:26-27). The New Testament also sees Abraham as an obedient man of God, and Abraham’s interrupted attempt to offer up Isaac is seen as the supreme act of perfect faith in God. “By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, of whom it was said, ‘In Isaac your seed shall be called,’ concluding that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead, from which he also received him in a figurative sense” (Hebrews 11:17-19). The imagery of a father sacrificing his son is seen as a type of God the Father offering his Son on Calvary.
The traditional view in Christianity is that the chief promise made to Abraham in Genesis 12 is that through Abraham’s seed, all the people of earth would be blessed. Notwithstanding this, John the Baptist specifically taught that merely being of Abraham’s seed was no guarantee of salvation. The promise in Genesis is considered to have been fulfilled through Abraham’s seed, Jesus. It is also a consequence of this promise that Christianity is open to people of all races and not limited to Jews.

Liturgical commemoration
The Roman Catholic Church calls Abraham “our father in Faith,” in the Eucharistic prayer of the Roman Canon, recited during the Mass (see Abraham in the Catholic liturgy). He is also commemorated in the calendars of saints of several denominations: on August 20 by the Maronite Church, August 28 in the Coptic Church and the Assyrian Church of the East, with the full office for the latter, and on October 9 by the Roman Catholic Church and the Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod. He is also regarded as the patron saint of those in the hospitality industry.[7]
The Eastern Orthodox Church commemorates him as the “Rigteous Forefather Abraham”, with two feast days in its liturgical calendar. The first time is on October 9 (for those churches which follow the traditional Julian Calendar, October 9 falls on October 22 of the modern Gregorian Calendar), where he is commemorated together with his nephew “Righteous Lot”. The other on the “Sunday of the Forefathers” (two Sundays before Christmas), where he is commemorated together with other ancestors of Jesus. Abraham is also mentioned in the Divine Liturgy of Saint Basil the Great, just before the Anaphora. Abraham and Sarah are invoked in the prayers said by the priest over a newly married couple at the Sacred Mystery of Crowning (i.e., the Sacrament of Marriage).

Islam
Main article: Islamic view of Abraham
Abraham, known as Ibrahim in Arabic, is very important in Islam, both in his own right as a prophet as well as being the father of Ishmael and Isaac. Ishmael, his firstborn son, is considered the Father of the Arabised Arabs, and Isaac is considered the Father of the Hebrews. Islam teaches that Ishmael was the son Abraham nearly sacrificed on Moriah. To support this view Muslims use various proofs, including the belief that at the time Ishmael was his only son. Abraham is revered by Muslims as one of the Prophets in Islam, and is commonly termed Khalil Ullah, “Friend of God”. Abraham is considered a Hanif, that is, a discoverer of monotheism.
Abraham is mentioned in many passages in 25 Qur’anic suras (chapters). The number of repetitions of his name in the Qur’an is second only to Moses.[8]
Abraham’s footprint is displayed outside the Kaaba, which is on a stone, protected and guarded by Mutawa (Religious Police). The annual Hajj, the fifth pillar of Islam, follows Abraham, Hagar, and Ishmael’s journey to the sacred place of the Kaaba. Islamic tradition narrates that Abraham’s subsequent visits to the Northern Arabian region, after leaving Ishmael and Hagar (in the area that would later become the Islamic holy city of Mecca), were not only to visit Ishmael but also to construct the first house of worship for God (that is, the monotheistic concept and model of God), the Kaaba -as per God’s command.[9] The Eid ul-Adha ceremony is focused on Abraham’s willingness to sacrifice his promised son on God’s command. In turn, God spared his son’s life and instead substituted a sheep. This was Abraham’s test of faith. On Eid ul-Adha, Muslims sacrifice a domestic animal — a sheep, goat, cow, buffalo or camel — as a symbol of Abraham’s sacrifice, and divide the meat among the family members, friends, relatives, and most importantly, the poor.

Arab connection
A line in the Book of Jubilees (20:13) mentions that the descendants of Abraham’s son by Hagar, Ishmael, as well as his descendants by Keturah, became the “Arabians” or “Arabs”. The 1st century Jewish historian Josephus similarly described the descendants of Ishmael (i.e. the Ishmaelites) as an “Arabian” people.[10] He also calls Ishmael the “founder” (κτίστης) of the “Arabians”.[11] Some Biblical scholars also believe that the area outlined in Genesis as the final destination of Ishmael and his descendants (“from Havilah to Assyria”) refers to the Arabian peninsula. This has led to a commonplace view that modern Semitic-speaking Arabs are descended from Abraham via Ishmael, in addition to various other tribes who intermixed with the Ishmaelites, such as Joktan, Sheba, Dedan, Broham, etc. Both Judeo-Christian and Islamic traditions speak of earlier inhabitants of Arabia.
Classical Arab historians traced the true Arabs (i.e., the original Arabs from Yemen) to Qahtan and the Arabicised Arabs (people from the region of Mecca, who assimilated into the Arabs) to Adnan, said to be an ancestor of Muhammad, and have further equated Ishmael with A’raq Al-Thara, said to be ancestor of Adnan. Umm Salama, one of Muhammad’s wives, wrote that this was done using the following hermeneutical reasoning: Thara means moist earth, Abraham was not consumed by hell-fire, fire does not consume moist earth, thus A’raq al-Thara must be Ishmael son of Abraham.[12]

According to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
The Book of Abraham is a scriptural text for some denominations of the Latter Day Saint movement (also know as Mormons). Abraham’s sojourn in Egypt is given very differently in the Latter-day Saint Abraham 1 – 2.[13] than in in Genesis 12. Abraham is credited for restoring praise and worship of the One true God (Elohim, Jehovah, and the Holy Ghost) and restoring the lost ordinances of circumcision and Temple covenants.
In July 1835, Michael Chandler brought a traveling exhibition of four Egyptian mummies and papyri contained Egyptian hieroglyphics to Ohio, then home of the Latter-Day Saints. Chandler asked Joseph Smith Jr. to look at the scrolls, due to Smith’s notoriety and claims to translate the golden plates of the Book of Mormon. These Joseph Smith and two other LDS purchased for $2400. Smith declared two of the scrolls contained original writings of Abraham and Joseph. From this results the The Book of Abraham. This translation became a book dealing with Abraham’s journeys in Egypt, containing many distinctive Mormon doctrines. Considerable controversy surrounds the surviving papyri claimed as the source for the translation of the Book of Abraham.
While the Book of Abraham scrolls were reported to be longer than the Bible,[14] only a small portion was published by Latter-day Saint Founder Joseph Smith. This portion, published serially in 1842,[15] is now found in the Pearl of Great Price. Chapters 1 and 2 include details about Abraham’s early life and his fight against the idolatry of Egypt (under rule of Pharaoh) and even of his own family.[16] It recounts how pagan priests of Pharaoh tried to sacrifice him, but an angel appeared and rescued him. Chapter 2 includes information about God’s covenant with Abraham, and how it would be fulfilled.
In addition to the text, there are three facsimiles of vignettes from the papyrus. The first and most disputed facsimile depicts Abraham about to be sacrificed by a priest; the second is the hypocephalus which contains important insights about the organization of the heavens (Cosmos) for order of the Temple ordinances and covenants to be officiated through the Priesthood Keys of Heaven. The final picture shows Abraham teaching in the Pharaoh’s court.
“Abraham is always regarded in the Old Testament as founder of the covenant race, which is personified in the house of Israel. He is the “father of the faithful.” Latter-day revelation has “clarified” the significance of the Abrahamic covenant and other aspects of Abraham’s life and ministry. He was greatly blessed with divine revelation concerning the planetary system, the creation of the earth, and the pre-birth activities of the spirits of people. One of the most valiant spirits in the pre-birth or “premortal” life, he was chosen to be a leader in the kingdom of God before he was born into this world (Abr. 1 – 5) and that he is now exalted and sits upon a throne in eternity (D&C 132:29, 37).”[17]

In philosophy
Abraham, as a man communicating with God or the divine, has inspired some fairly extensive discussion in some philosophers, such as Søren Kierkegaard and Jean-Paul Sartre. Kierkegaard goes into Abraham’s plight in considerable detail in his work Fear and Trembling. Sartre understands the story not in terms of Christian obedience or a “teleological suspension of the ethical”, but in terms of mankind’s utter behavioral and moral freedom. God asks Abraham to sacrifice his only son. Sartre doubts that Abraham can know that the voice he hears is really the voice of his God and not of someone else, or the product of a mental condition. Thus, Sartre concludes, even if there are signs in the world, humans are totally free to decide how to interpret them.

Textual criticism
Writers have regarded the life of Abraham in various ways. He has been viewed as a chieftain of the Amorites, as the head of a great Semitic migration from Mesopotamia; or, since Ur and Haran were seats of Moon-worship, he has been identified with a moon-god. From the character of the literary evidence and the locale of the stories it has been held that Abraham was originally associated with Hebron. The double name Abram/Abraham has even suggested that two personages have been combined in the Biblical narrative; although this does not explain the change from Sarai to Sarah.
The interesting discovery of the name Abi-ramu on Babylonian contracts of about 2000 BC does not prove the Abraham of the Old Testament to be an historical person, even as the fact that there were Amorites in Babylonia at the same period does not make it certain that the ‘patriarch’ was one of their number. A fairly lucid treatment of the subject is given by Michael Astour in The Anchor Bible Dictionary (s.v. “Amraphel”, “Arioch” and “Chedorlaomer”), who explains the story of Genesis 14 as a product of anti-Babylonian propaganda during the Babylonian captivity of the Jews:
“After Böhl’s widely accepted, but wrong, identification of mTu-ud-hul-a with one of the Hittite kings named Tudhaliyas, Tadmor found the correct solution by equating him with the Assyrian king Sennacherib (see Tidal). Astour (1966) identified the remaining two kings of the Chedorlaomer texts with Tukulti-Ninurta I of Assyria (see Arioch) and with the Chaldean Merodach-baladan (see Amraphel). The common denominator between these four rulers is that each of them, independently, occupied Babylon, oppressed it to a greater or lesser degree, and took away its sacred divine images, including the statue of its chief god Marduk; furthermore, all of them came to a tragic end.
3. Relationship to Genesis 14. All attempts to reconstruct the link between the Chedorlaomer texts and Genesis 14 remain speculative. However, the available evidence seems consistent with the following hypothesis: A Jew in Babylon, versed in Akkadian language and cuneiform script, found in an early version of the Chedorlaomer texts certain things consistent with his anti-Babylonian feelings.” (The Anchor Bible Dictionary, s.v. “Chedorlaomer”)
Another scholar, criticizing Kitchen’s maximalist viewpoint, considers a relationship between the tablet and Gen. speculative, also identifies but identifies Tudhula as a veiled reference to Sennacherib of Assyria, and Chedorlaomer, i.e. Kudur-Nahhunte, as “a recollection of a 12th century BC king of Elam who briefly ruled Babylon.” (“Finding Historical Memories in the Patriarchal Narratives” by Ronald Hindel, BAR, Jul/Aug 1995)
The Anchor Bible Dictionary suggests that the biblical account was in all probability derived from a text very closely related to the Chedorlaomer Tablets, and this in a publication which can be said to do at least a reasonably good job of getting good scholarship. The Chedorlaomer Tablets are thought to be from the 6th or 7th century BC, well after the time of Hammurabi, at roughly the time when Gen. through Deu. are thought to have come into their present form (e.g. see the Documentary Hypothesis). While Astour’s identifications of the figures these tablets refer to is certainly open to question, he does cautiously support a link between them and Gen. 14:1. Hammurabi is never known to have campaigned near the Dead Sea at all, although his son had. Writes Astour, “This identification, once widely accepted, was later virtually abandoned, mainly because Hammurabi was never active in the West.” The Chedorlaomer Tablets, then, appear to still be the closest archaeological parallel to the kings of the Eastern coalition mentioned in Gen. 14:1. The only problem is, that in all probability, they refer to kings that were from widely separated times, having conquered Babylon in different eras. Linguistically, it seems, there is little reason to reject the identification of Hammurabi with Amraphel, but the narrative does not make sense in light of modern archeology when it is made. A number of scholars also say that the connection does not make sense on chronological grounds, since it would place Abram later than the traditional date, but on this, see the section on chronology below.
If Gen. ch. 14 is a historical romance (cf., e.g., the Book of Judith), it is possible that a writer who lived in an exilic or post-exilic age (i.e. during or after the Babylonian Captivity), and who was acquainted with Babylonian history, decided to enhance the greatness of Abraham by claiming his military success against the monarchs of the Tigris and Euphrates, the high esteem he enjoyed in Canaan, and the practical character displayed in his brief exchange with Melchizedek. The historical section of the article Tithe deals more extensively with the historicity of the meeting with Melchizedek.
Many scholars claim, on the basis of archaeological and philological evidence, that many stories in the Pentateuch, including the accounts about Abraham and Moses, were written under King Josiah (7th century BC) or King Hezekiah (8th century BC) in order to provide a historical framework for the monotheistic belief in Yahweh. Some scholars point out that the archives of neighboring countries with written records that survive, such as Egypt, Assyria, etc., show no trace of the stories of the Bible or its main characters before 650 BC. Such claims are detailed in “Who Were the Early Israelites?” by William G. Dever (William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, MI, 2003). Another similar book by Neil A. Silberman and Israel Finkelstein is “The Bible Unearthed” (Simon and Schuster, New York, 2001). Even so, the Moabite Stele mentions king Omri of Israel, and many scholars draw parallels between the Egyptian pharaoh Shoshenq I and the Shishaq of the Bible (1 Ki. 11:40; 14:25; and 2 Chr. 12:2-9), and between the king David of the Bible and a stone inscription from 835 BC that appears to refer to “house of David”–although some would dispute the last two correspondences.

Dating and historicity
Traditional dating
According to calculations directly derived from the Masoretic Hebrew Torah, Abraham was born 1,948 years after biblical creation and lived for 175 years (Genesis 25:7), which would correspond to a life spanning from 1812 BC to 1637 BC by Jewish dating. The figures in the Book of Jubilees have Abraham born 1,876 years after creation, and 534 years before the Exodus; the ages provided in the Samaritan version of Genesis agree closely with those of Jubilees before the Deluge, but after the Deluge, they add roughly 100 years to each of the ages of the Patriarchs in the Masoretic Text, resulting in the figure of 2,247 years after creation for Abraham’s birth. The Greek Septuagint version adds around 100 years to nearly all of the patriarchs’ births, producing the even higher figure of 3,312 years after creation for Abraham’s birth.
Other interpretations of Biblical chronology place Abraham’s birth at 2008 AM (Anno Mundi). In Genesis 11:32 : Abraham was the youngest son of Terah who died in Haran aged 205, in year 2083 AM. In Gen.12:4 we learn that at that time Abraham was 75 years old. In other words Abraham was born when his father Terah was 130 years old. (205-75 = 130). Therefore Abraham was born in year 2008 AM.

History of dating attempts
When cuneiform was first deciphered, Theophilus Pinches translated some Babylonian tablets which were part of the Spartoli collection in the British Museum. In particular, he believed he found in the Chedorlaomer Text, currently thought to have been written in the 6th to the 7th century BC, the names of three of the kings of the Eastern coalition fighting against the five kings from the Vale of Siddim in Gen. 14:1.
In 1887, Schrader then was the first to propose that Amraphel could be an alternate spelling for Hammurabi (cf. the ISBE of 1915, s.v. “Hammurabi”).
Vincent Scheil subsequently found a tablet in the Imperial Ottoman Museum in Istanbul from Hammurabi to a king of the very same name, i.e. Kuder-Lagomer, as in Pinches’ tablet. Thus are achieved the following correspondences:
Name from Gen. 14:1 Name from Archaeology
Amraphel king of Shinar Hammurabi (=”Ammurapi”) king of Babylonia
Arioch king of Ellasar Eri-aku king of Larsa (i.e. Assyria)
Chedorlaomer king of Elam (= Chodollogomor in the LXX) Kudur-Lagamar king of Elam
Tidal, king of nations (i.e. goyim, lit. ‘nations’) Tudhulu, son of Gazza
By 1915, many scholars had become largely convinced that the kings of Gen. 14:1 had been identified (cf. again the ISBE of 1915, s.v. Hammurabi, which mentions the identification as doubtful, and also The Catholic Encyclopedia of 1917, s.v. “Amraphel”, and Donald A. MacKenzie’s 1915 Myths of Babylonia and Assyria, who has (p. 247) “The identification of Hammurabi with Amraphel is now generally accepted”). The terminal -bi on the end of Hammurabi’s name was seen to parallel Amraphel since the cuneiform symbol for -bi can also be pronounced -pi. Tablets were known in which the initial symbol for Hammurabi, pronounced as kh to yield Khammurabi, had been dropped, such that Ammurapi was a viable pronunciation. Supposing him to have been deified in his lifetime or afterwards yielded Ammurabi-il, which was suitable close to the Bible’s Amraphel.
Albright was instrumental in synchronizing Hammurabi with Assyrian and Egyptian contemporaries, such that Hammurabi is now thought to have lived in the late 18th century, not in the 19th as assumed by the long chronology. Since many ecumenical theologians may not hold that the dates of the Bible could be in error, they began synchronizing Abram with the empire of Sargon I (23rd century in the short chronology), and the work of Schrader, Pinches and Scheil fell out of favor with them.
The objection[citation needed] resurfaced that Amraphel could not be derived from Khammurabi, in spite of the Ammurabi/Ammurapi spelling for Hammurabi that had already been found. More substantial objections were later made, including the finding that the days of the Kuder-Lagomer of Hammurabi’s letter preceded the writing of the letter early in Hammurabi’s reign led some to speculate that the Kuder-Lagomer of Gen. 14:1 should be associated with later Hittite or Akkadian kings with similar names. These scholars[citation needed] thus generally considered the passage anachronistic – the product of a much later period, such as during or after the Babylonian Captivity. Others[citation needed] pointed out that the Lagomer of Kuder-Lagomer was an Elamite deity’s name, instead of the king’s actual name, which some believe referred to a king that must have preceded Hammurabi. Other misreadings of the Chedorlaomer Text[citation needed] were pointed out, causing them to be associated with entirely different personages known from archaeology. It seemed that the theory of Schrader, Pinches and Scheil had fallen utterly apart.
Mainstream scholarship in the course of the 20th century has given up attempts to identify Abraham and his contemporaries in Genesis with historical figures.[18] While it is widely admitted that there is no archaeological evidence to prove the existence of Abraham, apparent parallels to Genesis in the archaeological record assure that speculations on the patriarch’s historicity and on the period that would best fit the account in Genesis remain alive in religious circles. “The Herald of Christ’s Kingdom” in Abraham – Father of the Faithful (2001) implies a historical Abraham by stating “At one time it was popular to connect Amraphel, king of Shinar, with Hammurabi, king of Babylon, but now it is generally conceded that Hammurabi was much later than Abraham.”
A traditional chronology can be constructed from the MT as follows: If Solomon’s temple was begun when most scholars put it, ca. 960-970 BC, using e.g. 966, we get 1446 for the Exodus (I Ki. 6:1). There were 400 years reportedly spent in Egypt (Ex. 12:40), and then we only need add years from Jacob’s going into Egypt to Abraham. So, we can add that Jacob was supposedly 130 when he came to Egypt (Gen. 47:9), Isaac was 60 years old when he had Jacob (Gen. 25:26) and Abraham was 100 when Isaac was born, and we get 1446 + 400 + 130 + 60 + 100 = 2136 BC for Abram’s birth.
A considerable variety of scriptural chronologies is possible. For example, unlike most modern translations, according to all the oldest Bible versions not dependent on the mediaeval rabbis — the Septuagint, the Samaritan Pentateuch, and the Dead Sea Scrolls — the 430 years of the sojourn is the period “in Canaan and Egypt” (probable text of Exodus 12: 42), thus reckoning from the time of Abraham. Cf Paul’s belief in Gal 3:17. Therefore the figure is more than two hundred years less (1446 + 430 = 1876 BC).
Thus, if one adheres to an Early Exodus theory, then Abram is usually synchronized with Sargon I, or sometimes other figures in the Sumerian Empire. If one favors a Late Exodus theory, and then Abraham’s life could overlap that of Hammurabi’s empire.
Gen. 10:10 has it that Babel was the beginning of Nimrod’s empire. Before the location of Sargon’s capital city, Agade, was identified, it was sometimes supposed that Nimrod was Sargon I, and that Agade was Babel. But even so, there are reasons to prefer the equation of Hammurabi with Amraphel. The Nimrod of Gen. ch. 10 precedes the Amraphel of ch. 14, and Nimrod’s kingdom began with “Babylon, Erech, Akkad, and Calneh, in Shinar” (Gen. 10:10). Mentions of Nimrod both precede and follow those of Abram. Furthermore, Nimrod is associated with the Tower of Babel, not the Tower of Agade, in the Bible.
Rabbinic materials are full of an accounts of Abram being thrown into the furnace used for making bricks for the Tower of Babel by Nimrod, but Abram was miraculously unharmed, while the furnace spread to the rest of the city, causing the “Fire of the Chasdim”.[citation needed] The conclusion then, based on these assertions, would be that Nimrod and Abram were more or less contemporaries. But only during the time of Hammurabi did Babylon become the beginning of an Empire in its own right.
If one insists that Gen. Ch. 14 reads as a testament of historical authenticity, then the Old Babylonian Empire, like Nimrod’s, extended into the Trans-Jordan, but only during the reign of Hammurabi’s son; whereas the Sumerian Empire by contrast did not. The city of Babel was not only the beginning of the Old Babylonian Empire, it was its capitol. After the end of the Old Babylonian Empire with the defeat of Hammurabi’s son by the Elamites, there was not another empire ruled from the city of Babel until the Neo-Babylonian Empire, which was much too late to be synchronized with Abraham.
There are no archaeological correlates for the life of Abram, whereas the Exodus can be correlated with traces of a Semitic presence in Egypt, as per Bietak, as well as numerous transitions in Israel from Egypto-Canaanite material culture to proto-Israelite. An Early Exodus would preclude synchronizing Abram with Hammurabi’s empire, pushing him back to Sumerian times.

Speculations on Hindu connections
In the 18th and 19th centuries, there were isolated speculations about an identity of Abraham and Brahma, or of Abraham and Rama. This was based on the similarities of the names (Abraham is a near anagram of Brahma). Voltaire summarised such speculations:
This name Bram, Abram, was famous in India and Persia: some learned men even allege that he was the same legislator as the one the Greeks called Zoroaster. Others say that he was the Brahma of the Indians.[19]
Such arguments were taken up by later religious synchretists such as Godfrey Higgins, who argued in 1834 that “The Arabian historians contend that Brahma and Abraham, their ancestor, are the same person. The Persians generally called Abraham Ibrahim Zeradust. Cyrus considered the religion of the Jews the same as his own. The Hindus must have come from Abraham, or the Israelites from Brahma…”[20]
One may also consider noteworthy the similarity of the names of Brahma’s wife Sarasvati[21] compared to Abraham’s wife Sarah.
The argument has been used by Biblical literalists to prove that Brahma is a corrupted memory of Abraham and by certain Hindu nationalists to suggest the converse.[22]
The argument has been used by Muslim missionaries to prove that Brahma is a corrupted memory of Abraham. They also have claimed that other characters in Hindu scripture are actually people mentioned in the Quran.[23] A. D. Pusalker, whose essay “Traditional History From the Earliest Times” appeared in The Vedic Age, claims a historical Rama dated to 1950 BC.So hence this cannot be true, since the historical dating of these scriptures were long before the biblical age.[24]

Guns N’ Roses

Guns N’ Roses
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Guns N’ Roses is an American hard rock band, formed in Los Angeles, California in 1985. The band, led by frontman and co-founder Axl Rose, has gone through numerous line-up changes and controversy since its formation. Guns N’ Roses have released five studio albums, two EPs, one live album, and three music video DVDs within its career. The band is currently working on the infamous album Chinese Democracy, which has been in production for over a decade. Once released, the album will be the first original recording from Guns N’ Roses since the 1991 releases of Use Your Illusion I and Use Your Illusion II.
Guns N’ Roses have sold an estimated 90 million albums worldwide,.including 39 million in the United States.The band’s 1987 major label debut album, entitled Appetite for Destruction, has sold 27 million copies worldwide and reached number one on the United States Billboard 200. In addition, the album charted three Top 10 hits on the Billboard Hot 100, including “Sweet Child o’ Mine” which reached number one.1991’s Use Your Illusion I and Use Your Illusion II debuted on the two highest spots on the Billboard 200 and have sold a combined 14 million copies in the United States alone.
While glam metal was the leading genre in record sales, video charts and radio airplay, Guns N’ Roses offered a grittier, more traditional take on rock music, and they are known for their authenticity.

Formation
The group was formed in March of 1985 by Hollywood Rose members Axl Rose (vocals), Izzy Stradlin (rhythm guitar), and L.A. Guns members Tracii Guns, Ole Beich (bass) and Rob Gardner (drums).The band took their name by combining the two original groups. Their first performance took place on March 26, 1985.[6] Ole Beich quickly left the group and was then replaced by Duff McKagan. A short time later, guitarist Tracii Guns left the group to reform L.A. Guns, and was later replaced by Slash, who had known Rose and Stradlin during a short stint in Hollywood Rose. The new line-up came together quickly , and after Gardner quit and was replaced by Steven Adler, the band established its first stable line-up. It wasn’t until June 1985 when the band went on what they dubbed the “Hell Tour” from L.A. to Seattle, that their comaraderie as members of Guns N’ Roses really solidified. According to an interview with SuicideGirls.com, Slash insists, “That [trip to Seattle] is really what cemented the band” and established its chemistry.

Discovery
After witnessing a Guns N’ Roses show at the Troubadour, Tom Zutaut, a Geffen Records A&R executive, falsely warned other scouts “they suck” so he could have more time and leeway to try to sign them.Axl Rose demanded, and received, a $75,000 advance from Zutaut before revealing that he had promised an A&R executive from Chrysalis that the band would sign with her if she walked naked down Sunset Boulevard. For three days, Zutaut nervously watched from his office window for a naked A&R executive before he could close the deal.Alan Niven was subsequently hired as the band’s manager, and the team set out to record the band’s full-length debut album.

Live ?!*@ Like a Suicide
Before the first full album was ready Geffen decided to release an EP to keep the interest in the band that had to disappear from the clubs scene to work on the album. For this purpose an “independent label” Uzi Suicide Records was created by Geffen and on December 16 1986, a four song EP entitled Live ?!*@ Like a Suicide was released.
Designed to gauge public opinion of the band outside of Los Angeles, the record contained covers of Rose Tattoo’s “Nice Boys” and Aerosmith’s “Mama Kin”, along with two original compositions: the punk anthem “Reckless Life” and the classic rock inspired “Move to the City”, both of which were co-written by Hollywood Rose’s founding member Chris Weber. Despite having the look and sound of a live album, band members have admitted that the tracks were actually studio recordings with a live audience enitoverdubbed.
Only 10,000 vinyl copies of the album were produced, and even though the tracks were re-issued verbatim two years later as part of the GN’R Lies EP, the original Live ?!*@ Like a Suicide has been a valuable and sought after collector’s item among fans since the late 1980s.

Appetite for Destruction, G N’ R Lies (1987–1989)
The band’s first album, Appetite for Destruction was released on July 21, 1987. In the US, “Welcome to the Jungle” was issued as its first single with an accompanying music video. Initially, the album and single lingered for almost a year without performing well, but when Geffen Records founder David Geffen was asked to lend support to the band, he obliged by personally convincing MTV executives to play “Welcome to the Jungle” during their after hours rotation. Even though the video was initially only played one time at 4 a.m. on a Sunday, rock and punk fans took notice and soon began requesting the video and song en masse.
Overseas, countries were often treated to material that never saw release to the US market, and went unexposed to US fans. The original UK “Welcome to the Jungle” single was backed with a Marquee Club performance of AC/DC’s “Whole Lotta Rosie” and a 12-inch (300 mm) single included live renditions of “It’s So Easy” and the Bob Dylan classic “Knockin’ on Heaven’s Door” (which would later be covered by the band in the studio on Use Your Illusion II). In Japan, an entire EP entitled Live from the Jungle was issued, containing the album version of “Sweet Child o’ Mine” along with a selection of numerous Marquee Club recordings.

Axl Rose
The album underwent an artwork change after the original Robert Williams cover design (a surrealist scene in which a dagger-toothed monster vengefully attacks a robot rapist) spawned complaints from religious groups and caused some record stores to brown bag, obscure, or refuse to sell the album.[10] The revised cover was gleaned from a tattoo that Axl Rose had recently commissioned featuring skeleton faces of the five musicians arranged on a cross. Rose later insisted that the Gold and Platinum plaques issued by the RIAA be set using the original cover. The artwork from the original cover can be found in the booklet of the CD release.
“Sweet Child o’ Mine” was the album’s second US single co-written by Axl Rose as a poem for his girlfriend and future wife, Erin Everly. Due to the growing grassroots success of the band and the cross-gender appeal of the tune, the song and its accompanying music video received heavy airplay on both radio and MTV, and became a smash hit during the summer of 1988. “Welcome to the Jungle” was then re-issued as a single, with new pressings of records and tapes and new artwork. The UK re-release was backed with an acoustic version of “You’re Crazy”, recorded much earlier than the one featured on the G N’ R Lies EP.
By the time “Paradise City” and its video reached the airwaves, the band’s touring success and fame had catapulted the album to #1 on the Billboard charts. “Welcome to the Jungle”, “Sweet Child o’ Mine” and “Paradise City” were all top ten singles in the U.S. To date, Appetite for Destruction has sold over 26 million copies.
Guns N’ Roses began opening shows for major acts, but as their fame began to take hold, a world tour in support of Appetite for Destruction was scheduled. The band traveled across the United States, and in spring 1988 were invited to the notorious Monsters of Rock Festival at Castle Donington in Leicestershire, England, where they shared the bill with groups like KISS and Iron Maiden. At the start of the Guns N’ Roses set, the capacity crowd of over 100,000 began jumping and surging forward. Despite Rose’s requests that the crowd move away from the stage, two fans were trampled to death. The media largely blamed the band for the tragedy, and reported that the band had continued playing even when there were dangerous crowd conditions. In fact, the final report on the Donington incident filed by the head of security at the venue noted that the band had not been aware of the extent of fan injuries, had immediately halted their set when requested to do so, and had attempted to calm the crowd. Nonetheless, events such as these during the Appetite for Destruction tour earned the group the title of “the world’s most dangerous band”. In addition, the behavior of the band members also garnered negative attention from the media. Duff, Slash, Izzy and Adler were often seen intoxicated both on and off stage.
The band’s next release was G N’ R Lies in 1988, which reached #2 in the Billboard music charts. The album included the four Live ?!*@ Like a Suicide recordings on one side and four acoustic songs on the other. The song “One in a Million”, which included the words “niggers” and “faggots” among other such profanities, led to controversy in which critics accused the band, and specifically Axl Rose, of racism and homophobia. Rose responded (in a 1990 interview with MTV) by saying the claims were unfounded, particularly considering Slash himself is half black. He went on to explain that the words were those of a protagonist and not a personal statement, and that the lyrics reflected racial and prejudicial problems within society rather than promoting them. Rose also cited that he idolized gay singers like Freddie Mercury and Elton John. The band had played gigs alongside the all-black group Body Count, and lead singer Ice-T said in his book The Ice Opinion that Axl had been “a victim of the press the same way I am”.
After the release of GN’R Lies, Slash and McKagan appeared on the nationally televised American Music Awards, visibly intoxicated and using profanities. The members finally took steps to deal with their addictions after Rose threatened to end the band if they continued with their heavy drug abuse. He even spoke publicly about the situation, specifically the heroin addictions, while opening for The Rolling Stones at the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum in 1989.

Fame and fortune (1990–1993)
Use Your Illusion
In 1990, Guns N’ Roses returned to the studio to begin recording their most ambitious undertaking yet. During the recording session of “Civil War”, drummer Steven Adler was unable to perform well due to his struggles with cocaine and heroin addiction – his difficulties in the studio caused the band to do nearly 30 takes.[16] As a result, Adler was fired in July 1990, and was replaced by former The Cult drummer Matt Sorum. A few months prior, keyboardist Dizzy Reed became the sixth member of the group when he joined as a full time member. The band fired their manager, Alan Niven, in May 1991, replacing him with Doug Goldstein. According to a 1991 cover story by Rolling Stone magazine, Rose forced the dismissal of Niven (against the wishes of some of his bandmates) by refusing to complete the albums until he was replaced.
With enough music for two albums, the band released Use Your Illusion I and Use Your Illusion II on September 17, 1991. The tactic paid off when the albums debuted at #2 and #1 respectively in the Billboard charts, setting a record as they became the first and only group to date to achieve this feat. The albums spent 108 weeks in the chart.
Both prior to and after the release of the albums, Guns N’ Roses embarked on the 28-month-long Use Your Illusion World Tour to support them. It became famous for both its financial success and the many controversial incidents that occurred at the shows.

Use Your Illusion World Tour
The Use Your Illusion World Tour included a Slash guitar solo incorporating The Godfather theme, a piano driven Axl Rose cover of “It’s Alright” by Black Sabbath and an extended jam on the classic rock inspired “Move to the City” where Rose showcased the ensemble of musicians assembled for the tour.
Many of the successful performances during the tour were equally matched, and often overshadowed in the press, by riots, late starts and outspoken rants by Rose. While the band’s previous drug and alcohol issues were seemingly under control, Axl was often agitated by lax security, sound problems and unwanted filming or recording of the performances. He also used the time in between songs to fire off political statements or retorts against music critics or celebrity rivals.

Main article: Riverport Riot
On July 2, 1991, at the Riverport Amphitheater in Maryland Heights, Missouri, just outside of St. Louis during a performance of “Rocket Queen”, Rose jumped into the audience and tackled a fan who was recording the show with a video camera. After being pulled out of the audience by members of the crew, Rose said: “Well, thanks to the lame-ass security, I’m going home!”, slammed his microphone on the ground and left the stage. The sound the microphone made caused some fans to think he shot someone, so Slash quickly told the audience, “He just slammed his mic on the floor. We’re outta here.” The angry crowd began to riot and dozens of people were injured. The footage was captured by Robert John, who was documenting the entire tour for the band. Rose was charged with having incited the riot, but police were unable to arrest him until almost a year later, as the band went overseas to continue the tour. Charges were filed against Rose but a judge ruled that he did not directly incite the riot. In his defense, Rose stated that the Guns N’ Roses security team had made four separate requests to the venue’s security staff to remove the camera, all of which were ignored, that other members of the band had reported being hit by bottles from the audience and that the venue’s security had been lax, allowing weapons into the arena and refusing to enforce a drinking limit.[19] Consequently, Use Your Illusion’s artwork featured a hidden message amidst the Thank You section of the album insert: “Fuck You, St. Louis!”
After a repeat of the St. Louis incident nearly unfolded during a concert in Germany, rhythm guitarist Izzy Stradlin quit the band due to a combination of being upset with Rose’s management of the band[21] and differences between Slash, Sorum, and McKagan due to his newfound sobriety.[22] He was replaced by Los Angeles based guitarist Gilby Clarke. During many shows throughout the tour, Rose introduced Clarke and had him play “Wild Horses”, a Rolling Stones cover. In late 1991, Rose added a touring ensemble to the band which included a horns section and several background vocalists.
In 1992, the band appeared at the Freddie Mercury Tribute Concert, performing a two song set. Slash later performed “Tie Your Mother Down” with the remaining members of Queen, while Axl Rose performed “We Will Rock You” and duetted with Elton John on “Bohemian Rhapsody”. When they returned to the U.S. for the second leg of the Use Your Illusion tour, Queen guitarist Brian May opened the shows with a band that included Cozy Powell on drums.
Later in the year they went on the mini-GNR-Metallica Stadium Tour with American Metal band Metallica. During a show in August 1992 at Montreal’s Olympic Stadium, Metallica frontman James Hetfield suffered severe burns after stepping too close to a pyrotechnics blast. Metallica was forced to cancel the second hour of the show, but promised to return to the city for another show. After a long delay, during which the audience became increasingly restless, Guns N’ Roses took the stage. However, the shortened time between sets did not allow for adequate tuning of stage monitors, resulting in musicians not being able to hear themselves. In addition, Rose claimed that his throat hurt, causing the band to leave the stage early. The cancellation led to another riot by audience members, reminiscent of the rioting that had occurred in St. Louis one year earlier. Rioters overturned cars, smashed windows, looted local stores and set fires. Local authorities were barely able to bring the mob under control. This can be seen on video in A Year and a Half in the Life of Metallica. On MTV’s Rockumentary about Metallica, the band spoke about this tour and how they learned from Guns N’ Roses what not to do.
The Use Your Illusion Tour is also notable for the many videos the band released to support it, including “Don’t Cry”, “November Rain” and “Estranged” – some of the most expensive music videos ever made. The hit ballad “November Rain” became the most requested video on MTV, eventually winning the 1992 MTV Video Music Award for best cinematography. During the awards show, the band performed the song with Elton John accompanying on piano.
The historic tour ended in Buenos Aires, Argentina, on July 17, 1993. The tour set attendance records and lasted for 28 months, in which 192 shows were played. The show in Buenos Aires marked the last time original members Slash and McKagan as well as newcomers Clarke and Sorum would play a live show with Rose.

“The Spaghetti Incident?”
On November 23, 1993, Guns N’ Roses released a collection of punk and glam rock covers entitled “The Spaghetti Incident?”. Despite protests from Rose’s bandmates, an unadvertised cover of the Charles Manson song “Look at Your Game Girl” was included on the album at his request. Years later, Rose said he would remove the song from new pressings of the album, claiming that critics and the media had misinterpreted his interest in Manson. However, as of 2008, the song is still on the album. The Spaghetti Incident? did not match the success of the Illusion albums and tension increased within the band.

Decline (1994–1998)
Axl Rose began work on a new album of original material in 1993, but none of the material has ever been released.In 1994, Gilby Clarke left the band, and was replaced with Paul Tobias. That same year, the band recorded a cover version of The Rolling Stones’ “Sympathy for the Devil” for the movie Interview with the Vampire. According to Slash’s autobiography published in 2007, the first version of guitar track was rejected by Axl – he wanted Slash to copy Keith Richard’s playing on the original while Slash wanted to create a GN’R version of the song rather than copy Keith’s style. Reluctantly Slash agreed and recorded another version closer to the original. Slash was further infuriated when he discovered Tobias’ guitar copying his own solo note by note layered in the final mix of the song. This would be the last recording by the original version of the band, and five years would go by before any new material came out under the Guns N’ Roses name.
Slash then drifted in and out of the band for the next couple of years, beginning a side project called Slash’s Snakepit. In August 1996, the band returned to the studio, even though McKagan and Sorum were simultaneously touring with their side project Neurotic Outsiders. Eventually, only Slash and Rose were left alone to continue working. During this period, Slash commented in an interview, “My relationship with Axl right now is sort of at a stand still.”
In 1996 and 1997 Slash, Sorum and McKagan all left the band for good, leaving Rose as the only remaining charter member of the band. Slash, McKagan and Sorum later formed rock supergroup Velvet Revolver with former Stone Temple Pilots frontman Scott Weiland and guitarist Dave Kushner.
In 1998, a “clean” (i.e. profanity removed) version of Use Your Illusion was released (in the USA only), mainly so the album could be sold in Wal-Mart and K-Mart stores.
Also in 1998, Axl put a new version of the band together and returned to the studio. This version of the band has been touring and recording sporadically ever since. The new band’s membership has changed frequently, but its core members have included guitarist Robin Finck, effects man Chris Pitman, and bassist Tommy Stinson (formerly of The Replacements)— as well as Paul Tobias, drummer Josh Freese and longtime Guns N’ Roses keyboardist Dizzy Reed.

Chinese Democracy (1999–present)
In 1999, the band released one new song, “Oh My God”, which was included on the soundtrack of the film End of Days. The track featured additional guitar work by Dave Navarro and Gary Sunshine, Rose’s personal guitar teacher. The song’s release was intended to be a prelude to their new album, now officially entitled Chinese Democracy. Geffen also released Live Era: ‘87-’93, a collection of live performances from various concerts during the Appetite for Destruction and Use Your Illusion tours. Also in 1999, during an interview with Kurt Loder for MTV, Axl said that he had re-recorded Appetite for Destruction with the then-new band, apart from two songs which he had replaced with “Patience” and “You Could Be Mine”.
In 1999, guitarist Robin Finck departed the band in order to rejoin his former band, Nine Inch Nails, on tour. In 2000, avant-garde guitarist Buckethead joined Guns N’ Roses as a replacement for Finck. Josh Freese was replaced with Bryan Mantia (formerly of Primus). Robin Finck returned to Guns N’ Roses in late 2000, to complement Buckethead on lead guitar.

The New Guns N’ Roses
The revised lineup finally made a public appearance in January 2001, with two well-received concerts, one in Las Vegas and one at the Rock in Rio Festival in Rio de Janeiro. The band played a mixture of old hits as well as new songs from their forthcoming album. During their Rock in Rio set, Rose made the following comment regarding former members of the band:
I know that many of you are disappointed that some of the people you came to know and love could not be with us here today. Regardless of what you have heard or read, people worked very hard (meaning my former friends) to do everything they could so that I could not be here today. I say fuck that. I am as hurt and disappointed as you that unlike Oasis, we could not find a way to all get along.
The new lineup played a further two shows in Las Vegas at the end of 2001. In 2002, rhythm guitarist Paul Tobias left the band because of his frustrations with life on the road. He was replaced by Richard Fortus (formerly of The Psychedelic Furs and Love Spit Love). The band then played several shows in August 2002, headlining festivals and concerts throughout Asia and Europe. They made their way to New York for a surprise appearance at the MTV Video Music Awards in September.
In 2002, the band’s first North American tour since 1993 was organized to support Chinese Democracy. However, the opening show in Vancouver was cancelled by the venue when Rose failed to turn up (having remained in Los Angeles), and a riot ensued. This tour was met with mixed results. Some concerts did not sell well, while shows in larger markets such as New York sold out in minutes. Due to a second riot by fans in Philadelphia, tour promoter Clear Channel cancelled the remainder of the tour.
The band went on hiatus until they were scheduled to play at Rock in Rio IV in May 2004. However, Buckethead left the band in March of that year, causing the band to cancel. Also in March 2004, Geffen released Guns N’ Roses’ Greatest Hits, since Rose had failed to deliver a new studio album in more than ten years. Rose expressed his displeasure with this album as its track listing was established without his consent and went as far as trying to block its release by suing Geffen. This failed, however, and the album went triple platinum in the USA.
In February 2006, demos of the songs “Better”;;, “Catcher in the Rye”, “I.R.S.”, and “There Was a Time” were leaked on the internet through a Guns N’ Roses fan site. The band’s management requested that all links to the MP3 files and all lyrics to the songs be removed from forums and websites. Despite this, radio stations began adding “I.R.S.” to playlists, and the song actually reached #49 on the Radio & Records Active Rock National Airplay chart in the final week of February – the first time an internet leak has done so.
On May 5, 2006, Axl Rose appeared on the Friday Night Rocks with Eddie Trunk radio show (during an interview with Sebastian Bach) and said that the new Guns N’ Roses album would be released before the end of the year. Later in May, the band launched a European tour, headlining both the Download Festival and Rock In Rio – Lisbon. Four warm-up shows preceded the tour at Hammerstein Ballroom in New York City and became the band’s first live concert dates since the aborted 2002 tour. The shows also marked the debut of guitarist and composer Ron “Bumblefoot” Thal, replacing Buckethead. During the tour, former bandmate Izzy Stradlin and ex-Skid Row frontman Sebastian Bach made frequent guest appearances.
Five warm-up shows before a 2006 North American tour were held in September 2006. The tour officially commenced on October 24 in Miami. Drummer Frank Ferrer replaced Bryan Mantia, who took a leave of absence to be with his wife and newborn child. Coinciding with the tour, the song “Better” was featured in an internet advertisement for Harley-Davidson beginning in October 2006. That same month, Rolling Stone published an article revealing that Andy Wallace would be mixing the final album.
In December 2006, Axl Rose released an open letter to fans announcing that Merck Mercuriadis had been fired as the band’s manager. He revealed that the last four dates of the North American tour would be cut so the band could work on postproduction for Chinese Democracy. He also set a tentative release date for the album for the first time since the album’s announcement: March 6, 2007.
On February 8, 2007, the band played a two-song set at the Rodeo Drive’s Walk of Style ceremony, held on February 8 in Beverly Hills, California. The band, with Chris Pitman on bass, blazed through “Knockin’ on Heaven’s Door” and “Sweet Child o’ Mine” to close the event, which honored Gianni and Donatella Versace.
On February 23, 2007, Del James announced that Chinese Democracy’s recording stage was finished, and the band had now moved onto mixing the album. However, this proved that the March 6 release date would be impossible to achieve, and the album once again had no scheduled release date.

Recent events
On May 4, 2007 three more tracks leaked from Chinese Democracy; an updated version of “I.R.S.”, “The Blues” and the title track. All three tracks had previously been played live. Guns N’ Roses embarked on the 2007 leg of the Chinese Democracy World Tour in Mexico on June, followed by dates on Australia and Japan. The songs “Nice Boys” and “Don’t Cry” were played for the first time since the Use Your Illusion Tour. The tour ended on the twentieth anniversary of Appetite for Destruction’s release date, in Osaka. During this tour, the band featured Axl Rose, Robin Finck, Ron Thal and Richard Fortus on guitars, Tommy Stinson on bass, Dizzy Reed and Chris Pitman on keyboards and Frank Ferrer on drums.
Rose appears as a guest performer on three of the tracks on Sebastian Bach’s album, Angel Down, which was released on November 20, 2007.
On March 26, 2008, several news outlets reported that Dr Pepper will offer a free can of soda to everyone in America – except the band’s former guitarists Slash and Buckethead – if the band releases Chinese Democracy this year.[31] In a posting on Guns N’ Roses’ official site, Rose responded, “We are surprised and very happy to have the support of Dr Pepper with our album ‘Chinese Democracy,’ as for us, this came totally out of the blue. If there is any involvement with this promotion by our record company or others, we are unaware of such at this time. And as some of Buckethead’s performances are on our album, I’ll share my Dr Pepper with him.”
On March 27, 2008, Rose announced on the official Guns N’ Roses website, that new management was hired. The new management team consists of Irving Azoff and Andy Gould.
On April 5, 2008, a picture of Robin Finck appeared on Nine Inch Nails web page, under the title “Welcome Back!” starting the rumor of his possible reunion with Trent Reznor. Later, on April 11, 2008, Robin Finck expressed his happiness on playing again with NIN. [35] On April 20, 2008, on Guns N’ Roses official website, Axl Rose expressed his surprise about Robin Finck’s latest news but assure that the band was working with its management on the release of Chinese Democracy and thanked the fans for the continuous shows of support

Music style
The music of Guns N’ Roses is a fusion of punk rock, heavy metal and classic rock and roll. In the 1990s, the band integrated keyed instruments (played by either Rose or Reed, and accompanied on tour by Teddy Andreadis) into the band, and for roughly half of the Use Your Illusion tour, added a horn section to the stage. While Reed has remained on some of the Chinese Democracy demos, tours since 2000 have not included wind instruments, though the band has employed synthesized horns on some of their new songs.
A heavy influence on both the image and sound of the band was Finnish band Hanoi Rocks (singer Michael Monroe and Rose have collaborated on various occasions). Rose has stated that the band was massively inspired by bands like Queen,[37] The Rolling Stones, Rose Tattoo and AC/DC, and also that the sound of Appetite for Destruction was influenced by Aerosmith, The New York Dolls, AC/DC and Hanoi Rocks.

Legacy
Guns N’ Roses signed with a major label within eight months of their inception and topped national sales charts weeks after garnering late hours airplay on MTV. Appetite for Destruction was the second highest-selling debut album of all time, behind Boston’s self-titled debut album.
Their peers in the music industry often spoke highly of the band: Ozzy Osbourne called Guns N’ Roses “the next Rolling Stones.” In 2002, Q magazine named Guns N’ Roses in their list of the “50 Bands To See Before You Die”. Also, the television network VH1 ranked Guns N’ Roses ninth in its “100 Greatest Artists of Hard Rock” special, and also ranked 11th on “Top 50 bands”. Appetite for Destruction appeared in the Rolling Stone Magazine special issue “The 500 Greatest Albums of All Time”. In 2004, Rolling Stone ranked Guns N’ Roses #92 on their list of the “100 Greatest Artists of All Time”.
The band has not been free of criticism by the media. The flagrant alcohol and drug abuse by some members of the group, and Axl’s fondness of Charles Manson T-shirts, were used by the media to portray Guns N’ Roses as a poor example and negative influence on their young fans. The long periods of time that the band took to release albums were also a source of heavy criticism (the band’s second album, GN’R Lies, was actually an EP and an old EP packaged together, and one of the songs was an acoustic cover of one from the band’s debut album, it took from 1987 to 1991 to come up with a proper follow up to Appetite for Destruction and it has been 15 years since the band began work on their Chinese Democracy album).
Frontman Axl Rose has become a source of both controversy and criticism since the other founding members left the group. His constant elusiveness, such as the fact that he has not held a press conference since 1994, has led to several stories claiming he is suffering from bipolar disorder. Music critics have blamed Rose for the break-up of the original group, have criticized him for continuing the band after the original members had departed and have questioned the constant change in band members. They also cite his neurotic behavior and sense of perfectionism as a cause of personal conflict and the long delays between albums. However, Rose still has fans who view him as a sort of musical anti-hero.
Guns N’ Roses will be eligible for induction into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame beginning in 2012.
On the VH1 special Behind the Music, Slash was questioned about the possibility of a reunion. He replied that “no matter how much money they throw in our faces, there’s no reason for us to get together. Unless there’s a mutual respect or understanding, and we’re way far from that.” In January 2007, former drummer Steven Adler claimed that he had been talking with Axl, Izzy, and Slash about a “classic” line-up reunion.
In April 2007, Slash said, on the Brazilian format of MTV, that he was open to a reunion of the “old” Guns N’ Roses: “And I’m not saying never. I would say it would be a good idea to get, just for a couple of shows, to get the original STP (Stone Temple Pilots) and the original Guns N’ Roses just to do a couple of shows for the fun of it”. However, in another interview from the same year, Slash stated: “I’ve obviously moved on and have a lot to do with Velvet Revolver, so that’s where my head is. Obviously it’s not an idea that I’m entertaining in any way, shape, or form at this point. I think the more time that passes, the less likely it will happen—and it was pretty unlikely five years ago.”
On July 28, 2007, Adler’s Appetite played the Key Club in Los Angeles to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the release of Appetite for Destruction. The evening featured former Guns N’ Roses member Tracii Guns’ band LA Guns opening for Adler’s Appetite, and original members Izzy Stradlin and Duff McKagan joined Adler’s band on stage for several songs. While Adler touted the event to the press as a “reunion,” the show was not advertised as such,[46] and was not considered as such by the other former members. Slash was in the crowd watching for most of the show, but avoided getting on stage to discourage reunion rumours; Axl was also invited. This was the first time Adler had shared a stage with either musician since he left Guns N’ Roses in 1989.
In a 2007 interview, former Guns N’ Roses guitarist Slash admitted to visiting Axl Rose’s house in 2005, a rumor which he had initially denied.