It’s a secret, that’s why!

After reading "The da Vinci Code" I was certainly intrigued about the whole, Jesus is married and has a blood-line, theory. Not knowing much about Christianity, it makes for a neutral like me to enjoy the occasional jab at someone else's mysterious religion. And being an agnostic makes it even more fun. Mind you, an atheist would have loaded his gun and gone berserk, and they have. But for me it was entertainment and reading about what people on both sides felt was amusing.

Then last night I watched the National Geographic and the History Channel takes on "decoding" the theories in the book. What they presented was proof that it was all lies, blasphemy and so on. Not that they actually said those words, but anyone would guess that's what they meant. Now who in the world would want to say that I wonder?

Now to be concise, the book states that there was a "secret" society. It was proved that the society as created by some Frenchman just to get his hands on royalty. And it was said that there is no proof that a secret society existed. Now isn't this a contradictory statement in itself? It is secret, hence no proof.

And even if Jesus was married, how would his message change? How would people think, "Oh he was married, then he is not a Messaih!" Just because he did not happen to throw a lavish party calling everyone to his wedding or having his reception at The Plaza, doesn't mean he may not have been married. It might be a stretch to agree that the Priory of Sion existed, but who says it can't. In the world, everyone has the right to question everything, so why have people taken to resentment when such questions are asked?

Like I said before, I am an agnostic and I seem to enjoy conspiracies and so this book was a wonderful read for me. The documentaries providing proof against it were entertaining too. But let's just keep it at that. What people did in India was just another way to get your 15 minutes of fame. In a democratic country like India, the largest I may add, if someone wants to say something against a religion, then he is cursed and burned.

My point is, if something didn't exist, but you cannot prove that it didn't, it may have existed. It's like being innocent until proven guilty.