A SHWI view of the Da Vinci Code

One of my favorite alt history authors, one one confines himself to writing on a newsgroup, is Raymond Speer. Some author posted an ad for his new book on soc.history.what-if. Raymond Speer takes that as a suggestion for a DBTL involving a secret history opposite to the da Vinci code. Here also is Screewtape's view of The da Vinci Code. Ha Ha.

Raymond Speer wrote:

I read Dan Brown's bestseller, _The Michaelanglo Code_, which says that Jesus never founded a dynasty, but instead was a celibate preacher.

If you look in the Gospels, you'll see that there is never any mention, not even once, of any marriage ceremony between Jesus and Mary Magdalene. (Or between Jesus and Lazarus' sisters, to anticipate objections by Orthodox.) The assumption that Jesus was a married man is only a guess made "fact" by constant repetition.

Look at his cousin, John the Baptist. It is conceded that John was single, a wanderin preacher in the Wilderness. Josephus mentions the Essenes, a Jewish faction that praised refraining from sex. Why would it be improbable to assume that Jesus migh have been a follower of the Essene Way through the influence of his cousin?

A long time ago, back in the third century when the texts still existed, a Christian named Loquoqus reviewed the writings of an early missonary named Paul, or Shorty. Shorty drowned when a ship he was on sank, but before then he had been one of the bolder messengers of Jesus Christ. Shorty was a real prude, advocating the restriction of sexual activity to the marital procreation of children. Would Shorty have been endorsing celibacy had Jesus Christ been fornicating normally only twenty years before?