Mistakes like this are why newspapers like the New York Times have become a joke, not a serious source of reliable information.

Early Christian Gospels suggesting that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus and a respected apostle in her own right, not a fallen woman, are the foundation of Gnostic studies by scholars like Elaine Pagels — as well as of the plot of the Dan Brown best seller “The Da Vinci Code.”

Which "Early Christian Gospels" would those be, Alessandra? The Times apparently has no idea, and gives no further detail. Indeed, in saying so, it is actually treating the DaVinci Code, which popularized that suggestion, as a reputable historical document, rather than fiction.

First, the "gospels" in question would be Gnostic ones, not "Christian" ones. Yes, I know: we're currently trying tell everyone that Gnosticism was Christian. Sorry to puncture that narrative. Second, the "gospels" in question weren't "early" at all -- being produced centuries after Christ -- except, perhaps, compared to last week's edition of the Times. Third, and most importantly, as Mark D. Roberts ably demonstrates, these documents do not actually even claim Jesus was married.

Dan Brown simply made the assertion they said so. And the New York Times has apparently taken to repeating Brown's fictional assertions as though they were well-known, credible facts. It's the Big Lie in action: repeat anything, no matter how wrong, often enough and people will accept it as true.

With one side of their mouth, news reporters dismiss DaVinci debunkers, saying: "It's just fiction, let's not get excited here." With the other side of their mouth, they promote its principal assertions.