Sign of The Cross by Chris Kuzneski, at a glance, seems like a controversial book. I must say that I had a great time reading this. The actions are handled well, not like Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code. The amount of violence is very high, but it can't be helped as there are many mercenaries in the story.
A man is found crucified in Kronborg Castle in Denmark, and he is only the first of the four. The Interpol must find the killer(s) and why. Meanwhile, an archaeologist and his student are attacked in the Catacombs of Orvieto, Italy, because they have found something very important.
The dialogues are sometimes stupid (too many puns), and I even think I found some mistakes. I heard that Jesus was flogged before the crucifixion because Pilate thought he could save him. They didn't flog a man who would be crucified. That was why Jesus died much sooner than the two thieves beside him. Also, the Jews at that time had this idea that the Messiah would deliver them from the Romans (In Ben Hur, this is very clear.). So we can say that Tiberius's idea of the Messiah was different from the Jews. However, in the end, the writer has created a very good fiction. A reviewer at Amazon said that this book was 'a waste of paper' and I was afraid that I only wasted my money on this. It turned out the book was enjoyable (almost couldn't put it down) and I see perhaps the reviewer said so because there was a twist in the end which would make you feel that you had wasted your time reading this nonsense. Usually, the controversial books, like Da Vinci Code, try to tell you that what you believe all your life, is not always true. The idea of Sign of The Cross is similar to that, but not in the same sense. It's quite funny actually, and I see now why the man is laughing.