The Da Vinci Code- definitive or deceptive document?
Sun 28th Aug 2005 wbc .1 Tim 1:3-7 & Col 2:6-10 from GNB
Readers please note: tapes of this are available from Carolyn Breakwell. The tape will make more sense to you than my script.
Why covering this?
- a tremendously successful book
- 25 million copies in the last year
o cracking good read
o gonna do even better- here we are doing publicity for Dan Browne
- challenging and disturbing many people’s faith
o confusing others
o (is actually a book with great power to misinform)
There is a genre of literature called historic fiction: where fictitious characters/events are placed within true history
- with such literature is it is obvious that some if fiction, some is history
The trouble with Dan Browne is he makes this statement at the beginning, p1
- "All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents and secret rituals in this novel are accurate"
But it’s not quite true. He makes quantum leaps and assumptions about documents and artwork…. interprets them…. and makes some subtle historical changes that have HUGE ramifications historically and to the Christian faith
- and, of course, most people simply don’t have the time or knowledge to challenge these statements
o and so… perhaps without knowing it…. end up swallowing something…believing something that is not true
o end up poisoned…. Inoculated against what could change their lives forever
Why people should read a novel and take it as truth… but not do the same with the Bible- which IS historically sound document… is an interesting and key phenomenon, here. Something I shall be looking at in closing.
Anyway- if you can read it as a novel- go ahead! Enjoy it! If you are easily mislead or can’t handle a challenge- don’t!
I simply can’t cover all the issues in the book: there are simply too many and I’m just not qualified to comment without more research. So, I’ve narrowed it down to three key issues.
But first, a summary of the story
- from National Geographic’s 19th June prog
Harvard scholar Robert Langdon is drawn into an investigation of the murder of Louvre curator Jacques Saunière. Langdon is a symbols expert, and together with Saunière’s code-breaking granddaughter Sophie Neveu sets out to decipher various clues Saunière has left to discover the identity of his killer. What the pair gradually realise is that Saunière was the Grand Master of an ancient secret society, the Priory of Sion. The Priory holds documents inherited from the Knights Templar which reveal an astonishing secret: that Jesus married Mary Magdalene and fathered a child by her, whose blood line led down through the early medieval rulers of France, the Merovingians. The Catholic church has consistently suppressed Jesus’ original teaching - that woman is sacred and that it was Mary Magdalene whom Jesus intended to take the Church forward. But the Priory has always sought to pass the secret on from generation to generation. One former Priory Grand Master was Leonardo da Vinci, who concealed coded messages in a number of his paintings - hence the title of the book. It was therefore the Vatican, or rather, the extreme Catholic movement Opus Dei, which killed Saunière and is now trying to silence Langdon and Sophie too.
1 MARY MAGDALENE
Here’s what this bloke says
- Jesus married Mary Magdalene, that she was in fact pregnant at the cross, and that she and her daughter, Sarah, settled in France and that Mary Magdalene is the Holy Grail (San Greal but it is really sang real- holy blood ). The early church sought to suppress this, primarily because of it’s misogynist, male dominated, outlook and so portrayed Mary Magdalene as a prostitute. They wanted to Leonardo Da Vinci sought to convey Mary as Jesus’ wife in ’the Last supper’
Gosh. Where do I start?
Was Jesus married?
- If this were so it would be no problem. Jesus was fully human. Marriage and sex in marriage is good from God’s perspective!
- But were they married?
o At the cross- why did Jesus only commit his mother into John’s hands (Jn 19:24)
" Why not mother and wife? Or wife to John?
o 1 Cor 9:5, Paul appeals to James and Peter’s example of taking a believing wife on their journeys. Why not go straight to the top and cite Jesus?
o He cites some documents called the Gnostic gospels as proof of their marriage and her, therefore, being the ’divine balance of Jesus’. But…
…. These documents (gospel of Thomas, Philip, Mary) are undeniably all second century documents (all historians agree).
- he says the church chucked these out because they presented the truth about Jesus: married and only human
- but the truth is they paint exactly the opposite picture! All who appeal to these gospels are very selective! Dare not quote them whole!
o Humanity, marriage, sex and women are seen as BAD in Gnosticism. Women only receive enlightenment by becoming men! (and THAT is what is said of Mary Magdalene!)
o And so Jesus is ABOVE humanity in them. Doesn’t touch the ground. Doesn’t defecate. Plays at being God. Zaps his enemies.
o The truth is: Jesus liberated women. Gnosticism didn’t! And you can only use them to prove Jesus is more divine, not less… and that Mary was special to Jesus- but no way would He have linked flesh with her.
The Gospel of Thomas mentions Jesus kissing Mary on the [gap]. And it does call her a companion of his, and Teabing says ’companion in Aramaic means wife’ but they weren’t written in Aramaic, rather Greek!
So- they could have been married (from a Christian perspective, not a Gnostic one!)- but there is absolutely no evidence of it.
- there IS evidence of her being special. She is one of 5 at the foot of the cross (3 called Mary!). She is the first to see Him after the resurrection (and Browne says Christianity has suppressed women)
Browne holds that Da Vinci was part of a Night Templar order called the priory of Sion. In fact he was its Grand Master, and predecessor of Saunière. Charged with keeping the secret about Jesus and Mary- but that he disclosed it in the painting of the last supper where it is Mary who sits next to him, not John… and that there is no wine or bread on the table amplifying that Mary is the Sang Real and Jesus didn’t die. But
- there is wine and bread on the table. Little cups.
- Whoever is next to Jesus DOES look very feminine- but if this isn’t John (the youngest and hence painted thus)- where is he and why aren’t the numbers boosted to 13?
- This has been re-worked 20 times
- All the art experts are convinced this is John
- Look at Da Vinci’s David!
Da Vinci’s representation of masculinity and femininity was culturally (and personally?) defined
2 JESUS
Again, there is SO much I could say here! I have to be selective.
Browne makes one historical error that has huge implications.
- He says that prior to Constantine… the first Christian roman emperor… Jesus was not thought of as the Son of God. This idea was introduced by Constantine at the Council of Nicea in 325 AD
o And so with one slip he negates the whole of Christianity. What Constantine introduced was new, innovative…. And we who have followed Jesus as the Son of God…. God in the flesh have been deluded
Well- he dare not mention the Gnostic gospels at this point as they point to Jesus as being more than divine! Only divine! Not human as well
- but he does! Claims that they paint only a human Jesus!! Come on!! But since no one has ever read them or follows up such claims…. People believe him
But- some quick quotes and dates from the Bible:
RO 1:1 Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God-- 2 the gospel he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures 3 regarding his Son, who as to his human nature was a descendant of David, 4 and who through the Spirit of holiness was declared with power to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.
- written early 50s AD
PHP 2:5 Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
PHP 2:6 Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
PHP 2:7 but made himself nothing,
taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
PHP 2:8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
and became obedient to death--
even death on a cross!
PHP 2:9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
PHP 2:10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
PHP 2:11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.
- written early 60s AD
- in very nature God and very nature human
quotes Is 45:23 ISA 45:23 By myself I have sworn,
my mouth has uttered in all integrity
a word that will not be revoked:
Before me every knee will bow;
by me every tongue will swear.
ISA 45:24 They will say of me, `In the LORD alone
- are righteousness and strength.’ "
- equates Jesus with God
I could go on
JN 20:26 A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" 27 Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."
JN 20:28 Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"
JN 20:29 Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."
The concept of Jesus being the Son of God… and God in the flesh was not a later innovation- It was there from the start! It was what got Him killed!
And besides- Browne got his facts wrong. The council of Nicea did not meet to debate whether Jesus was divine/God’s son or not… and narrowly decide that he was.
- they met to debate the teachings of Arius, a Bishop, who taught that Jesus was the Son of God, divine, but that He was created AFTER the Father. So they debated the nature of his (long assumed!) divinity. 300 Bishop’s threw out Arius’ innovation, reinforcing that Jesus and the Father always equally existed. 2 voted for it: Arius and someone else.
But Constantine determined the Bible, didn’t he? He included books that showed Jesus’ divinity and rejected books that showed his humanity?
- like the Gnostic gospels, you mean? If anyone wanted to make a point of Jesus’ divinity you’d include those! But he didn’t
o in fact, Constantine really didn’t define the canon that much. Time had already done that!
" The 4 gospels had already been circulated, together and were already accepted as the only worthwhile ones since 200AD! 125 years earlier!
" The church had simply copied those they trusted and knew. Constantine simply affirmed those
" And the church had selected the documents on the basis of their authorship…not theology
Do you see how Browne’s smallest twisting of history has huge ramifications? Do you see why the church is a bit heated?
Watch final Nat Geo clip
Now, finally, us
3 US
I was talking with someone recently and they were sharing with a friend why they were a Christian. Their friend asked them- ’were you brought up in a Christian home?’ ’yes’
- ’oh, that explains it’
- As if the only reason someone would believe this Christian stuff is if they were conditioned, programmed to.
But the incredible thing about that stance…opinion…. is that it judges others but fails to apply the same test/standards to itself
- what if that knife cuts both ways?
We are ALL a product of our programming…. Culture
o we can’t see that programming, because we see WITH that programming
o but what if our culture… what we are part of is so dishevelled, disconnected… godless…. that it programmes us badly? What if the air we breathe and the water we swim in inclines us to believe something… or should I say ’NOT believe’ something… completely logical to other cultures?
What if the problem is with those who don’t believe? What if THEY have been badly programmed?
- well, which is it? How do we know? What objective test can we apply to ourselves and our beliefs to show whether our cultural conditioning is logical/good or illogical/bad?
How about this? When people of our culture read a book that is clearly a novel… raises some new and innovative ideas… may have historical inaccuracies in it (they wouldn’t know… but it IS a novel!)- what are they inclined to believe?
- that book or a book which is the world’s bestseller hundreds of times over…. Is spoken of by great historians as a great history book (I could quote them!)… cannot be picked to bits by the critics like the novel…. And has changed cultures and billions of lives for 2000 years?
Folks are inclined to believe the fictitious novel!
- doesn’t that say something!
- Maybe the problem is with us…. Our culture… the lies we have been fed… that we are so immediately inclined to exalt the lie and the novel
Maybe the book we reject is JUST…. ACTUALLLY… the book we should be looking into
- maybe it has the secrets we are looking for!
ALPHA
6 so far. Doctors. African culture. Chinese culture.
-
