Da Vinci's Masterpiece Ruined...Beware of Gnosticism
http://www.letusreason.org/Current45.htm
Da Vinci's Masterpiece Ruined
Over the years books have come out that challenge the Christian faith
or the Bible. Many use every strategy possible to discredit the Bible.
Some have spoken vigorously against the resurrection, others have
challenged the Bible itself. The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown is just
such a book that can make peoples faith in Christ and the Bible be
shaken if they do not know TRUE history.
On the first day of its release The Da Vinci Code 6,000 copies, then
23,578 by week's end. It was No. 1 on the NewYork Times hard-cover
fiction bestseller list in its first week, which is very rare for an
obscure author. The book went into its 56th printing, bringing the
total number of copies in print to 7.35 million (July).
And its popularity continues. It has been #1 at amazon.com, #1 on the
New York Times bestseller list, or near the top of The New York Times
hard-cover fiction bestseller list for 58 weeks, selling between
80,000 and 90,000 copies per week.
TV specials were done on the books premise. ABC aired a primetime
special called Jesus, Mary, and Da Vinci, which considered the
historical ideas in the book to be factual. Brown appeared on ABC's
Good Morning America and the ABC primetime special called Jesus,
Mary, and Da Vinci.
Brown is now writing a sequel to The Da Vinci Code, to be due out
next year. It is also set to become a major motion picture produced by
Sony Pictures with Ron Howard as the director. The challenge to the
church from this book unlike anything we have recently seen and only
beginning. You can be sure there is more to come.
We cannot underestimate the potential of well packaged heresy to
unknowledgeable people on Christianity. It is banking on the premise
that more people are attracted to what is false, than what is true.
This book, based on a supposed secret kept hidden for almost 2,000
years is an open attack on Christ and the truth of His word, the
Bible.
Brown does not claim his book is a novel, it is classified as fiction
it - but a historical fiction surrounded by true historical facts.
On his website Brown states, While the book's characters and their
actions are obviously not real, the artwork, architecture, documents,
and secret rituals depicted in this novel all exist. My hope in
writing this novel was that the story would serve as a catalyst and a
springboard for people to discuss the important topics of faith,
religion, and history.
Many stories are done and promoted as truth, but truth without proof
is non-truth. It is here that the truth gets twisted on its head. As
the author weaves his story , up becomes down; backwards becomes
forward.
On the television special, Brown says he became a believer in the
theories that he inserts in the storyline of The DaVinci Code-- after
his attempts of trying to disprove them. Brown says I spent a year
doing research before writing The Da Vinci Code. That is quite a
short time to put together a supposed secret kept hidden from the
masses for almost 2,000 years.
Bible scholar Darrell L. Bock of Dallas Theological Seminary, who
authored Breaking the Da Vinci Code, contends that Brown has a deeper
agenda than mere fiction, and he cites the author's remark on Good
Morning America that he might not change any of the historical
material if the book were nonfiction.
There is something he's doing under the cloak of fiction that needs
to be brought to the conscious level, Bock said. It is a concern to
the degree that poor information never helps anyone. He has said he
did it to create a discussion on the origins of Christianity. We are
obliging him.
The book is 450 pages of a revisionist view of Christian doctrines and
history -- in light of Gnostic writings -- that Brown claims are the
real truth. In response to Browns speculations, 12 books refuting it
have been published.
Historical inaccuracies become the basis for this fiction book, and
most people are not equipped to discern fact from fiction within the
book's cleverly written pages.
Brown opens his book with the words FACT in bold, capital letters
and this statement: All descriptions of artwork, architecture,
documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate.
The New York Daily News states His research is impeccable. Is it? It
is amazing that no news journalist has challenged all the
misrepresentations of facts.
The most fascinating part of the book is the revelation of facts and
conspiracies interwoven in the story. This theory has not originated
with Brown but as many have pointed out it was promoted over 20 years
ago with less success in the 1983 book Holy Blood, Holy Grail by
Michael Baigent, Henry Lincoln, and Richard Leigh. The book has been
shown to be based on fraudulent manuscripts and poor scholarship. Yet
Brown uses it as his primary source? Dan Browns interview with
Borders states that all of the history and ancient documents in The Da
Vinci Code are accurate.
www.bordersstores.com/features/feature.jsp?file=browndan
Michael Baigen In his book Holy Blood, Holy Grail explains Leonardo da
Vinci (1452-1519) belonged to a secret organization called the Priory
of Sion. According to Baigent, Leonardo and the other members of this
group were in possession of privileged information about an alleged
marriage between Jesus and Mary Magdalene. This information was
apparently passed down through history in conspiratorial fashion. Da
Vinci was one of the keepers whom passed this secret knowledge. The
history in Baigents book has been seriously questioned by many
scholars.
Scholars' should do the same to Browns.
Brown states As I mentioned earlier, the secret I reveal is one that
has been whispered for centuries. It is not my own. Admittedly, this
may be the first time the secret has been unveiled within the format
of a popular thriller, but the information is anything but new. My
sincere hope is that The Da Vinci Code, in addition to entertaining
people, will serve as an open door for readers to begin their own
explorations.
The Da Vinci code attacks the eyewitnesses of the Bible and it
historicity. Its intent is to bring doubt to the accuracy and
reliability of the Scriptures. Browns hero in the book remarks that:
every faith in the world is based on fabrication. That is the
definition of faith-acceptance of that which we imagine to be true,
that which we cannot prove (Brown, 341
http://www.answers.org/issues/davincicode.html). In other words the
only religious truth you will find is that there is no truth, except
what Brown reveals by his book.
Our Christian faith is based upon revealed truth; that everyone can
understand if they take the time. It is not something secret or
hidden. The New Testament uses faith as a set of convictions, a trust
in actual facts and truth, the meaning intended is in the sense of
faithfulness, or loyalty as owed to one in whom one is embedded for
service. It is grounded in facts that are historical, have proof from
archeology, manuscript evidence and most importantly proved by
prophecy, which no other book (religious or otherwise) contains.
Sir William Ramsay, one of the greatest archaeologists who ever lived
wrote of Luke the author of the gospel and the book of Acts stating,
Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements
of fact trustworthy, this author should, be placed along with the very
greatest of historians. Luke's history is unsurpassed in respect of
its trustworthiness.
Browns books detail known historical names mixed in his storyline to
legitimize a theory that Brown has concocted. The book presents a
mixture of anti-Christian teachings, radical feminist theology
(goddess worship). In it, Browne claims through his characters that
Jesus made no claims of his divinity; that the early Christians did
not believe in the divinity of Christ; he was just an ordinary man who
was not divine, did not die for our sins, the Resurrection never
happened; that our Bible is the result of a political power play by
the Roman Emperor Constantine; and early Christians worshiped the
divine feminine.
The book makes the outrageous claim that Jesus Christ was married to
Mary Magdalene. A child was born in their marriage, and that Mary and
her child fled after the crucifixion to Gaul France, where they
established the Merovingian line of European royalty.
Despite all this content, on Browns Website the question is asked ARE
YOU A CHRISTIAN? His answer- Yes. Interestingly, if you ask three
people what it means to be Christian, you will get three different
answers. Some feel being baptized is sufficient. Others feel you must
accept the Bible as immutable historical fact. Still others require a
belief that all those who do not accept Christ as their personal
savior are doomed to hell.
we're each following our own paths of
enlightenment. I consider myself a student of many religions. The more
I learn, the more questions I have. For me, the spiritual quest will
be a life-long work in progress (Emp. mine).
Does this sound like a Christian? Or, someone always learning an never
coming to the knowledge of the truth (2 Tim.3:7). I have an idea, why
dont we start with Jesus and see what the apostles said were the
requirements for being a Christian? But he does not believe the Bible.
So his opinion of interpretation becomes equal to all others, in fact
it becomes superior. His animosity toward the Bible and Christ exudes
from almost every chapter. Brown is not a Christian as he sides with
the enemies of Christianity, the Gnostics; his statement, ...we're
each following our own paths of enlightenment should be sufficient.
The Plot
The book begins with the murder of the curator of the Louvre in Paris.
The Harvard code specialist called into the case pursues the culprit,
and in so doing discovers an array of clues hidden in the works of
Leonardo da Vinci. The plot revolves around a mystery with evil
figures and secret societies, puzzles, symbols, amazing escapes, as
the plot twists ands turns through the book making fascinating
reading.
The book is also filled with conspiracy theories. Everyone that ever
was attached to a conspiracy is involved, the Knights Templar, the
Rosicrucians, the Vatican, Opus Dei, the Freemasons, Nazis, the Dead
Sea Scrolls, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the Catholic church
. The only group left missing are UFOs. Maybe they will appear in the
sequel.
The book reveals to the readers that Jesus was not divine; that he
married the Mary Magdalene had a child with her, the church conspired
for millennia to hide the truth. Where does his information on this
come from? Very simply, the Gnostics, who were an anti-christian cult
that claimed to have secret knowledge of God and challenged
Christianity.
Readers are told Mary had to flee Jerusalem after Christs crucifixion
because Peter was angered by her leadership role; That Mary survived
and found refuge in France where she gave birth to Jesus daughter. So
the story goes...
The history of Mary, her daughter and their descendants are
chronicled by those who protected them. This lineage of Jesus
intermarried with French royal blood in the fifth century; that
documents detailing this secret history were hidden. The Knights
Templar entrusted the safekeeping of the documents to a group called
The Priory of Sion.
I think I need to ask a question that becomes obvious, are these
French descendents Jewish? Or are we next going to hear Jesus was not
even Jewish.
On the ABC special it was stated the Merovingian kings say the first
queen was impregnated by a fish. This is interpreted as symbolizing
Jesus, because of the early Christian's symbol of a fish. This is
stretching a imaginary story to its max. Brown reveals to us the
Priory of Sion was been given charge of the Holy Grail to guard
these secrets that would severely damage Christianity. That this
secret knowledge was passed on through codes and symbols. The priory
is to maintain a religion of balance between male and female
(celebrated in ritual intercourse) which Constantine banished out of
Christianity to strengthen male power.
Indiana Jones was mistaken to look for a chalice with the blood, the
search for the Holy Grail turns out not to be the chalice, but Mary
Magdalene-who married Jesus and bore a child, Sarah, whose descendents
are still alive. Knights who claimed to be searching for the chalice
were speaking in code as a way to protect themselves from a Church
that had subjugated women, banished the Goddess, burned non-believers,
and forbidden the pagan reverence for the sacred feminine (The Da
Vinci Code, pp. 238-239).
This brings us to Leonardo da Vinci, we are told he was at one time a
Grand Master of The Priory and many of his famous paintings contain
numerous symbols and codes to pass on the secret.
Who is Leonardo Da Vinci?
Leonardo lived in about 15th century in Florence Italy. In
1500produced his first designs for the now famous flying machine the
scythed chariot and the armored car. No doubt, he was a visionary of
sorts. He is especially known for two paintings, the Mona Lisa and the
Last supper. On Browns webpage titled Bizarre True Facts from The Da
Vinci Code
http://www.danbrown.com/secrets/bizarre_facts/davinci_code.html
Out of hundreds of pages of calculations and drawings there is nothing
in his notebooks that presupposes passing on secrets attributed to him
in browns book. However, imagination and reality are blurred as Brown
writes that Leonardo was a prankster and genius who is widely
believed to have hidden secret messages within much of his artwork.
Widely believed is never proven, exaggerations are Browns forte.
Statements like these are made throughout the book.
Many claim the book is filled with historical inaccuracies. Bruce
Boucher of Chicagos Art Institute in an article in The New York Times
Aug. 3, 03 tore apart Dan Browns knowledge of Leonardo da Vinci.
The Da Vinci Code correctly states that there are two versions of this
painting-the earlier one is in the Louvre in Paris and the later one
is housed at the National Gallery in London (painted on a wood panel).
But Browns facts are again misconstrued, he describes the painting as
a a five-foot-tall canvas, when it is actually about 6.5 feet tall
according the Louvre web site.
He could not even get the measurements right but states in his book
All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents and secret
rituals in this novel are accurate. The original fresco is on a wall
of the refectory (dining hall) in the Convent of Santa Maria delle
Grazie in Milan, Italy. It is huge, 15 x 29 feet.
The painting was finished in 1498. The Last Supper is Leonardo's
visual interpretation of an event recorded in all four of the Gospels
(books in the Christian New Testament not the Gnostic writings). The
evening before Christ was betrayed by one of his disciples, he
gathered them together to eat the traditional Passover meal and tell
them about what would soon take place. Da Vinci painted the 12
disciples during the moment when Christ tells them there is a traitor
among them. His intent was to capture the reaction of each person at
the table. What seems to be a twist of irony is that Brown does not
believe the Biblical record that Da Vinci used to base his painting
on.
How do we know if the painting of Da Vinci is accurate? He was not
there. Leonardo did not copy a photo of the actual Last Supper. Though
the eye -witnesses are no longer here, we have written what took
place. We must go to the Bible just like he did to find out what
tranpired.
Brown claims that it is Mary Magdalen, not John to the right of Jesus
-because the person looks feminine. This late 15th century mural is
not proof about 1st century events described in the New Testament.
Even if Leonardo intentionally made the Beloved Disciple have a
feminine look, so what. There is such a thing as artistic license.
John isn't the only effeminate-looking male Leonardo had painted.
Leonardo's painting Angel in the Flesh figure has a similar feminine
face (in the likeness of John in The Last Supper). The theory that
DaVinci included Mary Magdalene in his painting The Last Supper is not
accepted by art historians, who say that the feminine figure seated
to the left of Jesus is the boyish looking Apostle John as he is
normally depicted in artwork of the period.
The books reveal a secret code in Da Vincis painting- Between the
alleged Mary and Jesus forms a letter. Glaring in the center of the
painting was the unquestionable outline of an enormous, flawlessly
formed letter M. (p. 245) (Or a V) Also, we should also notice the
dinner is taking place in daylight, not in evening as it is supposed
to, maybe thats another clue? A clue that it is absolutely not
accurate.
A flawlessly formed letter M, is debatable. What is the significance
of this? This like finding messages in rock formations or words in
Alphabet soup. It really means absolutely nothing except to those who
an active imagination and want to connect the dots. Maybe this cannot
be seen by the uninitiated.
We also read the character Teabing saying, Oddly, Da Vinci appears to
have forgotten to paint the Cup of Christ. (p. 236). Brown admits
that it was his professor that showed the class a slide and pointed
out the chalice is missing, then supposing the Holy Grail was Mary.
First of all they did not use a chalice but ordinary pottery cups and
these are found in the painting, plainly in view on the table in front
of Christ and the others. This Mystery is solved. One can see the
straw man arguments in this book and are not grounded in what really
took place. We have Brown reinterpreting history with a painting.
Some have also pointed out that the Templar Revelation is the source
of almost all of Browns research into Leonardo.
Umbert Eco interviewed on the ABC TV special (Jesus Mary and Da Vinci,
Aug.5, 2004) says that he puts the Holy Grail as a literary invention
like Pinnochio or Little Red Riding Hood.
What is the Bibles Account?
In John 12:1-2 six days before the Passover, Jesus came to Bethany,
and Martha served the dinner. So it is possible a woman was there to
serve the dinner but this proves nothing of Jesus being married to
Mary.
What is the Bibles account? Luke 22:13-14
and they prepared the
Passover. When the hour had come, He sat down, and the twelve apostles
with Him. Thats who the Bible says is at the table. Thats whom Da
Vinci painted, there are only 12 people. If Mary is not John, where
is John or whoever is missing?
Where did Brown get this secret knowledge passed down? Mary Magdalene
-- as the disciple whom Jesus loved -- is reflected in the Gnostic
Christian writings of Nag Hammadi -- e.g., the Gospel of Philip and
the Gospel of Mary. In some ancient gnostic communities, Mary
Magdalene was thought of as having been the Beloved Disciple and the
companion of the Lord. What is not taken into account is that the
Gnostics were not Christians. They were a cult that used Jesus and
others names to attack the Bible and Christianity. They even claimed
Mary as their leader but there is no historical proof of this.
We know from the Bible that Peter was on one side and Judas was
probably next to or near Jesus. But who is the person on the other
side that Da Vinci painted that makes this controversy. What we need
to look at carefully is who is on the right of Jesus because this is
the basis of Brown's book, and it rests on Da Vincis painting passing
down this secret information.
At the last supper gathered around the table enjoying the Passover,
Jesus tells the disciples one will betray him. The disciples looked at
one another, perplexed about whom He spoke. Now there was leaning on
Jesus' bosom one of His disciples, whom Jesus loved. Simon Peter
therefore motioned to him to ask who it was of whom He spoke. Then,
leaning back on Jesus' breast, he said to Him, Lord, who is it?
Jesus answered, It is he to whom I shall give a piece of bread when I
have dipped it. And having dipped the bread, He gave it to Judas
Iscariot, the son of Simon.
(John 13:18-33) At the last supper gathered around the table enjoying
the Passover Jesus tells the disciples one will betray him. Now there
was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of His disciples, whom Jesus loved.
Simon Peter therefore motioned to him to ask who it was of whom He
spoke. Then, leaning back on Jesus' breast, he said to Him, Lord, who
is it?
Its not a mystery because the Bible tells us. Jesus mother, his
mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene were all
at the cross, and so was John. In John 19:26 When Jesus saw his
mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said
to his mother, woman, here is your son, and to the disciple, Here
is your mother. From that time on, this disciple took her into his
home. (John 19:25-27) Here John refers to himself, as one Jesus loved
not Mary, the disciple is a he. And he also is the author of the
gospel it is written. If one is going to accept the 4th gospel by John
as actually by Mary, they would have to accept the other epistles he
(she) wrote also, as they clearly are the same styles and concepts
ingrained showing it is the same author. Yet he ignores what John
himself writes in it.
John 20:1-2 On the first day of the week Mary Magdalene went to the
tomb early finding the stone removed. Then she ran and came to Simon
Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved. One has to change
a number of Scriptures in the Bible to make Magdalene the disciple
Jesus loved
At one of the post-resurrection appearances of Jesus John 21:7
Therefore that disciple whom Jesus loved said to Peter, It is the
Lord! after the Lord restores Peter. V. 20-21 Peter, turning around,
saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following, who also had leaned on
His breast at the supper
Peter, seeing him, said to Jesus, But Lord,
what about this man? v22 Jesus said to him, If I will that he remain
till I come, what is that to you? You follow Me.
One may jump to conclusions and say this was Mary but the Bible tells
us this was John. What these Gnostic promoters do is say this was
intentionally changed from Mary to John being the disciple Jesus
loved.
Brown lays the groundwork by having his main characters deny the
inspiration and authority of the gospels Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John
replaced with the gnostic gospels. The gnostic texts are called the
unaltered gospels, and the New Testament texts are mocked as
misinformation from the goddess-bashers. [Brown claims the Gospel of
Mary Magdalene as unaltered (p.248)].
Brown's intent to undermine the very historicity of the New Testament
is not hidden. He holds the belief that the true Jesus was a Gnostic;
and that the earliest Christian writings were the Gnostic Gospels
and the still searching for document Q party. In The Da Vinci Code:
Many scholars claim that the early Church literally stole Jesus from
His original followers, hijacking His human message, shrouding it in
an impenetrable cloak of divinity, and using it to expand their own
power (p.233).
The Biblical Jesus becomes an imposture, created by the church,
specifically patriarchal males that was hungry for power. In essence,
Brown drops the A-bomb by saying everything the church believes is a
lie because it is based on the Bible. (be it Roman Catholic,
Protestant, evangelical, etc. everyone who claims to believe in the
Bible)
The Da Vinci Codes accusation; that Christianity is based upon a Big
Lie (the deity of Christ) used by patriarchal oppressors to deny the
true worship of the Divine Feminine. 2,000 years ago the church
covered up Mary being the leader of the Christian community. Like I
said the truth is twisted on its head and its not the church that has
done it. Brown has convincingly brought doubt through a conspiracy
story and forgeries that were rejected by those who lived when they
were produced.
According to Browns book Almost everything our fathers taught us
about Christ is false, laments one of Browns characters. The real
truth was rejected. The word Everything is the fuel that makes his
theory run. Brown takes a negative view of the Bible and promotes a
distorted image of Jesus. Hes neither the Messiah nor a humble
carpenter but a wealthy, trained religious teacher bent on regaining
the throne of David.
Hid character Teabing gives a quotes, one he claims is from Napoleon:
The winners in history are usually the ones who write the history we
read.
I would say that his rewriting history does far greater harm.
When one reads the Gnostic gospels, one thing becomes immediately
obvious they read very different from our narratives. They do not
present Jesus within a historical background with connected events in
the life of Christ -- the details of his birth, baptism, ministry,
crucifixion and resurrection of Christ that we have all become
familiar with are distorted or missing. They fail miserably in
contrast to the canonical New Testament Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke
and John that are set in a historical setting. It was these that were
accepted long before these gnostic forgeries were written.
The da Vinci codes regurgitated Gnostic stories
The word Gnostic means a knowing one, it is derived from the Greek
word gnostiko or gnosis (inner esoteric knowledge). Gnosticism taught
that spirituality came through a self-knowledge found outside the
written Word, a mystical knowledge acquired from direct spiritual
experience. To a Gnostic God could not be rationally explained to the
mind, but only be known by direct experience. The fact is the Gnostics
were branded as heretics by the early church. Those who were pastors
and apologists openly debated the challenges to the received text from
the apostles against the Gnostics new spiritual knowledge.
For a more in depth analysis of what the Gnostics taught. What is
Gnosticism?
The Gnostics used sources such as Platonic dualism (docetism) and
Eastern religious thought, combining them with ideas derived from
Christianity. The Gnostics called their doctrine the depths of God,
known then to contain arcane secrets and mysteries of divine wisdom.
Christ answer, he calls them the depths of Satan (Revelation 2:24).
God says in Isaiah 48:16 Come near to Me, hear this: I have not
spoken in secret from the beginning. The Gnostics and mystics pursue
the unknown; despising what is already revealed. The New age movement
continues using the Gnostic / mystical ways today.
This is why Brown is so convinced and antagonistic of the Bible, he
listening to those who received guidance and messages outside the Word
delivered by God through the apostles. Gnostics were never Christian.
They tried to undermine the church and the work that God was doing.
The Gnostic viewpoint that there was no sin. The spirit and the flesh
were separate. In the Gnostic Gospel of Mary, Mary Magdalene appears
as a disciple, singled out by Jesus for special teachings. Peter said
to Jesus, Since you have explained everything to us, tell us this
also: What is the sin of the world? 26) The Savior said There is no
sin, but it is you who make sin when you do the things that are like
the nature of adultery, which is called sin. Sounds more like
Christian Science, not Scripture, that says all have sinned and fall
short of the glory of God. Sin is mans inherited fallen nature. John
writes in his 1st epistle if we say we have no sin we are calling God
a liar and do not know the truth. The Gnostics believed they were the
possessors of truth and the Christian church was not, thus they
opposed them.
The Gnostic's Marriage of Jesus
Brown uses his favorite two Gnostic documents, the Gospel of Philip
and the Gospel of Mary, to prove that the Magdalen was Christs
companion. In the Gospel of Philip: And the companion of the [Savior
is] Mary Magdalene. [But Christ loved] her more than [all] the
disciples [and used to] kiss her [often] on her [mouth]. What needs to
be pointed out is there are holes in this Gnostic gospel writing where
ie. and used to, mouth etc. are written. Where the holes are words
were added as assumptions of what was said. These holes are not as big
a hole as the theory its based on.
The rest of [the disciples were offended] by it [and expressed
disapproval]. They said to him, Why do you love her more than all of
us? The Savior answered and said to them, Why do I not love you like
her? When a blind man and one who sees are both together in darkness,
they are no different from one another. When the light comes, then he
who sees will see the light, and he who is blind will remain in
darkness.
Gospel of Philip also writes against the Scripture: Some said, Mary
conceived by the Holy Spirit." They are in error. They do not know
what they are saying. When did a woman ever conceive by a woman? Mary
is the virgin whom no power defiled. She is a great anathema to the
Hebrews, who are the apostles and the apostolic men. This virgin whom
no power defiled [...] the powers defile themselves. And the Lord
would not have said My Father who is in Heaven (Mt 16:17), unless he
had had another father, but he would have said simply My father.
In the Gnostic Gospel of Philip You saw the Spirit, you became
spirit. You saw Christ, you became Christ. You saw the Father, you
shall become Father. (Gospel of Philip) But one receives the unction
of the [...] of the power of the cross. This power the apostles called
the right and the left. For this person is no longer a Christian but
a Christ. (Gospel of Philip).
This is direct opposition to everything the bible teaches. Then Jesus
is not the only Christ.
In the gospel of Mary I found no mention of an intimate relationship,
especially of marriage. Surely if this was such a held truth as
claimed it would be consistently recorded. There is one item mentioned
Surely the Savior knows her very well. The Gospel of Mary (referring
to Magdalene) says the following: Peter said to Mary, Sister, we know
that the Savior loved you more than the rest of women. Tell us the
words of the Savior which you remember -- which you know (but) we do
not, nor have we heard them. Mary answered and said, What is hidden
from you I will proclaim to you. Mary Magdalene goes on to tell
Peter, Andrew, and Levi about her visions of the Risen Christ and her
conversations with the Lord. These visions involve something which she
refers to as the seven powers of wrath.
The first form is darkness, the second desire, the third ignorance,
the fourth is the excitement of death, the fifth is the kingdom of the
flesh, the sixth is the foolish wisdom of flesh, the seventh is the
wrathful wisdom. These are the seven powers of wrath. 20) They asked
the soul, Whence do you come slayer of men, or where are you going,
conqueror of space? 21) The soul answered and said, What binds me has
been slain, and what turns me about has been overcome,22) and my
desire has been ended, and ignorance has died.23) In a aeon I was
released from a world, and in a Type from a type, and from the fetter
of oblivion which is transient.24) From this time on will I attain to
the rest of the time, of the season, of the aeon, in silence.
(Chapter 9 v.1) When Mary had said this, she fell silent, since it was
to this point that the Savior had spoken with her. 2) But Andrew
answered and said to the brethren, Say what you wish to say about what
she has said. I at least do not believe that the Savior said this. For
certainly these teachings are strange ideas.3) Peter answered and
spoke concerning these same things.4) He questioned them about the
Savior: Did He really speak privately with a woman and not openly to
us? Are we to turn about and all listen to her? Did He prefer her to
us?
That is a good question. Did Jesus give special knowledge to a woman
contradicting what the Bible teaches after his training the disciples?
It becomes clear the Gnostics used Mary Magdalen to bring doubt and
confusion challenging the validity of the Scripture from the apostles
that was already in the church. The true gospels written by the
apostles tell us a number of times who the inner circle of disciples
were, Peter, James, and John, and Mary was not there. The Gnostics may
have forged her name and the apostles names on their documents, but
the content revealed the author. Scholars date the Gospel of Mary mid
2nd century, the Gospel of Philip at the end of third century. This is
about 200 years after Jesus lived. How can it be a written by the
disciple named Philip in Acts, unless he lived to be at least 200! The
text of the Gospel of Philip which exists today is a Coptic
translation, not its original language (Greek). Gospel of Thomas (the
primary one), Gospel of Philip, (a collection of sayings, metaphors,
and esoteric teaching) Gospel of Mary, Gospel of the Egyptians, and
the Gospel of Truth are attributed by most to Valentinus. Many of the
Gnostic documents have sexually suggestive statements incased in them
thus the importance of women in their spiritual belief system.
On Brown's website, we find, THIS NOVEL IS VERY EMPOWERING TO WOMEN.
CAN YOU COMMENT? Two thousand years ago, we lived in a world of Gods
and Goddesses. Today, we live in a world solely of Gods. Women in most
cultures have been stripped of their spiritual power. The novel
touches on questions of how and why this shift occurred
and on what
lessons we might learn from it regarding our future.
Considering that Brown says the Gnostics were matriarchal we have this
statement in the Gospel of Philip The superiority of man is not
obvious to the eye, but lies in what is hidden from view.
Brown neglects other Gnostic teachings. The gospel of Thomas (the
primary one), another 2nd century writing that gives imaginary stories
of Jesus from his 5th to 12th year of childhood and challenges the
revealed record. This is why the church rejected them, they were
Gnostic forgeries. According to the Gospel of Thomas, Peter says the
following about Magdalene: Let Mary leave us, for women are not
worthy of life, Jesus responds, I myself shall lead her in order to
make her male.... For every woman who will make herself male will
enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Doesnt sound like a pro-feminine
goddess view to me. The very writings he is upholding refutes his own
conspiracy theory of the church rejecting women and made patriarchal.
The Da Vinci's Codes Marriage of Mary Magdalene?
Browns character in the book Teabing, is described as a reputable
historian. This persuades the reader to accept the historical facts
presented in the novel as accurate. Sir Leigh Teabings states the
marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene is part of the historical
record. In Chapter 58 , Browns book states:
Jesus as a married man
makes infinitely more sense than our standard biblical view of Jesus
as a bachelor
Because Jesus was a Jew and the social decorum during
that time virtually forbid a Jewish man to be unmarried.
Teabing insists that the marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene is
mentioned specifically in two ancient documents, The Gospel of Philip
and The Gospel of Mary Magdalene, which he calls, together with the
Dead Sea Scrolls, the earliest Christian records. Teabing cites The
Gospel of Philip as proof that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married.
The Gospel of Philip was produced at the end of the 3rd century AD,
How can it be a written by the disciple named Philip in Acts, unless
he lived to be at least 200! This is almost one hundred years after
the Gospel of John, which is the last of the four New Testament
gospels to be written by the LAST LIVING APOSTLE.
There is not one shred of evidence accepted by any credible historian
stating that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene. If your looking for
evidence of this kind you may as well go to the Mormons who teach that
it was Jesus who got married at Cana, except they say he was a
polygamist, he had many wives Martha, Mary and others; he also had
many children (Journal of Discourses vol.1 345-346 vol.2 79-82
vol.4:259-260 the Seer p.172). While Brown does not agree with many
wives, he does shares in their inaccuracy.
On the recent ABC special Dan Brown seems to contradict the love Jesus
had for Mary saying Jesus wasnt in love with her he was just trying
to help her out (Jesus Mary and Da Vinci, Aug.5, 2004, on ABC).
In Chapter 58 Teabing, continues According to Jewish custom, celibacy
was condemned, and the obligation for a Jewish father was to find a
suitable wife for his son. If Jesus were not married, at least one of
the Bibles gospels would have mentioned it and offered some
explanation for His unnatural state of bachelorhood (Da Vinci Code,
p.245.)
Brown has a classic argument from silence. If one is appealing to the
gospel narratives as evidence, then why reject the other points that
are clear in them. Obviously because he must if it does not agree with
his theory. We also can appeal to the same evidence; if Jesus were
married at least one of the Bibles gospels would have mentioned it.
It makes no sense that his disciples would try to hide his marriage if
it was normal. They were eyewitnesses and wrote accurately everything
He did, because they were inspired by the Spirit of Truth. John
writes, This is the disciple who testifies of these things, and wrote
these things; and we know that his testimony is true. It was John who
was giving testimony by his writing and became the last living apostle
among those who were eyewitnesses of Jesus Life, death and
resurrection. It was John who Jesus entrusted his mother to. If Jesus
were married he would certainly have entrusted his wife as well. But
then Brown does not believe the biblical record of Jesus going BACK to
HEAVEN, or anything in the Bible for that matter.
Yes, marriage was the norm for 1st century Judaism and not being
married was unusual but not condemned (it was looked upon as God's
blessing not being there). We have examples of celibacy accepted in
the Jewish culture. Therefore, Jesus would not have been require to be
married. Daniel was not married, Jeremiah an Old Testament prophet of
the 7th century B.C. abstained from marriage as a sign to the Jewish
people that the end of the kingdom of Judah was near (Jeremiah
16:1-9). John the Baptizer was not married, yet Jesus said he was the
greatest of the prophets. Even Paul was not married as he did his
ministry unto the Lord. (Neither was Jesus, really). In fact Paul said
Do we have not have the right to take along a believing wife, as do
also the other apostles, the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?(1 Cor
9:5) This was a perfect opportunity to mention Jesus but he doesnt.
Another point Paul writes Are you loosed from a wife? Do not seek a
wife. But even if you do marry, you have not sinned (1 Cor.
7:27-28). Paul certainly knew the teachings of Christ and would not
have contradicted him. Again we see Brown is wrong, marriage was not
required.
If Jesus were married it would actually contradict what he preached
about love and commitment. Brown is presenting a Jesus who is married
and leaves his wife to go back to heaven (according to the Bible). It
would make Jesus a hypocrite, and not a teacher that one could
respect. Brown's argument is from the silence of Scripture and the
loud voice of heretics.
Even liberal scholar Elaine Pagel on the ABC TV Special agreed with
the Bible and stated Jesus was NOT married.
Brown's main sources within the text of his novel is from feminist
scholarship such as The Gnostic Gospels by Elaine Pagels. Yet even
they are not all in agreement with all he has to say. and The Woman
with the Alabaster Jar: Mary Magdalen and the Holy Grail, both by
Margaret Starbird )
And what about the argument in John 20:17 of Mary, when she finds
Jesus holds him. Jesus said to her, Do not cling to Me, for I have
not yet ascended to My Father. The Greek word means to attach oneself
to, i.e. to touch (in many implied relations): to fasten oneself to.
Matt 28:8-9 So they went out quickly from the tomb with fear and great
joy, and ran to bring His disciples word. And as they went to tell His
disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, Rejoice! So they came and
held Him by the feet and worshiped Him. The Greek word here means to
use strength, i.e. seize or retain (literally or figuratively): keep,
lay hand (hold) on, to restrain.
We see the Scripture recording that they all held him by the feet, not
just Mary. So if this makes Mary married, then it makes them all
married; not just Mary.
Brown doesnt miss a beat to criticize Christianity for anything
possible that is wrong. In other words Christianity is set up to take
the blame, despite it being Gods revelation of love to the people of
the world, to both men and women alike.
Is the Council of Nicaea where Everything was Decided?
Dan Brown claims the Roman Catholic church created a divine Christ and
an infallible Scripture. p. 233 Teabing states, Jesus' establishment
as the 'Son of God' was officially proposed and voted on by the
Council of Nicea. Brown claims That the divinity of Jesus was first
raised and established at the Council of Nicaea in A.D. 325, prior
to that time, no onenot even Jesus followersbelieved Jesus was
anything more than a mortal prophet. A key character in the book
announces, that the idea of the divinity of Jesus was hatched by the
Roman Emperor Constantine as a political power play. The Emperor led
the bishops to declare Jesus as the Son of God by a vote. A
relatively close vote at that, the text elaborates. p. 233)
The council boldly claimed Jesus being uncreated as the faith of the
Church and named Arianism as a heresy and Arians as heretics. This was
NOT a close vote? Only two out of more than 300 bishops failed to sign
the creed. Where is this man reading his history from, a candy-bar
wrapper?
If Jesus is not God then what He said is false, and anything he did
becomes absolutely meaningless, especially the atonement. And that is
message Brown is trying to get through in his book.
Brown feelings are not hidden. He routinely refers to the Church as
the Vatican. He systematically portrays it throughout history as
deceitful, power-hungry, scheming and murderous. Im not going to
defend the atrocities by Popes who indeed made it their business to
remove even Christians and control counties. But almost all the
conspiracies he finds on the church do not exist nor had the influence
he attributes to them.
The Church may no longer employ crusades to slaughter, but their
influence is no less persuasive. No less insidious. What the
backsliding Church did in defiance of Christ, Brown and others do by
their pen, and is no less serious. As the cliché goes the pen is
mightier than the sword.
In The Da Vinci Code, Brown adopts Arius as his representative for all
pre-Nicene Christianity because of his gnostic loyalty, disregarding
history. Referring to the Council of Nicaea, Brown claims that until
that moment in history, Jesus was viewed by His followers as a mortal
prophet
a great and powerful man, but a man nonetheless.(p.233) At
[the Council of Nicea]
many aspects of Christianity were debated and
voted upon the date of Easter, the role of the bishops, the
administration of sacraments, and, of course, the divinity of Jesus
.
(Da Vinci Code p. 233.)
Brown is irresponsible between distinguishing fact from fiction. The
average reader without any knowledge of history can only assume his
claims are factual. The council was about one thing, the debate of
Arius new teaching, that Jesus was created -- not sacraments, Easter
or anything else on his list.
It was around the year 318 A.D. n Alexandria, Egypt that attention was
focused on a man named Arius who began teaching in opposition to the
church. Arius insisted that, there was a time when the Son was not.
(Christ must be numbered among the created beings - highly exalted, to
be sure, but a creation). This controversy became very sharp and began
dividing the Church. Bishop Alexander was teaching that Jesus, the Son
of God, had existed eternally, being generated eternally by the
Father. Arius wrote to Eusibius We are persecuted because we say the
Son had a beginning, but God is without beginning. (Letter to
Eusibius, 321 A.D). Alexander called a synod in 321 A.D. Constantine
did not even attend the council of Nicaea because of his age, (and
because he had no theological knowledge), but was represented by two
presbyters. Almost all the Council consisted of bishop's (estimations
of 300 or more) from the eastern Churches where this heresy was
thriving.
Neither the church or man invented the divinity of Jesus. This was
already the held belief by the Church, because it was claimed by Jesus
himself and proclaimed by the apostles in the Bible. If one reads the
early church documents, the consistent teaching is that Jesus is God
in the flesh these are written hundreds of years before the council.
The 7Q4 fragment of I Tim 3.16 God appeared in a body dated to 50-80
AD by leading papyrologists.
How can Brown be right when so many pastors thaught Jesus was God over
nearly 200 years before Constantine. 100 AD Ignatius of Antioch I
give glory to Jesus Christ the God who bestowed such wisdom upon you"
(Letter to the Smyraeans) Jesus Christ . . . was with the Father
before the beginning of time
Hippolytus For Christ is the God over all (Refutation of All
Heresies 10.34).
Iranaeus (lived between 120-202 A.D.) In order that to Christ Jesus,
our Lord, and God, and Savior, and King.
150 AD Justin Martyr The Father of the universe has a Son, who also
being the first begotten Word of God, is even God. (Justin Martyr,
First Apology, ch 63)
Scholar J.N.D. Kelly writes that the all but universal Christian
conviction in the [centuries prior to the Council of Nicaea] had been
that Jesus Christ was divine as well as human. The most primitive
confession had been Jesus is Lord [Rom 10:9; Phil 2:11], and its
import had been elaborated and deepened in the apostolic age.
Remember Mt.16 Peters confession of Jesus deity he is the Son of
the Living God.
The Gnostics View
Members of the various gnostic sects had a secret knowledge not
available to others; it was given to them by a series of lesser
mediating divinities either called Archons or Aeons; they had a
dualistic view, an antithesis between matter and spirit, body and soul
and a hatred of the physical world that was often believed to have
been created not by God but by a lesser, evil demigod to imprison the
souls of human beings. None of these beliefs are Christian.
The book claims that the gnostic Jesus is far more human than the
divine Jesus of the four canonical Gospels contained in the Christian
Bible. The fact is -- the Gnostics did not believe Jesus was truly
human because of their dualistic worldview. Docetism was a form of
Gnosticism that rose later in the first century. (comes from the
Greek word dokeo, meaning to seem or appear). Their philosophy was
that matter is inherently evil and that God was not subject to any
human experiences or feelings. Jesus only appeared to have flesh, they
denied his genuine humanity, and said he was really a (spirit)
phantom. In other words he was not human, the very opposite of what
Brown claims is the truth. Since this was the held belief of Gnostics
it would be impossible to reconcile Jesus was married and went off to
have children. Again the sources he used to confirm his theory are
actually speaking against it. What Brown quotes say the opposite, they
deny he was human not divine. All one has to do is read the Gnostic
gospels and the debates that occurred 150 years BEFORE the Nicaean
council to find this out.
The Fact is Jesus being BOTH God and man is not an exclusive New
Testament idea but an Old Testament one that is spoken of by prophets
hundreds of years apart. Isa.9:6 , Jer.25:5-6 the branch who is a man
His name is called THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS. Zech.12:10 God says
they will look upon me and mourn for son whom they pierced.
The New Testament gives clear evidence of Jesus being viewed as divine
throughout the New Testament. Numerous passages affirm the absolute
deity of Christ, such as John 1:1 (the Word was God and became
flesh), Mt.1:23) God with us fulfilling Isa.7:14. John 5:18 (calling
God His own Father, making himself equal with God), John 20:28
(Thomas saying [you are] my Lord and my God), Titus 2:13 (our great
God and Savior, Jesus Christ), Romans 9:5 (God over all, blessed
forever), and Colossians 2:9 (within Him dwells all the fullness of
being God in bodily form), and many others attribute the Son of God
being the creator. He is called the Lord from heaven in 1 Cor.15:47.
In fact, one would have to remove passages from almost every book of
the New Testament to not have it teach he was divine.
The debate at Niacea was about whether Christ was a created being,
which Arius of Alexander was promoting, or that he was the same
substance (homoousia as God, being God) as Bishop Alexander proposed.
Both sides argued in the council from the Scriptures, expounding with
language and logic. It was a young deacon name Athanasius who joined
in the debate and shined in his biblical expertise and settled the
issue. Arius was pronounced as teaching heresy and deposed from
teaching by an overwhelming vote in the council who were present at
the debate.
In Browns book Teabing states The word heretic derives from that
moment in history (p. 234) (the time of Constantine, in the early
fourth century). If so how did New Testament authors in the first
century refer to heresies 2 Peter 2:1 and a man that is a heretic
Titus 3:10. Even Irenaeus in the second-century was able to write a
book entitled Against Heresies100 years before this council.
Hippolytus in his Refutation of All Heresies 7:22 written in 230 AD.
Again Brown is wrong on his facts, by this time in the book it matters
little.
Teabing states that Constantine was a lifelong pagan who was baptized
on his deathbed, too weak to protest. (p. 232)
This is about as close to the truth on church history that Brown gets.
Constantine at first settled the issue by banishing Arius, but it only
proved temporary. Constantine received Arius' friend Eusebius of
Nicodemia on his deathbed, and was baptized an Arian (337 A.D.).
Supporting Arius' view, the Roman church then rejected the Trinitarian
view, and his son who took his fathers place disposed Athanasius and
his followers. For the next 50 years Arianism became a major movement
inside the Church from Rome. So it is nothing like what Brown writes
in his book that the church made Jesus into deity.
According to Browns book Almost everything our fathers taught us
about Christ is false, laments one of Browns characters. The real
truth was rejected. The word Everything is the fuel that makes his
theory run. Brown takes a negative view of the Bible and promotes a
distorted image of Jesus. Hes neither the Messiah or a humble
carpenter but a wealthy, trained religious teacher bent on regaining
the throne. He makes him into what the Pharisees were like.
The Dead Sea Scrolls
The character Teabing referring to Nicea council states that the Dead
Sea Scrolls confirm that the modern Bible was compiled and edited by
men who possessed a political agenda
. (p. 234)
The Qumran society was monastic community within Judaism that produced
the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Da Vinci Code claims they are part of the
earliest Christian records. But they contain no Christian
teachings whatsoever, they are the products of an ancient Jewish
community that was separated. They contain among other things some
of the oldest known manuscripts of the Old Testament. The Dead Sea
Scrolls actually confirm that the Old Testament we have today has not
changed and affirms it being accurate. Which does damage to Browns
theory of the Bible being drastically changed by unscrupulous men.
What Dan Brown's character goes on to say about the Dead Sea Scrolls
and the Nag Hammadi Library intentionally misleads the reader. He
says: Fortunately for historians, some of the gospels that Constantine
attempted to eradicate managed to survive. The Dead Sea Scrolls were
found in the 1950s (sic) hidden in a cave near Qumran in the Judean
desert. And, of course, the Coptic Scrolls (sic) in 1945 at Nag
Hammadi. In addition to telling the true Grail story, these documents
speak of Christ's ministry in very human terms. (The Da Vinci Code,
p.234).
The Nag Hammadi texts are incorrectly called scrolls in this book
when they are codices. In the Nag Hammadi library contains 13 codices
52 tractates (6 which are duplicates). And the Dead Sea Scrolls were
discovered in 1947 (not the 1950s). If the author can get something
this elementary wrong, we must question the other historical facts
presented elsewhere to see if they too are wrong. This Coptic codex
was acquired in Cairo in 1896 by Dr. Rheinhardt, it was not published
until 1955. It is missing pages 1 to 6, pages 11 to 14 -- these
included sections of the text up to chapter 4, and portions of chapter
5 to 8.
The Dead Sea Scrolls were not in the possession of the Nicene council
so how could they prevent them from being part of the Bible? In fact,
the Dead Sea Scrolls are not Christian documents, they do not contain
any gospels nor mention Jesus Christs ministry on earth at all.
They were Old Testament scrolls prior to his birth. Brown seems to
lack integrity in his research everywhere one turns. And they
especially do not mention anything about Jesus and Mary Magdalene
having children, or being married.
Over 60,000 scrolls, fragments and manuscripts were uncoveredof which
one-third were Scriptural, mostly copies of Old Testament books
including internal documents for the Qumran community. They contain
portions of every Old Testament book except Esther. They predate the
New Testament, carbon-dated to the second-century BC. prior to Christ.
We find the Dead Sea Scrolls were produced by a community of mostly
male Jewish celibates, precisely the kind of people Langdon in Browns
book asserts couldnt have existed within Judaism at the time of
Jesus. Once again this goes against Browns theory of Jesus must be
married because all Jewish men are married. The very evidence Brown
brings forth to undermine the consistent story of the canonical
Gospels teach contrary to the secret Christianity Brown says they
represent.
The Bible
In chapter 55. Teabing, answers some questions from the two lead
characters about the nature and background of their quest. To begin:
The Bible did not arrive by fax from heaven
The Bible is the
product of man, my dear. Not of God. The Bible did not fall magically
from the clouds. Man created it as a historical record of tumultuous
times, and it has evolved through countless translations, additions,
and revisions. History has never had a definitive version of the
book. (The Da Vinci Code p.231)
No, man wrote it ass God spoke to the prophets spanning over 1500
years. The text of the New Testament is comprised of over 24,000
copies or pieces of manuscripts, some dating as early as first century
many more from the second and third century. There is no other ancient
piece of literature with such manuscript evidence. We have manuscripts
dating back to the first century and they are what we hold in our hand
today, no changes. Recently a piece of Matthew was found where
Carston Theide dates back into 60 AD. The Bible has been translated
into many languages; our literal English translated Bibles are often
translated directly from Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts so the
argument over so many translations is moot one. Versions or
translations of the New Testament into Syriac, Old Latin, Egyptian,
etc. began far after the completion of the canon of the New Testament
was circulated (the later 4th and fifth century).
Teabing in the book goes on with more specific claims: Jesus Christ
was a historical figure of staggering influence, perhaps the most
enigmatic and inspirational leader the world has ever
seen
.Understandably, His life was recorded by thousands of followers
across the land
More than eighty gospels were considered for the New
Testament, and yet only a relative few were chosen for inclusion
Matthew, Mark, Luke and John among them
The Bible, as we know it
today, was collated by the pagan Roman emperor Constantine the Great
(p.231).
Was Jesus a figure of staggering influence did thousands of
followers write of him? The answers to this is, No. Jesus never
traveled outside Palestine, he was known among the Jews, especially
the poor and hurting. There are only a few first-century works outside
the Scripture about Jesus and none compare to the eyewitness accounts
in Scripture.
Were there eighty Gospels out of which four were chosen by
Constantine? This is a completely unsubstantiated claim from his book
and history. again, they werent choosing Bible books at Nicaea but
debating if Jesus was created by God or is the creator who is God FROM
the Bible.
The Bible, as we know it today, was collated by the pagan Roman
emperor Constantine (Brown p.231).
Again Browns research of history is failing, Constantine was not the
decider of the canon. In fact, he played no role in its assembly; the
church at large was responsible. Church History tells us the Church
had a near complete New Testament canon of Scripture 170 years before
the council of Nicea. Almost all the New Testament books were written
between 45-75 A.D excluding the apostle Johns writings occurred in
80-95 A.D. From the beginning the church copied and shared the
original documents to circulate the apostles writings. These books
were read copied and distributed as scripture by individual
Christians. We have examples of letters in scripture written by the
apostles who said they were to be read to all. I charge you by the
Lord that this epistle be read to all the holy brethren. 1 Thess.5:27
to be read to all the churchs Col.4:16 read to the church of
Colosse and the Laodiceans Gal.1:21 to the churchs of Galatia.
Paul in jail asks to bring to him the parchments the scrolls. Peter
states of Pauls letters there are hard things to understand, so it is
obvious they were copied and read even by the apostles. Early church
leaders considered letters and eyewitness accounts authoritative and
binding only if they were written by an apostle or close disciple of
an apostle. This way they could be assured of the documents'
reliability. As pastors and preachers, they also observed which books
did in fact build up the church
And we have the evidence of the church as well proving they had the
New Testament Bible. Clement of Rome, 95 A.D. in his Epistle to the
Corinthians quotes from Matthew, Luke, Romans, Corinthians, Hebrews, I
Timothy, 1 Peter. Many of the church fathers (bishops) quote the New
Testament such as Polycarp (69-155 A.D.) quotes much of the New
Testament (Mt., Acts, Hebrews, 1 Pt. And 10 of Paul's letters) to his
letter to the Philippians. Justin Martyr (100-160 A.D.) quotes all 4
Gospels, Acts and the epistles of Paul and Revelation. Portions of the
gospels were read every Sunday in church. Clement of Alexandria
165-220 names all the books of the New Testament except Philemon,
James, 2 Peter and 3 John. Irenaeus 135-210 quotes from all the New
Testament books except Philemon, Jude, James and 3 John. Origen
185-254 names all the books of both the Old and New Testaments.
Tertullian 160-240 mentions all the New Testament books minus James, 2
Peter and 2 John.
Tatian, about A.D. 160, made a Harmony of the Four Gospels called the
Diatessaron, is an evidence that Four Gospels were generally
recognized among the churches.
When you read the early church fathers the one consistent teaching
that comes through is that they are completely convinced Jesus is God
himself from the Scripture that Brown says they do not have. These are
bishops and teachers from the 100 and 200 long before the Nicaean
council (Brown claims) enforced on the church the supposedly minority
position of Christ's divinity.
The proof to counter a decidedly modern edition of the Greek New
Testament is the manuscript evidence. The quotations of the Greek
scriptures by the Greek fathers confirm the authenticity of the
original text. Nearly every verse of the New Testament in Greek can be
recovered from quotations of the New Testament by the early church
pastors (or scholars, apologists) in their writings. In fact all but
11 verses can be put together by collecting the early church writings,
it is the same scripture we have today.
At Council of Nicea in 325 - Athanasius in his debate with Arius
quoted from almost all the books of the New Testament, (not from the
Gnostic gospels) he said the 27 books are the springs of salvation, do
not add or take away from them. So these were already accepted by the
Church need no council to affirm them (though the Roman Catholic
church did have meetings years after to put closure to the canon it
was not necessary).
The early Church did not establish the canon (official set of New
Testament writings) at Nicaea. The New Testament writings were long
since recognized inspired of god because of their authorship and
agreement with what was revealed. We need to understand that the
gospels and letters were written in the first generation of the
eyewitnesses of the facts. Other gospels, not by eyewitnesses were
rejected in the long history of the church because they did not
coincide with what is already written. In the same way today we would
reject the new book of Mormon today, because it does not agree but
actually opposes what is delivered to us in the Scripture.
By the time of Origen (185-254 A.D.), there was general acceptance on
nearly all of the New Testament we have today. There was a ongoing
discussion on only six epistles to be part of the New Testament canon
in a certain area of the church (Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 John, 3
John, and Jude.) Nobody questioned which Gospels should be included,
they were accepted for along time. New Testament dates they were
written: Matthew, 50-70 AD, Matthew; An eyewitness. Mark, 50-70 AD,
Mark; An eyewitness. Luke, 56-60 AD, Luke who compiled the
eyewitnesses accounts; John, 85-95AD, John; An eyewitness. These are
the dates accepted by conservative scholars who are not liberals.
The distribution of the Gnostic writings are not proportionate to the
acceptance of the Gospels by the apostles throughout the world from
Asia to Africa.
Pagan Influences
Peter Jones who written extensively on the Gnostics says of Brown:
Browns positive approach resurrects pre-Christian symbols and
promotes the ancient spirituality of paganism-the worship of Nature as
god. Browns hope for the future of the planet in the Age of Aquarius
is the all-inclusive circle, the divine feminine and the figure of
the Goddess. He finds this message encoded in the blocks of the Roslyn
Chapel, which he calls the Cathedral of Codes (p.432).
Each block was carved with a symbol
to create a multifaceted surface
(Da Vinci Code p.436)
Christian cruciforms, Jewish stars, Masonic
seals, Templar crosses, cornucopias, pyramids, astrological signs,
plants, vegetables, pentacles and roses
Rosslyn Chapel was a shrine to
all faiths
to all traditions
and, above all, to nature and the
goddess (p. 434).
The idea of the goddess is a main point in Browns theory. Another
Assertion in the book is about the name YHWH: Gods original name.
The Jewish Tetragrammaton YHWH the sacred name of Godin fact
derived from Jehovah, an androgynous physical union between the
masculine Jah and the pre-Hebraic name for Eve, Havah (Da Vinci Code
p. 309).
This is completely false! Adonai or Ha Shem meaning the Name was
said by devout Jews whenever they came across Gods name in the text
of the Old Testament because they felt the actual name of God was too
holy to be pronounced by human lips. It was to avoid pronouncing it in
vain and be punished. In fact when the scribes were copying the texts
they would wash their hands before they wrote Gods name.
YHWH derived from Jehovah is completely false. The name Jehovah
didnt even exist until the thirteenth century at the earliest (and
wasnt in common use until the sixteenth century), and is an English
word not Hebrew or Greek. We can trace the name Jehovah to the first
person to use it a Roman Catholic monk from the 1200s. The first
recorded use of this form dates from the thirteenth century C.E.
Raymundus Martini, a Spanish monk of the Dominican Order, used it in
his book Pugeo Fidei of the year 1270. It was created by
artificially combining the consonants of YHWH (or JHVH) and the vowels
of Adonai (which means Lord). The insertion resulted in the hybrid
term [J]YaHoWaH.
Jehovah becomes a 16th century rendering for the King James Version of
the Hebrew YHWH using the vowels for the name.
In the book, Langdon claims that YHWH comes from the name Jehovah,
which he insists is an androgynous union between the masculine Jah
and the pre-Hebraic name for Eve, Havah.
If you go to the Encyclopedia or theological dictionary it shows that
Langdon is wrong. The Hebrew, not pre-Hebraic word for Eve is found
in the original Hebrew of the Old Testament is hawwâ, (pronounced
havah), which means mother of all living. There is no androgynous
meaning of this, but Brown formulates his facts never veering off the
Gnostic vein of his novel to diminish real Christian teaching.
The term Jah is not even a Hebrew word, Hebrew uses Yah, a
contracted form of YHWH. And throughout the Hebrew Scriptures, Yah
is coupled with a masculine verb. In Psalm 106:1, for example, halal
Yah means Praise the Lord or Praise Yah. Havah has nothing to do
with some androgynous physical union with Jah. This is from
someone's imagination.
Brown claims that Jews in Solomons Temple adored Yahweh and his
feminine counterpart, the Shekinah, [E]arly Jewish tradition
involved ritualistic sex. In the Temple, no less. Early Jews believed
that the Holy of Holies in Solomons Temple housed not only God but
also His powerful female equal, Shekinah (Da Vinci Code p. 309).
They believed no such thing. The Shekinah is not the name of a
goddess, but a Hebrew words that means dwelling, or presence. The
Shekinah glory is the visible manifestation of God presence. This
Shekinah in the Old Testament was called the kvod adonai which means
glory of the Lord. Kvod (Glory) in Hebrew and means means weight. In
the New Testament it is called in Greek Doxa Kurion.
God would often manifest himself in glory so the Israelites would know
he is among them. It is used for Jesus in John 1 The word became
flesh and dwelt among us. Dwelt in Greek is skeinei, which is from
the Hebrew mishkhan, which is the same root as shekinah. It means to
tabernacle as God did in the Old Testament tabernacle. It infers that
Jesus is the God of the Old Testament..
Ritualistic sex was NEVER sanctioned in the temple. this could only
take place at the time of the Temples corruption after Solomon when
there was disobedience to the Mosaic Law by priests who defiled the
temple with religious prostitution (1 Kings 14:24 and 2 Kings
23:4-15). Pagan altars were repeatedly torn down by various kings
and prophets of Israel ( Judges 6:25-26,28,30).
Sabbath and Sunday
Written as if this was taken right out of a Sabbatrian book like the
7th Day Adventists, Brown makes another historical inaccuracy part of
his brand of truth. In the book Teabing states Even Christianitys
weekly holy day was stolen from the pagans. Langdon adds,
Christianity honored the Jewish Sabbath of Saturday, but Constantine
shifted it to coincide with the pagans veneration of the sun. To this
day, most churchgoers attend services on Sunday morning with no idea
that they are there on account of the pagan sun gods weekly tribute
Sunday (pp. 232233).
Nothing could be further from the truth. This is the type of
misinformation people get from cults. Although early Christians met on
the Lords day, they still considered Saturday to be the Sabbath.
A number of writers from the post-apostolic period confirm the
practice of Christians gathering for worship on Sunday. Justin the
Martyr (150 AD) describes Sunday as the day when Christians gather to
read the scriptures
The Epistle of Barnabas (120-150) The Didache (60-80 AD) and Other
later testimonies from Irenaeus, Dionysius, Tertullian of Africa
Cyprian, Pliney the younger and Melito of Sardis (late 100s) which
all pre-date Constantine by over 100 years.
In the New Testament epistles there are only 2 references to the
Sabbath (Col.2:16, Heb.4:4). The apostle Paul explains clearly that
the day is not obligatory for Christians, it was a commandment from
God to Israel, not the Church.
Schaff- Herzog Encyclopedia of religious knowledge 1891 Ed., vol.4
Article on Sunday. Sunday
was adopted by the early Christians as a
day of worship... Sunday was emphatically the weekly feast of the
resurrection of Christ, as the Jewish Sabbath was the feast of
creation. It was called the Lords day, and upon it the primitive
church assembled to break bread.
So Browns lesson in history fails again.
Teabing asks what would happen if people found out that the greatest
story ever told (a reference to the Biblical story of Christ) is, in
fact, the greatest story every sold (p. 267). If Brown is correcting
the story with all these facts, is he not selling his book. Whose
selling what? Most of the Bibles throughout the world have been
funded to be given away. Many churches give away free Bibles. What
has The Da Vinci Code done? It tries to keep people in unbelief
having them think his story is the truth and the Bibles history is
not. Its intent is to turns sincere seekers away from examining
Christianity and only bring confusion.
Browns attack on our faith may provide us with greater opportunities
for evangelism, but we need to know how to counter it. Hopefully I
have helped to give a few answers to his challenge.
In conclusion the Jesus portrayed in The Da Vinci Code is not the
Lord Jesus Christ of the Bible. Jesus warned us that there would be
false Christs. (Matthew 24:24) false gospels: This is one of them.
We are told they will believe in fables in the last days and not the
truth.
How can a book like this stay this long on the shelves and continue
to be a bestseller? It's easy. People would rather believe the lie
than believe the truth.
© 2002 No portion of this site is to be copied or used unless kept in
its original format the way it appears. Articles can be reproduced in
portions for ones personal use, any other use is to have the
permission of the author first. Thank You.
We would like to hear from you. Please send us an e- mail and let us
know how we can be of more help. Our time is valuable just as yours
is. Please keep in mind, we only have time to answer sincere
inquiries. We will use discretion in answering any letters. Also: we
do not accept attachments, so please send the mail viewable.
E -Mail Let Us Reason Ministries ***@letusreason.org
We thank you for your support in our ministry
