Da Vinci Code
Fact, Fiction or Delusion?
from 
JoeUser Forums
JoeUser Forums
I'm kind of surprised I haven't seen anything written here on Joe User on the upcoming Da Vinci Code phenomenon in the form of an upcoming movie. I'm sure Brown's movie, as was his novel, will not only be very popular but also widely controversial as well. Because of that he's managed to sell about 46 million books. He has been criticized by many different religious groups and scholars alike.
While I'm no fan of this man's work , I am not worried about Christianity's demise as a result of this work of fiction. I read a quote in the paper this week from a very wise British priest. He said..."Christian theology has survied the writings of Galileo and the writings of Darwin. Surely it will survive the writings of some novelist from New Hampshire." I agree. God is bigger than Dan Brown and his Da Vinci Code.
What many seem to forget is that this book is fiction. It is not real. He said on CNN that tho his characters and action are fictional the "background is all true." Of course many scholars beg to differ. Here's a take on a few differences:
Jesus' Divinity
According to Brown and his version, Jesus was but a mere man until 325 AD when Constantine "turned Jesus into a deity" by getting the council of Nicaea to endorse divine status by a relatively close vote.
But his critics contend (that would be me as well) and cite that Jesus was worshipped by many in the early church. Paul wrote in the 50's AD "though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped and became a man."
Historians also say that the bishops involved in the Council of Nicaea never questioned the divinity of Christ but rather debated the technicalities of how he could be both divine and human. Their vote was a lopsided one, not even close at all.
The New Testament
According to Brown there were 80 gospels considred for the NT but only four were chosen by Constantine. Brown would like us to believe that the omitted gospels spoke of his human traits and those chosen embellished his godlike ones. These unchosen gospels were gathered up and burned and that the Dead Sea Scrolls were the earliest Christian records not these four gospels.
The historians tells us that Constantine had nothing to do with the decision made about the cannon. The Christians had already reached a concensus on the authority of the gospels well before Constantine in the second century. But some of the 27 NT books were not universally accepted until after the death of Constantine. Some of the "other gospels" are rejected because they lack the narrative histories that characterized the NT four. The four we have today, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were not only written earlier but they had won wide approval by the first century believers many of whom lived through what was written.
The rejected books often pointed to Jesus as lacking human qualities depicted in the NT gospels which is the exact opposite of Brown's scenario. These gnostic gospels often spurn Judaism's creator and the OT. Much different than the four we have today.
About the mass burning of books? There is little evidence to support that claim. They simply disappeared from lack of use and nobody bothered to make new copies this being well before the printing press was available.
As far as the Dead Sea Scrolls go, they were Jewish writings, not Christian ones.
Jesus as married
According to Brown's version Jesus married Mary Magdalene and their daughter initiated a royal bloodline in France.
Again his critics would say ,no this isn't true at all. The Magdalene myth came to the forefront in medieval times. I think it is true that the popularity of this whole scene is sensationalism. This is what sells especially to those who are unhappy with traditional answers.
The lawyer, Justice Peter Smith, who recently defended Brown in his troubles with plagiarism said this:
"Merely because an author describes matters as being factually correct does not mean that they are factually correct. It is a way of blending fact and fiction together to create that well known model "faction." The lure of apparent genuineness makes the books and the films more receptive to the readers/audiences. The danger of course is that the faction is all that large parts of the audience read, and they accept it as truth."
That my friends, pretty much sums it up for me. Follow the money trail all the way to the movies.
While I'm no fan of this man's work , I am not worried about Christianity's demise as a result of this work of fiction. I read a quote in the paper this week from a very wise British priest. He said..."Christian theology has survied the writings of Galileo and the writings of Darwin. Surely it will survive the writings of some novelist from New Hampshire." I agree. God is bigger than Dan Brown and his Da Vinci Code.
What many seem to forget is that this book is fiction. It is not real. He said on CNN that tho his characters and action are fictional the "background is all true." Of course many scholars beg to differ. Here's a take on a few differences:
Jesus' Divinity
According to Brown and his version, Jesus was but a mere man until 325 AD when Constantine "turned Jesus into a deity" by getting the council of Nicaea to endorse divine status by a relatively close vote.
But his critics contend (that would be me as well) and cite that Jesus was worshipped by many in the early church. Paul wrote in the 50's AD "though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped and became a man."
Historians also say that the bishops involved in the Council of Nicaea never questioned the divinity of Christ but rather debated the technicalities of how he could be both divine and human. Their vote was a lopsided one, not even close at all.
The New Testament
According to Brown there were 80 gospels considred for the NT but only four were chosen by Constantine. Brown would like us to believe that the omitted gospels spoke of his human traits and those chosen embellished his godlike ones. These unchosen gospels were gathered up and burned and that the Dead Sea Scrolls were the earliest Christian records not these four gospels.
The historians tells us that Constantine had nothing to do with the decision made about the cannon. The Christians had already reached a concensus on the authority of the gospels well before Constantine in the second century. But some of the 27 NT books were not universally accepted until after the death of Constantine. Some of the "other gospels" are rejected because they lack the narrative histories that characterized the NT four. The four we have today, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were not only written earlier but they had won wide approval by the first century believers many of whom lived through what was written.
The rejected books often pointed to Jesus as lacking human qualities depicted in the NT gospels which is the exact opposite of Brown's scenario. These gnostic gospels often spurn Judaism's creator and the OT. Much different than the four we have today.
About the mass burning of books? There is little evidence to support that claim. They simply disappeared from lack of use and nobody bothered to make new copies this being well before the printing press was available.
As far as the Dead Sea Scrolls go, they were Jewish writings, not Christian ones.
Jesus as married
According to Brown's version Jesus married Mary Magdalene and their daughter initiated a royal bloodline in France.
Again his critics would say ,no this isn't true at all. The Magdalene myth came to the forefront in medieval times. I think it is true that the popularity of this whole scene is sensationalism. This is what sells especially to those who are unhappy with traditional answers.
The lawyer, Justice Peter Smith, who recently defended Brown in his troubles with plagiarism said this:
"Merely because an author describes matters as being factually correct does not mean that they are factually correct. It is a way of blending fact and fiction together to create that well known model "faction." The lure of apparent genuineness makes the books and the films more receptive to the readers/audiences. The danger of course is that the faction is all that large parts of the audience read, and they accept it as truth."
That my friends, pretty much sums it up for me. Follow the money trail all the way to the movies.
....