|
I
read "The Da Vinci Code" in a 24-hour period and found
it quite exciting. It is a series of cliff-hangers. By
comparison the film isn’t particularly good. In fact I
found it quite annoying. What are we to make of the Da
Vinci phenomenon?
People today love a good conspiracy theory, especially
if it is anti-establishment. New spirituality also
fascinates many. Throw in a dose of feminism, as Dan
Brown does, and you have a winning formula.
However, the book is full of inaccuracies, a fair number
of them quite serious (see the appendix if you are
interested). But that is not my main interest. I am
pleased it has made people think about important issues
such as the deity of Christ. Here are some of the
questions raised in people’s mind:
Is the God of the Bible Male?
No, God has no gender. Both men and women (not just men)
are "made in image of God." Also there is some female
language used about God in the Bible.
Could Jesus still have been divine if he had married?
Yes, the Bible teaches that God’s divine son became
fully human as Jesus so he could have got married. But
it would have been inappropriate because of his imminent
death. There is absolutely no evidence of Jesus being
married. The New Testament writers would certainly have
mentioned if he had.
Is the Church sexist?
It has been, but the Gospels have a high view of women:
women travelled with Jesus and were important witnesses
of his death and resurrection. The New Testament teaches
that men and women are equal before God.
How important is Mary Magdalene?
She was a key and possibly leading follower of
Christ. She accompanied Jesus and was a witness of
crucifixion. Jesus appeared to her on her own when he
rose again.
In the Bible, is sex sinful?
No, it is a sacred gift of God, and hence should be
enjoyed within the total commitment of marriage.
How
reliable are the NT books?
The Gospels were certainly written within 50
years of Jesus lifetime, quite possibly from AD 60
onwards or even earlier. They are clearly based on
earlier eyewitness accounts. Very early on (about 130AD)
the Gospels and Paul’s letters were accepted by the
church as Scripture. Having done very detailed studies,
scholars tell us that we have some 97-99% of the
original text of the Gospels. We have about 25,000
ancient manuscripts of the New Testament, dating back as
far as 130AD. This compares with 8-20 copies of other
famous ancient Greek and Latin books all dating from
900AD onwards
Did the NT Gospels omit Jesus’ human characteristics to
make him divine (as The Da Vinci Code claims)?
Certainly not. The New Testament speaks of Jesus being
born, learning as a child, obeying his parents. It
records him being hungry, tired, thirsty, exasperated,
angry, compassionate, crying out for joy and weeping in
grief. He is tempted and he dies. In fact the New
Testament condemns those who deny the true humanity of
Jesus.
Was the idea of Jesus being divine originated by the 4th
century Roman Emperor Constantine for political purposes
(as The Da Vinci Code claims)?
No. In the New Testament Jesus claimed to be divine: the
only way to God and salvation, the source of eternal
life, the complete revelation of God, the eventual judge
of the whole of humanity. The New Testament clearly
teaches that Jesus is the divine "Word" who is God. He
is the one through whom and for whom the universe was
created. His teaching is the foundation of our entire
civilisation in the West. His character is admired by
billions of non-Christians too. Jesus fulfilled 300
ancient Old Testament prophecies spoken over 500 years.
This is far more than coincidence. Also his resurrection
is one of the most established facts of history. The
effect of Jesus on the church and history cannot be
explained if he did not rise from the dead. Millions of
Christians claim to experience the risen Christ.
As C S Lewis said: "A man who was merely a man and said
the sort of things Jesus said, would not be a great
moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic on a level
with the man who says he is a poached egg – or else he
would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice.
Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a
madman, or something worse."
Tony Higton
APPENDIX: HOW ACCURATE IS THE DA VINCI CODE?
The Da Vinci Code is full of mistakes. Here are some of
the main ones:
The Priory of Sion was founded in 1956 not 1099. The
founder, Piere Plantard, admitted that the documents
about it in the Paris Library were forgeries during a
trial in 1993. He and his colleagues confessed to this
in a programme presented by Tony Robinson on Channel 4
in Feb 2005.
The person next to Jesus in Leonardo’s Last Supper
painting is not Mary Magdalene but the Apostle John.
Leonardo often painted effeminate-looking men. Even his
John the Baptist (in reality a macho character) looks
effeminate. (Interestingly there is an effeminate
stained glass window portrait of the Apostle John in All
Saints Church, North Wootton!)
It s not true that Constantine set up the Council of
Nicaea in order to establish his new idea that Jesus was
divine and this was accepted by a majority of just two
bishops. The church wanted the Council of Nicaea in
order to settle the crisis caused by the teaching of
Arius that Christ was a lesser god, not fully divine.
Constantine opened the Council then handed over
presidency. 99% of the 250 bishops present affirmed the
Nicene Creed that Jesus is fully divine.
It is not true that all First Century Rabbis had to be
married.
It is not true that the Dead Sea Scrolls show the NT
Gospels are wrong about Jesus. They make no reference to
Jesus or Christianity.
It is not true that more than 80 Gnostic (alternative)
gospels were considered for inclusion in the New
Testament, but were rejected. There were only 11 Gnostic
Gospels. They are obviously fictional and very mystical.
They were written over a century after Jesus died.
Contrary to what The Da Vinci Code claims, they deny the
humanity (not the divinity) of Christ and are quite
sexist.
If you would like a full list of the inaccuracies in The
Da Vinci Code contact me on
tony@higton.info
or send me a stamped addressed envelope. |