Debunking the Da Vinci Code

[jcr4runner]

The Da Vinci Code has enjoyed an immense popularity especially among academics and college students. The premise of the book is that the bloodline of Jesus and Mary Magdalene survives to the present day. Although the Catholic Church sought to destroy the account of Jesus’ marriage to Mary Magdalene, it survived through the writings of the Gnostic Gospels, and also through a secret order of the Knights Templars, the protectors of the Holy Grail. The big secret, according to the novel, is that the Holy Grail isn’t a cup, but a code name for the lineage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene.

The Last Supper portrait by Leonardo Da Vinci is one of Dan Brown’s supposed evidences that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus. According to Dan Brown, the Apostle seated at Jesus’ right side is not John, but rather Mary Magdalene. Even if Leonardo intended to convey this message, the portrait of the Last Supper would then be glaringly out of sync with the Gospel accounts. Since scripture records that only the twelve Apostles were present at the Last Supper (Mat. 26:20), then “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (John 13:23) who was “leaning on his side” (v.25) is conspicuously absent from Leonardo’s painting. The disciple whom Jesus loved is identified five times in scripture as none other than the Apostle John (John 13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7,20).

Contrary to the vast consensus among art historians that the youth depicted in Leonardo’s famous painting of the Last Supper is the Apostle John, Dan Brown insists that Leonardo depicts Mary Magdalene at Christ’s side -- not only as an Apostle of Jesus, but also as his wife or lover. According to Brown, early church leaders who feared the truth would undermine Catholic Church’s teaching on celibacy concealed her real identity.

One character in the book explains, “The church, in order to defend itself against the Magdalene’s power, perpetuated her image as a whore and buried evidence of Christ’s marriage to her, thereby defusing any potential claims that Christ had a surviving bloodline and was a mortal prophet” (The Da Vinci Code, p. 214).

Dan Brown’s conspiracy theory is nothing new. In the novel itself, one of the main characters points to several books that form the basis of this claim -- that in 325 A.D., the church conducted a massive cover-up in order to refute an earlier Gnostic Christianity that honored Mary Magdalene as its chief apostle.

The Templar Revelation: Secret Guardians of the True Identity of Christ, by Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince.

The Woman with the Alabaster Jar: Mary Magdalene and the Holy Grail, and The Goddess in the Gospels: Reclaiming the Sacred Feminine, both by Margaret Starbird.

Holy Blood, Holy Grail, by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, and Henry Lincoln.

And of course, Elaine Pagels controversial book, The Gnostic Gospels.

By referring to these works, usually found in the Occult and New Age section of bookstores, Dan Brown claims credibility for his novel in the rapidly growing interest in Gnosticism. This “alternative” form of religion has made frequent appearances in popular media, including novels, television, and movies. One example is the 1999 film, Stigmata, which depicted the Catholic Church’s supposed cover-up of subversive “truths” found in Gnostics writings such as the Gospel of Thomas.

There are quite a few good books and videos available today that examine these claims and debunk each one as not only contrary to scripture, but also as illogical and contrary to historical fact as well. We’ve included a list of books, articles and videos for further research on the menu of this DVD. Our intention is neither to delve into the intricacies of art history in relation to Leonardo’s works nor to explore the origins of the Holy Grail legend. Our main purpose here is to examine and debunk the main premise of The Da Vinci Code -- the ancient heresy of Gnosticism.

[Leonidas Carrington Hill]

???? Bunch of hogwash ????

If someone has a secret to keep, they don't leave clues around so that others can discover it.

[Tanja_von_Hannover]

anytime someone has a secret to keep, they end up telling someone. regardless of who, someone ends up knowing.

but anyway, my point wasn't that.
my point, was is it so difficult to believe that Jesus might have wed Mary M, had a child (or children) and his bloodline exists to today?
the intolerance to the very consideration is very similar to how many catholics respond to Christ having siblings.
'absolutly not mary m wasn't mentioned as being his wife!'
'absolutly not because then how could mary be a virgin?!'

[jcr4runner]

Who is the bride of Christ?

Is it possible that Jesus could have been married and conceived children?

This is the question at the center of most of the controversy surrounding The Da Vinci Code. Dan Brown took this idea from several books written in recent decades. Entire television documentaries have been devoted to examining the relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene. We won’t spend too much time here trying to refute this outrageous claim, but a few points ought to be considered.

1. In the four canonical Gospels, several prominent woman are mentioned among Jesus’ disciples. Mary of Bethany, the sister of Lazarus, is more prominent than Mary Magdalene. John chapter 11 tells the story of Lazarus who was raised from the dead by Jesus. In verse five we are told, “Now Jesus loved Martha and her sister, and Lazarus” (John 11:5). In all of the New Testament, Mary and Martha of Bethany are mentioned as the only women disciples whom Jesus loved. Mary of Bethany is also identified as the woman who “took a pound of very costly oil of spikenard, anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped His feet with her hair” (John 12:3) in order to prepare Him for the crucifixion. One could just as easily concoct another conspiracy theory involving Mary of Bethany. Yet Holy Blood, Holy Grail and The Da Vinci Code rely on a few obscure passages from the Gnostic Gospels to claim that it was Mary Magdalene who was loved by Jesus “more than all the disciples.” And therefore, in a quantum leap of logic, Mary Magdalene must have been his wife.

The lack of credibility here is staggering. Take, for instance, Margaret Starbird’s book, The Woman With the Alabaster Jar: Mary Magdalen and the Holy Grail. Since Mary of Bethany was the woman with the alabaster jar, right away, the scholarship of Starbird is suspect. One has to wonder: Has she even read the biblical texts?

2. Many of Jesus’ immediate family are mentioned in the New Testament. James and Jude, authors of the two general epistles were both called brothers of the Lord; John the Baptist was his cousin; John’s parents were Elizabeth and Zechariah; and several of Jesus’ siblings are mentioned as part of what some churches have termed “the Holy Family.” In Matthew 13:55,56, when Jesus teaches in his home country of Galilee, the people hearing him are astonished and ask: “Is this not the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary? And His brothers James, Joses, Simon, and Judas? And his sisters, are they not all with us?” (Matthew 13:55,56). Given the fact that so many immediate family members are mentioned in scripture, it is unlikely that someone as important as a wife would be left out.

3. One might counter that the Catholic Church wanted to “cover-up” evidence against the celibacy of Jesus, and decided to suppress the fact that Jesus was married. But if so, they also would have suppressed the fact that Jesus had brothers and sisters since it contradicts the life-long celibacy of Mary, the mother of Jesus -- another Roman Catholic teaching -- one so universal in the history of the church, by the way, that it was also held by Protestants such as Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Zwingli and John Wesley. Yet the scripture mentioning Jesus’ brothers and sisters has always been included in the text of the New Testament.

4. Eusebius, the fourth century church historian wrote that at the time of Jesus’ birth in the year 4 B.C.

... there had been kept in the archives up to that time the genealogies of the Hebrews as well as of those who traced their lineage back to proselytes, such as Achior the Ammonite and Ruth the Moabitess, and to those who were mingled with the Israelites and came out of Egypt with them.

Eusebius goes on to mention that King Herod, the first king of Judea not of Hebrew descent, had the genealogical records burned. But a few Jews had kept careful records of their lineage even until the time of Eusebius He goes on to write that some of these were Christians who claimed lineage from the family of Jesus.

Among these are those already mentioned, called Desposyni, on account of their connection with the family of the Savior. Coming from Nazara and Cochaba, villages of Judea, into other parts of the world, they drew the aforesaid genealogy from memory, and from the book of daily records as faithfully as possible.

Nowhere in Eusebius or in any other record up until this time is there any mention of direct descendants of Jesus. This is a fantasy invented by 20th century skeptics.

5. If Dan Brown is citing the Gnostic Gospels to prove his claim of a secret bloodline, then how is it that the Gnostic writings contain no references to this? The answer is quite simple. While orthodox Christians have always thought of Christ as fully God and fully man, the Gnostics believed Christ to be fully God, but a man in appearance only. In shunning the material in favor of the spiritual, no value would be placed in a mortal bloodline according to Gnosticism. If Mary Magdalene married Jesus and bore his child, then there would be nothing special either about his "bloodline" or about the woman in relationship with him.

6. Finally, there is a “bride of Christ” mentioned in the book of Revelation. “One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls full of the seven last plagues, came to me and talked with me, saying, ‘Come, I will show you the bride, the Lamb’s wife’” (Revelation 21:9). John then sees in a vision the city of Jerusalem, a type of the church, coming down from heaven. While scripture promises that the victorious and risen Christ will one day wed a spotless bride in the form of spiritual Israel, the church, Dan Brown imagines an earthly Jesus joined to a woman in the flesh. While Jesus did live on earth as a flesh and blood man, the marriage supper of the Lamb described in the book of Revelation tells us who the bride of Christ truly is.

Not only is the speculation about Jesus’ relationship with Mary Magdalene without any evidence, the Gnostic Christ is clearly different in essence from Jesus the Son of God, who came in the flesh and was crucified for the sins of the world, as described in the New Testament.

[jcr4runner]

Who were the Gnostics?

Gnosticism refers to a religious philosophy that permeated the Eastern world at about the time of Christ and for many centuries afterward. By the end of the first century, Gnosticism had infected not only the New Testament era Church, but also Judaism. Gnosticism adopted many Christian and Jewish elements, and had become a major threat to Christianity when it influenced the teachings of second century Christian heretics, such as Marcion, Cerinthus and Valentinus.

Gnosticism held that spirit is good, matter is evil. Salvation consists in deliverance of the spirit from matter or the physical world, and salvation is achieved by means of a secret or higher "knowledge" (Gnosticism getting it name from the Greek word: gnosis). The Gnostics taught that the Supreme God was transcendent and unapproachable, but from Him came a series of progressively inferior emanations called aeons. The lowest of these aeons is "Jehovah." Christ is one of the highest aeons. Since all matter is evil, they taught that Christ was a spirit being and had only an illusive body. Sometimes this is known as the doctrine of Docetism. The Gnostics taught that Christ was a spirit temporarily inhabiting the body of the man Jesus who died.

Gnosticism has its roots in Eastern religions that teach that human beings can attain to a god-like state through enlightenment. This deception can be found in the devil's false promise to the woman in the Garden, "Your eyes will be opened and you will be like God" (Gen. 3:5). The philosophy of Eastern Mysticism and Gnosticism promises this "opening of the eyes" resulting in enlightenment and the attainment of a God-like consciousness.

Gnostic views of the Godhead were opposed by Paul in his writings, by Peter in his second epistle, by the Apostle John in his writings, and by the Church Fathers and apologists.

The Apostle Paul wrote in his first epistle to Timothy:

O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called (1 Timothy 6:20).

It's worth noting here that the word translated as "science," or as "knowledge" in some translations, is the Greek word gnosis. Paul is warning his young disciple Timothy against the error of Gnosticism. Likewise, the letter to the Colossians also deals with Gnosticism.

Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ (Colossians 2:8 ).

Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind (Colossians 2:18 ).

Peter's second epistle also warns against heresies. Many scholars believe he is referring specifically to the teachings of Gnosticism.

But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction (2 Peter 2:1).

John's writings were written in part to counter the Gnostic error that supposed that Christ came in spirit form only, but not in human flesh.

That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon and touched with our hands (1 John 1:1).

By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit which confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God (1 John 4:2).

John further condemns the "mystery religions" that had corrupted first century Jews represented by the harlot in the book of Revelation.

And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication: And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS (Revelation 17:3,4).

Around 180 A.D., the Christian apologist, Irenaeus, wrote his great polemic, Against Heresies: The Refutation and Overthrow of Knowledge Falsely So Called, dealing with Gnostic heresies.

At about the same time, Tertullian quoted the four Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, thirteen of Paul's epistles, Hebrews, 1 John and the book of Revelation in arguing against Marcion the Gnostic heretic.

Gnosticism flourished in the Middle East until about 700 A.D. There were many different types of Gnostic sects ranging from the pseudo-Christian cults already mentioned to any sect that believed it had secret knowledge about the nature of the universe and the pathway to God. Gnosticism's influence on Greek speaking Jews at the time of Christ later developed into the religion of Kabbalah.

[steelgirder]

I have read the Book "The Da Vinci Code" and found it to be a very good yarn. And yarn is all that it is. I have no trouble realizing the difference between fiction and fact. Apparantly a lot of you do have a problem. Read it as work of fiction as stated and intended and move on to something more important than debating the authenticity of a work of fiction.

[jcr4runner]

No we do not have a problem. The author, Dan Brown, claims that the historical background is all factual. You ought to know that if you have read the book.

You might find yourself thinking of the plot of Indiana Jones and the Final Crusade or American Treasure, two films which also feature eccentric conspiracy theorists who set out on quests to find legendary treasure and who, despite all common sense, turn out to be right in the end. The story lines of the Indiana Jones movies and American Treasure also contain some references to biblical accounts and church history. But even in these cases, Christians understand that they are viewing fictional entertainment.

If The Da Vinci Code is read purely on this level, as a fictional mystery thriller, many Christians will still be offended at the idea that the marriage of Jesus to Mary Magdalene was the object of a massive cover-up by the Catholic Church. To compound the insult, the author insists from the book's first pages that all descriptions of historical documents in the novel are "fact." In later interviews, Dan Brown has claimed that although initially a skeptic, he became a believer in the premise of the book after many hours of exhaustive research.

The same line is used by Margaret Starbird in The Woman With the Alabaster Jar -- that she set out to prove this theory false and ended up a believer. The sincerity of these authors might be questioned, however, given the fact that controversy sells plenty of books.

[steelgirder]

Good Morning;
On the copyright page is a disclaimer that goes something like this: "This is a work of fiction. Names, character, places, and incidents either are the products of the AUTHOR'S IMAGINATION (capitals mine) or are used fictitiously, and any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, events, or locales is entirely coincidental".
Any statement after that page is fiction and is used to build the plot and believabilty of a story. I have seen the Author make the statements you quoted, but I would suspect he is laughing all the way to the bank.
By the way I have a bridge for sale. Anyone interested?

[steelgirder]

I would like to off an apology to everyone concerned for my smart alec remarks. I did not originally intend to get this worked up over this topic, but I guess I am no different than anyone else. Please accept my apology and I will try my darndest to keep myself under control in the future.

[jcr4runner]

Oh, I agree that it is laughable. But there are a lot of people out there who vehemently believe in the Christ myth and the Gnostic Christ theories espoused by Dan Brown and the authors he culled his theory from --

Check out for instance the threads by AmBomb on this discussion board.

I think also that the Da Vinci Codes premise has been sufficiently debunked by the media in the past year -- on TV specials and other media -- that most people understand the flimsiness of the theory. A few years ago, I was hearing a lot of college students and even teachers say: IT IS FICTION BUT THE PREMISE IS BASED ON HISTORICAL FACT.

Of course, Dan Brown's conspiracy theory is nothing new and is not confined to his writing. In the novel itself, one of the main characters points to several books that form the basis of this claim -- that in 325 A.D., the church conducted a massive cover-up in order to refute an earlier Gnostic Christianity that honored Mary Magdalene as its chief apostle.

The Templar Revelation: Secret Guardians of the True Identity of Christ, by Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince.

The Woman with the Alabaster Jar: Mary Magdalene and the Holy Grail, and The Goddess in the Gospels: Reclaiming the Sacred Feminine, both by Margaret Starbird.

Holy Blood, Holy Grail, by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, and Henry Lincoln.

And of course, Elaine Pagels controversial book, The Gnostic Gospels.

By referring to these works, usually found in the Occult and New Age section of bookstores, Dan Brown claims credibility for his novel in the rapidly growing interest in Gnosticism. This "alternative" form of religion has made frequent appearances in popular media, including novels, television, and movies. One example is the 1999 film, Stigmata, which depicted the Catholic Church's supposed cover-up of subversive "truths" found in Gnostics writings such as the Gospel of Thomas. Another example is the media hoopla over the recently discovered Gospel of Judas.

There are quite a few good books and videos available today that examine these claims and debunk each one as not only contrary to scripture, but also as illogical and contrary to historical fact as well.

I would encourage you to check out my web articles on the Da Vinci Code and the related Christological heresies of pop culture:

http://forerunner.com/realjesus/part2.html

[jcr4runner]

http://www.townhall.com/opinion/column/ ... 99382.html

Mike Adams, a criminology professor at the University of North Carolina, Wilmington, has posted excerpts from six real conversations that people initiated after seeing him with a copy of The Da Vinci Code. Says Adams, the conversations "explain why I now carry it to work, to restaurants, and just about everywhere except for church."

The portable Dan Brown
Jun 1, 2006
by Mike S. Adams

I used to think The Koran was the best book to read in the airport, simply because carrying it guarantees you’ll never get searched by airport security. Later, I decided that The Book of Mormon was better because it guarantees the person sitting next to you will never start a conversation during the flight. Now, I’ve decided – once and for all, I think – that The Da Vinci Code has both of them topped.

Toting Dan Brown’s book is far better than toting the aforementioned works of fiction because it helps to identify my least favorite segment of American society – the conspiracy theorists. The following excerpts from real conversations – conversations people actually initiated with me after seeing my copy of The Da Vinci Code - explain why I now carry it to work, to restaurants, and just about everywhere except for church:

Conversation 1

Quacky conspiracy theorist (Q): So, you’re just now reading The Code? What took you so long? How do you like it?
Adams (A): Well, I’m trying to enjoy it like a Grisham novel but, unfortunately, people are taking it way too seriously.
Q: Oh, do you mean the religious right?
A: No, I’m talking about the whacky conspiracy nuts who actually think the book is evidence of patriarchal oppression. Those nuts really annoy me.
Q: Well, you have to agree that it’s curious that the Bible was written by males, don’t you?
A: That’s a great point, I’ve never really thought of that.
Q: Really?
A: Yes, really. I’ll remember that the next time I read a report from the Women’s Resource Center or the Women’s Studies department.
Q: What does that have to do with it?
A: Obviously, since all the authors of those reports are women, they must be involved in a conspiracy to oppress men. I think I just discovered a new concept; matriarchal oppression. Thanks for the inspiration.

Conversation 2

Q: Oh, I just love that book. Have you read about the Council of Nicea and how they conspired to keep out the Gnostic Gospels? It was all so political the way they choose the Books of the Bible, don’t you agree?
A: No.
Q: Well, why not?
A: I’ve read the Bible seven times, the New Testament ten times, and all of the so-called Gnostic Gospels.
Q: And what have you concluded?
A: The New Testament books were selected long before 325 A.D. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were either written by eyewitnesses or on the basis of eyewitness evidence. The Gnostic Gospels were not. In addition to being incoherent fragments, they were written many, many decades later.
I just try to treat the life of Jesus as a murder mystery, which is easy to do since he was, in fact, murdered. If you want to solve the mystery, you have to know everything you can about the victim. To do so, you should prefer eyewitness testimony over all other forms of evidence. There was no better type of evidence back then. And, of course, only a fool would give preference to the accounts that were written later. That is a backwards way of thinking. I mean that literally.
Q: Then why does The Da Vinci Code suggest that members of the Council of Nicea conspired to exclude certain books for sexist reasons, if it isn’t true?
A: Because The Da Vinci Code is fiction.
Q: How do you know?
A: Because I picked it up at Barnes and Noble in the section marked “fiction.”

Conversation 3

Q: Won’t you admit that there was a conspiracy to label Mary Magdalene as a whore in order to deny her true place at the top of the Christian hierarchy?
A: No.
Q: Aren’t you open-minded enough to even consider that Pope Gregory’s public labeling of her as a whore was an intentional act undertaken in concert with the members of the Council of Nicea?
A: No.
Q: Why not?
A: Well, Pope Gregory made the statement in 591 A.D. If he were Pope during the time of that council, too, that means he called Mary a whore in the 266th year of his pope-hood. You conspiracy theorists are either profoundly ignorant of history or just plain crazy enough to believe in time travel. I don’t know which is worse.
Conversation 4
Q: Why do you keep demanding that I produce evidence to support my theories? Do you have evidence to support everything you believe in?
A: I don’t know. Test me.
Q: You believe Jesus was a real person who walked the earth, don’t you?
A: Yes.
Q: But they haven’t found Jesus’ bones have they?
A: No.
Q: Is that consistent with the Bible?
A: As a matter of fact, yes. It is consistent with the story of his resurrection.
Conversation 5
Q: Did you hear that they have uncovered evidence that Adam had another wife before Eve?
A: No. But, please, tell me more.
Q: She was not subservient to Adam so he divorced her and married Eve. Since Eve was more submissive they put her in the Bible.
A: Well, that’s certainly impressive research. When you got your Master’s Degree at Duke, I assume there was a “Dr. They” who uncovered all of this information. Or maybe there was a They Institute of Historical Research.
Q: Why do you have to be so crass and cynical?
A: I’m only joking. But when people talk about what “they” have discovered or research that “they” have done, I find that “they” generally don’t know what the hell “they” are talking about.
Conversation 6
Q: Are you really serious when you say that there would have to have been too many people involved in a conspiracy to keep Mary Magdalene’s marriage to Jesus a secret?
A: I am.
Q: Well, what about the fumes coming from airplanes?
A: I don’t know what you are talking about.
Q: Well, they have found that the government has been using commercial airplanes like the one we are on now to spray the earth with chemicals to counteract the effects of global warming. The government makes them do it. You can tell because the fumes look different from the earth than they did before global warming.
A: Ma’am, that is rich. I’m going to write about it in my column next week. I hope you don’t mind if I quote you. I promise not to reveal your name in the column. I don’t want to hurt your career as a practicing psychiatrist.
Good day. I have another flight to catch. Could you please hand me my book?

Mike Adams is a criminology professor at the University of North Carolina Wilmington and is a regular columnist for Townhall.com. Log on to Dr. Adams' website http://www.DrAdams.org for information on upcoming speeches and to order signed copies of his first book.

[data13]

I enjoyed the movie for what it was- just entertainment.

data13
http://www.MightyChristianWebsites.com

[Wiccans]

Who the heck spends time reading the Da Vinci Code.
I mean cmon, seriously its a book.
if you guys want a real thing to do, go to http://www.worldofwarcraft.com
make an account and make your character a wiccans.
dont ever choose to be a morlech since they have like THE WORST SPELLS
all they have is a spirit sword
but my Olympian axe can easily own that crap sword.

Wiccans Lord

[I R TooThKicker]

y u ever read a book when movie is out
y spend time thinking when you can be killing morlechs or wiccans
TOOTHKICKERS OWN all other WOW people with our big clubs
no need spells or swords when got big club
dont waste your time being a wiccan
i break olympian axe when i sit on it

[Morlech666]

Toothkicker, who the hell sits anymore?!? I squat. Sitting is for losers and turkeynecks like them Wiccans and Trolls like you. Why dont you go ROLF with a train. HAHAHA, good one Morlech. Us Morlechs come up with the best insults. Haha, Toothkicker, your club sucks so much its probably made out of poop!! AHAHAHAHAHA. And what the hell is a Da Vinci? Some kinda fancy toilet paper? Jeez, you guys talk about the stupidest things.

Sincerely
Morlech Lord

P.S. Toothkicker the Troll is a penisface.