|
|
"As part of the Vatican's campaign to eradicate pagan religions and convert the masses to Christianity, the church launched a smear campaign against the pagan gods and goddesses, recasting their divine symbols as evil.... Venus' pentacle became the sign of the devil."(page 37)
p. 37 FICTION: As part of the Vatican's campaign to eradicate pagan religions and convert the masses to Christianity, the church launched a smear campaign against the pagan gods and goddesses, FACT: Many people might not realize this, but there is a great deal of historical evidence that shows that pagans tried to eradicate Christianity and that pagans copied Christian symbols and ceremonies in the hopes of surviving the rapid spread of Christianity, especially during the first three centuries after the time of Jesus. During that era, the pagans had tremendous resources, including the support of emperors, who by default, where designated as high priests of pagan religions. Their efforts to eradicate Christianity were remarkably unsuccessful, and Christianity was able to become the first religion to spread to followers worldwide. Even today, it can be argued that Christianity is still the only worldwide religion.
p. 37 FICTION: “… recasting their divine symbols as evil.... Venus' pentacle became the sign of the devil." FACT: Some Christians actually embraced the pentacle! "The truth is, during the later medieval era (the 1100s to the 1500s), Christians used the pentagram and pentacle as a reminder of Christ's five wounds (hands, feet, side, back, head). They also used it as a symbol for "the five books of Moses" and "the five stones used by David against Goliath," according to page 32 of The Truth Behind the Da Vinci Code. There is nothing about a symbol, such as the pentacle or pentagram, that is inherently good or evil. Its meaning depends on who is using it and for what purpose they are using it. Some school teachers will mark a student's homework assignment with a star (a pentacle) to show that the student did excellent work. In this context, there is nothing demonic about the pentacle, it simply represents "stellar" work. But, when the founder of the Church of Satan needed a symbol for his religion during the 1960s he chose to use a pentacle, which he turned upside down. A pentacle, then, is what one makes of it. So who "demonized" the pentacle? According to some scholars, and according to some modern pagan sources, it was a French occultist who lived during the 1800s. In other words, it was a pagan who "demonized" the symbol.
"Da Vinci had always been an awkward subject for historians, especially in the Christian tradition. Despite the visionary’s genius, he was a flamboyant homosexual and worshipper of Nature’s divine order, both of which place him in a perpetual state of sin against God. . . .. Even Da Vinci’s enormous output of breathtaking Christian art only furthered the artist’s reputation for spiritual hypocrisy. Accepting hundreds of lucrative Vatican commissions, Da Vinci painted Christian themes not as an expression of his own beliefs but rather as a commercial venture—a means of funding a lavish lifestyle." (page 45)
p. 45 FACT: Mr. Brown's references to Leonardo as "Da Vinci," as if that were the painter's last name, yet it is no surname but simply a reference to the fact that he was the illegitimate son of Ser Piero of Vinci, in the Florentine territory. Like other great artists, with or without last names, Leonardo is invariably referred to by his given name and not by da Vinci.
p. 45 FACT: Leonardo appears to have been celibate and the only hint of sexual activity on his part was a charge (quickly dropped) of sodomy. Far from being "flamboyant," he was very private.
p. 45 FACT: There is no evidence that he was a "nature worshipper" as Brown claims; he did many sketches of nature, but none of them had religious elements or hints.
p. 45: FICTION: Accepting hundreds of lucrative Vatican commissions. FACT: Leonardo was infamous for his very meager production of artwork; by most accounts, he received one commission from the Vatican and spent little time in Rome. He “had trouble finishing works and they would
p. 119: FICTION: The greatest work. Of the Mona Lisa, Leonardo claimed that it was his finest accomplishment. He carried the painting with him whenever he traveled and, if asked why, would reply that he found it hard to part with his most sublime expression of female beauty" FACT: The artist worked on the Mona Lisa for at least four years, and perhaps as many as ten years, beginning around 1503 to 1506. He did not carry it around with him "whenever he traveled," nor did he tell people "he found it hard to part with." No one knows why it remained with him when he moved to France in 1516. There are many theories. Some say that whoever commissioned it grew tired of waiting and canceled the order. Others think that the woman whose portrait the Mona Lisa is, may have died. Leonard himself, however, never gave an explanation.
p. 121 FICTION: Langdon explains that the Mona Lisa’s name is a combination of the names of the Egyptian god and goddess of fertility, Amon and L’Isa, which he says Leonardo used to symbolize “the divine union of male and female.” Why did Leonardo da Vinci actually give his famous painting that name? FACT: Leonardo never actually gave the painting a name, according to Dan Burstein’s book, Secrets of the Code: The Unauthorized Guide to the Mysteries Behind The Da Vinci Code. Instead, Burstein writes, it went by various names, including “Courtesan With a Gauze Veil.”
drag on for long periods."
p. 124: FICTION: “Constantine and his male successors successfully converted the world from matriarchal paganism to patriarchal Christianity by waging a campaign of propaganda that demonized the sacred feminine, obliterating the goddess from modern religion forever." FACT: Constantine did not convert the world from matriarchal paganism to patriarchal Christianity. Again, history is quite clear about what Constantine did and did not do, and matriarchal paganism was not something that even concerned him. Historical studies have proven that in almost all societies around the world, rule has been patriarchal in nature. This is not to deny the reigns of various queens in some cultures, but by and large, patriarchal rule has been the normal pattern throughout recorded history. This was certainly the case during New Testament times. It is therefore false to say that the early orthodox Christians overcame "early" matriarchal pagans so that their own "later" version of Christianity would prevail. Such a view involves the worst kind of revisionism, pure and simple. To say there was a campaign to demonize the "sacred feminine"— has ZERO historical support.
p. 125 FICTION: "Those deemed ‘witches’ by the Church included all female scholars, priestesses, gypsies, mystics, nature lovers, herb gatherers, and any women ‘suspiciously attuned to the natural world.’ Midwives were also killed for their heretical practice of using medical knowledge to ease the pain of childbirth—a suffering, the Church claimed, that was God’s rightful punishment for Eve’s partaking of the Apple of Knowledge, thus giving birth to the idea of Original Sin. During three hundred years of witch hunts, the Church burned at the stake an astounding five million women." FACT: The number of people (both men and women) executed between 1400-1800 for suspected witchcraft was about 30,000-80,000. Not all were burnt, not all were women, not all were executed by the Church, but rather by political figures using religion to “justify” their deeds. Many were also executed by the state and some were killed by Protestants in England and other Protestant countries. Even non-Christian scholars, including folks at Gendercide.org, concur: "Despite the involvement of church authorities, ‘The vast majority of witches were condemned by secular courts,’ with local courts especially noted for their persecutory zeal (Gibbons, Recent Developments). The standard procedure in most countries was for accused witches to be brought before investigating tribunals and interrogated. In some parts of Europe (e.g., England), torture was rarely used; but where the witch-hunts were most intensive, it was a standard feature of the interrogations. Obviously, a large majority of accused who "confessed" to witchcraft did so as a result of the brutal tortures to which they were exposed. About half of all convicted witches were given sentences short of execution. The unluckier half were generally killed in public, often en masse, by hanging or burning. …"The most dramatic [recent] changes in our vision of the Great Hunt [have] centered on the death toll," notes Jenny Gibbons. She points out that estimates made prior to the mid-1970s, when detailed research into trial records began, "were almost 100% pure speculation." (Gibbons, Recent Developments.) "On the wilder shores of the feminist and witch-cult movements," writes Robin Briggs, "a potent myth has become established, to the effect that 9 million women were burned as witches in Europe; gendercide rather than genocide. [See, e.g., the witch-hunt documentary "The Burning Times".] This is an overestimate by a factor of up to 200, for the most reasonable modern estimates suggest perhaps 100,000 trials between 1450 and 1750, with something between 40,000 and 50,000 executions, of which 20 to 25 per cent were men." Briggs adds that "these figures are chilling enough, but they have to be set in the context of what was probably the harshest period of capital punishments in European history." (Briggs, Witches & Neighbours, p. 8.)
p. 125: FICTION: The once hallowed act of Hieros Gamos—the natural sexual union between man and woman through which each became spiritually whole—had been recast as a shameful act. FACT: The church has not recast sex as a shameful act. Sex within marriage is good (see Genesis 2:24; Matthew 19:5; 1 Corinthians 6:16; Ephesians 5:31). Sex was a part of God’s "good" creation. Indeed, God created sex and "everything created by God is good" (1 Timothy 4:4). But it is good only within the confines of the marriage relationship (1 Corinthians 7:2), which He Himself ordained (see Hebrews 13:4). The Song of Solomon indicates that God desires married people to have truly fulfilling sex. Christians, however, are to abstain from fornication (Acts 15:20). Paul said that the body is not for fornication and that a man should flee it (1 Corinthians 6:13,18). Certainly the sex ritual depicted in THE DA VINCI CODE (a copulating couple surrounded by chanting people) constitutes a form of fornication and is thus condemned by God. Scripture is quite clear: "For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure or greedy person—such a man is an idolater—has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of such things God’s wrath comes on those who are disobedient" (Eph. 5:5-6).
p. 125: FICTION: Holy men who had once required sexual union with their female counterparts to commune with God now feared their natural sexual urges as the work of the devil, collaborating with his favorite accomplice…woman . FACT: Sex was never intended as a means of achieving "gnosis." Man is not to seek revelation or knowledge in altered states of consciousness related to the sex act, but rather from God’s Word. Scripture alone is the supreme and infallible authority for the church and the individual believer. Jesus always used Scripture as the final court of appeal in every matter under dispute. We must do the same. Instead of a view that says individuals can receive individual insights from God during sexual ecstasy, Scripture indicates that a definitive body of truth was objectively communicated to man. This is why Jude 3 admonishes us to "contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints." In the Greek text, the definite article "the" preceding "faith" points to the one and only faith; there is no other. "The faith" refers to the apostolic teaching and preaching which was regulative upon the church (see Acts 6:7; Gal. 1:23; 1 Tim. 4:1). This body of truth is referred to in Jude 3 as that which was "once for all delivered to the saints." The word translated "once for all" (Greek: apax) refers to something that has been done for all time, something that never needs repeating. The revelatory process was finished after this "faith" had "once for all" been delivered.The word "delivered" here is an aorist passive participle, indicating an act that was completed in the past with no continuing element. There would be no new "faith" or body of truth communicated through people in sexual ecstasy. It is God’s will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality; that each of you should learn to control his own body in a way that is holy and honorable, not in passionate lust like the heathen, who do not know God; and that in this manner no one should wrong his brother or take advantage of him. The Lord will punish men for all such sins, as we have already told you and warned you. For God did not call us to be impure, but to live a holy life. Therefore, he who rejects this instruction does not reject man but God, who gives you His Holy Spirit (1 Thess. 4:3-8). The Lord God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him."...So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep…. Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. The man said, "This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, for she was taken out of man." For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh (Gen. 2:18,21-24). Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the Church and gave Himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to Himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies…. "For this reason, a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh." This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the Church. (Eph. 5:25-32, emphasis added)
p. 202: Brown also does not know the difference between a nave and a choir in church architecture.
p. 227-228 FICTION: Brown talks about the absence of a chalice in The Last Supper. FACT: Guess he failed to notice Christ's left hand is touching a cup of wine.
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 (page 231).
p 231: Was Jesus a figure of “staggering influence” about whom “thousands of followers” wrote? The answers to these questions is, “No, not exactly,” and “No, not that the evidence would allow.” Jesus became a figure of “staggering influence” only AFTER the Christian church became a prominent force. As far as the historians of the day were concerned, Jesus was just a "blip" on the screen. Jesus was not considered to be historically significant by historians of his time. He did not address the Roman Senate, or write extensive Greek philosophical treatises; He never traveled outside of the regions of Palestine, and was not a member of any known political party. It is only because Christians later made Jesus a "celebrity" that He became known. Historian E. P. Sanders, comparing Jesus to Alexander the Great, notes that the latter "so greatly altered the political situation in a large part of the world that the main outline of his public life is very well known indeed. Jesus did not change the social, political and economic circumstances in Palestine...the superiority of evidence for Jesus is seen when we ask what he thought.” Jesus was also executed as a criminal, providing him with the ultimate “marginality”. He lived an offensive lifestyle and alienated many people. He associated with the despised and rejected: Tax collectors, prostitutes, and the band of fishermen He had as disciples. Finally, he was a poor, rural person in a land run by wealthy urbanites. The idea that Jesus had a “staggering influence” during his own life on earth is completely in error, which means that he could not have had “thousands of followers” to write authoritative biographies. In fact, three or four biographies would be the most we should expect – especially since 90 percent of all ancient persons were illiterate and unable to write such a work to begin with!
p.231: FICTION: 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. FACT: Aside from the four canonical gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John), history reveals there were only twelve other gospels in circulation during this general time, and these were clearly not "inspired Scripture." There were also Gnostic gospels that emerged later, but these are too late to be counted.
p.231: FICTION: "Who chose which gospels to include?" Sophie asked. "Aha!" Teabing burst in with enthusiasm. "The fundamental irony of Christianity! The Bible, as we know it today, was collated by the pagan Roman emperor Constantine the Great.” FACT: Dr. F.F. Bruce (1910-1990) was Rylands Professor of Biblical Criticism and Exegesis at the University of Manchester in England said the following: “One thing must be emphatically stated. The New Testament books did not become authoritative for the Church because they were formally included in a canonical list; on the contrary, the Church included them in her canon because she already regarded them as divinely inspired, recognizing their innate worth and general apostolic authority, direct or indirect. The first ecclesiastical councils to classify the canonical books were both held in North Africa—at Hippo Regius in 393 and at Carthage in 397—but what these councils did was not to impose something new upon the Christian communities but to codify what was already the general practice of those communities.” (The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? (5th ed, Leicester: InterVarsity Press, 1959).) Long before Constantine, the Church Fathers had compiled a list of books that were considered inspired. The reaction of the apostles to a book was also an important factor in determining it’s canonicity and comparison to the teachings of the Old Testament and Jesus Himself were important factors in determining inspiration and canonicity. Not all books on the list were equally accepted by the Early Church. Some continued to be disputed for centuries. In that regard, Constantine may well have played a role in how quickly the church in the East accepted which books should be considered inspired, and therefore included in the canon, but that is as far as his influence went.
|
p. 231 FICTION: "The Bible is a product of man,... not of God." FACT: The Bible is not the product of man but is rather God- inspired. Inspiration does not mean the biblical writer just felt enthusiastic, like the composer of the "Star Spangled Banner." Nor does it mean the writings are necessarily inspiring to read, like an uplifting poem. The biblical Greek word for inspiration literally means "God-breathed." Because Scripture is breathed out by God—because it originates from Him—it is true and inerrant. Biblical inspiration may be defined as God’s superintending of the human authors so that, using their own individual personalities—and even their writing styles—they composed and recorded without error His revelation to humankind in the words of the original autographs. In other words, the original documents of the Bible were written by men, who, though permitted to exercise their own personalities and literary talents, wrote under the control and guidance of the Holy Spirit, the result being a perfect and errorless recording of the exact message God desired to give to man. Hence, the writers of Scripture were not mere writing machines. God did not use them like keys on a typewriter to mechanically reproduce His message. Nor did He dictate the words, page by page. The biblical evidence makes it clear that each writer had a style of his own. (Isaiah had a powerful literary style; Jeremiah had a mournful tone; Luke’s style had medical overtones; and John was very simple in his approach.) The Holy Spirit infallibly worked through each of these writers, through their individual styles, to inerrantly communicate His message to humankind.
p. 231 FICTION: "The Bible... has evolved through countless translations, additions, and revisions. History has never had a definitive version of the book." FACT: One must emphasize that out of these 200,000 variants, over 99 percent hold virtually no significance whatsoever. Many of these variants simply involve a missing letter in a word; some involve reversing the order of two words (such as "Christ Jesus" instead of "Jesus Christ"); some may involve the absence of one or more insignificant words. When all the facts are put on the table, only about 40 of the variants have any real significance—and even then, no doctrine of the Christian faith or any moral commandment is effected by them. For more than 99 percent of the cases the original text can be reconstructed to a practical certainty. By practicing the science of textual criticism—comparing all the available manuscripts with each other—we can come to an assurance regarding what the original document must have said. Perhaps an illustration might be helpful. Let us suppose we have five manuscript copies of an original document that no longer exists. Each of the manuscript copies is different. Our goal is to compare the manuscript copies and ascertain what the original must have said. Here are the five copies:
Manuscript #1: Jesus Christ is the Savior of the whole world.
Manuscript #2: Christ Jesus is the Savior of the whole world.
Manuscript #3: Jesus Christ the Savior of the whole world.
Manuscript #4: Jesus is Savior of the whole world.
Manuscript #5: Jesus Christ is the Savor of the world.
Could you, by comparing the manuscript copies, ascertain what the original document said with a high degree of certainty that you are correct? Of course you could. This illustration may be extremely simplistic, but a great majority of the 200,000 variants are solved by the above methodology. By comparing the various manuscripts, most of which contain relatively minor differences like the above, it becomes fairly clear what the original must have said. Further, I must emphasize that the sheer volume of manuscripts we possess greatly narrows the margin of doubt regarding what the original biblical document said.
p. 232: Brown's police cryptographer Sophie, a native Parisian, hugely blunders in claiming that Paris was founded by the Merovingians. It was originally a Gaulish village called Lutetia Parisorum that the Romans expanded. Even Asterix knows better than Sophie does!
"Nothing in Christianity is original. The pre-Christian god Mithras - called the Son of God and the Light of the World - was born on December 25, died, was buried in a rock tomb, and then resurrected in three days. By the way, December 25 was also the birthday of Osiris, Adonis, and Dionysus. The newborn Krishna was presented with gold, frankincense, and myrrh." (page 232)
p. 232: FICTION: The pre-Christian god Mithras….. was buried in a rock tomb, and then resurrected in three days. FACT: Serious scholars who have studied the Mithraic traditions, including Franz Cumont, paint a very different portrayal. They don't mention any death of Mithra, and they certainly don't mention any type of resurrection for Mithra.
p. 232: FICTION: The pre-Christian god Mithras …. was born on December 25, … By the way, December 25 was also the birthday of Osiris, Adonis, and Dionysus. FACT: Some Christians do celebrate Christmas on December 25 as a time of year to commemorate the birth and life of Jesus. But that doesn't mean that they believe that Jesus was born on that particular date. In fact, the Bible does not mention a specific birth date for Jesus. For comparison, consider the American holiday called "Presidents Day." The holiday occurs on a day in February, but that doesn't mean that Americans believe that all presidents were born on that particular day in February. Of course not. It is simply a day that is set aside to commemorate American presidents. As for the claim that the myths known as Osiris, Adonis and Dionysus were born on December 25, I have been unable to track down any scholarly source that actually makes that claim.
p.232 FICTION: The pre-Christian god Mithras - called the Son of God and the Light of the World - …. then resurrected in three days. FACT: From page 87 of de-coding Da Vinci: The facts behind the fiction of The Da Vinci Code by Amy Welborn: "Mithras was a god with many forms. By the centuries after Christ, his cult was primarily a mystery religion, popular among men, especially soldiers. Mithraic studies do not find any attribution of the titles 'Son of God' or 'Light of the World,' as Brown claims. There is also no mention of a death-resurrection motif in Mithraic mythology. Brown seems to have picked this up from a discredited nineteenth-century historian, who provided no documentation for his assertion.”
p. 232 : FICTION: The newborn Krishna was presented with gold, frankincense, and myrrh." FACT: From page 87 of de-coding Da Vinci: The facts behind the fiction of The Da Vinci Code by Amy Welborn: “Brown seems to have picked this up from a discredited nineteenth-century historian, who provided no documentation for his assertion. The same historian is the source for the Krishna connection to which Brown alludes. There is not a single story in actual Hindu mythology of Krishna being presented with gold, frankincense, and myrrh at his birth (see Miesel and Olsen, Cracking the Anti-Catholic Code)."
p. 232: FICTION: The historian Teabing states official religion of Constantine’s time was "sun worship–the cult of Sol Invictus, or the Invincible Sun–and Constantine was its head priest." FACT: Rome’s official religion was not sun worship. "Rome's official religion" states Dr. Margaret Mitchell, Associate Professor of New Testament and Early Christian Literature in the Divinity School at the University of Chicago, "was the cult of Roma–the goddess–and of her deified emperors, and the Capitoline trio Jupiter, Juno and Minerva."
p.232: FICTION: The vestiges of pagan religion in Christian symbology are undeniable. Egyptian sun disks became the halos of Catholic saints. Pictograms of Isis nursing her miraculously conceived son Horus became the blueprint for our modern images of the Virgin Mary nursing Baby Jesus. And virtually all the elements of the Catholic ritual—the miter, the altar, the doxology, and communion, the act of "god-eating"—were taken directly from earlier pagan mystery religions. FACT: Many alleged similarities between Christianity and the Greek pagan religions are either greatly exaggerated or fabricated. Liberal scholars (such as those in the Jesus Seminar) often describe pagan rituals in language that they borrowed from Christianity, thereby making them appear to be "parallel" doctrines. New Testament scholar Bruce Metzger is quoted by Nash: "It must not be uncritically assumed that the Mysteries [i.e., pagan religions] always influenced Christianity, for it is not only possible but probable that in certain cases, the influence moved in the opposite direction." Nash notes that it should not be surprising that leaders of cults that were being successfully challenged by Christianity should do something to counter the challenge. What better way to do this than by offering a pagan substitute? Pagan attempts to counter the growing influence of Christianity by imitating it are clearly apparent in measures instituted by Julian the Apostate. The mysticism of the mystery religions was essentially nonhistorical. The religion of Christianity is grounded in history.
p.232: FICTION: Pictograms of Isis nursing her miraculously conceived son Horus became the blueprint for our modern images of the Virgin Mary nursing Baby Jesus. RESPONSE: Just how many ways is there to pose a mother and her child? They all resemble each other. Even now a days if you take a picture of a mother and her child. They would resemble a previous picture.
|
p.232: FICTION: And virtually all the elements of the Catholic ritual—the miter, the altar, the doxology, and communion, the act of "god-eating"—were taken directly from earlier pagan mystery religions. FACT: The "mystery religions," strictly speaking, did not come into existence until the end of the first century at the earliest, making it impossible for the first Christians to take, borrow, or steal much of anything from them. The word "miter," or "mitre," is derived from mitra, a Greek word meaning "turban" or "headband." It is the liturgical head-dress and part of the insignia of the bishop (Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, 1096). It didn’t appear in the West until the middle of the tenth century and was not used by bishops in the East until after the fall of Constantinople in 1453. In the East it seems to have been derived the crowns worn by Byzantine Emperors; in the West is appears to have been a variation of unofficial hat, the camelaucum, worn by the Pope in processions. In both cases, the mitre has no connections with pagan mystery religions. Altars are a common element in most religions and there are over three hundred references to altars in the Old Testament. Thus, the first Christians, who were all Jewish, would hardly be new to the concept of an altar, especially when the altar in the Temple was a focal point of the Jewish religion.
p. 232: FICTION: In 325, Constantine "decided to unify Rome under a single religion. Christianity." FACT: In 313, Constantine and his fellow-emperor Licinius issued the Edict of Milan, which recognized Christianity as a legal religion. It stated that "Christians and all others should have the freedom to follow the kind of religion they favored; so that the God who dwells in heaven might be propitious to us and to all under our rule. . . . Moreover, concerning the Christians, we before gave orders with respect to the places set apart for their worship. It is now our pleasure that all who have bought such places should restore them to the Christians, without any demand for payment." (Edict of Milan, March 313. Par. 3, 7).
p. 232: FICTION: In 325, Constantine "decided to unify Rome under a single religion. Christianity." FACT: "The Christians were a tiny minority of the population," states A.H.M. Jones in Constantine and the Conversion of Europe, "and they belonged for the most part to the classes of the population who were politically and socially of the least importance, the middle and lower classes of the towns. The senatorial aristocracy of Rome were pagan almost to a man; the higher grades of the civil service were mainly pagan; and above all the army officers and men, were predominantly pagan. The goodwill of the Christians was hardly worth gaining, and for what it was worth it could be gained by merely granting them toleration" (Jones, 73).
pages 232-233: FICTION: "Christianity's weekly holy day was stolen from the pagans. Christianity honored the Jewish Sabbath of Saturday, but Constantine shifted it to coincide with the pagan's veneration day of the sun." FACT: Actually, long before Constantine was even born, there were Christian writings that made it clear that there was a Sabbath, which corresponds to Saturday, and a "Lord's Day," which corresponds to Sunday. Since the early beginnings of Christianity, Christians had an affection for the first day of the week (Sunday) because this is the day on which Jesus was resurrected. Early references to the "Lord's Day" include Acts 20:7 and 1 Corinthians 16:2, which are books in the New Testament. These were written during the first century and predate the birth of Constantine by more than 200 years! Outside of the New Testament, there are early Christian writings that confirm that Christians celebrated a "Lord's Day" (Sunday). These writings include those by Justin Martyr and Melito of Sardis. Both lived during the Second Century (during the 100s), and both had already died before Constantine was even born.
p. 233 FICTION: amateur symbologist Sir Leigh Teabing suggests that the story of Jesus was copied in part from the pre-Christian god Mithras, who also was buried and subsequently resurrected in three days as well. True or false? FACT: False. Mithras, the god of the sun, justice and war in pre-Zorastrian Iran, dates back to 1500 BCE, but his cult religion didn't spread to the Roman Empire until 100-300 A.D. Christian authors already had put the story of Jesus' resurrection into writing by then. Additionally, Mithras clearly was a mythical figure, rather than a historical one. His cult focused upon the story of the god's primordial sacrifice of a sacred bull, from whose body sprang plants, animals and the rest of creation. To Christians, in contrast, Jesus was a person who actually had walked the earth.
p. 233: FICTION: Teabing insists that until the Council of Nicaea in A.D. 325, "Jesus was viewed by His followers as a mortal prophet … a great and powerful man, but a man nonetheless. A mortal." He adds: "Jesus’ establishment as "the Son of God" was officially proposed and voted on by the Council of Nicaea". FACT: The New Testament and the writings of the early Church fathers show that Jesus’ first followers believed He was somehow divine—not merely mortal. Patristics scholar J.N.D. Kelly sums up this fact, writing that "the all-but-universal Christian conviction in the [centuries prior to 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." [J.N.D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, rev. ed. (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1978, 138.] John’s Gospel contains strong statements about the divinity of Jesus, including its famous Prologue (Jn 1:1-3) and this statement: "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father" (Jn 1:14). After upsetting authorities because of His activities on the Sabbath, John reports, Jesus was threatened "because He not only broke the sabbath but also called God His Father, making Himself equal with God" (Jn 5:18). In the eighth chapter Jesus declares, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am" (v. 58), an overt reference to the name by which God had revealed Himself to Moses in the burning bush (Ex 3:14). Similar declarations are made by Paul and other New Testament writers (cf., 1 Cor. 12:3; Phil. 2:6; 1 Tim. 3:15-16; Rev. 1:17; 22:13). In the same way, the early Church fathers wrote often of the divinity of Jesus. St. Ignatius of Antioch (died about 110) described Jesus Christ as "our God" (Letter to the Ephesians,18) and "the Christ God" (Letter to the Smyrnaeans, 10). St. Justin Martyr tells his readers: "If you had understood what has been written by the prophets, you would not have denied that He was God, Son of the only, unbegotten, unutterable God" (Dialogue with Trypho,126). Similar statements abound prior to the fourth century. An influential heretic priest of that period, Arius (c. 250–c. 356) believed that Jesus was the Son of God, but he thought that the Son was not coequal with the Father. So the main issue at Nicaea, which was called to address the Arian heresy, was not whether Jesus is divine. The issue was rather what kind of divinity He is and what His relationship is with the Father. If that’s the case, are we to believe that Christians who had been severely persecuted for holding fast to their faith in Jesus would meekly allow Constantine to change such an essential feature of their doctrine?
p.233: FICTION: "Hold on. You’re saying Jesus’ divinity was the result of a vote?" "A relatively close vote at that," Teabing added…. FACT: In actuality only two out of 300 bishops at the Council did not sign the resulting creedal statement affirming the full deity of Christ and condemning any view of Him that was less!
p.234: "Fortunately for historians," Teabing said, "some of the gospels that Constantine attempted to eradicate managed to survive And, of course, the Coptic Scrolls 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 scrolls highlight glaring historical discrepancies and fabrications, clearly confirming that the modern Bible was compiled and edited by men who possessed a political agenda—to promote the divinity of the man Jesus Christ and use His influence to solidify their own power base."
234: FICTION: "Fortunately for historians," Teabing said, "some of the gospels that Constantine attempted to eradicate managed to survive. FACT: There is no evidence that the early church fathers deliberately tried to hide or destroy these documents, we do have evidence that they knew about them, and rejected them because they were not accurate and trustworthy sources of information about Jesus or the Christian faith:
234: FICTION: The Dead Sea Scrolls were found in the 1950s hidden in a cave near Qumran in the Judean desert. FACT: They were found in 1947.
p. 234: FICTION: According to Leigh Teabing, Constantine “commissioned and financed a new Bible, which omitted those gospels that spoke of Christ’s human traits and embellished those gospels that made him godlike”. FACT: The truth is most of the canon was well known and in use nearly two centuries before Constantine.
|
p.234 FICTION: The scrolls highlight glaring historical discrepancies and fabrications, clearly confirming that the modern Bible was compiled and edited by men who possessed a political agenda—to promote the divinity of the man Jesus Christ and use His influence to solidify their own power base." (p.234) FACT: "The Dead Sea Scrolls in no way provide proof that any secret gospels exist. Instead, they confirm the accuracy of the Old and New Testament." The assertion by Brown that these are secret gospels is false. We have known of these for centuries. The early church fathers wrote about the texts and rejected them as uninspired and non-apostolic. Iraneaus (130-200 AD) and Tertullian (160-225 AD) mentioned the texts in their letters and stated their rejection of them. These texts were never considered part of the inspired writing of the Apostles for several reasons. Many of the texts are dated well after the death of the apostles. The teachings are inconsistent with previous revelation of Jesus and apostolic teaching. The teaching of Gnostic dualism is what the gospels of John and Epistles appear to be reacting against. Additionally, the church fathers knew of these texts and never regarded them as equals to the gospels.
Jesus as a married man makes infinitely more sense than our standard biblical view of Jesus as a bachelor… Because Jesus was a Jew… the social decorum during that time virtually forbid a Jewish man to be unmarried. 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 Bible’s gospels would have mentioned it and offered some explanation for His unnatural state of bachelorhood.(p. 245)
FICTION: “ the marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene is part of the historical record" (p. 245) FACT: Just exactly which "historical record" is he talking about? The Gospels never even hint that Jesus was married or had a romantic relationship. There is no mention of Jesus being married prior to the beginning of His three-year ministry. There is no mention of Jesus being married during His three-year ministry. There is no mention of Jesus being married at the crucifixion. There is no mention of Jesus being married at His burial. There is no mention of Jesus being married at His resurrection. In other words, there is no mention of a wife anywhere! Aside from this deafening silence regarding a wife are theological arguments against Jesus having been married. For example, in 1 Corinthians 9:5 the apostle Paul defends his right to get married if he so chose to do so: "Don’t we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas?" Now, if Jesus had been married, surely the apostle Paul would have cited Jesus’ marriage as the number-one precedent. The fact that he did not mention a wife of Jesus indicates that Jesus was not married.
FICTION: … Because Jesus was a Jew… the social decorum during that time virtually forbid a Jewish man to be unmarried. According to Jewish custom, celibacy was condemned, and the obligation for a Jewish father was to find a suitable wife for his son.(p. 245) FACT: First, note that a number of major prophets were never married—including the likes of Jeremiah and John the Baptist. Second, note that there were whole communities of Jews which included non-married men—such as the Essene community at Qumran. Third, note that Jewish leaders often granted exceptions to the general rule of marriage. It was certainly not an unbending requirement, and hence this general requirement does not constitute proof that Jesus must have been married.
“the companion of the Savior is Mary Magdalene. Christ loved her more than all the disciples and used to kiss her often on her mouth. 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?'" (p. 246) Response: If, in the context of this Gnostic text, the Savior and Mary Magdalene were supposedly married, then why would the disciples bother to ask their leader why he loved his her more than them? Can you imagine a scenario in which a group of men would ask a married man, "Why do you love her (your wife) more than us?" Such a question doesn't make any sense if the two are supposed to be married. In fact, it wouldn't make any sense if the two were merely engaged, or even if they were simply dating. The only way that the question would make sense in the Gnostic text is if there was no reason for Mary Magdalene to be treated any differently. And the only way that this could be true is if Mary Magdalene was supposed to have the exact same relationship with the "Savior" as did the "other disciples." In other words, only if she was not married, or otherwise intimately involved.
p.246: Despite Brown's "translation" of that key passage from the Gnostic gospel of Phillip, the word "mouth" doesn't actually appear in the original text. According to page 49 of The Da Vinci Deception, by Erwin W. Lutzer: "You should know that because of the poor quality of the papyrus, a word or two is missing in the original. The text reads, 'Jesus kissed her often on the [blank].' So scholars fill in the blank with the word mouth, face, or forehead, etc. Actually, for all we know the text might have said 'the hand' or even 'the cheek' since the statement implies that he also kissed his other students – presumably on the cheek as is still done in the Middle East."
Brown claims that the Aramaic word for "companion" literally meant "spouse." (p.246) FACT: That is not true according to various Aramaic scholars. Biblical scholar Roy Heller of Perkins University noted that the Gospel of Philip was written not in Aramaic, but in Greek. (Olson and Miesel [94] add a detailed study of that Greek word, which is used of "partners" in a variety of relationships, including non-sexual ones.) (two falsehoods)
FICTION: Peter is leaning menacingly” toward Magdalene and “slicing his blade-like hand across her neck” (p.248) FACT: He is talking to “Mary” not “slicing his blade-like hand across her neck.” Like the others, Peter is reacting to Jesus’ announcement that one of those present is going to betray him. (Matthew 26:21). He is leaning over Judas and touching the figure to the right of Jesus on the shoulder while leaning in to speak, as if he is trying to communicate with John or “Mary” without Judas hearing him. This accounts for the inclination of John’s head toward Peter and down, as if he is listening closely to hear a whisper. And Peter’s left hand is in fact positioned similarly to the left hand of James the Lesser, who is trying to get Peter’s attention by touching him on the back. Is James trying to “menacingly” slice at Peter?
"The rock on which Jesus built His Church ... was not Peter ... It was Mary Magdalene." Brown’s statement alludes to Matthew 16:18.(p. 248) In this passage Jesus was not even saying that Peter was the rock upon whom the church would be built. Rather, He was saying that Peter’s previous confession that Jesus was the Christ would be the rock upon which the church would be built. There are a number of factors in the Greek text that argue against the interpretation that Peter was the rock. First, whenever Peter is referred to in this passage (Matthew 16), it is in the second person ("you"), but "this rock" is in the third person (verse 18). Moreover, "Peter" (petros) is a masculine singular term and rock" (petra) is a feminine singular term. Hence, they do not have the same referent. What is more, the same authority Jesus gave to Peter (Matthew 16:18) is later given to all the apostles (Matthew 18:18). So Peter is not unique.
Jesus "intended for the future of His Church to be in the hands of Mary Magdalene." (p. 248) Ephesians 2:20 affirms that the church is "built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the capstone." Two things are clear from this: (1) all the apostles, not just Peter, are the foundation of the church; (2) the only one who was given a place of uniqueness or prominence was Christ, the capstone. Indeed, Peter himself referred to Christ as "the cornerstone" of the church (1 Peter 2:7) and the rest of believers as "living stones" (verse 4) in the superstructure of the church. There can only be one head of the church, and that is Jesus Christ. Ephesians 5:23 tells us that "Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior" (see also Col. 1: 18).
FICTION: "The Sangreal documents include tens of thousands of pages of information. Eyewitness accounts of the Sangreal treasure describe it as being carried in four enormous trunks. In those trunks are reputed to be the Purist Documents - thousands of pages of unaltered, pre-Constantine documents, written by the early followers of Jesus, revering Him as a wholly human teacher and prophet." (p. 254) FACT: Tens of thousands of pages and four enormous trunks sounds like too much. We have barely such amount of contemporary documents about many of the major figures in the history of the world, you think that these Jews would have compiled encyclopedia sized chronicles of Mary and the child? It does not sound very realistic.
|
FICTION:“ ..history is always written by the winners. When two cultures clash, the loser is obliterated, and the winner writes the history books—books which glorify their own cause and disparage the conquered foe"(p. 256)FACT: To begin, anyone who knows anything about Christian history knows that the early Christians were anything but "winners." The early Christians were fiercely persecuted by the Roman authorities (as well as by Jewish authorities). Christianity itself was outlawed by the Romans in the second century, and in the third and early fourth centuries, there was widespread persecution and murder of Christians. Some Christians were thrown into the arena to be eaten by lions, to the entertainment of Roman citizens who were watching. Other Christians were tied up on poles, drenched with fuel, and lit as streetlamps at night. Despite all this heavy persecution, the church survived and spread around the world. Christianity grew not because the Christians were "winners" and wrote a "winner’s history," but rather Christianity grew despite being big losers under Roman persecution.
FICTION:The Da Vinci Code says that the Jews of first century France wrote thousands of pages, chronicling the life of Mary Magdalene and her child and that part of the grail treasure is these thousands and thousands of pages.(p. 256)FACT: We have barely such amount of contemporary documents about many of the major figures in the history of the world, you think that these Jews would have compiled encyclopedia sized chronicles of Mary and the child? It does not sound very realistic.
FICTION: As Brown represents Teabing, "The Sangreal documents include tens of thousands of pages of information. Eyewitness accounts of the Sangreal treasure describe it as being carried in four enormous trunks. In those trunks are reputed to be the Purist Documents - thousands of pages of unaltered, pre-Constantine documents, written by the early followers of Jesus, revering Him as a wholly human teacher and prophet." (p. 256) FACT: Tens of thousands of pages and four enormous trunks sounds like too much.
FICTION: "The Jewish Tetragrammaton YHWH - the sacred name of God - in fact derived from Jehovah, an androgyn
|
|
| |
|
