The long awaited movie based on Dan Brown's controversial novel, "The Da Vinci Code", will be hitting theaters on May 19th. As you have heard from published reports, the book denies the diety of Christ, fallaciously links Christ and Mary Magdelene through marriage and attributes offspring to them, as well as making other outrageous claims; many of which are not new.
The question is: when the book came out, were we as Christians ready to refute the lies and answer the questions posed by the curious and confused? As a whole, I don't think so. Personally, I know I wasn't. I was asked point blank about some of the claims made in the novel, and had no definitive answer to give.
The follow-up question is: when the movie comes out, are we as Christians going to be ready to refute the lies and answer the questions posed by the curious and confused? There are plenty of books, videos, pamplets, websites, etc popping up all over the place in preparation of the theatrical release. There are answers we can give. Are we ready? Let's get ready!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Ronnie Floyd's last two sermons have dealt with how to refute the DC. It has been good stuff. He has read the book - at least once - in an effort to gain the proper understanding of how to combat its claims. Still... most people are attempting to battle the book with the bible. The bible will deny the book, no question. However, the book denies the bible, too. My word against your word - type of deal... It's a sickening thing that society is so quick to latch onto anything unbiblical. We shouldn't let this quash our enthusiasm, but we should have some other questions ready on top of our biblical arguments. For instance: why is it that anything or anyone that refutes the bible, which cannot be proven as having error, becomes an immediate hit with the public? Why is it, all of a sudden, that society embraces the gospels of Thomas and Judas when they have NEVER embraced any of the real Gospels? Does this not throw up warning signs - even to the blind?
This battle was pretty strategically staged, where it will have to involve not only scripture, but also history. As "The Da Vinci Code" is mostly a rehash of Gnosticism, the so-called "Gospel of Judas" is just an extension of the same fight, and I found it rather interesting at the timing of it coming public.
This battle resembles the strategy of the battle with evolution involving scripture and science. In both, history and science have been twisted, interpreted, and/or fabricated to fit the opposing view.
As you said, the public happily grabs onto these things. Why? Well, they are easily led and "willingly ignorant". The history of "the Church" (political intrigues, Inquisitions, etc) will always blacken the eye of Christianity in the viewpoint of unbelievers looking for a "whippin' boy". Once they have it, they often won't look any farther.
I've been listening to Chuck Missler speak on The Da Vinci Code. He states that there is a "hidden code" which Dan Brown didn't write about, but is part of - a reversal of values.
He points out that Mel Gibson personally wrote the check for "The Passion", he didn't need anyone else's help, and he did a marvelous job taking the most true thing we know of and dramatizing it on film so we could relate to it.
He then points out the contrasts between "The Passion" and "The Da Vinci Code" by the secular reviewers/critics.
Regarding "The Passion":
“A repulsive masochistic fantasy, a sacred snuff film” that uses “classically anti-Semitic images,” rants Leon Wieseltier in the New Republic.
"Courting bigotry in the name of sanctity." Maureen Dowd, New York Times.
"A real nut case whose alterior motive was making money." Andy Rooney, 60 Minutes.
A quick search through Google can find scores more:
“A sickening death trip,” says David Denby in the New Yorker.
New York Times’ Frank Rich, ten days after the Ash Wednesday opening wrote: "With its laborious buildup to its orgasmic spurtings of blood and other bodily fluids, Mr. Gibson’s film is constructed like nothing so much as a porn movie, replete with slo-mo climaxes and pounding music for the money shots. Of all the ‘Passion’ critics, no one has nailed its artistic vision more precisely than Christopher Hitchens, who ... called it a homoerotic ‘exercise in lurid masochism’ for those who ‘like seeing handsome young men stripped and flayed alive over a long period of time.’"
Then Dan Brown comes along with just the opposite. This is untrue, deliberate deceit.
Regarding "The Da Vinci Code":
"It's a compelling blend of history and page turning suspense." "A masterpiece that should be mandatory reading." Library Journal
"An exhaustively researched page turner." Publishers Weekly
(Missler points out that Brown's research is shoddy, incorrect, faulty, deliberately twisted, he presents things that he knows is untrue to deceive his readers beyond the needs of his plotline)
He asks "Why is 'The Passion' excoriated and 'The Da Vinci Code' extoled? Why is this upside down thing going on? Why are Gibson's motives denounced and Brown's dignified? Gibson was trying to make money, and Brown was trying to be self-sacrificing? You've gotta be kidding! No; it's backwards. Why was Christ's passion regarded as repulsive masochistic fantasy, and the supposed marriage to Mary Magdalene touted as researched material fact? There's not a scrap of evidence of that."
We see this same kind of thing daily. Killing unborn children, yet protesting the execution of seriel killers; celebrating the diversity of various religious observations, yet squelching anything linked with Christianity; etc.
I agree with mom, it's trash. But it will be a legitimate stumbling block to some people who are just flat-out unfamiliar with the bible or Christianity. We should know how to defend our faith for that reason. If you know nothing of the weapon the enemy is using against you, it's hard to know how to defend. Reading the book isnt necessarily 'dipping yourself' in it. What it does do is give you credibility with the people who might as you your take on it. If you havent read it, what you have to say doesnt matter much to them. I havent read the book or seen the movie, and I dont want to. But if I thought i'd have to face some folks who wanted my honest opinion about it, i'd be underequipped. We all know it's fictitious trash.
Yes, it is absolute trash, but it has become a weapon in The War, just as evolution became one hundreds of years ago. Evolution is just plain stupid when you consider that you have to believe that everything in the universe came from literally nothing of its own accord, and that life came from nonliving material of its own accord. What The DaVinci Code is basically saying is that everything Christians believe and teach now is nothing but the continuance of lies and cover-ups.
And many people, both unbelievers and believers unsteady in their walk with God, are actually believing The DaVinci Code just as other are believing evolution explains creation. Here's a conversation I had with a friend just the other day about it:
----
Brian: Listening to a talk on Da Vinci Code while I do some input
Milady: My Mom gets riled when she reads or hears anything about the DaVinci Code
Brian: Understandably.
Brian: I'm brushing up on the info for when the movie comes out and all the questions start up again
Milady: You know, when that book first came out...way before the movie, the author went on record to say this story is complete fiction...although much research was done and facts threaded through the movie to lend *current* relative feel to the movie, it is JUST a movie
Brian: Well, even if that is true despite the fact page included in the novel, the book still promotes heretical beliefs which many people are accepting as fact because of how it is presented as fact.
Milady: which is plain stupid
Brian: What is stupid?
Milady: "many people are accepting as fact because of how it is presented as fact"
Brian: Well, stupid or not, many are. Just as how many are ready to accept this "Gospel of Judas" that just came to light recently after many centuries. There are literally 10s of thousands of copies of the true Gospel texts (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) with incredible accuracy in copying that they will dismiss with a wave. Then comes along this one, torn, tattered to pieces script of heretical text that contradicts the cannonical Gospels, and the public are swarming on it as "shedding light" on the life of Christ
Brian: To show you that you just might be in the minority of your view of the novel and movie.... http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/June2005/23/c5136.html "TORONTO, June 23 /CNW/ - A National Geographic Channel survey reveals 32% of Canadians who have read The Da Vinci Code believe the theories outlined in the bestselling novel are true -- particularly that a holy bloodline exists and that this secret has been protected through the ages by a dedicated
society."
Brian: That's a 1 in 3 ratio of just Canadians surveyed that believe the claims in the book are true.
Brian: "Conducted by Decima Research Inc. among 1,005 Canadians 18 years of age
or older..."
Brian: beliefnet.com survey had 27% of respondents believe that Mary Magdalene was Jesus' wife
Brian: As for Brown himself, he believes at least part of the drivel that he has promoted, and is recorded in interviews as saying so: http://www.sundayherald.com/50846
Milady: I'll check it out tomorrow
Brian: “I began as a sceptic,” he says. “As I started researching Da Vinci Code I really thought I would disprove a lot of this theory about Mary Magdalene and holy blood and all of that. I became a believer.”
Milady: Hmmm
Brian: Then there's the whole matter of slandering the King of the Universe, the Creator of all things, and the great I AM.
----
Another survey, Vancouver Sun, April 21, 2006, "found that seventeen percent of Canadians "think Jesus's death on the cross was faked and that he married and had a family"
SurveyUSA.com posed the question: "How accurate do you think the book The DaVinci Code is when it comes to religious history?"
11% believe Very Accurate
55% believe Somewhat Accurate
29% believe Not Very Accurate
Only 4% beleve Not Accurate At All
and 1% were not sure.
That means 66% believe the majority of the religious history of the book. That's pretty frightening, especially if they even partially reflect the common belief.
This means they are believing "religious history" such as (and this list isn't complete):
* Jesus married Mary Magdalene
* Jesus empregnated Mary Magdalene
* Jesus didn't rise from the dead, but Mary Magdalene stole his body
* Mary Magdalene was Jesus' choice to lead the church
* Mary Magdalene and Peter (and the other apostles) fought for power until she fled for her life
* The early church dominated women into submission
* Constantine was the first to attribute deification to Christ
* The Council of Nicea choose the 4 Gospels out of as many as 80 and established which books would make up the bible
Ones that want to believe it will, just as those who want to believe in evolution will. Those who want to defame, slander, and malign Christianity will eat it up. But for the curious and confused who will ask questions, answers should be ready to give, and much of the argument is history and knowledge outside of scripture.
'Da Vinci Code' Could Fill Pews, Says Actor
Tom Hanks hopes the The Da Vinci Code will make people flock to church. The Oscar-winning star hopes church leaders use his new movie - which investigates the possibility that Jesus had a child with Mary Magdalene - to increase church congregations.
He told US magazine Entertainment Weekly: "I think the movie may end up helping churches do their job.
"If they put up a sign saying, 'This Wednesday we're discussing the gospel,' 12 people show up. But if the sign says, 'We're discussing The Da Vinci Code', 800 people show up." ...tonight
Oddly, that "possibility" is part of a discussion I had with a friend at work this morning. He had heard that while listening to K-LOVE radio.
I told him I can't see how it would. The whole story of Jesus as told by The DaVinci Code is 180 degrees from what is taught in a true bible-believing church. Besides, there weren't droves of new church goers after the novel came out, the movie won't make that much difference in church attendance.
No, I believe this battle will be at the work cubicles, water coolers, lunch tables, sports fields, etc.
There's nothing in the novel to show a loving Savior who died a horrible death and was risen again to life so that we humans could be forgiven and given eternal life with a loving God.
So what would there be in that book to lead people into church? A mortal man having a love child, then dying, then having his body stolen, and the "exposed myth" that he is still alive? No wonder so many people are still worshipping Elvis!
That's almost exactly what I was saying to Darci yesterday. If you know what the bible says and know it to be true, then the fakes become obvious. The problem is, few know what the book says, even even fewer think it is without error. Huge problem.
Agreed. That's what I was trying to point out with the statistical numbers above. There are vast numbers of people, some even proclaiming to be Christians, that believe claims coming out of Brown's novel are accurate. The numbers I found were staggering. There are many people out there ignorant, willingly or otherwise, of what the Bible really says.
When people accept Brown's story, then to them the argument becomes a case of one book versus another book, and part of Brown's novel teaches that the early church modified and fabricated the Bible.
Further, if a person takes Brown's book as accurate, then they are looking at a false Christ - one who was not God-become-man, one who was not slain in our stead, one who was not raised from the dead to live and rule for eternity, therefore one who is not capable of cleansing and forgiving us of our sins. (Even if Tom Hanks' "wish" that this movie would fill church pews, who would worship someone like that "Jesus"? That "Jesus" is more of a new-agey person at best. It strikes me that Hanks has no understanding of real Christianity.)
Even people deceived by Brown will realize that a group of people simply getting together and stating something doesn't make it fact or truth. If the "history" they take from Brown says Jesus was just a mortal man and His body was just stolen, what kind of truth could there possibly be in a council of men gathering together later to simply agree, "Ok, let's say Jesus was really divine"?
This is why I think we need to be aware of what Brown is pushing, and be armed with weapons to counter the lies. There are some fights that scripture isn't going to convince people. Sometimes it is a scientific, historical, or mathematical evidence that will do it. Then the eyes can open to the truth of the Word.
Post a Comment