The da Vinci Code

[Gold Dragon]

Originally posted by Erin:
Oh...and just to tell y'all....the Prieuré de Sion does NOT exist. It's a hoax. Sorry folks, unlike the books first few pages say it is accurate.

The Priori of Scion did exist but was created in the 1950s with a fabricated secret society "history" that goes back to the Order of Sion created in the first century and included famous grandmasters like DaVinci and Newton. It is believed the "society" ended in 1993 when its founder Pierre Plantard, under oath to French judge Thierry Jean-Pierre, stated that it was a fabrication.

Originally posted by Erin:
Now, from my searching the Opus Dei does. *shrugs*

I didfind this and liked how opusdei.org put it...: "The Da Vinci Code is a work of fiction, and it is not a reliable source of information on these matters." Referring to claims made in the book I presume. I would also like to add this:

"The Da Vinci Code makes it appear that Opus Dei members practice bloody mortifications. In fact, though history indicates that some Catholic saints have done so, Opus Dei members do not do this."

While Opus Dei members do not require or even encourage members to practice corporal (bodily, not bloody) mortification, this is something that does happen in rare cases in Opus Dei and the Catholic church at large because of devout followers trying to identify with the suffering of Christ's passion, which is more emphasized in Catholicism than other branches of Christianity (ie Passion of the Christ).

[ May 02, 2006, 02:15 PM: Message edited by: Gold Dragon ]

 

[Erin]

Originally posted by Gold Dragon:
The Priori of Scion did exist but was created in the 1950s with a fabricated secret society "history" that goes back to the Order of Sion created in the first century and included famous grandmasters like DaVinci and Newton. It is believed the "society" ended in 1993 when its founder Pierre Plantard, under oath to French judge Thierry Jean-Pierre, stated that it was a fabrication.

From Widepedia: "The Prieuré de Sion, usually rendered in English translation as Priory of Sion or Priory of Zion, has, since the 1970s, been an elusive protagonist in many works of non-fiction and fiction. It has been characterized as anything from the most influential secret society in Western history to a modern Rosicrucian-esque ludibrium, but has ultimately been considered a hoax. Most of the evidence presented in support of claims pertaining to its historical existence, let alone significance, has not been considered authentic or persuasive by established historians, academics and universities. There was a very small medieval monastic order known as the Priory of Sion, but it and all its assets were absorbed by the Jesuits in 1617."

[ May 02, 2006, 02:34 PM: Message edited by: Erin ]

 

[Erin]

This book is pretty good. It had alot of twists and turns and surprises. However, I guessed part of the ending. And the rest of the ending was anti-climatic. But anti-christian? Nah. That's just silly sayings of someone who isn't secure with their beliefs. For what it's worth, The Da Vinci Code was a good read nonetheless. I highly recommend it.

 

[Karen]

Erin,
I have to disagree with you.
Yes, the book is written in an entertaining style.

But it is anti-Christian.
Among other things, it presents the deity of Christ, a key doctrine, as something the church did not believe in till the Council of Nicaea.
And then only because of politics.

Denying that Jesus is God as well as man is anti-Christian. We do well as Christians to guard how we speak about and represent our Lord. Dan Brown has the legal right to write what he wants. And he wrote something entertaining enough to sell 40 million copies and turn into a movie.

But I don't see that I can say it is just a "fun, fast read" quoting C4K, when the book denies who Jesus is and presents a view of Him that is completely false. Not only false, but exceedingly irreverent.

It has nothing to do with how secure I am. And everything to do with not trivializing it when someone speaks falsely and irreverently of the Lord and of His Church. According to polls, millions of people in the U.S. and Canada believe this book.

Karen

 

[Karen]

Originally posted by C4K:
I must really be missing the boat here. I did not see this at all as a serious attempt at revisionist history. The "history" in it is so far-fetched that surely no one could take it seriously. It was so historically off base that no thinking person gives it any credence.

How is this any more "dangerous" than Indiana Jones?

I love the comment that anyone who enjoys this must have a limited library

.

I think you are missing the boat here.
Part of the issue is how real people actually take it. Millions of people regard this book as truth.

I am surprised that you are not troubled by this book's portrayal of the Lord.
I am no fan of Indiana Jones, but I think this book's irreverent (blasphemous) portrayal of our Lord is a direct attack on Christianity and is far, far, worse.
Are you not troubled by how the book portrays who Jesus is as just a political hoax?
It denies every major point about who Jesus is.

I don't see how you compare that to Indiana Jones.
What if Arius had written a novel? Would you just tell Athanasius to not worry, no one will take it seriously, and it's just a good read?

Karen

 

[Marcia]

Originally posted by Erin:
This book is pretty good. It had alot of twists and turns and surprises. However, I guessed part of the ending. And the rest of the ending was anti-climatic. But anti-christian? Nah. That's just silly sayings of someone who isn't secure with their beliefs. For what it's worth, The Da Vinci Code was a good read nonetheless. I highly recommend it.

Not anti-Christian? I don't see how you can say this. The book attacks Christ by saying that his deity was decided on by a bunch of men (not that he was really God), that a man decided what the Bible should be and the church hid the "real" gospels (the Gnostic one), and that the Divine Feminine is what we should really worship, among other things.

The book is an attack on Christ, God, God's word, and the church (even though it mainly picks on the Catholic church). It is about as anti-Christian as you can get. The fact that this is wrapped up in a thriller makes it all the more alluring and powerful.

The book resurrects ancient attacks on God and on Christ, and I believe, has Satan behind it.

The fact that the story is fiction means nothing - Brown asserts that all the art, architecture, documents, and secret rituals are accurate ! The worldview behind the book does indeed exist and is part of ancient and modern attacks on the truth.

 

[Erin]

Interesting. I found http://SoDumbTheConOfDan.com I beleive it was. That was cool.

I would also like to add I studied Gnostic Christianity. Which seemingly the story of this book is based on the beliefs of the Gnostics.

However, it seems to me be has little knowledge and then "wings it" the rest of the way to explain "details" of things. It's almost...laughable.

And might I add the gnostic christianity is a heresy anyway.

 

[thjplgvp]

I have not read the book or seen the movie but I do know that the natural man recieveth not the things of God for they are foolishness to him. And Jesus said in John 5:43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.

The world will claim anything as truth if it will justify their deeds and thoughts in their own mind.

 

[Charles Meadows]

Marcia is right in assailing this book as dangerous.

"PostChristianism" is society's current pseudointellectaul fad. There are scores of people out there who have resigned themselves to the fact that everything can be explained rationally, and by extension any religious beliefs of the supernatural have their roots in myth and not reality.

This book, while full of falsehood, may well be seen by many as an example of just that - an explanation of how Christianity, just like all the other religions, can be explained away.

For those who are secure in their faith it may be nothing more than a good novel. But given the postChristian ethos of today's society this book poses extraordinary danger to those who are still searching.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

Even though Dan Brown was cleared of plagiarism by a court in the U.K., the ideas in TDVC are not unique. Indeed, the same ideas are found in "Holy Blood, Holy Grail".

As I have not yet read either of them, I can't intelligently comment on it, as what I know is only anecdotal. I have heard from several friends that TDVC is a very engrossing and entertaining book.

 

[Erin]

Originally posted by Magnetic Poles:
Even though Dan Brown was cleared of plagiarism by a court in the U.K., the ideas in TDVC are not unique. Indeed, the same ideas are found in "Holy Blood, Holy Grail".

He even goes far to mentioning the books he probabyl gleemed from IN TDVC. Including Holy Blood, Holy Grail.

 

[Don]

Man, I can't believe a book that a judge in a court of law declared was a work of fiction, and that the author didn't claim otherwise in the same court of law, is generating so much controversy!

Of course, I can't believe that Ray Nagin got re-elected as mayor of New Orleans, either!!!

Now, here's something for all of us to consider: A lot of the same people who are coming up and asking if this book is true, are the same ones who think the "Left Behind" books are how it's going to really happen.

 

[Phillip]

True

What gets me is that I believe that Christians themselves have helped in the advertising and marketing plan of this book by being so vocal about it.

If we had ignored it, there would have been much less controversy to get people's attention.

I think we should be more careful next time a book of this fashion comes out. What can we expect from a non-christian writer anyway? A book that is pro-Christianity?

Just because this book strikes right at the heart of Christianity itself by questioning the diety of Jesus, it is no different than other books that contain sinful or even Satanic themes.

A lot less talk and Dan Brown wouldn't have sold 40 million copies. Besides, the movie is being rated as poorly produced and the acting by such a big star is also poor. These ratings by secular movie critics.

One thing---Dan Brown had best enjoy his money--its not going with him.

 

[Phillip]

He even goes far to mentioning the books he probabyl gleemed from IN TDVC. Including Holy Blood, Holy Grail.

By law, copyright infringement would require almost copying large portions of a person's work verbatim. Dan simply took the ideas presented by Holy Blood, and write a fiction story around it.

By the way, as a side note (which is not really an issue here)---titles cannot be copyrighted. Although, they can be trade-marked--such as the "for dummies" series.

 

[bluecollarsurfer]

The Passion of the Code ...

I published this first on my blog but thought it might contribute something to the discussion here ...

Blessings,

Ken


THE PASSION OF THE CODE

An acquaintance of mine, Stephen Mansfield, once observed it is not necessarily a good thing that Christianity is legal. Because it is, Christians often abdicate their personal responsibility to respond to the Master’s call. Instead, we rely on government, among other things, to accomplish the Gospel’s goals.

Stephen used abortion as an example. We lobby for Constitutional amendments and laws or attend a pro-life rally. But where is the sacrifice and cost? We work the system and shrug off lack of success claiming we did our best. Contrast this with Christians in pagan Rome. Their faith was illegal, but personal and intense, as each person had to count the cost before choosing Christ. Identification as a Christian might cost a person his life! The Romans killed unwanted children by putting them in sacks and tossing them off bridges into rivers. Horrified Christians had no legal or political options. So, moved by the Master, they waited in boats under the bridges, pulled the children from the river and took them home to raise them as their own.

Such activity likely did not just manifest itself in the Body of Christ. I believe it required submission, training and discipline. It required leadership. Leadership that sought God as to how to engage the culture. Leadership that led from the front in implementing strategies given by Holy Spirit. Leadership that passed on that knowledge to the Body of Christ at large expecting it to be adopted and acted on.

Few recent events have provoked larger, more passionate responses in the Body of Christ than the 2004 film "The Passion of the Christ" and this year’s film "The DaVinci Code". The response of some in the church to the second film exposes a blind spot in leadership that must be addressed.

A call for a boycott of "The DaVinci Code" reveals more about those calling for it than it does about the author or filmmakers, none of whom claim to be Christians. What are the boycotters afraid of? Why do they think we should not see the film? For the record, I saw it and found it to be well written and well acted. I found the film’s premise to be as blasphemous as it has always been. But it was well done.

The disagreement thus cannot be with the quality of the film. It is with the content. Put another way, the boycotters are afraid of an idea. This is light years removed from the situations early Christians faced and how their leaders helped them through those times. The faith that stared down the 1st century’s superpower and eventually replaced it has little in common with the fear that exists in parts of the church today.

When Christ stood before Pilate in John 18 He spoke of Truth. Pilate, a Roman leader, asked "What is truth?" In John 14, the Master had already answered that question for His disciples. He said, "I am ... the Truth ... " Truth is defined as more than a concept, it is a Person! That Person stood before Pilate speaking Truth but the leader would not be taught. Moments later Pilate announces he finds Jesus innocent. But the crowd threatens him and Pilate did not stand on the strength of his convictions or the accuracy of his revelation. Rather, he took counsel of his fears and gave the crowd the crucifixion they demanded instead of the Truth they needed. He preserved himself and poorly served those he was tasked to lead.

Those leaders calling for boycotts are admirable. They are trying to safeguard those looking to them for guidance. And I am not insisting that every Christian must see the movie. However, you don’t get Light by turning off the Darkness. You dispel Darkness by turning on the Light. Just so, you don’t defend against a Lie by avoiding it but by confronting it, knowing why it is wrong while possessing the Truth! Rather than call for boycotts, perhaps we could expose the film’s errors and train the sheep how to encounter it. Because Truth, when shared openly, will always correct the Lie it confronts. It is the nature of Truth to do so.

The entire world is talking about our Jesus! While some of what they are saying is wrong, fixing that is simple. Just turn on the Truth! The nature and character of Christ are being talked about around office water coolers, dinner tables and as pillow talk. Will those following us have something effectual and fervent to contribute to the discussion? It will depend on us.

Some of my most successful evangelism was in 2004 when I asked a couple of simple questions designed to open up a dialogue. "Have you seen ‘The Passion of the Christ’?" Followed up, depending on the response, with either, "Really? Why not?" or, "Really? What did you think?". The ensuing discussions were filled with seed planting, watering and harvesting! The same opportunity exists around "The DaVinci Code". But have we taught, trained and led well enough to permit our sheep to enter that dialogue with believers and unbelievers alike?

Many leaders saw this coming and equipped their people to do exactly this. But others have failed to discharge their leadership responsibilities well. Were this an isolated incident, it might make little or no difference. But it is not. More testing will come in the years ahead. Will we use this opportunity to learn, both leader and led alike? We must since there are other issues where this same lesson must be applied. What does the Gospel say about Israel’s future role? What does the Gospel say about marriage and family? What of the clash between Islam and the West? Are we teaching? Are we leading? If we, and our people, cannot stand up to an idea that does not personally threaten us, how can we or they be expected to stand up to people, movements or governments that surely will?

Ultimately, that’s what it comes down to - are we leading? Will we stand wrapped in Truth and Light the world around us and teach and lead? Or will we, like Pilate, bow to fear, self-preservation and expedience? It is not just our own well-being that is at stake. The people are looking to us. How will we lead?

Teacher, open our eyes to those areas where we mean well but where our human efforts fall short of accomplishing Your purposes! Lead us onward that we might learn how to lead from You! Fill us with wisdom that we might not simply tickle the ears of our sheep but provide them with spiritual food even if they find it unpalatable. Help us to be true to You first and then we will not be false to any man!

You are free to quote or reproduce any part or all of this post provided you note that you are quoting www.mondaymorningmeditations.blogspot.com and provide a link back to the specific post you are quoting.