Last week, I was at a library that had a couple of shelves of books that they were giving away free. Among them, I spied a paperback copy of "The DaVinci Code" by Dan Brown. This book took the Western world by storm when it was first published in 2003. Many Christians who were not grounded in their faith were shaken, and staunch unbelievers felt vindicated. Many Christians wrote books refuting "The DaVinci Code".
Even PBS (Public Broadcasting Station) got into the act, lauding and honoring this book as if it were a great archeological find, instead of a FICTION NOVEL. PBS showed film of very old Catholic Churches in Paris with bas-relief carvings of women, two of whom were reported to be Mary Magdalene and her daughter by Jesus Christ, Sarah. (I DID wonder from where such a legend sprung.) According to PBS, these carvings were proof that Jesus was, indeed, married to Mary Magdeline and had a daughter by her.
I heard my neighbors talking about this book, and saying how realistic it seemed. And, although I did not read the book until this very week, I did watch the PBS documentaries about it, and marvelled, as usual, at how they always "lick their lips" when they find something that seems to refute historic Christianity.
When I found "The DaVinci Code" in the free give-away stack at the library, however, I picked it up and put it in my bag, thinking, "It's about time I read this and found out what the big to-do is all about."
The first thing that anybody who reads "The DaVinci Code" should notice are the words, "A Novel" on the title page. This is a work of fiction. It says so right on the title page. Why PBS should pay it much attention is beyond me. I also wondered why so many Christian authors would bother writing books refuting "The DaVinci Code" when it is simply a fiction novel, but I found the book to be so blasphemous, that I decided to write a review myself.
The next thing I noticed about the book was that it is an adventure story, along the lines of "Raiders of the Lost Ark". When a movie was made about this book, the producers should have cast Harrison Ford as Robert Langdon. Why they didn't, is also beyond me.
After that, I noticed was that there are many accusations made against the Roman Catholic Church. The author seemed to assume that all Christians everywhere regard the Roman Catholic Church as "the one, true Church". This is not true. Many of us who call ourselves Christians are Protestants, or Evangelicals, or Fundamentalists. We believe that the Bible is the final authority as to Christian faith and practice, not the Roman Catholic Church.
Many of the things said against the Roman Catholic Church in this novel may be true. It is not my aim to defend the Roman Catholic Church. For instance, the self-flagellization (whipping yourself) mentioned several times in "The DaVinci Code" has been practiced by Roman Catholic clergy, monks and nuns over the centuries. This practice is un-Biblical, and I will not defend it.
In fact, the book of Colossians 2:23 specifically warns against this voluntary form of abasement (with you in control): "Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh." (King James Version). Another translation renders this passage, "Such regulations indeed have an appearance of wisdom, with their false humility and their harsh treatment of the body, but they lack any value in restraining sensual indulgence." (New International Version, italics mine.) Self-flagellization is not going to help anybody to overcome temptation or sin.
We, as saved, born-again, Bible-believing Christians know that we are cleansed by the Blood of Christ, not by our own blood. (Romans 3:23-25 -- "For all have sinned, and come shot of the glory of God; Being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in HIS BLOOD, to declare His righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God." And also, Romans 5:8-9 -- But God commendeth His love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more than, being now justified by HIS BLOOD, we shall be saved from wrath through Him.") Sola Hema -- Nothing but the Blood! Only Christ's death can attone for sin.
The author of "The DaVinci Code", Dan Brown, seems to allege in this book that pagan goddess worship is normal and natural, and that Jesus Himself approved of it and practiced it. How can this be, when the Old Testament, the Hebrew Scriptures, are filled with condemnation of pagan Ashtoreth (goddess) worship? If He had ever worshipped a goddess, He would have been a sinner, according to the Bible. The Bible tells us that Jesus Christ, perfect God and perfect man, was WITHOUT SIN (II Corinthians 5:21 -- "For He that made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him.")
In the book, the Apostle Peter is portrayed as a liar and a conspirator, covering up the "fact" that Jesus wanted His "wife", Mary Magdalene, to be the head of the Church. Peter suppossedly did this so that he could be the head of the Church and wield power. In the Word of God, Peter is portrayed as a man of God.
The book mocks Christians for meeting on Sunday for worship, claiming that Sunday was the pagan day of worship. This may be true, but it is irrelevant. The Bible clearly shows that, "...upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them..." (Acts 20:7). The first day of the week is when the first century Christians met to worship.
This book is filled with errors about the Bible, about Jesus Christ, and about the historic Christian Church. I had to refute errors in doctrine and practice perpetrated by the Catholic Church as well as errors by Dan Brown.
According to "The DaVinci Code", Jesus Christ was a good man who inspired millions to live better lives. According to the words of Jesus Himself, "For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, AND TO GIVE HIS LIFE A RANSOM FOR MANY." (Mark 10:45). Jesus did not die by accident. HE CAME TO DIE. He said, "Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it up again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my father." (John 10:17-18).
Dan Brown sees cryptic messages in Leonardo DaVinci's paintings of The Last Supper and The Mona Lisa. These cryptic messages may, indeed, exist in these paintings, for, according to Dan Brown, Leonardo DaVinci was a God-hater. However, one obvious truth should stand out: Leonardo DaVinci's paintings were strictly that -- PAINTINGS. NOT PHOTOGRAPHS. When you read, "The DaVinci Code", you come to the conclusion that these paintings were actual photographs.
Leonardo DaVinci did not take PHOTOGRAPHS. He painted PAINTINGS, about 1,400 years AFTER CHRIST!!! Come on!
This book would be pathetic in its assertations and allegations, if it were not for the fact that readers forget that it is FICTION.
Then, there is the allegation that Mary Magdeline was Jesus' wife. According to "The DaVinci Code", it would have been impossible for Jesus to have been single, because singleness was condemned according to Jewish custom. However, in Genesis 25:20, we are told that Abraham's son, Isaac, did not marry until the age of 40 ("And Isaac was forty years old when he took Rebekah to wife..."). Jesus was 33 years of age when He died. The fact that He was still single at that age is no big deal.
Jesus left no off-spring. Isaiah 53:8 says, "He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare His generation? for He was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was He stricken." This is a prophesy about the Messiah. So, the idea that Jesus had a child by Mary Magdeline is un-Biblical and preposterous.
Dan Brown says that the Roman Catholic Church calls Mary Magdeline a prostitute. The Bible never says that she was. It simply says that Mary Magdeline was a woman, "...out of whom He had cast seven devils." (Mark 16:9b) Many staunch unbelievers, however, are titillated by the false idea that Jesus had relations with a prostitute. Such an idea gives people an excuse to live any way they want to.
Dan Brown also constantly quotes "The Gnostic Gospels", which were never accepted by the First Century Church. Also, the idea of "The Holy Grail" or chalice from which Jesus drank during the Last Supper, is a legend. We are told by the Apostle Paul, in I Timothy 4:7, "But refuse profane and old wives' fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness."
This book mocks everything that calls itself orthodox Christianity, refuting Jesus' deity and resurrection. But, I Corinthians 15:16-17 says, "For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins." But there are always people who are looking for any excuse to disbelieve God and His Word.
Dan Brown did not do his Biblical research very well. He kept referring to Eve's eating of "the apple". The book of Genesis refers to "fruit", not an apple: And, "Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the FRUIT of the trees of the garden: But of the FRUIT of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the FRUIT thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat." (Genesis 3:1-6).
Of course, Dan Brown makes allusions to sexuality out of these verses, as he does out of the "Star of David" symbol, and as he does out of Christian Church architecture. But, of course, sex sells. By the way, Dan Brown also alleges that sex is seen as evil in the Bible and by the Christian Church through the ages. This is not true. Normal sexual relations between a man and a woman, who are husband and a wife, are shown in the Bible to be good, not evil.
Overall, I was disappointed in the book. It is not Biblically accurate. It portrays the Roman Catholic Church, which does not take most of its doctrines from the Bible, as the organization recognized by all Christians at all times everywhere as "the one true Church." This is not true.
I can defend the Roman Catholic Church in one area, however. Dan Brown's book, "The DaVinci Code" accuses the Roman Catholic Church of being "sexist", because it covers up the "fact" that Jesus Christ wanted a woman, Mary Magdeline, to be the head of the Church.
How, I ask you, can an organization that venerates the Virgin Mary, the Mother of Jesus, practically to the point of worship, (declaring her to be the "co-Redemptrix" of mankind, alongside her Son, Jesus Christ), be sexist?
Although the Roman Catholic Church claims to merely "venerate" the Virgin Mary and to be devoted to her, pragmatically, they worship a female deity. So, why is Dan Brown saying that the Roman Catholic Church is sexist? It is not.
Every Roman Catholic Church that I have EVER seen (and I was raised a Roman Catholic, and went to Catholic School with the nuns for seven years) has had a HUGE statue of a WOMAN (the Virgin Mary) in front of it!!! Come on!
In closing, "The DaVinci Code" by Dan Brown was not as "gripping" as I expected. I had been told, "you can't put it down!" In fact, I found it to be tedious in many places. If you are grounded in your faith, this book won't shake you. I am glad that I did not pay any money for this book. I would not want the author to get rich on my money with such a blasphemous work of fiction.
And here is the perfect addendum to my review -- one of those "co-incidences", if you will. I was at a yard-sale, browsing through a tool-shed filled with old books, when I came upon a small volume titled, "France, Crossroads of Europe", by Anne Merriman Peck and Edmond Meres, published in 1936 by Harper and Brothers.
On page 20 of this little book, "The Christian faith probably drifted into Gaul (France) from Italy in a very natural manner, but according to the charming legend of Les Saintes Maries de la Mer (the Holy Marys of the Sea), still firmly believed by the religious people of Provence, it was brought by a boatload of saints. Soon after Christ left His disciples, so it is said, the saintly Marys (which two women named Mary, we don't know, words in these parenthesis and the italics are mine) set sail in a small boat with their Egyptian servant Sarah, who became the saint of gypsy people, and several other holy ones. They went forth to bring Christianity to the heathen world, and they came ashore on the sandy coast of Provincia Nostra, not far from marseille. From there they set out to preach Christianity to Gaul. The huge basilica church of Les Saintes Maries de la Mer stands on the shore where they are supposed to have landed. The walls are covered with ex-votos, which are thank-offerings brought by people who have been cured of illness or saved from disaster. Some of them are small ship models, others crude paintings picturing the trouble from which they were saved, others arms, legs, and so forth, representing the member cured by the help of the saints. Every year there is a great pilgrimage to the spot, to honor the images of the saints and receive healing from them. Gypsies come from many countries at this time to honor their saint, the dark-skinned Sarah.
PBS and Dan Brown are playing on our ignorance of art, history, geography, and the Bible.
So, there is the REAL story of the carvings on the Parisian churches. For some reason, PBS, which my husband calls "Propaganda Broadcasting Station", wants people to disbelieve in Jesus Christ and the Bible.
Whether or not you decide to read "The DaVinci Code" by Dan Brown is up to you. This is not the first book that has ever been written to try to shake people's faith in the God of the Bible, nor will it be the last. All the more reason, in our day and age, to "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." (II Timothy 2:15)
I must point out, too, that many of the Roman Catholic practices that Dan Brown riducules were practices of that denomination many years ago, and are not practiced by modern Catholics. The modern Catholic church has made many changes for the good.
I was raised a Roman Catholic, and although I am no longer Catholic, prefering a denomination that is more Bible-based, I owe the Roman Catholic Church a great deal for giving me my faith in God as a child.
Lifetime
Chatboard (28)