| The DaVinci Code? |
Apparently, another Indiana Jones movie is in the works. It is scheduled for release in 2007. It seems that old directors, producers, and actors are revisiting the beginnings of their careers. Perhaps not solely for the financial success that sequels promise. It seems like a ‘let’s go back to what we did best.’ It’s a nice sentiment regardless of whether the final product will be worth seeing or not.
I did enjoy the original Indiana Jones movies for their action, humour and comic book like depiction of the characters. And even though the Indiana Jones franchise touched on religious themes it was always apparent that it was all pure fiction. Those of us to whom religious themes mean something knew that there was no such thing as a “Holy Grail”, and that the arc of the covenant had nothing to do with magic.
Maybe that’s what I don’t like about the DaVinci Code. I don’t mind fiction and I don’t mind serious historical and theological questions but when fiction, facts, and theories are woven together it becomes difficult to discern the truth.
We live in a time when nothing is immune to scepticism and when for lack of exposure a large part of the population knows little if anything about the Christian faith. I am not sure what effect book or movie will have on those who do not consider themselves Christian, but perhaps those not always sure of their faith and their tradition may find scepticism presenting itself as an alternative to faith, not as a means for finding answers.
I have been told that the book itself is a page turner because it thrives on conspiracy theories. It offers nothing that hasn’t been said before but makes for a thrilling read.
Since the main ‘claim’ of the book seems the denial of Jesus’ divinity we may remind ourselves that the Christian truth lies in the paradox, precisely in things beyond our understanding and that anyone trying to package or repackage Jesus and Christianity in a way that fits into our systems of thought too well may not have understood this. Anyone who denies Cross and Resurrection, humanity and divinity, powerlessness and glory proclaims a different story.
Bart Ehrman is the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor and Chair of the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina. Since he describes himself as an agnostic we will not suspect him of pushing the agenda of the church. In the preface to his book Truth and Fiction in the Da Vinci Code: A Historian Reveals What We Really Know about Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and Constantine he lists Ten Factual Errors in The Da Vinci Code:
1. Jesus’ life was decidedly not “recorded by thousands of followers across the land.” He didn’t even have thousands of followers, let alone literate ones. 2. It’s not true that eighty Gospels “were considered for the New Testament.” This makes it sound like there was a contest, entered by mail. . . . 3. It’s absolutely not true that Jesus was not considered divine until the Council of Nicea, that before that he was considered merely as “a mortal prophet.” The vast majority of Christians by the early fourth century acknowledged him as divine. (Some thought he was so divine he wasn’t even human!) 4. Constantine did not commission a “new Bible” that omitted references to Jesus’ human traits. For one thing, he didn’t commission a new Bible at all. For another thing, the books that did get included are chock-full of references to his human traits (he gets hungry, tired, angry; he gets upset; he bleeds, he dies . . .). 5. The Dead Sea Scrolls were not “found in the 1950s.” It was 1947. And the Nag Hammadi documents do not tell the Grail story at all, nor do they emphasize Jesus’ human traits. Quite the contrary. 6. “Jewish decorum” in no way forbade “a Jewish man to be unmarried.” In fact, most of the community behind the Dead Sea Scrolls were male unmarried celibates. 7. The Dead Sea Scrolls were not among “the earliest Christian records.” They are Jewish, with nothing Christian in them. 8. We have no idea about the lineage of Mary Magdalene; nothing connects her with the “house of Benjamin.” And even if she were, this wouldn’t make her a descendent of David. 9. Mary Magdalene was pregnant at the crucifixion? That's a good one. 10. The Q document is not a surviving source being hid by the Vatican, nor is it a book allegedly written by Jesus himself. It’s a hypothetical document that scholars have posited as having been available to Matthew and Luke, principally a collection of the sayings of Jesus. Roman Catholic scholars think the same of it as non-Catholics; there’s nothing secretive about it.
If our education hour gets the go-ahead, perhaps there will be time to discuss these issues and others at more detail. In the mean time, remember that the DaVinci code is found in the fiction section of your local book store.
Yours, Pastor Christoph
|
| Posted by Christoph Reiners on Wednesday, July 20, 2005 at 09:46
|
|
|