Is The Da Vinci Code Cracked - Or Just the People Who Believe It
By Michael Bresciani (04/04/06)
In Australia it is reported that people have purchased tickets for the
soon to be released movie “The Da Vinci Code” directed by Ron Howard as
much as eight weeks in advance of the films release. And we thought Star
Wars freaks were chomping at the bit. What about this film is it real,
does it have the right stuff?
Research for this article was easy because of all the hype about Dan
Brown’s new movie about the Da Vinci code. The question is simple. How can
an educated public anywhere in the world take this novel or the movie it
spawned seriously? I have found a few answers and some of them come from
the bible itself which the Da Vinci code obviously does not take very
seriously. There are those who would insist that if it looks like a duck
and sounds like a duck it still may not be a duck but even this crowd
could hardly deny that it at least sounds quacky.
The bible says that in the last days that people will not endure or allow
sound teaching or admonition from the bible or just about any other
source, 2 Timothy 4:3. It says people would rather scour the earth looking
for teachers who will scratch their itching exactly the way they want to
be scratched. Of course Dan Brown has repeatedly said that after all it is
only a novel and is not meant to be a history or an immutable heretofore
un-acknowledged truth. Against that claim I can remember the night I
watched two of TV’s most prominent movie reviewers discuss all that we the
public have learned from various movies over the past forty years. Let’s
get real. Whether Dan Brown insists that his novel was meant to be
didactic or not, it will teach the weak minded and those hungry for any
new thing that’s hot off the secular media buffet.
Who would dare argue with three hundred million copies sold? Who has not
noticed the great foul perched and proud sitting atop the New York Times
bestseller list? I for one believe that all this acclaim still wouldn’t
be reason enough for some people not to actually look at and compare
Brown’s imaginative roll through an Alice in Wonderland style theology
and come to the obvious conclusion that trash by any other name is after
all… trash.
Opening scenes of The Da Vinci Code are weird and bloody as the curator of
the world famous Louvre in Paris is killed by obsessed Opus Dei monk named
Silas. It seems Silas is carrying on in the Monty Python tradition of
finding the elusive “Holy Grail” But now the grail has changed from being
merely the cup from which Christ and his apostles drank from at the last
supper to something far more human. The grail is now the truth kept secret
for centuries that the blood of Christ is kept in a bloodline created by
his marriage to Mary Magdalene and their offspring. Modern secularism it
seems will stop at nothing to remove deity from Jesus Christ including
passing it on to Mary Magdalene. For those in the western society who have
been drifting beyond just standing in awe of the feminine mystique it
seems but a small step to move up to the deification of a women. We
should not be surprised if new churches start springing up where Magdalene
is the new and highest deity.
The movie conveys itself with a full range of characters psychotic,
obsessed, possessed, mislead and misinformed but eventually winds up back
in the Louvre where nothing at all is positively resolved. New York Times
reviewers have said that Brown’s research was above question. Yet his
historical errors are lavishly sprinkled throughout the movie with such
profusion that if they were salt that serving of meat would be wholly
inedible. One example is the inference that upwards of five million women
were burned as witches during the inquisition. When does exaggeration pass
the line from benign error to the malevolent? Brown s research and implied
conclusions are at least as good as those used to find the answers to who
actually killed Brer Rabbit but not much more.
More blatant are the errors that seem borne out of a lapse in common
sense. Leonardo Da Vinci painted the Last Supper fifteen hundred years
after Christ walked the earth and gave his life to ransom the sinful.
Neither Da Vinci nor anyone else seemed to think that the effeminate
person to the right of Jesus in the Last Supper was anyone other than the
Apostle John. Yes, he is depicted in a somewhat feminine manner which is
typical of all renaissance art and especially that of Leonardo Da Vinci.
Brown interprets Da Vinci for us and ascribes to him some exclusive secret
knowledge about who the person on the right really is. It is alleged that
Da Vinci was homosexual. Let’s reason here, would a homosexual man really
paint a woman into the picture or an effeminate man? As if insulting the
Apostle John weren’t enough Brown goes on to insult Mary Magdalene but why
stop there. While he’s at it why not throw in a grand slam against the
Savior of the world. Where did Da Vinci and or Brown get this secret
knowledge about Christ? In simple language they didn’t get it anywhere. It
comes rather from the fertile minds of the modern secularists who will
stop at nothing to insult, defame and un-deify the most dignified human
being to ever set foot on this old ball we call the planet earth.
Da Vinci often referred to himself as “omo sanza lettere” or “man without
a formal education.” Now the worshippers of science have raised the
status of their revered high priest of empiricism close to that of apostle
of science with notions of a secret knowledge that could only be derived
from something slightly above genius. Sounds pretty much like revelation
to me but no, this novel and this movie are no revelation.
The best description of this movie I have heard to date is that it is
“Harry Potter for adults.” But I think it should be taken step further to
warn those less versed and perhaps a bit weaker in heart. Brown begins his
Novel with statements about the truth regarding the actual existence of
the documents purported to have come from the Opus Dei and other sources.
No need to argue here. The documents may exist but does the truth exist in
the documents? Mein Kamph truly exists but not much useful truth exists in
it.
Almost all the documentation Brown uses for his novel was derived from
first century documents and other material not allowed into New Testament
Canon. What does that mean? It means he derived the bulk of his material
from writings that were labeled as false and spurious in origin. Plain
language…not from God. Reviewers say the movie is fast paced and
intelligent. I conclude that it needs to move fast so no one will notice
the recurring inaccuracies and bumbling historical mistakes that are
anything but intelligent.
The movie may provide fodder for the cannons of freshmen academia to
incite waves of controversy but beyond that it has no upward levels. I
doubt this juvenile presentation of magic and mystery could shake the
faith of even a college freshman but it should also be said that those who
produce both this book and the movie should be warned.
I will place myself on no platform to judge either the author or the movie
producers but rather will leave only a clear warning of the scripture for
them to peruse and ponder while we all wait for the final judge who will
come and judge us all by the words he has spoken, “He that rejecteth me,
and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I
have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. John 12:48 And what
words did this judge say concerning making light of his holiness, making
fun of his deity, disregarding the purpose of his shed blood as an
innocent man. I’ll quote them here and I’ll meet you there where we will
all be gathered soon.
He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me
scattereth abroad. Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and
blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy
Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word
against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh
against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this
world, neither in the world to come. Either make the tree good, and his
fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the
tree is known by his fruit. O generation of vipers, how can ye, being
evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth
speaketh. A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth
good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil
things. But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak,
they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words
thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned. Matthew
12:30-37
(Printer friendly version) Email: Michael Bresciani
