--- Update on the whole "The DaVinci Code Is Full O' Fallacies" thing.
In case you're new here (and a goodly number of you seem to
be---welcome), the husband's sister lives on the other side of town.
They're pretty conservative and are very into their church---Missouri
Synod Lutherans. We visited them for Easter, and whenever we have a
family gathering and their parents can't join us, the siblings call the
folks to say howdy. During the course of the sister-in-law's
conversation, she asked her father if "he'd watched those DaVinci Code
CD-Rom's?" There were little kids flying around the room, all hopped up
on chocolate bunny ears, so I wasn't really following the conversation,
but it sounded to me as if she was trying to convince her dad to watch
them, but he wasn't having it. When she handed the phone over to the
husband, I asked her what was the deal with "The DaVinci Code?" She
reported that her pastor---a history buff---had
been concerned with all of the "historical fallacies" in the book, and
had sponsored a series of lectures about how inaccurate the book was,
to, you know, make sure all of his church members didn't take the book
for the truth. Long story short---the father in law had read the book,
had raved about it and the sister in law wanted to make sure he knew
what the "real" truth was regarding that book.
Despite the fact the book is a work of fiction.
Despite the fact she's never actually read "The DaVinci Code." And I
mean that. She's never read it and when the husband dumps it on her
this week and demands that she does read it, she'll probably give it
back a few months down the road, saying she never found the time.
Anyway, fast forward to last Friday, the husband and I are eating
supper, watching Anderson Cooper as usual and suddenly there are two
authors on, plugging their book, "Cracking DaVinci's Code."
We were a little surprised to see it was an actual movement, but I
suppose we shouldn't have been. I'll lay you good odds that these
"lectures" came from the same group of people behind this book---and
the pastor was only following a carefully prepared and plotted lesson
plan, sold by these people. How did I get to this conclusion? It's the
word "fallacy." It should have tipped me off. After all, who uses the
word "fallacies" these days in common conversation. But the authors do.
As did the sister in law---and she was very careful to use that
particular word. Most people use "errors" or "mistakes." The sister in
law went to secretarial college, and she reads self-help books, not
fiction or the collected works of Noam Chomsky---it's definitely not a
part of her regular vocabulary. The picture becomes clearer the more I
think about it. Hmmm.
Read for yourself.
COOPER (voice-over): It begins with a murder in the Louvre. The
first clue comes in the form of Leonardo's best known drawing "The
Vitruvian Man." But as the mystery unravels, the reader is led to other
mysteries in other masterpieces, wheels within wheels, the secrets
revealed in "The Last Supper" and the "Mona Lisa" opened the doors to
the Catholic Church's secret societies, some real, some maybe not so
real.
It's no secret that the book is incredibly popular. It spent 56 weeks
on the best-seller list much of that time at No. 1, and it's no
surprise that some of the questions raised by "The Da Vinci Code" are
causing controversy among Christians.
What was Jesus' real relationship with Mary Magdalene? Was there such a
thing as the Holy Grail? The author says the book is a work of fiction,
so why then are some biblical scholars working so hard to crack the
code?
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COOPER: Well, joining us now are two of those scholars, James Garlow
and Peter Jones, two Christian researchers who say "The Da Vinci Code"
undermines the integrity of the Christian faith. They have just come
out with their own book in response called "Cracking Da Vinci's Code,"
appreciate you being on the program.
JAMES GARLOW, CO-AUTHOR, "CRACKING DA VINCI'S CODE": I like to be with
you.
COOPER: They say this is a novel. This is a work of fiction yet you say
the Da Vinci code book has a hidden agenda. What in your opinion is the
hidden agenda?
GARLOW: For one thing people are taking it seriously. It is a novel
admittedly and if people were only treating it as a novel we wouldn't
be writing books about it either but the fact is people are taking it
seriously and it is redefining the understanding of who God is.
COOPER: But you think the author, Dan Brown, has this hidden
anti-Christian agenda basically.
PETER JONES, CO-AUTHOR, "CRACKING DA VINCI'S CODE": He does say
apparently in public that he was convinced by a new spirituality and
that he felt called to make it known throughout the culture.
COOPER: Dan Brown though says that he is a Christian and that he, you
know, it may not be your view of Christianity but he considers himself
a Christian and that this book is really prompting theological
discussions and therefore is a good thing.
JONES: You know we are in the presence of sort of a watershed in the
culture as to what life means and essentially the question is who is
God? And you have two definitions of God going and I think people are
wondering which one is the right one and I think Dan Brown...
COOPER: When you say there are two definitions, explains.
JONES: Two definitions of God, one is that God is the transcendent
creator and redeemer, has his own existence.
COOPER: Is separate from the rest?
JONES: But separate from creation. The other is a more pantheistic view
of God where you find God within. And, though this is fiction, the
novel has this agenda within it and communicates that view of God and
there are Christians buying that view of God and so we felt like we
needed to, you know, right the ship.
COOPER: But I mean some will say you're being intolerant. I mean can no
novel be written which deviates from your interpretation of
Christianity?
GARLOW: He can write anything he wants. He has the right to do that.
The issue is one of historical accuracy or historical fallacies.
He makes such claims that Jesus was not considered divine until the
year 325 in (unintelligible).
The evidence is quite to the contrary. The original followers all saw
him as divine and all the early writers of the first and second century
saw him as divine.
COOPER: And it's things like, I mean one of I guess the characters in
"Da Vinci Code," which I have not read, talks about Jesus marrying Mary
Magdalene having children. That sort of thing is one of the things
that...
JONES: That's not so bothersome actually. Marriage is a good thing.
It's just that it's doubtful and all scholars will say that, that Jesus
was ever married.
COOPER: So what do you hope to do with your book? I mean what is the
objective?
GARLOW: Well, one of the things I hope to do is get people to reexamine
the issues that Dan Brown raises, which is a good thing, and that is,
is their New Testament reliable, yes or no?
COOPER: So, in that sense you agree almost with Dan Brown that bringing
up these theological issues is a good thing?
GARLOW: Well, I'm glad they brought up, unfortunately I think he has
written a document that's historically unreliable because he raises the
question is the New Testament reliable and was Jesus considered divine,
for example prior to the year 325 or did Constantine manipulate this
into existence as he contends?
Now the fact is he's in error historically on both those issues but the
good thing is a lot of people are going to look at that issue and try
to get answers for it and that's encouraging. COOPER: Well, I know the
book is doing really well. I look forward to reading it this weekend.
Jim Garlow thanks very much and Peter Jones as well. Thank you very
much.
JONES: You're very welcome.
GARLOW: It's an honor to be with you.
COOPER: All right.
So, these guys take issue with the areas Brown played with and
apparently that he had the temerity to bring up a different version of
God outside of creator/redeemer---one where God resides in all of us
and they felt the need to "right the ship." Apparently, you can't have
people believing that God resides within themselves because then they
might actually think they're God and henceforth aren't accountable to
anyone---let alone a church. It's straight-up, hard core,
fundamentalist Christianity. Skip to Saturday afternoon, the husband is
chatting with his father and they're talking about how whacko this
business is. A few years ago, if you looked up the word "agnostic" in
the dictionary, the husband's picture would have been part of the
definition. He was one of those "I need proof" guys. Fine with me. He
thinks all of this is completely ridiculous. But he wants to see those
CD-Roms, so the mother in law brought them with her and is going to
pass them off to us sometime this week. Apparently, the father in law
never got round to watching them...until Saturday afternoon, after he'd
hung up. When he popped a disc into the Cd-Rom---Norton Anti Virus came
up onto the screen, helpfully informing him that something was trying
to access his system. He shut the CD down and called the husband back.
The husband was positively livid when he heard this---he was working
out all the possible implications in his head as he ranted: "IF...IF...
that's just wrong!
If they're trying to insert spyware onto people's hard drives with this
crap, man is {insert sister in law's name here} gonna get it! If that's
what they're trying to do...oh, man! So on and so forth.
So, later on in the week, providing the handover goes smoothly and the
sister in law doesn't think we're trying to persecute her religious
beliefs, we should have some interesting commentary on what's actually
in those Cd-Rom's and if they're putting spyware onto people's
computers.