Showing posts with label The Da Vinci Code. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The Da Vinci Code. Show all posts

Friday, December 18, 2009

The real story of how we got the New Testament

Ben Witherington, author of The Living Word of God, has a section in which he explains how the New Testament books were formed into the canon (books accepted as authoritative). It's important to know this story because many people today have mistaken ideas of how this all happened. Thanks to books like The Da Vinci Code, many readers assume a powerful church set up a council and picked which books they considered legitimate. However, it was not a matter of politics or powerful men sitting down in the fourth century A.D. to decide these issues. No one ruled out other books that had been previously considered legitimate. The truth is quite different.

The New Testament canon came about due to a process that actually started in the New Testament era. Take a look at 2 Peter 3: 16, where Peter describes Paul's writings as part of true scripture. The formation of the accepted New Testament writings was already happening in the primitive Christian community.

Some, including the author of The Da Vinci Code, will argue that Gnostic texts competed with traditional writings for inclusion in the canon. But Witherington says nobody argued for the inclusion of any of the Gnostic texts. They were seen as heresy in their own day as well as long afterward. As he notes, "Not even the earliest of the Gnostic texts, the Gospel of Thomas, was ever on a canon list or seriously considered for inclusion as a sacred text for Christians."

Most of the New Testament became accepted as sacred with no debate surrounding the various works. The ones accepted immediately were Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul's letters (except Hebrews, an anonymous letter).

Which works were debated? Hebrew was because it was anonymous. James and Jude were because they seemed so Jewish. Revelation was because of its prophecy.

What were the standards used to decide if a book belonged in the canon? Again, let Witherington describe this: "It needed to be an early witness, a first-century witness, one that went back directly or indirectly to the original eyewitnesses, apostles, and their co-workers or an early prophet like John of Patmos." So accepted books needed a combination of historical and theological factors to become part of the canon. Early church fathers said accepted books needed to have some sort of connection to an apostle and should involve orthodox teaching.

There was no single church gathering that created the current list of twenty-seven books in the New Testament. The process of sifting and choosing which books should belong in the Christian scriptures was going on throughout the second through the fourth centuries. A man named Marcion came to Rome around 144 A.D. He told the church there he had a list of acceptable books for a canon, but his list was extremely short. It included only Luke's gospel and a few of Paul's letters. The church rejected Marcion, claiming that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John should all be considered scripture.

By the end of the second century there was a list which looks a lot like what we have today. Only James, Hebrews, 1 and 2 Peter, and 3 John are missing. What's interesting is that eventually all geographical areas where Christianity was popular (the Eastern empire, Africa, the Western empire) independently concluded that these twenty-seven books should be recognized as the Christian scriptures. That's remarkable when you think about it: "The various parts of the church, without political or ecclesiastical coercion, and under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, all came to the same conclusion about the twenty-seven books of the New Testament.”

What can we say to wrap this up? Here's the key fact -- it was not a matter of the church conducting a big meeting, drawing up a list of books to form the canon, and imposing this list on its members. Instead, the church simply recognized the list of books that had been forming since the time of Peter and Paul. Over the centuries Christians had found these books valuable for worship and instruction. As one person says in Witherington’s book, "The canon thus represents the collective experience of the Christian community during its formative centuries." So there was no conspiracy, no imposition of books, no hiding or destroying competing gospels, no huddled gathering of old men.

Monday, July 13, 2009

The Gospel of Judas--a new understanding of Jesus??

Every once in a while, we get brash headlines, declaring the finding of a "new" gospel, one that throws out our traditional understanding of Jesus as seen in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Not too long ago, it was the Gospel of Judas. Here's Chuck Colson's take on the uproar over this document. By the way, I highly recommend anything by Colson, one of the clearest, most challenging Christian writers today.

Just last weekend I was in an airport bookstore and saw the new book counter filled with numerous editions of The Da Vinci Code. Then I picked up the New York Times, and there I was greeted with the headline on the front page that read, “In Ancient Document, Judas, Minus the Betrayal.”
You probably have seen the hype, including a one-hour National Geographic TV spectacular: After seventeen hundred years, the story goes, the long-lost text of the so-called “Gospel of Judas” has re-surfaced. It claims that Jesus secretly told Judas to betray Him; so Judas is really a good disciple.

Well, it’s not a new discovery. This “new gospel” and the heresy it espouses—Gnosticism—were rejected as fiction by Christian leaders and the Church as early as 180 A.D.

Gnosticism was an attempt to add to Christianity an essentially Eastern worldview dressed up with Christian language. It was presented to the Roman world as the true Gospel—complete with endless mysteries that only those with secret knowledge could unravel. Many unsuspecting people were enthralled with Gnostic writings, particularly their sometimes gory and salacious initiation ceremonies. Christian pastors and theologians repeatedly rejected all forms of Gnosticism, until, by the middle of the third century, it had all but disappeared.

But now it is back with a vengeance, with supposed discoveries and works like Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code. It provides the means for Christianity’s detractors to debunk the historical Jesus, and it certainly sells books. Seven million copies of The Da Vinci Code is testimony to that. Gnosticism has particular appeal today because of the postmodern age, which has rejected historical truth. So you can find God any way you wish, through your own group. This, of course, is the belief that is at the root of the spreading New Age movement.

The danger is that we have a biblically illiterate population. People today don’t know—maybe don’t care—whether there is a difference between the Gospel of Judas and the Gospel of John. They are unfamiliar with the work of the ancient canonical councils of the Church (which rejected the Gnostic “gospels” time and again) or even of the basic creeds or confessions of the Christian Church. Sadly, people are as gullible today as ever.

Now it is tempting to get angry at National Geographic and the liberal press for unleashing this fraudulent “gospel” at the beginning of the holiest week of the year. But don’t. Instead, let’s use the media attention to debunk the debunkers, to point out to friends that this regurgitated Gnosticism—the Da Vinci Code and the “gospel” of Judas included—is nothing more than historically unsupportable fantasy.

Then we can point them to the knowledge that is accessible to all people that has been accessible to Christians for two thousand years and proven historically accurate. It’s called the Bible.

But whatever you do, get informed first. Come to our website (see further reading below) or call us here at “BreakPoint” (1-877-322-5527) and find some of the resources that we are offering. And get busy because millions can be suckered in—unless you and I set the record straight.

For Further Reading and Information

Please help support the Christian worldview ministries of BreakPoint and the Wilberforce Forum. Donate online today! Or call 1-877-322-5527.

Ted Olsen, “Weblog: Kisses for Judas,” Christianity Today, 11 April 2006.

John Noble Wilford and Laurie Goodstein, “In Ancient Document, Judas, Minus the Betrayal,” New York Times, 7 April 2006.

Larry Hurtado, “The Gospel of Judas,” Slate, 10 April 2006.

James Martin, “No Revelations in Gospel of Judas,” Boston Globe, 11 April 2006.

BreakPoint Commentary No. 020329, “An Unholy Hoax?: The Authenticity of Christ.” (Free registration required.)

BreakPoint Commentary No. 040527, “False Advertising: Da Vinci Doesn’t Even Get Heresy Right.” (Free registration required.)

BreakPoint Commentary No. 060308, “The Da Vinci Hoax: A Tour de Distortion.”

Visit the “Da Vinci Challenge” website.

Also see the “Da Vinci Deception” website.

Cal Thomas, “The Gospel of Unbelief,” Townhall.com, 11 April 2006.

John Leo, “A Dud of a Gospel,” U. S. News and World Report, 10 April 2006.

Ben Witherington III, The Gospel Code: Novel Claims about Jesus, Mary Magdalene and Da Vinci (InterVarsity, 2004).

Luke Timothy Johnson, The Creed: What Christians Believe and Why It Matters (Doubleday, 2003).

Thursday, July 9, 2009

How do we explain the success of crazy ideas like those in The Da Vinci Code?

I get so frustrated at rational people who end up seriously considering the goofy claims of people like Dan Brown, author of The Da Vinci Code. I'm starting a book by a noted scholar, Ben Witherington (What Have They Done With Jesus?). In the early pages he deals with this same issue--why are we so easily taken in by radical claims about Jesus and the New Testament? I'm including his response here. After I've read more of this book, I hope to use later blogs to explore some of his points about this ongoing distortion of Jesus and the early church.

What is there about American culture that makes normally rational people extremely gullible about sensational claims about Jesus? For one thing, our society is biblically illiterate and, therefore, swallows almost any wild theory about Jesus. In addition, Americans today are burned out and skeptical of anyone offering traditional answers; they would rather listen to new theories even if there's no evidence behind them. Furthermore, our commercial-based society says that if something is new it must be better. One other reason has to do with fundamentalists on television where they preen and make foolish pronouncements, causing scholars to go crazy and to react by presenting a Christianity which is completely different. A fifth reason deals with scholars who want to win praise from fellow scholars by appearing to be mavericks; a good way for them to do this is to discount or discredit much of the traditional view of Jesus or the New Testament. One final reason deals with presuppositions that many modern scholars, including historians, use to shape their views of Jesus. For example, some of these people assume that miracles cannot happen and therefore do not happen. They have not proved this; they merely assert this to be true.

Sunday, April 26, 2009

Oh, no . . . he's back!!!

I saw on Drudge Report that Dan Brown is coming out with another book. His The Da Vinci Code was a monster hit that shook some Christians by claiming the gospels were not giving us the real picture of Jesus. I got curious then and read up on Brown's claims. The key point is that Brown got almost everything wrong in the book, not just Christianity. So here's a brief overview of his errors. If you'd like more details, let me know so I can email you additional info.


If The Da Vinci Code Comes Up . . .

Some say we shouldn’t take it so seriously (“it’s just a novel”)
But he claims it’s true


Brown got history wrong . . .
Constantine did not create a new religion out of Christianity
The Council of Nicea was not called to manufacture a belief in Jesus’ divinity
The Knights Templar were not guardians of the Holy Grail
The Priory of Sion is a recent invention


He got Christianity wrong . . .
Jesus was always considered divine
It predates mystery religions


He got ancient writings wrong . . .
The Dead Sea Scrolls contained no gospels or any reference to Jesus
Other “gospels” not included in our Bible were written much later; they contained fanciful stories of a non-human Jesus


He got Christian writings wrong . . .
The four gospels are actually the oldest and best sources for knowing about the life of Jesus
The New Testament canon was established long before Constantine


He got people wrong . . .
Mary Magdalen was not married to Jesus


He got his art and architecture wrong . . .
Art scholars disagree with most of his statements
The great Gothic cathedrals were not a result of the Priory of Sion or the Knights Templar