Introduction: In preparation for the spiritual tsunami that is coming on May 19th with the release of the movie, The DaVinci Code, we began last week, to look at the first of three claims that form the basis for the ideas found in Dan Brown’s book. The message focused on the trustworthiness of the Bible vs. other ancient writings, specifically "The Gnostic Gospels." I trust that I was able to present the information in a way that was not too confusing for you. I am very aware that ’a mist in the pulpit is a fog in the pew.’ This calls to mind an excerpt from an article about a power outage in a large city that brought some confusion to the readership. The reporter wrote, "During the power failure many people complained about having gotten stuck for hours on the escalators." (Don’t worry, it took a little bit for my kids to get it too, but when they did they laughed...uncontrollably).
Just to jog your memory, we discovered that Brown’s ideas, taken from "The Gnostic Gospels," were heavily influenced by Greek philosophy especially that of Plato. We looked at three reasons why they should not be accepted as true historical accounts of 1st century events involving the life of Christ. (1) They were not considered Christian writings at all by the church fathers. This is important because one of the claims of the DaVinci Code is that until 325AD Jesus was viewed by His followers as a mortal prophet (DaVinci Code, p. 233). This means that when we check the historical record, we should find no one contesting the ideas contained in the Gnostic Gospels until three centuries after Christ. This simply isn’t the case. When we take a closer look we discover that the early church fathers often wrote lengthy essays, and even books, to refute these claims. (2) They were not authored by the Apostles or their contemporaries. The names attached to these writings were borrowed to give their content greater credibility. (3) They were written nearly 200 years after Jesus. The source for much of their information was a secret divine knowledge that was available to only the spiritually elite and that could not be contested by anyone else. In contrast, the Gospels were authored either by apostles, who themselves were eyewitnesses of the life of Christ (See 2 Peter 1:16) or close associates who received their testimony firsthand (See Luke 1:1-2). Further they enjoyed widespread acceptance by Christian churches more than 150 years before the Council of Nicea, when the supposed cover-up actually took place.
As I mentioned earlier, there are three subjects that we’re going to address in this series. Next week, on Easter morning, we’ll take on the last one, which obviously has great implications to us, especially as we prepare to celebrate the resurrection: "Was Jesus God the Son dwelling in human flesh or was He nothing more than a man who, according to Dan Brown, ’walked the earth and inspired millions to better lives?’"
Today I’d like us to consider another claim found in the DaVinci Code. One charge of the DaVinci Code is that the Bible was compiled and edited by men at the Council of Nicea who possessed a political agenda given to them by the Emperor Constantine--to promote the divinity of the man Jesus Christ and use His influence to solidify their own power base (DaVinci Code, p.234). Jesus, according to Brown’s research was nothing more than a man who engaged in all the activities that any other Jewish man would from that era. Granted, He was from the royal line of David, but he was a man, nothing more and nothing less. What does this mean for the author? Here’s an excerpt that summarizes his theory from page 249: "Behold (Sir Leigh Teabing speaking), the greatest cover-up in human history. Not only was Christ married, but He was a father. My dear, Mary Magdalene was the Holy Vessel (i.e. The Holy Grail). She was the chalice that bore the royal bloodline of Jesus Christ." In case you missed it, Brown argues that Jesus was married to Mary of Magdela and fathered children by her, who we are told later, became part of the royal Merovingian ancestry (See DaVinci Code, p. 257) in France that still survives to this day.
Now before we dismiss his comments completely, we have to acknowledge that there is a smidgen of truth in his claim. We as Christians also believe in the humanity of Christ. It is clearly taught in the Scripture (See John 1:1, 14; 1 John 4:2) and is one of the assertions of the Nicene Creed: (Jesus) came down from heaven, and was incarnate (in flesh) by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary, and was made man." Certainly the Jews do as well. They recognized His humanity when they shouted on the first Palm Sunday, "Hosanna (A Hebrew expression meaning "Save," it later became an expression of praise) to the Son of David! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord! Hosanna in the highest!" The Messiah had come and Israel was looking for her deliverance. The Jews had always believed that God would provide a Messiah to deliver them from the rule and oppression of their enemies (See Psalm 2:1-9), but they only ever saw him as fully human. How do we know this is what they were thinking? The following verses are the giveaway. We’re told, "When Jesus entered Jerusalem the whole city was stirred and asked, "Who is this?" The crowds answered, "This is Jesus the prophet from Nazareth in Galilee." A prophet, in the eyes of Israel, was a holy man, yes, but still a man whose task was to speak for God to His people. This means that everyone, Dan Brown, Christians and Jews, seem to agree on the humanity of Christ!
The questions before us this morning are several as they relate to this subject: (1) What does it mean to say that Jesus was fully human? (2) Who was Mary Magdalene and was her marriage to Jesus clearly evidenced in the historical record as Dan Brown claims? (3) Was Jesus the first feminist and did He intend Mary to lead the church? Let’s spend a few minutes together and try to answer these questions.
I. What does it mean to say that Jesus was fully human?
A. For Dan Brown this means that Jesus was exactly the same as any other human being. Specifically he addresses the topic of marriage (p 245 - "Jesus as a married man makes infinitely more sense than our standard biblical view of Jesus as a bachelor." "Why?" "Because Jesus was a Jew and the social decorum during that time forbid a Jewish man to be unmarried.") The author also implies that though he was good man and an inspirational leader who influenced many, like all of us, Jesus was a sinner.
B. For believers the doctrine of Christ’s humanity means the following:
1. Jesus had a fully human body. He was born as all babies are born (See Luke 2:7); He grew from childhood to adulthood (See Luke 2:40); He became tired, thirsty and hungry (See John 4:6; John 19:28; Matthew 4:2) just like we do.
2. Jesus had a fully human mind. He increased in wisdom (See Luke 2:52); He learned obedience (See Hebrews 5:8); In His human mind, there were some things He didn’t know (See Mark 13:32). Note: Don’t get too hung up on this, because Jesus was also fully God and in His divine nature He could have known the time of His return if He had found it necessary.
3. Jesus had a fully human soul (spirit) and emotions. He was sorrowful in his soul (See Matthew 26:38) and spirit (See John 13:21); He wept (See John 11:35) and marveled at the faith of a centurion (See Matthew 8:10); He even experienced joy (See Luke 10:21). Application: Jesus was in every way a human being just as we are, except that He did not sin (See 2 Corinthians 5:21). This is very significant for us for many reasons. Due to time constraints permit me to share but two: (1) As a human being, He was able to act as our representative before God and obey for us where Adam had failed (See Romans 5:18-19). (2) As a human being He was able to die as a substitute for our sin (See Hebrews 2:16-17). Jesus had to become a man, not an angel, because God was concerned with saving men, not with saving angels. Application: You might be asking yourself why The DaVinci Code is so popular today. I suspect there are at least two reasons: (1) Everybody loves a mystery and what we have here is one of the best. Clues are slowly introduced that even the best of minds will have to labor over to come to the conclusion the author has ordained all along. (2) Nothing gets our blood boiling like a controversy. Dan Brown’s conclusions are meant to incite an emotional response and that is precisely what we find happens as readers take a side on the issues. If you think for a moment, you find the same elements in the triumphal entry of Christ into Jerusalem. The Messiah has come to deliver His people while riding on a donkey. He is only a mere carpenter from a humble family in Nazareth. He has no army at his side, just common people. Yet as we read on and put the pieces together, they lead us to a conclusion that is as controversial as it is amazing. The Messiah is none other than the Son of God in human flesh who will offer Himself in payment for our sin! Hosana to the Son of David!
II. Who was Mary Magdalene and was her marriage to Jesus clearly evidenced in the historical record as Dan Brown claims? Let me deal with the second issue first. May I say plainly: There is no record in the New Testament or from any of the church fathers that Jesus was ever married. In fact, in the words of Erwin Lutzer, "It is unthinkable that Jesus, the God-Man, could be joined to a sinner in the most intimate physical human bond. If he had married, presumably it would have been to someone as holy as He---which severely limited His options (See Lutzer, The DaVinci Deception, p. 75)." Besides, the Bible tells us that He is betrothed to another (See Revelation 19:7-9). NOW LET US TALK ABOUT MARY MAGDALENE. Called this because she was from the town of Magdala on the western shores of Galilee, Mary is mentioned 12 times in the four gospels. All, but one of these, are associated with the suffering, death, burial and resurrection of Christ. The other is found in Luke 8:2 and informs us that she was among several women who traveled with Jesus after He had cast seven demons out of her. She must have been a woman of some means as she helped to provide financial support for the group. Beyond this, the Bible says nothing about Mary Magdalene. Any additional information on her, according to Brown, comes from two other sources.
A. The Gnostic Gospels.
1. The Gospel of Phillip says: "The companion is Mary of Magdala. Jesus loved her more than His students. He kissed her often on her face, more than all of her students, and they said, "Why do you love her more than us?" As we mentioned earlier, there is no reason to accept these "gospels" as historical accounts of the life of Christ. Moreover, you should know that the document quoted here is in poor condition and is missing some words. The text actually reads, "And the companion of the (...) Mary Magdalene (...) her more than (...) the disciples (...) kiss her (...) on her (...)." It is the job of scholars to fill in the other words. As Daryl Bock says, "Talk about a mystery to solve!" Further (DaVinci Code, p. 246), we’re told that the word "companion," as any Aramaic scholar would know, means "spouse." This seems to lend some credence to his conclusion, until we realize that The Gnostic Gospels came to us in the Coptic language, and were most likely written in Greek, not Aramaic. The word for "companion" from the Coptic language is a Greek loan word (transliterated directly into Greek) that is used 10 times in the New Testament and never in the context of a sexual or marital bond (See Matthew 23:30)."
2. DaVinci’s famous painting, The Lord’s Supper. Brown points to several clues carefully placed by the artist that reveal the true identity of the person to the left of Christ. (1) The feminine features of the person (DaVinci, p. 243); (2) The symbolic V between Christ and this person (which resembles the shape of a woman’s womb and communicates femininity and fertility (DaVinci p. 238)). (3) The absence of a cup or chalice (which is the ancient symbol for womanhood) for this person. This is meant to lead us to conclude that she did not need one, for she herself, was the Holy Grail. LET’S TAKE THEM ONE AT A TIME. (1) Bruce Boucher of the Chicago Art Institute does not agree with Brown’s interpretation that the person to the left of Christ is Mary, not John the Apostle. He says, "Leonardo’s composition points, in fact, in another direction for it confirms the traditional Florentine (Leonardo grew up in Vinci, a town about 20 miles west of Florence) depictions of the Last Supper, stressing the betrayal and sacrifice rather than the institution of the Eucharist and chalice." (2) The V between John and Christ is merely in keeping with the biblical account. You remember that once Jesus had shocked them with the news that one of their own would betray Him, the disciples began to question among themselves which of them it might be who would do this (See Luke 22:21-23). This is exactly what we find John doing in the picture. (3) The missing chalice is explained in that it would not have been their custom to have used chalices. Rather they would have been much more likely to have used ordinary pottery cups for such a meal, exactly what we find in the painting on the table in front of Christ and the disciples.
III. Was Jesus the first feminist and did He intend Mary to lead the church? It is true that when it came to women, Jesus elevated their status giving them a place of respect and honor. He talked with an immoral woman at Jacob’s well, a cultural no-no (See John 4:7-27) and he permitted other woman into His inner circle (See Luke 10:38-42). There is, however, no indication in the Scriptures that our Lord ever commissioned Mary of Magdala to lead the church. Some have suggested this because she is called the "Apostle of Apostles." This phrase does not imply that she was the leader of the disciples, but that she was sent by our Lord to tell them that He had risen from the dead (See John 20:17-18). The word "apostle" means "one sent forth" and so Mary was sent by Christ to inform those still hiding in the upper room. In the Gospel of Mary (from the Gnostic Gospels) she is described as having a special revelation given to her by Christ. Peter asks, "Did He really speak to a woman secretly, without our knowledge and not openly? Are we to turn and all listen to her? Did He prefer her to us?" Mary began to weep and assured Peter that she did not make this up herself. At this point Levi steps into the conversation, "Peter, you are always angry. Now I see you contending against this woman as if against an adversary. If the Savior made her worthy, who are you to reject her? Surely the Savior knows her very well. That is why He loved her more than us." How are we to respond to this? As we have noted time and again, The Gnostic Gospels had a clear agenda. They wanted to elevate the secret revelations they received to an even greater status than the teachings of the church. This is nothing more than another attempt to do just that.
Conclusion: The DaVinci Code phenomenon is more than just an attempt to make a lot of money, though certainly it is that. If you watch closely you will find that behind it is our adversary, the devil. He is looking to devour those who would believe these lies so that they might miss out on the life that could be theirs’ in Christ (See 1 Peter 5:8). THE PORTIA SPIDER IS A MASTER PREDATOR whose chief weapon (just like Satan’s) is deception. It will crawl onto the web of another spider and tap the silken threads in a manner that mimics the vibrations of a mosquito caught in the web. When the host spider marches up for dinner, it is surprised to find that it is the main course. The Portia Spider can actually tailor its deception for its prey. When it encounters a type of spider that lives inside of a rolled-up leaf, it will dance on the surface imitating a mating ritual. Says Robert Jackson of National Geographic, "Portia can find a signal for just about any spider by trial and error. It makes different signals until the victim spider finally responds appropriately." He goes on to say that the amazing thing about the spider is that once it learns how to attract a certain kind of prey it will use the same bait every time thereafter. I ASSURE YOU THE DEVIL IS EVERY BIT AS SMART AS A PORTIA SPIDER. His current strategy is as old as the gospel itself, yet it continues to be effective. Give people a different truth that fits their biases and desires and they’ll take the bait every time.
