A BIBLICAL RESPONSE TO
THE DA VINCI CODE
Rev. Bryan Guinness, Associate Pastor, Peoples Church of Montreal
2097 Union Ave, Mtl, QC H3A 2C3, Tel: (514) 845-9834, Fax: (514) 845-1652
Email: peopleschurch@bellnet.ca
www.peopleschurchofmontreal.org
© May 2006
The first pages of Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code acknowledge that the story is fiction, but that the facts within it (dates, documents, historical figures, etc.) are true. This has led to a great confusion for many readers about how to distinguish between fact and fiction. Also, because Dan Brown quotes historical sources, the novel gives the illusion of being factual even in those matters where it can be shown to be fraudulent. The purpose of this paper is to clarify what is fact and what is fiction.
Plot of The Da Vinci Code
The Da Vinci Code opens with the curator of the Louvre lying dead in the museum. Meanwhile, Robert Langdon, a Harvard professor and expert in esoteric symbolism, who happens to be in Paris, is tracked down by the French police and asked to interpret a strange cipher left on the body of the murder victim. Langdon is joined in his investigation by a young cryptologist named Sophie Neveu. When Sophie warns Langdon that he is the prime suspect in the murder, they both flee from the scene of the murder. It turns out that the murder victim has intentionally left clues for them to follow. The crime is linked to the legendary search for the Holy Grail. The fugitive pair link up with a Holy Grail fanatic Sir Leigh Teabing. Teabing enthusiastically instructs them on matters surrounding an alternate understanding of Jesus and the New Testament. He cites Gnostic Gospels, ancient documents that supposedly give a more reliable account of Christ’s life and teachings that the New Testament. The trio flee to London and then Scotland, staying one step ahead of the police. They slowly uncover hidden codes and manuscripts that the Church has hidden from the public. The secret information concerns the notion that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and that they had a daughter. Legend has it that Mary and the daughter went to Gaul after the crucifixion where they established the Merovingian line of French royalty. This dynasty, we are told, continues even today and this information and their whereabouts is guarded by the organization known as the Priory of Sion. Members of this secret organization down through the centuries have supposedly included Leonardo da Vinci, Isaac Newton, and Victor Hugo. Furthermore, the Holy Grail is none other than the progeny from Jesus’ marriage to Mary Magdalene. Leonardo knew all this, we are told, and used his well known painting The Last Supper to conceal many levels of meaning.
Outline of Response
Dan Brown’s agenda is not hidden: This book is a direct attack against Jesus Christ, the church, and those of us who are his followers and call him Savior and Lord. The implication of the book is that Christianity is based on a big lie, or rather, several big lies. According to Brown, Jesus was not God, but his followers attributed divinity to him to consolidate male rule and suppress those who worshipped the divine feminine. According to Brown, at the Council of Nicaea, Constantine invented the idea of the deity of Christ. What makes The Da Vinci Code so troubling is that it purports to be based on facts. In the flyleaf we are told, “All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in the novel are accurate.” On his web site Dan Brown makes other statements about the historical reliability of the work. The purpose of this paper is to clarify what is fact and what is fiction. This is done under 5 headings:
1] Constantine and the Council of Nicaea
2] Gnosticism and the Gnostic Gospels
3] Jesus, Mary Magdalene, & the Search for the Holy Grail
4] The Bible: How it was formed
5] The Reliability of the Bible
1] Constantine and the Council of Nicaea
Q] Did Emperor Constantine reinvent Christianity for his own purpose?
Q] Did the Council of Nicaea invent or create the modern New Testament?
3 claims in The Da Vinci Code regarding Constantine and the Council of Nicaea
1. Constantine invented the deity of Christ in order to consolidate his power
In The Da Vinci Code Sir Leigh Teabing explains to Sophie that at the council the delegates agreed on the divinity of Jesus. Then he adds, “Up to that moment in history, Jesus was viewed by his followers as a mortal prophet…a great and powerful man, but a man nonetheless. A mortal.” So Constantine “upgraded Jesus’ status almost three centuries after Jesus’ death” for political reasons.
2. Constantine rejected other gospels from the New Testament (that were favorable to the divine feminine) because they did not suit his political agenda.
To quote Teabing again, “More than eighty gospels were considered for the New Testament, and yet only a relative few were chosen for inclusion – Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John among them…The Bible as we know it today, was collated by the pagan Roman emperor Constantine the Great.” In other words, according to The Da Vinci Code Constantine recognized a good opportunity when he saw it and called the council to ensure male power and accept those documents as canonical which were favorable to his political agenda.
3. The doctrine of Christ’s deity passed by a “relatively close vote”.
Some Facts about Constantine and the Council of Nicaea:
The Conversion of Constantine: A.D. 312
Church historians agree that next to the events of the New Testament, the most important event in the history of Christianity was the conversion of Constantine to Christianity in A.D. 312. The story in brief: Constantine’s troops were positioned at the Milvian Bridge just outside Rome where they were preparing to overthrow the Roman emporer Maxentius – a victory which would make Constantine the sole ruler of the Roman empire. The night before this famous battle, while he was praying to a pagan god he had a vision in which “he saw with his own eyes the trophy of a cross in the light of the heavens, above the sun and an inscription, Conquer by This attached to it…Then in his sleep the Christ of God appeared to him with a sign which he had seen in the heavens, and commanded him to make a likeness of this sign which he had seen in the heavens, and to use it as a safeguard in all engagements with his enemies.” The next day he crossed over the bridge and won the battle, fighting under the banner of the Christian cross. Later he issued the Edict of Milan, decreeing that Christians were no longer to be persecuted.
The Council of Nicaea: A.D. 325
Early in the fourth century doctrinal disputes were dividing the Roman empire. A man named Arius was gaining a wide following by teaching that Christ was not fully God but a created god of sorts. Although declared a heretic by many church bishops, the disputes nonetheless continued. Constantine called the council at Nicaea because he wanted to suppress the dissent and unify Christianity. He paid the travel expenses of the invited bishops and he in his opening speech he told the delegates that doctrinal disunity was worse than a war. More than 300 bishops met at Nicaea.
Q] What were the main issues debated at the Council of Nicaea? They were two-fold:
1) The deity of Christ.
Arius was declared a heretic, and the divinity of Jesus Christ was affirmed. To say that Christ was created is to deny the clear teaching of Scripture:
• Colossians 1:19 – “For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.”
• John 1:1-2 – “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.”
• Romans 9:5 – “Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised!”
2) How Jesus relates to the Father: Is he similar or the same?
The theologian Athanasius was the main spokesperson for the view that Jesus is the very same nature (Greek word: ‘homoousion’) as the Father. The council agreed and now we have the famous Nicene Creed. There was no question that the delegates therefore affirmed that Christ was God in the fullest sense.
Refuting the three claims regarding Constantine and the Council of Nicaea
1. In response to the claim that Constantine invented the deity of Christ, it has to be said that there is not a single shred of historical evidence for this notion. As mentioned, not only was Christ’s deity the consensus of the delegates, but this doctrine was held by the church centuries before the council met. Two things confirm this:
A. The Church Fathers
• Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in Syria writing in A.D. 110, referred to Christ as God
• Polycarp of Smyrna, a disciple of John the Apostle, writing in A.D. 112-118 affirmed the divinity of Jesus
• Justin Martyr, martyred in A.D. 165, also affirmed the deity of Christ.
• Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons in A.D. 177, taught that Jesus was fully God and fully man.
• Tertullian (A.D. 150-212) also advocated a fully divine and fully human Christ
This shows that the doctrine of the divinity of Christ was a doctrine of the church long before the Council of Nicaea.
B. The Witness of Christian Martyrs. Christians knew that if Christ was God, then they could not worship him and others – namely the Emperor. All good citizens were required to say at a ceremony that “Caesar is Lord”. Christians were faced with a tough choice: They either comply as citizens or face persecution. Interestingly, the pagans saw no conflict between emperor worship and the worship of their own gods. After all, if your own god is not a supreme deity, then you have little choice but to make room for other gods and celebrate diversity. However, for Christians, Jesus is and was the supreme deity and thus to acknowledge any other god was not possible. The thousands of early Christian martyrs who refused to confess that “Caesar was Lord” is evidence that Christians believed in the deity of Jesus long before the council of Nicaea.
The Da Vinci Code claim that Constantine “upgraded Jesus’ status” from man to God is pure fiction.
2. In response to the claim that Constantine and his delegates decided to eliminate books from the New Testament that were unfavorable to their theology of male rule and sexual repression, it has to be said that this is nothing but pure fiction. Practically everything we know of the Council of Nicaea comes from the historian Eusebius. Neither he nor anyone else gives a hint that such matters were discussed at Nicaea. Twenty rulings were issued at Nicaea, and the contents of all of them are still in existence today; not one of them refers to issues regarding which books were authoritative and which books should be included in the canon of Scripture.
3. In response to the claim that the doctrine of the deity of Christ passed by a relatively close vote at
the Council of Nicaea, it has to be said that this is also untrue. Only 5 out of the 318 bishops present
protested the Creed. In the end, in fact, only two refused to sign it. The outcome was not “relatively
close”.
2] Gnosticism and the Gnostic Gospels
Q] What is Gnosticism?
Q] How credible are the Gnostic gospels?
There is another so-called Bible for sale in your local bookstore – one that contains books like the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Philip, the Gospel of Mary, and the Gospel of Truth. Say “hello” to the Gnostic Bible. The word Gnostic comes from the greek word gnosis, which means knowledge. More precisely, the word is used to refer to hidden knowledge that is available to only the enlightened. Gnosticism says our real need is not for forgiveness but for self-enlightenment. The Gnostics taught that Jesus can help us, but he is not necessary to salvation. Gnostics either denied the historicity of the New Testament Gospels or considered them unimportant.
Problems with the Gnostic Gospels
1. Questionable Authorship
The Gnostic Gospels that bear the names of the early Apostles were not written by those Apostles. The dates of the documents and the locations in which they were written demonstrate they were simply attributed to apostles to give them credibility. The Apostle Paul was aware of such writings even being circulated in his days:
• 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2 – “Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers, not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the day of the Lord has already come.”
In the first century, heretics were already writing letters signed with Paul’s name. Such deception is certainly not consistent with the inspired Word of God.
2. The Late Dates of the Books
These Gnostic writings are not eyewitness accounts of the events of the New Testament. The Gospel of Philip was “written in the third century and possibly in Syria”. The Gospel of Mary is said to have been composed in the second century. Contrast this with the canonical Gospels written by eyewitnesses and completed before AD 70 (possibly with the exception of the Gospel of John completed as late AD 95). Matthew and John were Apostles, Mark’s gospel is based on the eyewitness accounts of Peter, and Luke’s gospel is based on eyewitness accounts as he states at the beginning of his Gospel:
• Luke 1:1-4 –“ Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.”
Luke was a companion of the Apostle Paul. He did his research carefully and organized the facts so that they could be presented in a clear and truthful way. Sir William Ramsey, a noted nineteenth century historian and archeologist, set out to prove that Luke’s history was filled with errors. But, after a lifetime of painstaking study and work, he wrote, “Luke’s history is unsurpassed in respect of its trustworthiness.”
3. The Content of the Books
The content bears striking differences with the New Testament Gospels. Dr. Erwin Lutzer writes about the Gnostic Gospels in his book The Da Vinci Deception saying, “These gospels are non-historical, even anti-historical; they contain little narrative and have no sense of chronology. They show no interest in research, geography, or historical contexts…They contain some New Testament allusions to and quotations of Jesus, along with many foolish sayings that are attributed to him.”
3] Jesus & Mary Magdalene
Q] Did Leonardo paint Mary Magdalene instead of John into his masterpiece The Last Supper?
Q] Is Mary herself the Holy Grail?
Q] Is there any evidence that Jesus was married to Mary?
The Da Vinci Code is so named because of the claim that Leonardo da Vinci was a member of the secret society - the Priory of Sion. The Priory was a small group of people who knew the so-called truth about the marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene, but because of opposition from the Church, the secret had to be hidden. The Priory members would encrypt their secret knowledge in paintings, writings, and architecture in such a way that only the learned could decipher their meanings. The Da Vinci Code reveals how encoded into his paintings is proof that Leonardo knew that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and that she, and not a cup, was the Holy Grail. In the novel we read that, “The marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene is part of the historical record.”
Did Leonardo paint Mary Magdalene instead of John into his painting The Last Supper?
In the novel, we are told that Leonardo actually painted Mary Magdalene, not John, to the right of Jesus in his portrayal of the Last Supper. Furthermore, there is no cup on the table because Leonardo wanted people to understand that Mary is the Holy Grail. Mary’s presence in the painting represents “the sacred feminine and the goddess, which of course has now been lost, virtually eliminated by the church.”
The notion that Mary rather than the apostle John is seated to the right of Jesus is rejected by most art historians. When you look at the picture, you might agree that John, sitting to the right of Jesus, looks a bit effeminate, but such a depiction was consistent with other portraits of him in Florence. Perhaps it could be added that the figure has no hint of breasts. Jack Wasserman, retired art history professor at Temple University, said simply, “Just about everything [Dan Brown] says about Leonardo is wrong.”
Is Mary herself the Holy Grail?
Jesus drank from a cup on the night he instituted the Lord’s Supper, but no one knows what happened to it. What we do know is that in the 12th century stories circulated about the cup, which was dubbed the Holy Grail and believed to have magical power. It wasn’t until the 15th century that the idea developed that the Grail is not an object, but rather a family tree – the royal bloodline of Jesus via Mary Magdalene. However, these ideas are not based on anything from the New Testament.
What does the New Testament teach about Mary Magdalene?
Mary is one of six people with this name in the New Testament, and most of them are distinguished by additional descriptions: (1) Mary, the mother of Jesus (Luke 1:30-31); (2) Mary of Bethany, sister of Lazarus whom Jesus raised from the dead (John 11:1); (3) Mary, the wife of Clopas, and also the mother of Joses and the disciple James the younger (Matthew 27:56; Mark 15:40; John 19:25); (4) Mary, the mother of John Mark (Acts 12:12); (5) an unidentified Mary (Romans 16:6); (6) Mary Magdalene, distinguished by reference to her home, Magdala (Luke 8:2). Luke introduces us to Mary Magdalene in his gospel. There were a group of women who followed Jesus and the disciples, helping to support them financially. Some of these women “had been cured of evil spirits and diseases: Mary (called Magdalene) from whom seven demons had come out; Joanna the wife of Cuza, the manager of Herod’s household; Susanna; and many others. These women were helping to support them out of their own means.” (Luke 8:2-3) The previous chapter of Luke includes the story of an unnamed prostitute who came to Jesus and some have been quick to speculate that she was Mary Magdalene. In A.D. 591, Pope Gregory the Great gave an Easter sermon in which he declared that the prostitute of Luke 7 was Mary Magdalene. But there is no reason to make such a connection. Mary Magdalene’s ministry with Jesus and his disciples brought her into contact with Salome - the mother of James and John, who was also the sister of Jesus’ mother, Mary – the wife of Clopas and mother of Joses and James the younger, and Mary - the mother of our Lord (Mark 15:47-16:1; John 19:25; Matthew 27:61) These women were standing at the foot of the cross when Jesus died. Mary Magdalene kept watch until the body was taken down and placed in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea.
Then, on the first day of the week Mary Magdalene and the other women “bought spices so that they might go anoint” Jesus’ body (Mark 16:1). When they arrived, however, they saw that the stone had been rolled away. Immediately, Mary ran to tell Peter and John (see John 20:1-2). Peter and John hurried to the tomb with Mary and find it empty. After Peter and John had seen the empty tomb and left, Mary was left alone. John records the events that followed:
“At this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, but she did not realize that it was Jesus. “Woman,” he said, “why are you crying? Who is it you are looking for?” Thinking he was the gardener, she said, “Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have put him, and I will get him.” Jesus said to her, “Mary.” She turned toward him and cried out in Aramaic, “Rabboni!” (which means Teacher). Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’” Mary Magdalene went to the disciples with the news: “I have seen the Lord!” And she told them that he had said these things to her.” (John 20:14-18)
Mary wanted to cling to Jesus’ feet like a child who fears the departure of a parent. Some argue that taboos about a woman touching a man existed in those days, so this account implies that she and Jesus were married. It is a stretch to conclude this on such a minor detail. Besides, other women also did what Mary did. Matthew’s gospel tells us that when later the women left the tomb Jesus met them and, “They came up to him, clasped his feet and worshipped him.” (Matthew 28:9) Obviously Mary wasn’t the only woman that was allowed to touch Jesus appropriately. The important thing is that there are no eyewitness documents that give evidence of a marriage between Jesus and Mary.
What about Mary Magdalene in the Gnostic Gospels?
In The Da Vinci Code we are told that in concealing the truth about Jesus’ marriage to Mary, the church has engaged in the biggest cover-up in human history. Evidence for the supposed marriage between Mary and Jesus is found in the Gnostic Gospels. I will examine two texts that are used by scholars to develop the theory that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene.
The first text is in the Gospel of Philip and reads:
The companion is Mary of Magdala. Jesus loved her more than his students.
He kissed her often on her face, more than all his students, and they said, ‘Why do you love her more than us?’ The savior answered, saying to them, ‘Why do I not love you like her? If a blind man and one who sees are together in darkness, they are the same. When light comes, the one who sees will see light. The blind man stays in darkness.’”
There are two major problems with this text. Firstly, this text was composed in the third century, a full two hundred years after the time of Jesus. This late date of course raises major questions as to its reliability as an eyewitness account. Secondly, because of the poor quality of the papyrus, the text is broken at 63:33-36 and reads, “And the companion of the […] Mary Magdalene. [… loved] her more than [all] the disciples [and used to] kiss her [often] on her […].” The brackets indicate broken locations in the manuscript where there is no reading because the manuscript is damaged. In some cases, where words are supplied in the brackets, the reading can be logically suggested because of the context and the size of the break. However, in other cases, the reading cannot be logically suggested. Scholars try and fill in the blank with the word mouth, face, or forehead, etc. There is no basis for the text pointing to something primarily sexual. For all we know the text might have said “the hand” or even “the cheek” since the statement implies that he also kissed his other students – presumably on the cheek as is still done in the Middle East.” Even if this account is true, it still says nothing about marriage! The Da Vinci Code makes the claim, “As any Aramaic scholar will tell you, the word companion, in those days literally meant spouse.” Dr. Lutzer points out however, in his book The Da Vinci Deception, that the account found in the Gospel of Philip did not come down to us in Aramaic, but Coptic. The word companion is used in both languages frequently to describe friendship; by no means does it always mean marriage. Darrell Bock elaborates on this argument in his book Breaking the Da Vinci Code:
The term ‘companion’ is a Greek loan word found in this Coptic language text.
(A loan word is simply a word borrowed from another language.) So the key term
here is a Greek term. It transliterates as ‘koinonos’ and is translated ‘companion.’ The term can mean ‘wife’ or simply ‘sister’ in a spiritual sense. But this term is not the typical or common term for ‘wife,’ which in the Greek would be some form of ‘gyne’.”
Clearly, the reference to a kiss and the use of the word companion merely pictures a tender, spiritual relationship. It is far less likely that something sexual is in view or that their marital status is being addressed.
The second major text that is used to back up the theory that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene is found in the Gospel of Mary 17:10-18:21. It reads:
But Andrew answered and said to the brethren, “Say what you (wish to) say about what she has said. I at least do not believe that the Savior said this. For certainly these teachings are strange ideas.” Peter answered and spoke concerning the same things. He questioned them about the Savior: “Did He really speak with a woman without our knowledge and not openly? Are we to turn about and all listen to her? Did He prefer her to us?” Then Mary wept and said to Peter, “My brother Peter, what do you think? Do you think that I have thought this up myself in my heart, or that I am lying about the Savior?” Levi answered and said to Peter, “Peter, you have always been hot tempered. Now I see you contending against the woman like the adversaries. But if the Savior made her worthy, who are you indeed to reject her? Surely the Savior knows her very well. That is why He loved her more than us. Rather let us be ashamed and put on the perfect Man and separate as He commanded us and preach the gospel, not laying down any other rule or other law beyond what the Savior said.”
The implication from this text is that Jesus knew Mary well enough to know whether she was worthy to receive independent revelation, and that out of that knowledge came Jesus’ exceptional love for her. This aside, the text nowhere indicates that Jesus and Mary had a marital status. The fact that out of all the material of the Gnostic Gospels, only two texts can be brought forward as even ancient candidates for the theory that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene shows how utterly unlikely it is. Furthermore, even these two candidates are poor evidence for the theory, because even if they are true (which is unlikely), the texts never claim that Jesus was married or that Mary Magdalene was his wife. In fact no text exists which indicates that Jesus was married or that Mary Magdalene was his wife.
The Case for Jesus as a single Man
No early Christian text we possess, either Biblical or extra-biblical, indicates the presence of a wife during his ministry, his crucifixion, or after his resurrection. There are three strong strands of evidence to demonstrate that Jesus was a single man and not married to anyone – especially Mary Magdalene.
1. Mary was never tied to any male when she was named.
In texts such as Matthew 27:55-56, Mark 15:40-41, Luke 8:2, and John 19:25, Mary is named along with other women. The other women listed are all connected to prominent or well-known males in their lives – sons or husbands. Mary is called Mary Magdalene; she is identified by where she was from – a good hint that she was unmarried. If Mary had been married to Jesus, these listings would have likely mentioned it.
2. A Minister’s right to marry was cited without a reference to Jesus.
1 Corinthians 9:5-6 reads, “Don’t we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas? Or is it only I and Barnabas who must work for a living?” Paul noted in this aside that the apostles, the Lord’s brothers, and Cephas (Peter) were married and had the right to bring their wives with them on their ministry trips. Had Jesus been married, there would have been no better place to mention it than here. Paul did not mention it because Jesus was not married.
3. Jesus showed no special concern for Mary Magdalene at the cross
At the cross many believing women, including Jesus’ mother, gathered. If there was an occasion were family would be present, it was there as Jesus was dying. Yet, no wife is described. Jesus was most concerned about his mother as he gave her into John’s care (John 19:26-27). Again no wife is mentioned because there never was a wife.
Proponents of Jesus being married make the argument that because Jesus was a teacher and functioned like a Jewish rabbi, he would have followed Jewish custom and married. To respond to this, it must be stated that although Jewish rabbis were usually married, there was no requirement that they must be married. Furthermore, Jesus, even though he was called rabbi by his disciples, was not part of the rabbinical order of his day. In fact, the Jews asked Jesus by what authority he did certain things because he did not occupy any official position within Judaism that would have permitted him to act as he did within the temple (Mark 11:28). New Testament writers such as Matthew and John who knew him make no reference to his marriage, which, had it occurred, would certainly have been mentioned. There are good reasons for the belief that Jesus was single. When he was in ministry there was no mention of a wife. When he was tried and crucified there was no mention of a wife. After his resurrection there was no mention of a wife. Jesus’ family members – his mother, father, brothers, and sisters – are mentioned more than once in the gospels, but never a wife. Darrell Bock concludes: “This is not an argument from silence in the classical sense because there were numerous opportunities to make the point about Jesus being married – had he been. The problem here is that where no marriage has occurred, silence will be the result!”
4] The Bible: How it was formed
Q] How was the Bible put together?
Q] Why were some books left out of the Bible?
The Bible is a unified collection of sixty-six books united by a common theme. Like a tapestry, it weaves together the story of God’s plan of redemption for the human race.
The Old Testament Canon
When God authorized the writing of a manuscript and the people of God recognized it as such, it was preserved for subsequent generations. For example, Moses wrote down “everything the Lord had said” to him (Exodus 24:4) and these writings were carefully laid in the ark of the covenant (Deut. 31:26). These writings became known as the Law of Moses, or the book of the Law – the books of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. In the same way, the writings of Joshua (Joshua 24:26) and Samuel (1 Samuel 10:25) were written down and safeguarded. The same can be said for the books like Daniel and Jeremiah (Daniel 9:2). In the post-exilic community we see how Ezra possessed a copy of the Law of Moses and read it out to the people (Nehemiah 8:1). He also makes mention of the prophets (Nehemiah 9:30) through whom God had also spoken to the people. The Law was read and revered as the Word of God. As the books in the canon grew in size, it was referred to as the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings. There were some books that were questioned as to their canonicity. For some, Song of Solomon was too sensual. Ecclesiastes was too skeptical. Esther was questioned because the book does not mention the name of God. Even Proverbs and Ezekiel were questioned. However, the majority of Jewish scholars did not question the authority of these books. The Old Testament canon of books was closed in about 400 B.C. with the prophecy of Malachi. Christ confirmed this same canon by referring frequently to the Old Testament as the very Word of God. There was no council or selection committee responsible for the selection of the Old Testament canon. Rather, in the providence of God, the very leaders who were responsible for Israel’s spiritual life recognized which books belonged in the Old Testament.
The New Testament Canon
The books of the New Testament were written during the last half of the first century. As letters from Apostles were written and received in the churches, copies were made and circulated. A growing group of books developed that were recognized as inspired Scripture – and thus part of the canon of New Testament. There were several criteria for inclusion in the canon:
1) Was it written or sanctioned by an Apostle?
Although Mark was not one of the Apostles, his teaching reflects his association with Peter; Luke, though not an Apostle, traveled with Paul (in fact parts of Acts are written using the pronoun ‘we’).
2) Did it conform to the rule of faith? That is, was it consistent with the Old Testament Prophets and the New Testament Apostles?
Although the authorship of the book of Hebrews is unknown, it was seen as an inspired exposition of how Jesus fulfilled Old Testament law and its rituals. The Gnostic Books, however, such as the Gospel of Thomas, simply fail this second criteria. The teaching and events recorded contradict the teaching of the Apostles.
3) Did it have widespread and continuous acceptance by the early Church?
It is important to state that councils only ratified what the church had already done. Just as books were added to the Old Testament canon, so the various books of the New Testament gained acceptance as they were written and circulated. Some books were accepted as authoritative even when others had not yet been written. Some books were accepted as Scripture soon after they were written. Peter regarded Paul’s letters as Scripture (2 Peter 3:15-16) and Paul referred to Luke’s gospel as Scripture (1 Timothy 5:18). The early Church recognized a growing number of books as the inspired Word of God. By the end of the first century more than two-thirds of our present New Testament was accepted as the inspired Word of God. The reason the other third wasn’t yet accepted at this point was most probably due to the fact that some books were unknown in certain areas.
When a heretic named Marcion came out with his own version of inspired writings in A.D. 135, the early Church was forced to define which books would be regarded as authoritative. A document called the Muratorian Fragment, dating back to A.D. 175, evaluates the various canonical books along with those that had been rejected by the Church. Unfortunately this document is mutilated and missing parts. Nevertheless, scholars can still identify a list that contains about twenty-three of our present twenty-seven books. Interestingly, a generation after the end of the apostolic age, every book of the New Testament had been cited as authoritative by some church Father. As far as historians can tell, it wasn’t until an Easter letter written by Athanasius in A.D. 367 that the complete list of our twenty-seven New Testament books first appeared. But, this canon of twenty-seven books had already functioned as the rule of the church for more than 250 years! The various books of the New Testament were not accepted or rejected by a council or committee. Contrary to The Da Vinci Code, Constantine did not decide what books should be accepted as Scripture at the council of Nicaea. The topic of the canon of the New Testament did not even come up at the Council of Nicaea in A.D. 325, and, future councils merely ratified what the church had already done for more than 250 years. The twenty-seven books of the New Testament were ratified by the Council of Hippo in A.D. 393.
5] The Reliability of the Bible
Q] Is the New Testament built on true historical facts and events?
Q] Is the Bible reliable?
In The Da Vinci Code, one of the main characters Langdon says, “Every faith in the world is based on fabrication. That is the definition of faith – acceptance of that which we imagine to be true, that which we cannot prove… Those who truly understand their faiths understand the stories are metaphorical…Religious allegory has become part of the fabric of reality. And living in that reality helps millions of people cope and be better people.” In other words, the implication of these words are that the story of Jesus isn’t true, but it is helpful for living in the world.
The Quest for the Historical Jesus
Perhaps no group of scholars has done more to discredit the New Testament portrayal of Jesus than the Jesus Seminar. Scholars of the Jesus Seminar meet regularly to vote on what they believe Christ did or did not say. Their conclusion is that only about 18% of the words ascribed to Jesus in the Gospels may actually have been spoken by him. The rest of the words of Jesus were made up by the early church and put into the mouth of Jesus. The Jesus Seminar rejects the resurrection of Christ along with all the other miracles recorded in the Gospels. The Jesus Seminar is merely itself based on subjective speculations. Their conclusions are not based on historical or archeological discoveries but on prior convictions and naturalistic beliefs that Jesus was merely a man. In their minds there can be no supernatural Jesus. The quest for the historical Jesus thus makes Jesus into whoever you want Jesus to be. Here’s what it comes down to. Do you believe the men who were eyewitnesses of Jesus or men who are living 2000 years after the events of the first century. Augustine, who lived in the fifth century, wrote, “If you believe what you like in the Gospels and reject what you don’t like, it’s not the gospel you believe, but yourself.”
The Reliability of the Bible
One of the criticisms that people have about Christianity is this: “How can you base your beliefs on a book written by humans that is thousands of years old and has been tampered with?” This is a loaded question. It presumes, falsely, that because the Bible was penned by humans and that it is thousands of years old, it must therefore be inaccurate and unreliable. This, however, is simply not the case.
Q] How can we be sure the Bible is reliable?
Firstly, the Bible makes the claim that it is reliable.
• 2 Timothy 3:16 - “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness.”
Whatever the Scripture has said, God has said. Scripture is the inspired Word of God. If all of Scripture is God-breathed, then it is a logical deduction from this to say that the Bible must therefore be totally accurate, without error, and 100% reliable.
Secondly, Jesus affirmed the inerrancy of Scripture.
• Matt.5:17-18 - “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.”
Thirdly, there are four convincing pieces of evidence that demonstrate the reliability of the Bible. They can be summarized with the acronym M.A.P.S (Manuscripts, Archeology, Prophecy, Statistics)
Manuscripts
We don’t have the original documents penned by the writers of the Bible. We have only copies of the originals – called manuscripts.
Q] How can we know if these copies are reliable - unaltered from the originals, unchanged, and exactly what the authors of Scripture wrote?
Q] How do we test these manuscript copies?
The best way to confirm the accuracy of the New Testament documents is to test them with the same standards used to investigate any other historical document. John Warwick Montgomery in his book History and Christianity, spells out three tests that can be applied to the New Testament.
1. Bibliographic Test: considers two things
i) the number of copies of the manuscripts
ii) the time span between the original and the earliest known copy.
Below is a table comparing various classical works with the New Testament - information taken from Josh McDowell’s The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict.
Work When Written Earliest Copies Time Span (yrs.) No. of Copies
Herodotus 480-425 B.C. 900 A.D. 1350 8
Thucydides c.460-400 B.C. 900 A.D. 1300 8
Tacitus’ Annals 100 A.D. 1100 A.D. 1000 20
Caesar’s Gallic War 100-44 B.C. 900 A.D. 1000 10
Livy’s History of Rome 59 B.C.-17 A.D. 900 A.D. 900 20
NEW TESTAMENT 50-100 A.D. 114 A.D (fragments)
200 A.D. (books)
250 A.D. (most)
325 A.D. (complete) 50
100
150
225 5366
No classical scholar doubts the authenticity and reliability of these secular works, in spite of the large time gap and the relatively few manuscripts. The New Testament stands absolutely and unapproachably alone in its wealth of manuscripts and its short time gap between the originals and the earliest copies. Listen to the words of Sir Frederic Kenyon, former director and principal librarian of the British Museum:
The Interval, then, between the dates of the original composition and the earliest extant [existing] evidence becomes so small as to be in fact negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the Scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed. Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established.
Even when we allow for the minor errors copyists made and take into account that the various manuscripts do have minor variations, we still have a reliable biblical text on which our faith is based.
2. Internal Test: This test looks at the claims of the writers themselves
Q] Were the original authors of the Bible eyewitnesses?
Q] Or, did they at least receive their information from credible sources.
It’s interesting to note the specific claims of four New Testament authors Luke, Peter, John, and Paul:
• Luke 1:1-3 - “Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.”
• 2 Peter 1:16 – “We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.”
• John 19:35 – “The man who saw it [namely John] has given testimony, and his testimony is true. He knows that he tells the truth, and he testifies so that you also may believe.”
• 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 – “For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.”
3. External Test: This test compares the manuscripts to see if they are trustworthy in historical events, geographical locations, and cultural things. It is important and significant to note that secular historians make direct references to Jesus that confirm the Bible’s record of Jesus. Examine the table below:
Josephus
(Jewish historian,
priest, & Pharisee)
The Antiquities
18.63-64
c.93 a.d. “About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who wrought surprising feats and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. [He was the Christ.] When Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing among us, had condemned him to be crucified, those who had in the first place come to love him did not give up their affection for him. On the third day he appeared to them restored to life, for the prophets of God had prophesied these and countless other marvelous things about him. And the tribe of Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared.”
Tacitus
(Roman historian)
Annals
15.44
c. 115 a.d.
“Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilate, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome…Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind.”
Pliny the Younger
(Roman)
Letters
10.96
c. 111 a.d. “I have asked them if they are Christians, and if they admit it, I repeat the question a second and third time, with a warning of the punishment awaiting them. If they persist, I order them to be led away for execution; for, whatever the nature of their admission, I am convinced that their stubbornness and unshakeable obstinacy ought not to go unpunished…
They also declared that the sum total of their guilt or error amounted to no more than this: they had met regularly before dawn on a fixed day to chant verses alternately amongst themselves in honor of Christ as if to a god, and also to bind themselves by oath, not for any criminal purpose, but to abstain from theft, robbery, and adultery… This made me decide it was all the more necessary to extract the truth by torture from two slave-women, whom they called deaconesses. I found nothing but a degenerate sort of cult carried to extravagant lengths.”
Archaeology
The Bible describes cities, people, places, and nations. Archeological research has confirmed the accuracy of many of the cities, people, places, and nations. Although it is not possible to verify every incident in the Bible, the discoveries of archaeology since the mid 1800s have demonstrated the reliability and plausibility of the Bible narrative. One example of this is the mention of Belshazzar, king of Babylon, in Daniel 5. According to secular recorded history the last king of Babylon was Nabonidus. Interestingly, archeological digs have uncovered tablets showing that Belshazzar was Nabonidus’ son who served as co-regent in Babylon. Thus, Belshazzar could offer to make Daniel “third highest ruler in the kingdom” (Dan. 5:16) for reading the handwriting on the wall. This was the highest available position he could offer, since he was second in command. Here we see the eye-witness nature of the Biblical record, as is so often brought out by the discoveries of archaeology. Another example of archeological discoveries concerns when Paul wrote about “Erastus, the treasurer of the city” at Corinth (Rom.16:23). When archeologists uncovered in 1927 an inscription from that period, in that city, referring to that very person, the historicity of the New Testament was underscored yet again.
Prophecy
The Bible records predictions of events and people hundreds and in some cases thousands of years before they happen. According to the Bible, God alone can predict the future:
• Isaiah 46:9-10 – “Remember the former things, those of long ago; I am God, and there is no other;
I am God, and there is none like me. I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient
times, what is still to come. I say: My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please.”
Peter records how prophecy does not originate with man but rather with God:
• 2 Peter 1:20-21 – “Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.”
Here are 27 examples of Messianic Prophecies from the Old Testament fulfilled in the New Testament
The Messiah would … Old Testament reference New Testament fulfillment
Be A descendent of David 2 Samuel 7:12-16; Jer. 23:5; Psalm 89:3-4 Matthew 1; Luke 1:27,32,69
Be Born in Bethlehem Micah 5:2 Luke 2:4-20
Be Born of a virgin Isaiah 7:14 Matthew 1; Luke 1
Be The “seed” of the woman come to destroy the work of Satan Genesis 3:15-16 1 John 3:8; ultimately Rev. 20:10
Be a Priest in the order of Melchisedek Ps. 110:4 Hebrews 5:6
Come before the “Scepter” passed from the tribe of Judah Genesis 49:10 11AD
Come while the temple of Jerusalem is standing Mal. 3:1; Dan. 9:26; Zech. 11:13; Haggai 2:7-9 Mt.21:12
Open the eyes of the blind Is. 29:18 Mt.9:27-31,12:22,20:29; Mk.8:22-26,10:46; Lk.11:14,18:35; Jn.9:1-7
Speak in parables Ps.78:2 Mt.13:34
Be rejected by his own people (Jews) but that the Gentiles would believe in him Is.8:14,28:16,49:6,50:6,52:33,60:3;
Ps.22:7-8,118:22 1 Peter 2:7
Be preceded by a messenger – “a man in the desert” Is.40:3; Mal.3:1 Mt.3:1-3,11:10; Jn.1:23; Lk.1:17
Enter into Jerusalem riding on a donkey Zech.9:9 Mt.21:5; Lk.19:32-37
Be betrayed by a friend Ps.41:9 Mt.27:3-10,26:47-48
Be betrayed for a price of 30 pieces of silver Zech.11:12 Mt.27:3-10
Be betrayed and the money would be used to buy a potter’s field Zech.11:13 Mt.27:6-10
Not open his mouth to defend himself against his accusers Isaiah 53:7 Mt.27:12
Be beaten and spit on Is.50:6 Mt.26:67,27:26-30
Would be “numbered with transgressors” Is.53:12 Mt.27:38
Crucified Ps.22; Is.53 Mt.27, Mk.15, Lk.23, Jn.19
Not have his bones broken Ps.34:20, Ex.12:46, Nb.9:12 Jn.19:33-36
Have his clothing divided up and people would cast lots for it Ps.22:18 Jn.19:23-24
Be given vinegar and gall to drink Ps.69:21 Mt.27:34,48
Say, “my God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” Ps.22:1 Mt.27:46
Be buried with the rich Is.53:9 Mt.27
Be resurrected physically from the dead Ps.16:10 Acts 2:31
Be seated at the right hand of God Ps.110:1 Heb.1:3
Be the Son of God Ps.2:7 Mt.3:17
Statistics
We have observed in the above table just 27 of the prophecies that predicted the Messiah who was to come. There are over 300. They were all fulfilled - to the letter - by Jesus Christ.
It is statistically impossible for one man to fulfill all of these prophecies by chance. To illustrate this even further, let’s calculate the odds of just 8 of these prophecies being fulfilled in any one person by chance.
• What’s the chance that a man would be born in the tiny town of Bethlehem? (Micah 5:2) - Scholars have conservatively estimated that during Jesus’ day, the chance would be 1 in 200,000.
• How many kings have entered their city on a donkey? (Zecheriah 9:9) - Let’s be very conservative and say 1 in 100.
• How many people have been betrayed by a friend for 30 pieces of silver? (Zech 11:12) - Certainly less than 1 in 1000.
• How often is betrayal money used to buy a potter’s field? (Zecheriah 11:13) - Probably none, other than Jesus, but let’s say 1 in 100,000
• Of those who were murdered, how many were wounded in their hands? (Ps. 22:16) - No more than 1 in 1000.
• How many criminals who are innocent offer no defense at their trial? (Isaiah 53:7) - Very few, but let’s say 1 in 1000.
• Of those crucified, how many died with the wicked, but had their grave with the rich? (Isaiah 53:9) - Maybe, at most 1 in 1000.
• Of all the people who have been put to death, what portion were crucified? (Ps 22:16) - Maybe 1 in 10,000.
Let’s take this principle of composite probability to our eight prophecies concerning Jesus the Messiah. Since we’ve used powers of 10, it’s easy to multiply our probabilities together. Using this simple formula, and taking all eight prophecies together with the very generous levels of probability we’ve allowed each one, we arrive at a composite probability for all eight prophecies of 1028. That’s 10 with 28 zeros following it. Moreover, to be entirely realistic we should divide that by the total population during the past two thousand years, (which we will estimate at 10 billion). When we do that, we arrive at a generous composite probability of 1 in 1016. What does this look like? Imagine filling an area the size of Texas with loonies to a depth of two feet, and marking one of them with an ‘X’. Then blindfold an individual and tell them to wander about and choose one coin. The odds of them finding the one with the ‘X’ marked on it is equivalent to the chances of one person fulfilling those eight prophecies. However, we still need to bear in mind that we actually have more than three hundred prophecies fulfilled in Jesus to choose from. So far we’ve used only eight.
Any person rejecting Jesus Christ as the Son of God – as the promised Messiah - is rejecting a fact proven more absolutely than any other fact in the world. Any person rejecting the accuracy and inerrancy of God’s Word is simply choosing to ignore the evidence.
Conclusion:
The capstone of Christianity is the resurrection of Jesus Christ. No other person in history predicted his own death and subsequent resurrection, and then proved his assertion by appearing to hundreds after his death, in his resurrected body. This fact alone, proves that Jesus is exactly who He said He was - God in human form. The Bible is God-breathed – and therefore totally reliable. The manuscripts we have are accurate copies of the originals. We can be confident that what we possess today is what the original authors wrote. The archeological discoveries of the past 2000 years have verified the accuracy and reliability of Biblical places, events, and people. The prophetic utterances in the Bible bear witness to the fact that the Bible is God’s reliable word. Just the 300 predictions in the Old Testament of the details of Jesus’ first coming and their astonishing fulfillment in the New Testament point to the truth that the Bible is not man’s thoughts but God’s word. Finally, the statistical probability of someone fulfilling the prophecies by chance is for all intents and purposes impossible. God is the one who is orchestrating history. Jesus is the promised Son of God. If the predictions of his first coming have been so astonishingly fulfilled, there is no question that his second coming also will occur just as the New Testament says. He will come with great power as Lord and King and Judge. What we have in our hands is God’s Word that has not been altered or changed down through the centuries.
Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code implies that Christianity, as we know it, is based on a big lie, or rather, several big lies. However, after carefully examining the claims made in The Da Vinci Code, it is clear that what is based on a big lie is not Christianity but rather The Da Vinci Code.
