The Truth about the DaVinci Code (2)...
In The Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown makes many incorrect assertions about a supposed marriage between Jesus and Mary Magdalene, about Mary Magdalene, about how we got the Bible, and about Jesus' divinity. He thinks these assertions are based on historical documents. In these articles I show that each of his assertions is based on faulty interpretations of those documents and the historical facts they present. For those desiring more explanation I provide more informations from other sources that gives more detailed background information to support my answers.
Dan Brown's Assertions about a Marriage between Jesus and Mary Magdalene
Introduction
In The Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown makes 5 (by my count) assertions about a supposed marriage between Jesus and Mary Magdalene. Essentially, he asserts that their marriage is supported by historical documents in the possession of a secret society, and that the Roman Catholic Church doesn't want the public to ever read them. He thinks that it would undermine the belief that Jesus is divine. Some people say, "Well, its only a novel, so why do you bother to criticize these ideas?" It is true that it is only a novel, but because of his statements at the beginning of the book and on his website FAQ page, that the description of these documents is "accurate" and "exist," we have to assume he really believes in them and the conspiracy theory to cover them up. In addition, many people who are not knowledgeable about the subject are entertaining the idea he is right and thereby getting a false view of history. Most importantly, what a person believes about Jesus ought to be based on truth not falsehood. I will show that what Brown believes about Jesus is based on false information.
In this article I address each of his 5 assertions, quoting the actual dialogs in his book and providing the page number where it is found. I also include the chapter number in case the text appears on different page numbers in future editions. Second, I give brief answers to each assertion to show how it is wrong. I know that many people are only seeking a brief answer and will be satisfied.
Assertion 1: The marriage of Jesus and Mary is confirmed by historical documents.
Teabing: "As I said earlier, the marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene is part of the historical record." (Chapter 58, p. 245)
Brief answer
Real historians, both liberal and conservative, disagree with this statement. There is absolutely, I repeat, absolutely no historical record or even slightest valid inference of a marriage between Jesus and Mary Magdalene. The source of this idea is a group of legends the origin of which no one really knows.However, Dan Brown's immediate source is Holy Blood, Holy Grail.1 Brown's idea of historical record is a passage from the Gnostic Gospel of Philip, which he misinterprets. I will address this in Assertion 3.
Assertion 2: Jesus was Jewish so he had to be married.
Teabing: "Moreover, Jesus as a married man makes infinitely more sense than our standard biblical view of Jesus as a bachelor." .... "Because Jesus was a Jew, "Langdon said, ... and the social decorum during that time virtually forbid a Jewish man to be unmarried. According to Jewish custom, celibacy was condemned, and the obligation for a Jewish father was to find a suitable wife for his son. If Jesus were not married, at least one of the Bible's gospels would have mentioned it and offered some explanation for His unnatural state of bachelorhood." (Chapter 58, p. 245)
Brief answer
There are several insurmountable problems with this assertion. First, Jesus being a bachelor actually makes infinitely more sense than being married. The New Testament Gospels portray him as being singularly focused on His mission to offer His Kingdom to Israel and then to die as a result of being rejected. He travelled and worked constantly, not exactly a lifestyle conducive to marriage and family. Second, even if Jewish custom condemned celibacy, so what? Since when did Jesus ever do something to avoid social condemnation? He broke all kinds of cultural taboos like healing on the Sabbath, hanging out with "sinners," touching lepers and forgiving sins (which only God can do). His autonomy from cultural baggage is one of the things people most admire about Him! Third, and another thing we admire about Him, is His non-worldly perspective on power. He denounced using the usual worldly strategies for attaining and perpetuating political power (e.g. Matthew 20:20-28), which would surely include nepotism. Since he was planning to die and wasn't interested in his followers becoming a state power, what would be the point of getting married and fathering children? He had no need for a Queen Mary Magdalene and Princess Sophia. That is not how He viewed Kingdom leadership. It would run directly counter to all He taught about what the Kingdom of God is like. It would not be an ordinary Kingdom following ordinary protocols.
The authors of the New Testament Gospels bend over backwards to portray Jesus' qualifications
0 Comments