The best sources we have are found in the Bible itself. The biblical texts are the earliest texts we have, written in the first century and recorded by eyewitnesses or those who directly consulted eyewitnesses. There is no evidence that the Bible “evolved through countless translations, additions, and revisions” as Brown, through Teabing, suggests. The Bible is in fact the most reliable ancient document we possess, and exists in thousands of ancient copies with no major discrepancies. Here’s what these earliest sources have to say regarding Jesus, who is called “Immanuel,” meaning “God with us” (Matthew 1:23).

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God … The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us” (John 1:1,14).
“Christ Jesus, who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness” (Phil 2:5-7).
“For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form” (Col 2:9).
“Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!”" (John 20:28)

Jesus also accepted worship, and for Jews this was seen as blasphemy because only God could be worshiped. The early church leaders agreed that Jesus was not merely a man: “God Himself being manifested in human form for the renewal of eternal life” – Ignatius (105AD)

It seems that since Dan Brown is contradicting the oldest and most reliable sources on who Jesus is, he is inventing his own Jesus to suit himself. That will never do for someone who “seeks the truth.” Jesus was clear regarding his claims about Himself and his work on earth. Many religious leaders have taught that we should love one another. But what made Jesus unique? Here’s what Billy Graham had to say:

Only Jesus died and then came back to life by the power of God, never to die again. … You can visit the tombs of philosophers and religious teachers of every kind across the world but you can’t visit Jesus’ tomb, because He rose from the dead and is now in heaven. Someday, He will return in glory to destroy all evil and rule in perfect justice. … Do you want to know God? Look at Jesus, for He was God in human flesh. And when you do, you also will discover that God loves you. He loves you so much that Christ was willing to die for you so you could be reconciled to God.

It’s time to answer Jesus’ question for yourself. It was first addressed to His twelve disciples but applicable to you and me today. Don’t jump to answer based on your preconceived notions or Dan Brown’s flawed history, but instead answer by examining the information available and asking God to help you answer Jesus’ question: “Who do you say I am?“

In the book Dan Brown writes:

Sophie examined the figure to Jesus’ immediate right … a wave of astonishment rose within her. The individual had flowing red hair, delicate folded hands, and the hint of a bosom. It was, without a doubt… female.

“That’s a woman!” Sophie exclaimed.

Teabing was laughing. “Surprise, surprise. Believe me, it’s no mistake. Leonardo was skilled at painting the difference between the sexes.” (Dan Brown, The Da Vinci Code)

The person sitting on Jesus’ right (the figure to the left of him in the painting) does have some feminine-looking features and may appear feminine but there is more evidence that it is a man, not a woman.

Evidence that the figure is not a woman:

• Da Vinci often drew androgynous looking men (men with feminine qualities); for example, see his painting of John the Baptist.
• It was common convention at that time to paint John the disciple with feminine qualities
• It makes sense to have John (called ?the beloved disciple? or ?the one that Jesus loved?) sitting to Jesus’ right.
• The person to Jesus’ right seems to be wearing men’s style clothing
• Surely when the picture was first painted, someone would have noticed it was a woman if indeed it was intended to be a woman. After all it is ?among the most famous paintings in the world?; it seems unlikely that this would just be coming to light now.
• The painting is meant to capture the moment when Jesus tells His disciples He will be betrayed, so all the disciples should be there. But if that is a woman in the painting, then one of the disciples is missing. Remember that at the time of the last supper, Judas has not yet betrayed Jesus so all twelve disciples would have been present.
• Even if da Vinci painted a woman sitting next to Jesus, that’s no reason to believe that da Vinci was accurate; he was painting over 1,400 years after the incident occurred

Sophie was pretty quick to identify the person in the painting as a woman, but what do you think? Looking at the painting is that a man or a woman? Do first impressions sometimes need correction? Is the evidence as obvious as Brown would have us believe?

The Rev. Lee Strobel encountered a few messiahs in mental hospitals during his years as the Chicago Tribune?s ultra-skeptical legal affairs reporter. “I met people who said they were Jesus on a fairly regular basis, he said, but anyone can claim to be God. The question is whether they can back that up. That?s why the resurrection is so crucial for Christians.”

I found this quote in an article giving reasons to believe in Jesus. The crux of it is this idea of the resurrection.

Dr. William Lane Craig, Research Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology, wrote in the article The Evidence For Jesus:

Any responsible historian, then, who seeks to give an account of the matter [of the resurrection], must deal with these four independently established facts: the honorable burial of Jesus, the discovery of his empty tomb, his appearances alive after his death, and the very origin of the disciples? belief in his resurrection and, hence, of Christianity itself. I want to emphasize that these four facts represent, not the conclusions of conservative scholars, nor have I quoted conservative scholars, but represent rather the majority view of New Testament scholarship today. The question is: how do you best explain these facts?

So let me pose that same question: how do you best explain the account of the resurrection of Christ?

CLICK PLAY TO BEGIN
[kml_flashembed movie="http://media.truthmedianetwork.com/davinci/michaelhorner2.swf" width="325" height="214" /]

This video requires Macromedia Flash 8. If you can hear it but all you see is a black box, make sure you upgrade your flash plugin.

Let us know what you think.

For a couple of years, I just ignored Dan Brown’s novel and the stream of articles and sermons coming from Christian groups and churches. When I heard about the movie, my interest was piqued a bit more.
Now I really wonder what’s going to become of this.

I heard all the reaction from concerned Christians and also began hearing Da Vinci Code-related terminology used in pop culture.
Now I’ve gotta find out what this is about.

It’s a great page-turner. Mystery, conspiracy, cover-up, murder, chase, investigation, romance(?). History? Not quite.

I’m not shocked that many people read this novel and think this is the way things are. Or were. Did Brown have an agenda?

I thought for a while Brown was missing facts on purpose — sort his way of saying he didn’t believe it all — that’s it’s just a story. And I went with this thought for weeks.
But he’s got it all wrong!

What does it matter if the Pyramid doesn’t have 666 triangles? What does it matter that the Virgin of the Rocks is painted on wood, not canvas? What does it matter that the Priory of Sion started in the 1970s and not 1099? What does it matter if Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene?
It’s just a novel.

Then I realized that if I was accepting some of his “facts” on face value, what other “facts” would others believe? Certainly not those about Jesus! But they do. He starts the book saying:

FACT:

[clip]

All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate.

I was watching a National Geographic Channel Special: Unlocking Da Vinci’s Code/Full Story last week. Brown was asked about Mary being the wife of Jesus and he replied:

I began as a skeptic. As I started researching The Da Vinci Code, I really thought I would disprove a lot of this theory about Mary Magdalene, holy blood and all of that. I became a believer.

Seriously?
What is he basing this on? His “Holy Grail” are stories. Most are recent. Some are older. None are surprising. Just because a story is old doesn’t make it true. You don’t believe everything you read online, do you? Just because something is authentically written doesn’t mean it’s accurate.
I’d rather take the story of Nessie more seriously than his story of Mary!

Don’t get me wrong. I thought the story was gripping. It was funny. I’m looking forward to the movie as some fun summer entertainment.

Josh McDowell was a skeptic too. He’s done a lot more research than I ever will. He went to Europe to learn more about the story of Jesus, just like Brown did. Both skeptics. Two conclusions. One concludes that Jesus was just a man. One concludes Jesus was God. And a lot of this seems to hinge on one historical event, an event we have lots of information on: The Council of Nicea. What was the issue when Constantine brought together over 300 church leaders? The question at hand was not about if Jesus was just a man, it was about whether or not Jesus had always existed.
Spin.

I can see where Brown is coming from. If I thought Jesus was just a man, I could see and follow his logical progressions to get to where he purports to be. But what if Jesus was God? Then it almost seems the spin could go the other way, couldn’t it?

So how is one to decide who’s right? Brown? McDowell?

I’m reminded of an Old Testament passage where Joshua was confronted with the Angel of the Lord and he asked the angel, “Are you on our side, or for our adversaries?” The angel replied, “Neither. I’m here to take over.” I think that’s where my skepticism ended. It’s where yours can end also. It’s not about if McDowell, Brown, or even I am right.

Jesus once asked Peter, “Who do YOU say I am?” If Jesus is a man, he can’t hear you. He’s dead. If Jesus is God, He can hear you. So here’s the challenge: ask Jesus who He is.
I’m not drinking the Dan Brown kool-aid anymore. Tastes like myrrh.

The Da Vinci Code claims: Was Jesus married, and also a father?
?Mary Magdalene was pregnant at the time of the crucifixion. For the safety of Christ?s unborn child, she had no choice but to flee the Holy Land. With the help of Jesus? trusted uncle, Joseph of Arimathea. Mary Magdalene secretly traveled to France, then known as Gaul. There she found safe refuge in the Jewish community. It was here in France that she gave birth to a daughter. Her name was Sarah.? ( The Da Vinci Code p.255)
?The marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene is part of the historical record.? ( The Da Vinci Code p.245)

History’s version of the events:

Mary Magdalene was a follower of Jesus and the first to see the resurrected Lord (John 19). This Mary was of the city of Magdala, a wealthy city. She was healed by Jesus and became one of his supporters (Lk 8:2, 3). The scriptures never said she was a prostitute and it wasn?t Peter who authored the rumor, but Pope Gregory the Great 5 centuries years later.

Read the rest of the article

History’s version:

In 325 AD there was a council of Nicea where Constantine permitted some 300 church leaders representing the consensus of the church to meet. The council was convened to address a fragment teaching that was in conflict with the teaching of the New Testament scriptures.
The heresy was Arianism, named after Arius who was teaching that Jesus was not completely divine. Arius taught that Jesus was not fully God because God created Him, and yet even Arius did not believe Jesus was a mere ?mortal.?

Constantine convened the Council to address this problem and restore peace in the church. The Council of Nicea was convened to define the faith based on the consensus of early church and let the debate take place. Athanasius represented the consensus and Arius and his supporters were overwhelmingly defeated and banished…

Read the rest of the article