My list of things to do today included but were not limited to cleaning the house, doing laundry, and submitting yet 3 more applications into the black hole of cyberspace. With hands on hips, surveying the scene, I grabbed the car keys and went to the matinee to see (drum roll please):
The DaVinci Code. Yes! Yes! I admit it! They sucked me in through my insatiable curiosity and I gave them my money!! Besides, it would take me more than 2.5 hours to read the book that I would also have to spend money on. Plus, I wanted the information firsthand in order to articulate an opinion based on firsthand experience. In this day of handed off journalistic sound bites, I went (you guessed it) across the flow of copycat opinions to give you my own.
I have friends who forward me stories, etc. via email. These will hereafter be referred to in my blog as Friend-Spam. Be thou warned from this moment forward (pardon the pun) that if you don’t forward the religious forwards to at least 10 friends that Jesus will be ashamed of you. Never mind that such Friend-Spam is considered In-The-Face by most recipients and you are at that precise click of the send key, destroying any kind of witnessing whatsoever, forever, no going back. That said…………
One friend-spam that I want to mention is the story of a father who didn’t want his teenagers to see a movie about which he had read negative reviews. Plus, it was rated R which really does mean something is in it that parents may not want teens to see and hear. “But Dad…..
- All our friends are going
- It’s well done in spite of some of its content
- There’s nothing in it we haven’t seen or heard
- We know right from wrong and don’t let the bad things affect us
- The nudity and profanity are such a small percentage, it’s hardly noticable”
Dad got his way and the kids were very upset with him. The next day, he appeared to be making up to them by baking them their favorite brownies. “They’re a little different this time. I added just a little doggie poo. I’ve sent samples to all your friends, it’s nothing you haven’t seen or smelled before, it’s not enough to affect your health, and it’s such a small percentage, you won’t even notice it. Besides, it’s well done.”
The gnostic writings that the early church witnesses and second generation Christians fought against and thought they destroyed are wagging their lying forked tongues again in these, the last days, and being presented on supposedly reputable stations like National Geographic and this week, The History Channel, as new findings, possible truth, probable debunking of the deity of Yeshua through His resurrection after which people spoke with and touched Him over a period of 45 days after the crucifixion, 500 of whom witnessed His ascension. These words also are “written.” Questions are being raised as to which writings are true. Try this one on for size: If the Bible was based on even partial untruth or lack of all truth, it would not have survived this long and it would not generate such concentrated efforts to disprove it after 2000 years. How many Aristotle followers do you know?
DVC, the movie, is, in my personal opinion, well done in spite of the Cannes critics. Usually, when critics give the thumbs down, it’s going to make big bucks in the trenches of the rabble. Therefore, being rabble, I comment.
The man christened in 1452 as Lionardo, a genius in many fields, was best known for his paintings, The Last Supper being the one featured in the movie as an explanation to prove that Jesus had married Mary Magdeline who became pregnant prior to the crucifixion, carrying the actual blood of Christ, therefore becoming the human Holy Grail and was whisked away to France and defended by the Knights Templar — you remember, the bad guys who for no reason except greed for relics in the name of Christ, killed indiscriminantly and pillaged Jerusalem. If you swallow that whole, I’m sure there’s some land in the Everglades and a bridge in New York you would be interested in. I have a book that will tell you the whole Crusade story, not just a part of it. Note also the birth date of the man with all the answers to a mystery allegedly protected in bloodshed, one thousand four hundred and ninteen years after Yeshua’s witnessed resurrection and ascension. And….AND…. get this — ! The way the movie “proved” by a silly cut and paste process of the painting was the lamest effort at an argument I’ve seen — ever!!
Consider This: The legend of the Grail is indeed about the lost cup from the Last Supper.
But biblical language about mothers wombs is always a reference to gestation and protection, never about bloodlines. Indeed, shed blood was always about the opposite of birth, that is, death.
There was enough history as we think we know it in the movie and enough twisting commentary of that history to make the weak in faith and the unchurched say “Wow. I didn’t know that!” and the church goers say “What did he just say??” right before another statement of twisted history is made and another, and another. After all, you just heard it in a movie so it must be true! It was written as fiction and has escalated into plausibility at a dizzying rate of speed with the undying support and aid of the press. Besides, Ron Howard helped produce it and he was Opie Taylor, so ……. (so what?)
As a work of fiction, I really enjoyed it. Well done! Excellent cinematography! Beautiful scenery. It held my attention despite the critics’ negative reviews. But…. did the author and producers present it as a possible alternative belief? I can’t read their minds. Maybe it’s more plausible that the author and production and cast are out to make a bunch ‘o’ bucks at the expense of the weak of faith for whom they don’t care and who will be turned away from considering the Bible as Truth, as inspired of God, probably because the Bible commands repentance and identifies sin. They would rather consider an alternative. Come to think of it, did Leonardo paint all those religious works because religious works was what the people wanted during the renaissance and he was out to make a living? Could it actually be that he had no commitment to Christ? Or, did DaVinci hate the Church so much that he set out to destroy it so subtly that no one in his time could understand it? Hmmm.
One little shocker for you: When the book came out and I heard the basic premise that Jesus could have been married, my response was “so what?” Did not God Himself institute marriage? Couldn’t Jesus have been married and still been pure and sinless, a spotless lamb, the Son of God? It was His shed blood that saves us, His conquering of death and hell through His resurrection that proves Who He is. The scriptures we do have mention His mother, brothers, and sisters. If He had a wife, would she not be worth mentioning as well? In the same sentence? He was already past marriagable age so if he was, he should have had a wife by then. By it’s lack of reference, I lean toward His not having a wife. One commentator notes that Jesus’ mission was the salvation of the lost, not to start a family.
The DaVinci Code is entertainment. A pack of twisted partial truths and doggie poo, but entertaining. Hey, man! Gandalf is in it so it must be fun!!
If you want me to tell you the ending, feel free to email me and save yourself the price of a theatre ticket. C’mon, you know you want to know!