The Da Vinci Code: Fact, Fiction, and Religious Friction
Jeremy Muller
Released in March 2003, Dan Brown’s ‘The Da Vinci Code’ quickly made the ‘New York Times’ bestseller list. A year later, it was declared a bestseller in 100 countries, while ‘Doubleday’, the publisher call it ‘The all time, bestselling adult novel’.
https://static.licdn.com/aero-v1/sc/h/al2o9zrvru7aqj8e1x2rzsrca
Released in March 2003, Dan Brown’s ‘The Da Vinci Code’ quickly made the ‘New York Times’ bestseller list. A year later, it was declared a bestseller in 100 countries, while ‘Doubleday’, the publisher call it ‘The all time, bestselling adult novel’.

The author claims to have given the world a fictional, fact-based conspiracy theory, alleging ‘scientific evidence that the New Testament is false testimony’. (Page 341).

But as a good read combined with bad history is not something we can stake our lives on. Christians I have discussed the book with, were confused. One said, as did so many others:

‘I don’t know where to turn now. I read ‘The Da Vinci Code’. It was an interesting book until I got to the part where this Brown is talking about how Christianity began and how it’s all false and that Christianity is basically a lie stolen from Pagan religions. And what of this Holy Grail and Secret Societies and the Church changing facts and removing parts of the Bible? How true is it all? Also, so much of it makes sense. There are things that I had read of before and ignored. But I’ve got to know now! Is the last thirty years I’ve been a Christian all a lie? Did it all happen the way this bloke says? Was Jesus just a man and was he married to Mary Magdalene? I everything I was raised to believe just made up for the sake of money? Now I’m beginning to doubt if there is a Heaven, of God, and a Jesus!’

Not what I expected to hear, but in re-reading the book, I found that it has a storyline that makes it difficult to know where the truth begins and ends. Although it is written as a novel, this conspirational murder mystery claims to be based on well-researched historical facts – facts that contradict historical Christianity.

The book begins with the murder of Jacques Saunière, curator of the Louvre Museum in Paris. As he is dying, Jacques hears his murderer say: ‘When you are gone, I will be the only one who knows the truth!’

‘The Truth!’ In an instant the curator grasped the true horror of the situation. ‘If I die,’ he whispered, mumbled in pain, ‘the truth will be lost forever’. (Page 4).

With the bullet lodged in his stomach, the Curator was gripped by a fear far greater than the thought of his own death. ‘I must pass on the secret’. He thought of the generations who had come before, of the mission they had each been entrusted to keep. ‘An unbroken chain of knowledge,’ he muttered – and suddenly he realized that despite all the fail-safes, he was the only remaining link, the sole guardian of one of the most powerful secrets ever kept. Shivering, he dragged himself on. ‘I must find a way…’

While in Paris on business, a Harvard Professor, Robert Langdon, receives an urgent call. The curator of the Louvre Art Museum has been found murdered. The police are baffled by an encoded message left by the dead man and the writing daubed with his blood.

Langdon follows the rail that leads him to clues left among the works of Leonardo Da Vinci. He is joined by Cryptologist Sophie Nevue, Saunière’s granddaughter. Together they discover that the dead curator was part of a Secret Society – The Priory of Sion – whose members included Isaac Newton; Victor Hugo; and Leonardo Da Vinci.

Beyond the scene, Opus Dei, a Catholic lay organization is also plotting to prevent the discovery of another ancient secret: The Holy Grail, also hidden in the Priory of Sion for centuries. If discovered, I would shake the foundations of the Church and the faith it has proclaimed for a millennia.

Dan Brown’s plot draws strength from public knowledge of the past and present Church scandals, and so many critics have recommended it as a good provocative read.

But many Christians and especially the Roman Catholic Church are shaken by the book’s alleged exposé of the historic church and it’s Bible. Since followers of the Christ stake their lives on the Biblical record, The Da Vinci Code touched a nerve when its experts declared the Church had two thousand years experience in pressurizing those who threatened to unveil its lies! ‘Since the days of Constantine the Church successfully hid the truth about Mary Magdalene and Jesus. We should not be surprised now, once again, they have found a way to keep the world in the dark’. (Page 407).

Brown claims ancient evidence that Jesus was NOT a God-Man as described by the Church. Instead the novel’s ‘experts’ describe Jesus as a mere man who had a child with Mary Magdalene and gave to her the responsibility of leading his disciples after He was gone.

The source of these allegations is a collection of ancient Gnostic Gospels found in Nag Hammadi, Egypt, in 1943. ‘The Secret Book of James’ and ‘The Gospel of Thomas’ are just two of the documents that reflect the ancient philosophy of Gnosticism.

From the early days of the Christian Church, Gnostics promoted a different view of Christ. They claimed to know of a ‘secret knowledge’ that was necessary in order to know the truth about God.

Regarding this second century teaching of Gnosticism, The New Bible Dictionary says:

‘From the standpoint of traditional Christianity, Gnostic thinking is quite alien. It’s mythological setting of redemption leads to a depreciation of the historical events of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. It’s view of man’s relationship to God leads to a denial of the importance of the personal work of the Christ, while in a Gnostic context ‘salvation’ is not understood ion terms of deliverance from sin, but as a form of existential self-realisation’.

Although the Gnostic Gospels are second and third century writings, Brown regards them as the ‘Lost Books of the Bible’ that represent the true picture of Jesus and His works. As such, Secret Knowledge – Goddess Worship – and self Deification emerged as an ‘Alternative Theory’ to the historic record of the Bible.

My readers must know that early Church leaders found consensus in examining and determining whether ancient Christian documents were sacred. They called for some basic answers:

Was it written by an Apostle of the Church or by someone who had direct contact with the Apostles?

Did the writings in question receive wide acceptance as being consistent with the teachings of the Christ and the Apostles?

Did they bear the mark of spiritual power and truth?

None of the Gnostic Gospels measure up to the New Testament’s standard of ‘Reliable Documents’. Instead of being consistent with the earliest and most reliable eyewitness accounts, and instead of resting on the foundations of the Jewish Scriptures, the Gnostic Gospels reflect a world view that is foreign to both Old and New Testaments. And yet, there are so many I know of who take ‘The Da Vinci Code’ seriously.

On the title page, Brown claims: ‘All descriptions of Artwork, Architecture, Documents, and Secret Rituals in this novel are accurate’. In addition, he offers a lengthy list of acknowledgements, giving the impression that all of his prestigious sources and institutions collaborated with him in his research. Since so much of the complex plot and theme-development depends on Brown’s claim of legitimate research into real people, times and places, it is easy for the reader to assume that the backbone of this book is credible and where the ‘heroes’ of the novel are ‘Seekers of Truth’ who will lead us to higher ground – as when the Harvard Professor says:

‘I am a historian. I’m opposed to the destruction of documents, and I would love to see religious scholars holding on to more information to ponder on the exceptional life of Jesus the Christ’. (Page 342)

There is the apparent passion for the truth expressed by another of the book’s ‘heroes’ – a researcher named Teabing, who says:

‘It’s a matter of historical record – and ‘Da Vinci’ was certainly aware of the fact. The ‘Last Supper’ practically shouts to all viewers that Jesus and Magdalene are a pair – and the marriage of Jesus and Magdalene is part of historical record! (Pages 244-245).

Taking a closer look, however, the book’s alleged factual basis does not stand up. In his book, ‘The Truth Behind the Da Vinci Code’ Richard Abanes says:

Most critics would acknowledge that Brown has the right to say whatever he wishes to say. What is problematic, however, is the way that he, his publisher and the media have been presenting ‘The Da Vinci Code’ as a fact-based exposé wherein the characters reveal TRUTHS long hidden from or at the very least, ignored by the general public’.

This observation is important because Brown has repeatedly insisted that his novel is based on fact. During one interview, he said: ‘One of the many qualities that makes ‘The Da Vinci Code’ unique is the factual nature of the story. All the History, Artwork, Ancient Documents and Secret Rituals in the novel are accurate – as are the hidden codes revealed in some of Da Vinci’s most famous paintings’.

This is what makes the book so misleading. It claims to be an accurate portrayal of history but is a clever mix of fact and fiction. Are we then to accept it as Historical Fiction and leave it at that? Oh no! Historical Fiction is a genre of literature in which imaginary characters live within the realistic boundaries of known facts.

In her work: ‘Using Historical Fiction in the History Classroom’, (Yale-New Haven Teachers’ Institute), Sarah K. Herz writes:

‘The author of Historical Fiction must blend historical facts with imagination and creative style to master his/her art and must be a master of the past so as to portray accurately his/her ideas, attitudes, tendencies and themes, and weave his/her story – accurate in all its details – into the thematic material. Historians and Novelists often differ in their points of view about the historical novel and its purpose but however, both agree that the writer of historical fiction must NOT distort past reality and must NOT manipulate historical facts to make the novel more interesting or exciting’.

By this definition, ‘The Da Vinci Code’ would need to develop its plot with historical integrity. If challenged on his facts, the author cannot rightfully say, ‘It’s only a novel.’ This only places his readers in a schizophrenic world of fact and fiction. What the writer has done is write an ‘alternate history’ without giving his readers the ability to see where his facts begin or end. Literary scholars may spot the difference, but how many other readers will?

Let’s see how this crooked history of the book plays out with elements that are alleged to be factual. There are claims about ‘The Holy Grail’, ‘The Priory of Sion’, and ‘The Knights Templar’. Are they historically true? The book claims that the legendary Holy Grail is a person – Mary Magdalene – who carries the bloodline of Jesus by having His child. The book also treats as fact, the existence of a secret society called the Priory of Sion which, for centuries, had kept the secret of Jesus’ relationship with Mary Magdalene, who, according to this bestselling novel, represents the ‘Feminine Aspect’ of God (The Devine Feminine); loved by Jesus but denied by the Church for hundreds of years. The Knights Templar are also included as protectors of the secret, but were all wiped out by the Church.

Shall we now submit these ‘Facts’ to a reality check? The Holy Grail is a medieval legend about ‘The Cup of The Last Supper’. The first appearance of the term was in 1170, in ‘Percival’ – a romantic writing about the legend of King Arthur and The Kingdom of Camelot. Brown altered the legend and used it to advance fictional claims about Jesus and Mary Magdalene.

The Priory of Sion DOES have its basis in fact but not in the sense that Brown has perceived or portrayed it. The Priory title has been used three different times. At first it was a Monastic Order founded in Jerusalem in 1100, and absorbed by the Jesuits in 1617.

The second and third Priories of Sion were under Pierre Plantard [1920-2000] – an anti-Semite Frenchman who was jailed in 1953 for fraud. Plantard formed a group he called the Priory of Sion to help those in need of low-cost housing. In the 1960s and 70s he created a series of forged documents to prove the existence of a bloodline descending from Jesus and Mary Magdalene through the knights of France and himself and then claimed to be the rightful heir to the Throne of France. He and his associates called themselves the Priory of Sion and sent forged copies of these documents to libraries all over France as well as to the National Library. In 1993 however, Plantard admitted under oath to a French judge that he had fabricated the documents. The judge gave him a sever warning and dismissed him as a harmless crank. Readers will find all this in detail if they log on to www.priory-of-sion.com.

The Knights Templar are also based in History but not as Brown portrays them. They were founded in 1118 as a military religious order but they did not become wealthy by discovering the story of The Holy Grail as alleged in the novel. There is no evidence that they were annihilated for having knowledge of it either.

Brown bolsters the significance of the Priory of Sion by claiming a little-known connection to Leonardo Da Vinci and Isaac Newton, but he bases these assertations on Plantard’s documents called Les Dossiers secrets d’Henri Labineau. Brown uses these as legitimate documents. In the light of all this, other factual claims in Brown’s book also need to be carefully looked at.

One of Brown’s claims is that Da Vinci left clues to his beliefs, hidden in his art. Brown’s main characters are Robert Langdon, Sophie Neveau and Leigh Teabing – all experts at deciphering code and interpreting symbols. This is one of the most compelling aspects of the novel. It points out, and accurately too, that Leonardo was known to have used ‘Reverse Text’ which could be read with a mirror, for some of his ‘Progressive theories on art, astronomy, geology, archaeology and hydrology’. (Page 300).

But these are scientific, not religious, and Da Vinci was among the Renaissance scientists who had to be careful not to raise suspicion that their theories were challenging established Church doctrines on Creation. Brown used this to hint that Da Vinci left clues about secret religious beliefs and portrayed Da Vinci as a Goddess-Worshipper, who left reverse messages in his art to declare that his views on Jesus were not in line with the teachings of the Church. Can we believe this claim? Art critics, who have no interest in defending the Church, have rejected the idea. They have said that Brown’s ‘hidden clues’ to Leonard’s secret faith exist solely in Brown’s imagination and are being used to make a conspiracy theory plausible.

And what of Opus Dei? Early in the book, a ‘tortured soul’ by the name of Silas, is introduced as a faithful assassin, doing the ‘work of the Lord’. Silas turns out to be a member of Opus Dei, complete with a spiked belt for self-mortification and a willingness to murder all enemies of the Sacred Society. Brown begins his book by stating:

‘The Vatican Prelature known as Opus Dei is a deeply devout Catholic Sect that has been the topic of recent controversy due to the reports of Brainwashing; Coercion; and a dangerous practice known as Corporal Mortification.

‘Opus Dei has just completed construction of a $47 Million National Headquarters at 243, Lexington Avenue in New York City’

Here again the book alleges to have uncovered ‘secrets’ about the Church. The truth is that the real Opus Dei is a Roman Catholic Lay Organization that emphasizes piety and good works. Its’ founder, Josemaria Escriva, was born in Babastros, Spain in 1902 and created Opus Dei – (Work of God) – to empower lay people instead of focusing on spirituality of the clergy. The characteristics of Opus Dei are self-denial and sacrificial good works within the context of the Roman Catholic Church, but it is portrayed by Brown as existing solely to protect the documents of the Priory of Sion, pertaining to the secret relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene.

Brown also states that:

‘Powerful men in the early Christian Church ‘conned’ the world by propagating lies that devalued the female and tilted the scales in the favour of the masculine –

‘Constantine and his male successors converted the world from matriarchal paganism to Patriarchal Christianity by waging a campaign of propaganda that demonized the Sacred Feminine.’ (Page 124).

In addition he refers to the Catholic Inquisition and to its victims:

‘They included all Female scholars, Priestesses, Gypsies, Mystics, Nature Lovers, Herb Gatherers, and any woman suspiciously attached to the Natural World. Midwives were also killed for their heretical practices of using medical knowledge to ease the pain of childbirth.’ (Page 125).

It is public knowledge that followers of the Christ have not always treated women with the love and respect that Jesus Himself showed to women who followed Him, Yet, the truth is that the persecuted groups listed by Brown, were not specifically targeted because of their gender. The Inquisition targeted both men AND women – priests, nuns, artists, transients, and political enemies among others. To the extent that Brown is right about the Church’s historically recorded devaluation of women, it is correct to say that followers of Jesus missed the spirit of their own scriptures and the words of their leaders.

For two thousand years the Bible had urged the renouncing of the fertility cults and Goddess-Worship of pagan religions, but it had also urged its flock to reject the patriarchal culture that treats women as servile, as sexual objects, or as property. Jesus’ treatment of women and the Apostle Paul’s teaching [in Ephesians 5:25] that men should love their wives as Jesus loved the Church has brought about a change, and the Church raised the status of women from ‘legal property’ to what Saint Peter [in 1 Peter 3:7] said of their relationship to be ‘co-heirs in Christ’.

According to Brown, Jesus wanted Mary Magdalene to restore to the Church the concept of the Sacred Feminine. As such, Brown had Robert Langdon, the Harvard symbologist to use the book to explain:

‘The Holy Grail represents the Sacred Feminine, and the Goddess which, of course has now been lost, virtually eliminated from the Church. The power of the Female and her ability to produce life was once very sacred, but it posed a threat to the predominantly male Church and so the Sacred Feminine was demonized and called unclean’. (Page 218).

By this rationale and with second century Gnostic documents, Brown built his case that Jesus took Mary Magdalene as His wife and also planned to make her founder of His Church. (Page 254).

But the New Testament portrayal of Mary Magdalene is in sharp contrast to Brown’s vile story of her. According to the Gospel of Saint Mark, Jesus delivered her from seven demons – [Mark 19:9]. Grateful to be freed, she became His follower, and with many others, provided financial support to Jesus and His disciples – [Luke 8:1-3]. She was also the first to see Jesus after His Resurrection – [John 20:1-18].

The New Testament gives us a picture of Jesus and Mary Magdalene that is honourable and beyond reproach. Their relationship is consistent with that of a woman who, along with the others, followed the Man who could heal shattered legs; urn water into wine; heal lepers; walk on water and raise the dead. There was no hint of any romantic involvement. Also the New Testament gives indirect evidence that Jesus never got married.

In 1 Corinthians 9:5, Paul asks: ‘Do we have no right to take along with us a believing wife as also do the other apostles, the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?’ Wouldn’t Paul have included Jesus’ name if He were also married?

But no evidence seemed to convince Brown who has one of his main characters claim: ‘Almost everything our fathers taught us about the Christ is false!’ (Page 235).

In the context of a novel, such a statement could reflect ‘Freedom of Speech’ and rotten speech at that!

Darrell L. Bock, Ph.D., Research Professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary, says in his book ‘Breaking the Da Vinci Code’:

‘Most scholars have long believed that Jesus was single. – No earthly Christian text we possess, either Biblical or extra-Biblical, indicates the presence of a wife during His ministry, His crucifixion, or after His resurrection. Whenever texts mention Jesus’ family, they refer to His mother, brothers, sisters, but never to a wife. What is more, there is no hint that He was widowed’.

Bock then gives three arguments against Brown’s claim that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married:

Mary Magdalene was never tied to any male when she was named by her parents – [Matthew 27:55-56] – [Mark 15:40-41] – [Luke 8:2] – [John19:25].

A Minister’s right to marry was cited without reference to Jesus – [1 Corinthians 9:4-6].

Jesus showed no special concern for Mary Magdalene even as He was hung on the Cross – [John 19:25-27].

I have kept meeting with the argument that even though the Bible gives us compelling reason to conclude that Jesus and Magdalene never married, why should such claims be trusted over the claims of the Gnostic Gospels and The Da Vinci Code? May I remind that the trustworthiness of any document depends on its ability to stand up under time-tested criteria?

In the ancient Greek world Aristotle cast a spreading shadow of scholarly and scientific insight that touches us even today. Long before the invention of the Printing Press, Aristotle used well-reasoned criteria for recognizing the trustworthiness of an ancient document, and listed three guidelines:

Was the Person an eyewitness to the event he recorded?

How many copies of the record do we have, and how close are they to the event they describe?

Are there other sources outside of the document that corroborated the document’s claims?

To this day historians follow these guidelines and they remain the foundation of the science of Textual Criticism.

The Gnostic Gospels reflect Gnostic doctrines and there is no record of witnesses. Also, they were written some 200 years after the life of Christ!

It was, I should say, an ‘anything goes’ effort! And this is just what ‘The Da Vinci Code’ is: - another ‘anything goes exercise’ that has put millions in the author’s pocket!

Let’s take Brown’s view on Constantine:

‘Constantine was a life-long Pagan who was baptized on his death-bed, too weak to protest – Rome’s official religion was Sun-Worship, the Cult of Sol Invictus of the Invincible Sun, and Constantine was its Head Priest.’ (Page 232).

This is a deliberate historical distortion. Constantine, the Fourth Century Emperor, confessed to a life-changing experience that caused him to reverse a long-standing prosecution policy against Christians. By his Edict of Milan in AD 313, he extended to Christianity the toleration granted to other religions of the day.

It was a fact that Roman Emperors were regarded as Pontifex Maximus – Commander and Chief of Priests of the Faith. Christians were regarded as enemies because of their creed that Jesus, rather than Caesar, was King of Kings. But Constantine steadily changed this. He convened The Council of Nicaea in AD 325 to help Church Leaders develop a consensus about the doctrines of Jesus.

At the Council, an aged Presbyter named Arius denied the full deity of Christ and caused controversy among other Church Leaders, but the Council’s conclusion, based on the sayings of the prophets of the Old Testament was that Jesus was ‘God of Very God’ and this was co-operated by Constantine.

Incidentally, the Old Testament recorded how Isaiah anticipated the coming of ‘a mighty God’ while later, John recorded how Peter addressed Jesus as ‘The Christ, the Son of the Living God’ and Paul called Him a Deity in Human Form.

Why didn’t Brown associate Constantine with the Council of Nicaea which the Emperor convened? Instead, we have his own ideas:

‘Jesus’ establishment as ‘The Son of God’ was officially proposed and voted on by the Council of Nicaea. Until that moment in history, Jesus was viewed by his followers as a Mortal Prophet – a great and powerful man, but nonetheless a man – a Mortal’. (Page 233).

‘The Bible, as we know it today, was collated by the Pagan Emperor Constantine’. (Page231).

‘Because Constantine upgraded Jesus’ status almost four centuries after Jesus’ death, thousands of documents already existed chronicling His life as a mortal man. To rewrite the history books, Constantine knew he would need a bold stroke. From this sprang the most profound moment in Christian history – Constantine commissioned and financed a new Bible, which omitted those Gospels that spoke of the Christ’s human traits and embellished those gospels that made Him godlike. Also, the earlier Gnostic Gospels were outlawed, gathered up and burned.’ (Page 234)

But it was another distortion of history. What Constantine ordered burnt were Arian papers found to be heretical of the Council of Nicaea. What is more, the official books of the Bible were only ratified decades after Constantine at the Synod of Carthage in AD 397 – 72 years after Constantine’s Death.

As matter of fact, the Council never addressed the canon of Scripture (and thus could not have changed it). Of course, they really didn’t have a “Bible” yet, anyway. Their Scriptures were a collection of books, and which books were accepted varied from church to church, though only over a few books, none of them Gnostic (like the Gospel of Thomas or the Pistis Sophia). We can tell what books were used as Scripture by the early churches. We have letters and books dating all the way back to A.D. 96, just 60 years after Jesus died and over two centuries before the Council of Nicaea. Those letters quote certain books as Scripture. There are lists of the books constituting Scripture dating back to around A.D. 160 (the Muratorian Fragment, for example, but there are several before Nicaea). What you find from these sources is that the Bible has always been basically what it is today.

Brown’s pen undid him time and time again. On Page 309, there is another shocking statement:

‘Admittedly, the concept of sex as a pathway to God was mind-boggling at first. Langdon’s Jewsih students always looked flabbergasted when he told them that the early Jewish tradition involved ritualistic sex, and in the Temples, no less.

‘Early Jews believed that the ‘Holy of Holies’ in Solomon’s Temple, housed not only God but also his powerful female equal, SHEKINA the Jewish Tetragrammaton XHWH, the sacred name of God – derived from ‘Jehovah’ and androgynous physical union between the Masculine JAH and the prehistoric name for ‘Eve’ – HAVAH.’

Brown was trying to make out that God was very pleased with the ancient Pagan Fertility Cults. If you were to go online to www.davincihoax.com you will find how guilty of duplicity Brown is.

Let me now quote researchers Carl Olson and Sandra Miesel:

‘The name Jehovah didn’t even exist until the 13th century at the earliest and wasn’t common until the 16th century. Also, it is an English word that was created by artificially combining the consonants of YHWH and the vowels of ‘Adonai’ which means Lord.

‘Brown uses his own assumptions to make unjustified claims about Hebrew word-meanings and origins. Also, the reader is asked to accept what is said by Robert Langdon, a fictitious character who tries to tie up the worship of Israel to the ancient fertility cults characteristics of Israel’s neighbours’.

Let’s drive all this into Brown’s head with a pickaxe. The people of the ‘Promised Land’ were surrounded by Pagans who worshipped many gods and goddesses, offered their children as sacrifices and engaged in ritual sex and other forms of moral depravity. Brown transferred all this across the borders into Israel, claiming that the original form of Judaism was Polytheistic with Goddess-Worship and Ritual Sex – and he places these practices within the ‘Holy of Holies’ – a direct violation of the Mosaic Law. We also have Brown’s ‘expert Grail Hunter’, Sophie Neveau to tell us:

‘History is always written by the winners. When two cultures clash, the loser is obliterated and the winner writes the history books – books that glorify their own cause and disparage the conquered for, as Napolean once said: ‘What is History but an agreed-upon fable?’ (Page 256).

Can Brown explain to us how Constantine could have collected and altered the combined evidence of history that preceded him? And how di the followers of Jesus become the winners? They were hated, persecuted people, poor and powerless – the outcasts of society who were willing to suffer in the Roman arena, and cling to life despite Roman power.

At least the first apostles of Jesus knew the difference between fact and fable. In 2 Peter 1:16, it was said:

‘We do not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitness to His majesty.’

The word ‘Fable’ is from ‘Mythos’, from which we get ‘Myth’. This is what ‘The Da Vinci Code’ is – a cunningly devised myth; a fable that reminds us of C. S. Lewis’ Screwtape Letters that was a collection of fictional letters from a Senior Demon called Screwtape to a novice demon named Wormwood who was Screwtape’s nephew.

Wormwood is given advice on how to use lies and deception to keep his victims from seeing the truth. In this book – and you should read it – we have Screwtape saying:

‘In the last generation we prompted the construction of such a ‘historical Jesus’ on liberal and humanitarian lines.

‘We are now putting forward a new Historical Jesus on Marxian catastrophic and revolutionary lines. The advantages of these constructions, which we intend to change every thirty years or so, are manifold. In the first place, they all tend to direct Man’s devotion to something that does not exist, for each Historical Jesus is unhistorical. The documents say what they say and cannot be added to. Each new Historical Jesus therefore, has to be got out of the Scriptures by suppression at one point and exaggeration at another’.

In the New Testament, Timothy warns of the deceiving spirits and the doctrines of demons. Like Screwtape, Dan Brown has made his own Historical Jesus and for one purpose only: To create a bestseller. He has distorted fact; referenced writings of well-known enemies of the Church; made unproven claims of genealogical documents that have never been found.

It’s a sad thing, actually, because the truth about Jesus is more amazing than any fiction any of us could ever write – a far more believable!