The Da Vinci Code is fiction
|By KRISTEN MILLER|
Like much of America, I have read the intriguing page turner, The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown.
I’m not much into suspense but when religion is involved, I become quickly intrigued.
After reading this book, I find the History Channel not so much of a bore anymore especially the documentaries that explore the Bible.
Many may feel science is against religion but I think science often gives us more proof and reassurance that the Bible is indeed true.
Much like science, The Da Vinci code has spun some major controversy since its release in 2004.
Now the book is becoming a major motion picture with big shot actor, Tom Hanks starring.
Brown was even taken to court by the writers of Holy Blood Holy Grail claiming copyright infringement. But that got thrown out of court because their claim didn’t hold much water.
Brown is also getting criticism from Opus Dei, a secret organization that was portrayed as evil in the story.
Opus Dei is asking for a disclaimer at the beginning of the movie telling the audience that it is a work of fiction.
They feel they were wrongfully portrayed as an evil and secret society, which they claim is false.
I can understand why they would be upset, but I didn’t even know the society was real upon reading it.
In their defense, I think Brown could’ve picked a different name instead of picking on the Opus Dei, but nonetheless, it is fictional.
I guess if it means that much to them, give them the disclaimer.
Some pastors and priests around the world are upset over the book as well, claiming it questions the authenticity of Catholicism and the Bible.
I admit upon reading it, I began questioning the validity of Catholicism. It definitely made me think that there possibly was something missing from Jesus’ story.
I guess it’s hard for me to trust every piece of information that is given to me. Many may say, that’s where your faith lies. I have faith in what is written, but what about the things that aren’t?
Even though I was logically examining the possibilities, I wasn’t considering Brown’s work to be factual.
It was intriguing, but it was indeed fictional.
And what if it was real? What if Jesus was married? What would that change? Nothing.
In the painting of the Last Supper, it does indeed look like a woman next to Jesus.
Indeed, Mary Magdalene was a follower of Jesus and therefore could’ve been one of the disciples.
Mary Magdalene was there during his crucifixion, and she was the first to find that Jesus’ body was no longer in the tomb.
With that evidence it is very likely Mary and Jesus were involved in some way.
If that were my husband or lover, I would act much like Mary did on the day he died.
Recently, I saw a documentary stating there were more than 30 gospels to choose from, but only four were selected because they told the story the most accurate.
Maybe there were other gospels that explained the relationship with Mary Magdalene and Jesus that we are unaware of.
After all, someone was in control of what was going to be in the Bible and what was not.
But that’s 36 others that tell their own story of Jesus.
The Bible doesn’t tell about Jesus as a child, but does that mean that he wasn’t a child?
I believe what is written in the Bible, but I question what isn’t written in the Bible.
I think Brown wanted his readers to explore the possibilities. After all, he’s done much research to compile his books, so he should have some basis to go on.