Soli Deo Gloria » Apologetics

Ravi Responds to a Muslim

Jay — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 00:45:26 +0000

A most excellent response to a Muslim’s question by Ravi Zaccharias. I also love how he explains the multiple denominations within Christianity.

How the Deaths of the Apostles Evidences Easter

Jay — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 01:48:17 +0000

Michael Patton has written an excellent article on how the martyred apostles gives evidence to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. (Michael is also the director of Reclaiming the Mind Ministries and the soon to be announced Credo House – if you haven’t taken advantage of the Theology Program it is excellent!)

May everyone have a blessed Holy Week. I’ll be taking some time off of blogging and writing this weekend.

I have an interest in the death of the Apostles. We all should. Every Christian should spend some time looking into the historical records. There are many legends concerning their deaths which makes the historical evidence hard to interpret. Many times the accounts conflict with one another. Most early Christians wanted their home to be crowned with the stature of having been the final resting place of one of the twelve. It is probably for this reason that there were embellishments forged.

Read the rest of this post…

He Died!

13 Evangelistic Phrases That Produce False Conversions

Jay — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 04:05:34 +0000

Churches divide over carpet color, building additions and budgets. In the meantime, our fellow church members are going to hell by the boat load.

A.W. Tozer said, “It is my opinion that tens of thousands of people, if not millions, have been brought into some kind of religious experience by accepting Christ, and they have not been saved.”

D. James Kennedy said, “The vast majority of people who are members of churches in America today are not Christians. I say that without the slightest contradiction. I base it on empirical evidence of twenty-four years of examining thousands of people.”

Friend, we argue over so many petty things. May I suggest we have lost sight of the most important debate of all, “What is salvation?” My theology teaches that salvation happens when a man repents and places his trust in Jesus Christ (Acts 20:21).

I would like to present thirteen ways that we have re-defined how a person becomes a true convert. Have we done this intentionally? Certainly not. We have simply created lingo that has a grain of truth in Scripture, but it is so open to interpretation that the un-converted understand it in ways that lead to false conversions.

1. “Make Jesus your Lord and Savior.” We cannot make Jesus our Lord and Savior, He is our Lord and Savior. We are living in rebellion to Him and He commands us to repent and trust Him.

2. “Ask Jesus into your heart.” Does Jesus come into our hearts? Yes He does. The question is, “How does He get in there?” It is not by simply asking Him in; it is by repentance and faith.

3. “Just believe in Jesus.” The demons believe and they tremble. We must repent and trust.

4. “You have a God-shaped hole in your heart and only Jesus can fill it.” We have far more than a hole that needs to be filled so we can feel complete; we have a wretched, deceitful, sinful heart that needs cleansing. Repentance and faith applies the blood of the lamb for that cleansing.

5. “Accept Jesus.” Whoa. We need to accept Jesus? This is entirely backward. We need Jesus to accept us–and He will, if we repent and trust.

6. “Make a decision for Jesus.” Decisional regeneration puts man in the driver’s seat of salvation. When we repent and trust, Jesus decides to save us. That puts Him in the driver’s seat…where He demands.

7. “It is easy to believe.” While the formula of repentance and faith sounds simple, a complete surrendering of self in repentance is anything but easy. It’s hard.

8. “God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life.” The only promises for the convert are trials, temptation and persecution. If that is how you define a wonderful life, fine. Otherwise we must command all men everywhere to repent and trust.

9. “Come to Jesus just as you are.” We should come to Jesus just as the sinners we are, but He also expects a broken heart and contrite spirit demonstrated in repentance and faith.

10. “Come to Jesus and you will receive forgiveness of sins and ________________ (fill in the blank with money, health, a healed marriage).” Jesus didn’t promise healed marriages; in fact He promised broken homes because we would divide when one member repents and trusts.

11. “Come to Jesus and experience love, joy, peace.” Do we get the fruit of the Spirit upon conversion? Yes. But if we come seeking the gifts and not the giver, we will receive neither. Instead, we must repent and trust.

12. “Jesus is the missing piece.” Um, no, the God of the universe is not the missing piece, He demands that He is the center of our lives when we repent and trust.

13. “Jesus is better than fame and fortune.” That is an understatement, and frankly, it is insulting. Saying Jesus is better than money is like saying that a steak dinner is better than eating a dung hill. He defies comparison and we trivialize the Son of God. Instead, we should be pleading with all men everywhere to repent and trust.

If I showed up at your door with a can of grapefruit juice and a roll of paper towels and offered to change your oil, you would say, “No thanks.” If we wouldn’t let someone mess with our car using the wrong method, why do we allow the Gospel to be presented so ambiguously?

Would you let a doctor operate on your child who was “sort of” accurate? The salvation of men is far more important than an appendix.

I beg you to consider how you share the Gospel. You and I know what we are talking about when we use these phrases, but do the unregenerate? Is it possible that we have so many backsliders today because they never slid forward in the first place? Is it because they were never told that they must repent and trust?

If we are willing to debate shag verse plush in the fellowship hall, shouldn’t we be more concerned about an issue that has eternal consequences?

Author: Todd Friel

Hell – It’s Under Fire.

Jay — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 12:51:23 +0000

The doctrine of hell and it being a real place of eternal torment never sits well. Of course no one should like the idea of a place of “gnashing of teeth” where “the worm never dies”. The Bible describes hell as a place of eternal fiery damnation. In fact, Jesus spoke of hell more than anyone else and yet in today’s postmodern culture the doctrine of hell is, you guessed it, under attack.

The idea in today’s churches (especially the American churches) is that we have to be politically correct in how we deliver the Gospel. We can’t hurt anyone’s feelings or offend anyone. You see, it’s all about numbers. If churches today preach like Charles Spurgeon or Jonathan Edwards then we might offend and our mega church numbers would go down. My response to this – BOLONEY! It’s not about how many people you have in your church – it’s about being faithful to the true word of God. It’s not about entertaining your congregation with “your best life now” messages and light and sound shows – it’s about teaching, equipping an edifying the saints to “go therefore…”. It’s about teaching the whole word of God – even the difficult doctrines like election.

The reason, I believe, that many of the sound Biblical doctrines are attacked today is because the church has slipped away from preaching and teaching the Bible and moved to “feel good” sermons or messages that focus on “our best life now” or our “purpose driven life”. Our focus should not be about us, it should always be about Him and His glory! And when there is a focus on us it should be a focus on godliness, sanctification, a hatred of sin and edification – all things that in turn point immediately back to God.

It’s time we get back to the true Gospel. It’s time we preach the God of the Bible – our God who is loving but who also is just, righteous, sovereign and wrathful. Hell exists and it’s a literal place of eternal punishment. Every single one of us deserves hell and punishment for our sin.

Jonathan Edwards couldn’t have said it better from his sermon “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God”:

They are already under a sentence of condemnation to hell. They do not only justly deserve to be cast down thither, but the sentence of the law of God, that eternal and immutable rule of righteousness that God has fixed between him and mankind, is gone out against them, and stands against them; so that they are bound over already to hell. John 3:18. “He that believeth not is condemned already.” So that every unconverted man properly belongs to hell; that is his place; from thence he is, John 8:23. “Ye are from beneath:” And thither he is bound; it is the place that justice, and God’s word, and the sentence of his unchangeable law assign to him.

My inspiration for this post comes from two sources. First and foremost from observing the postmodern viewpoints so active in the emergent church today. In Rob Bell’s book “Velvet Elvis”, he likens theology and doctrine to springs on a trampoline that are meant to stretch. This viewpoint can (and frankly is) dangerous in that it promotes the question of truth. In fact, that is the motto of the emergent, postmodern generation that “there is no absolute truth”. It reminds me of Pilate’s question to Jesus. This is precisely why this generation questions all doctrines, both essential and non-essential and creates new, more “palatable” versions such as “there is no literal place called hell. This is part of the “springs” that can be molded and stretched to suit your life. I have a real problem with that!

Second, I must give a hat tip to Tim Etherington from his blog “By Farther Steps“. He wrote an excellent post on hell and how the doctrine of hell as it is outlined Biblically is being attacked. I’d encourage you to jump over and take a read – he has some excellent articles!

Soli Deo Gloria!

- Jay

Fire Insurance

I Hate the Prosperity Gospel!

Jay — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:29:56 +0000

I was going to write a long post here on my absolute hatred for what is called the “prosperity gospel” but came across a video that sums it up for me better than I could ever write something. You know the prosperity gospel – it’s probably in your church. The preaching and teaching of health, wealth and prosperity. This heretical teaching is rampant on nearly all television programs (mainly by the so-called mega churches) and has caused many false converts in churches today. It’s right there in my book with “easy-believism” – the equally problematic presentation that is “invite Jesus into your heart”. Where in the Bible is that???

I’ll leave “easy believism” for another post because I too was one who was sold on the whole easy believism presentation of the Gospel until my eyes were opened by God Almighty and revealed the true Gospel message through His Word.

That aside, here is one of my favorite pastor/theologians speaking on the prosperity gospel. My prayer is that if you are reading this and are involved in a church that preaches, teaches or promotes this heretical teaching that your eyes will be opened to the true Gospel message of Jesus Christ. Be a Berean (Acts 17:10-11) and check everything you read or hear against Scripture.

What is your treasure? Is it money, career, stability, house, sex, car, wife or husband? Or is your treasure God. Is God all satisfying to you? Is God your treasure?

Watch this video and think about it and pray that God will open your heart and your eyes to Truth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukcV-xtU3hc

Every Knee Shall Bow…

Jay — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 03:31:20 +0000

You know much has been discussed on the deity of Christ. While the doctrine of Christ’s deity is an absolute essential to orthodox Christianity there continues to be struggles among fringe groups as well as most all “christian” cults such as Jehovah’s Witnesses when it comes to Christ being God in the flesh. Today I had the pleasure of listening to a wonderful preacher lay this issue out for all to see and frankly there is no way around it. Here are my observations as I meditated on the person of Christ after hearing this sermon… Scripture is our ultimate truth. It’s our only truth. God’s word is living and active. The Book of Hebrews testifies to Scripture as follows:

“For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart.” – Hebrews 4:12 (NAS)

Now I could go into an incredible discourse on Scripture’s ability to act as a mirror – allowing us to see what filthy, rotten sinners we are compared to a holy and perfect God. But for this discussion, the writer of Hebrews as inspired by the Holy Spirit is also saying that God’s word is living. It’s absolute truth. Yes, there is such a thing as absolute truth and Scripture is just that. It’s what God has given us to fully know Him. The amazing part is through repentance and saving faith in His Son we are not only given forgiveness of our sins and the promise of eternity in His presence but also the gift of the Holy Spirit while here in this life to “teach us all things” (John. 14:26) and open our eyes to see the glory of God in the face of Christ Jesus through His living word.Ok, now back to the discussion on the deity of Christ. Let’s take a quick look at Phillipians chapter 2:

“who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.” – Phillipians 2:6-7 (NAS)

The greek word for “form” in this text is morphe which does not mean form in the way we think of it today such as “the clouds took on the form of a cat” but rather this word means “substance”. Scripture is plainly saying here that Christ has the full substance of God. He is God. And if that’s not enough take a look at the text again and notice that the words “bond-servant” and “likeness of men” is used.

This indicates Christ is not just man but He is fully man and fully God co-existing at the same time. This is also called the hypostatic union: the theological term that Christ exists as two natures – divine and human equally and at the same time. If Christ were just a man then Scripture would never have to make a point to say that Christ was “made in the likeness of men” – that would of course be assumed.

Now we come to the crossroads of our text. We have to make a determination. Either Jesus is God or Paul is guilty of blasphemy in the highest possible form! Why do I say this? Let’s take a closer look at the second commandment of God:

“You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them…” Exodus 20:4-5 (NAS)

Here God is clear – we are not to bow down or worship anything other than God Himself – absolutely nothing. Notice the emphasis on heaven above, earth beneath and under the earth. Now, let’s take a look further along in Phillipians…

“Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” Phillipians 2:9-11 (ESV)

Here, Paul writes to the church in Phillippi that at Jesus’ name every knee will bow in heaven, earth and under the earth in confession of His Lordship. And of course all of this is to the Glory of God the Father. Once you stop and pause to take in this absolutely beautiful image and praise in awe of God then take a minute to compare this to the second commandment.

You’ll quickly see my point here. Either Paul is absolutely right that Christ is God and deserves our worship and humble servitude or Paul is committing the most grievous of blasphemy that every knee will bow to a mere man – a created being. It’s one or the other.There are of course numerous other verses that clearly state the deity of Christ.

Theologically of course if Christ were not God He would not have been able to atone for our sins.Doctrine is so vitally important. Sound doctrine helps us battle in the “truth wars” as John MacArthur puts in.

My friend, in this day and age truth is said to be relative and I will beg to differ to my last breath. There is absolute truth and that truth is the incarnate Word of God who “is the way and the truth and the life”. John 14:6 (emphasis mine)

Oh the joy of having your eyes opened to the glorious truths of God’s word and to have your eyes opened to the rich mercies of His grace in the face of Christ Jesus. It is my prayer that if you do not know about this wonderful Savior Jesus that you click on the link at the top of the page entitled “How to Know God”. Get a good Bible translation (I recommend the English Standard Version or ESV) and ask God to open your eyes to His truths and to give you a burning passion to meditate on and study His word constantly.

Soli Deo Gloria! (Glory to God Alone)

No related posts.

Apologetics – Are We Missing Out?

Jay — Sun, 03 Dec 2006 23:51:05 +0000

I’ve quickly become a huge supporter of Christian apologetics. It seems more and more the world is growing more intense on attacking the Christian faith. Long gone are the days of the infamous “Who Was Cain’s Wife” questions that puzzled many new Christians. Now people are taking more pluralistic approaches and aren’t even asking the good questions. Instead, our politically correct attitude of not offending anyone has caused a postmodern world to not question anything but take everything as a possible golden road to Heaven. It’s all the more important in this era that we live in to not only provide a defense (apologetic) to our faith but be every stronger lights of Christ in such a dark and confused world desperately seeking for truth.

As Peter writes:
‘Always be prepared to make a defense (gr. apologia) to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence’ (1 Peter 3:15)

Are we doing this effectively to those who 1) question our faith in a hostile manner or 2) who are seeking answers and genuinely have questions concerning our faith and the Bible. Imagine not being able to defend our own faith to someone struggling – it is possible that may cause that person to fall deeper in a state of dismay? Peter says it best and we should ‘always be prepared to give an answer to everyone’. Note two important words – ‘always’ and ‘everyone’. Not just the ones attacking, not just the ones genuinely struggling with questions. Equally important is the irenic stance of our defense as noted in 1 Peter 3:15 where we are to use gentleness and reverence in our apologetic.

I’m not saying at all that we should take a polemic approach to apologetics at all… nothing is worse than hostile apologetics. An irenic approach is exactly what all Christians should be armed with. But to be armed we first must gird ourselves with the armor of God. Paul explains to us exactly how this is done in Ephesians chapter 6. Theologically, the armor of God is explained by Paul as our defense against the schemes of the devil. However, there is a particular piece of armor that is tantamount to not only our obeying God and growing closer to Him, but also as the backbone of our ability as Christians to provide a solid defense to our faith. That piece of armor is the sword of the Spirit, or the Word of God…. the Holy Bible.

… and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. Eph. 6:17b

Apologetics are not just the responsibility of theologians or those who enjoy debating Christianity around a coffee table. Apologetics are the responsibility of each and every Christian that walks this earth. For me, this has caused me to want to delve even deeper into God’s Word and prayerfully ask God for wisdom and guidance to be able to be a Christian soldier in a world so desperate for truth – the truth of Christ Jesus.

So dig in tonight in your Bible and ask God to guide you on a journey of sharing your faith and apologetics! An excellent resource for apologetics is Ravi Zaccharias ministries at www.rzim.org.

No related posts.

Whatcha Readin’ Lately?

Jay — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 01:16:53 +0000

More and more books are showing up in bookstores as well as Christian bookstores that have either questionable content or down right heretical content. I urge Christians to carefully review a book and check Scripture carefully and maybe check with your pastor before delving into a book just because it’s labeled Christian or is on the top selling “Christian” list. In fact, more and more of the top sellers are contaminated with the ever popular “prosperity gospel”. (Joel Osteen is notorious for his prosperity gospel.) In fact, Osteen carries a very universalist view of salvation as indicated by a recent interview on Larry King live.

One such title that deserves some attention is “Wild at Heart” by John Eldredge. This book has become very popular and while there are a few good points in this book it is riddled with down right heretical views – many causing an incorrect view of God’s attributes.

In today’s postmodern world it is so important that Christians do their homework and have a good, sound understanding of Biblical doctrine so that they can carefully select literature to read outside of the Bible.

I stress the Bereans and their carefulness in checking Scripture. Oh do we need to be like the Bereans in today’s culture!

Speaking of “Wild at Heart”… here is a great article that demonstrates some of the heretical views of that book.

Gnosticism and the Gnostic Gospels

Jay — Sat, 08 Apr 2006 13:47:32 +0000

The "DaVinci Code" swirls around the Gnostics and their quest for a secret knowledge. I've put together some information taken from a few great articles that give a brief summary of who the Gnostics were, what they believe and where their "gospels" come from. Lately the National Geographic channel has been promoting their show "The Gospel of Judas" which is a gnostic gospel. This article will help shed some light on the background of this text…

Let's start first with Gnosticism and what it is…

"Christian" Gnosticism is the belief that one must have a "gnosis" (from Greek "Gnosko," to know) or inner knowledge which is mystical knowledge obtained only after one has been properly initiated. Only a few can possess this mystical knowledge, limiting the number of those "in the know". It is a heresy that Paul battled against in some of his letters to the churches and was soundly condemned as a heresy in the first century church (40-100 A.D.). It is resurrected today as the forerunner to the New Age Religion where virtually anything goes and "religion" takes on many forms, especially the mystic Eastern religions that are so prevalent today.

Gnosticism today seems to provide a lot of the form and color for the New Age portrait of Jesus where Jesus is seen as the illumined Illuminator: one who serves as a cosmic catalyst for others' awakening. As such it is as false and heretical as the Gnosticism of the first century and needs to be roundly condemned for the heresy that it is.

The Gnostics were a group of thinkers highly influenced by Plato. Most of them denied the idea of God becoming flesh, they believed that man must find his own way to salvation and his problem is not sin but rather the need for self-knowledge. (hence gnosis)

Some gnostics believed in a dual-gender deity and almost universally denied the physical resurrection of Jesus Christ. Some even taught that Jesus did not die on the cross, but that a substitute died for Him.

Irenaeus wrote in the second century a book entitled Against Heresies, in which he expounded the teachings of the Gnostics and regarded them as heretics.

What are the Gnostic Gospels?

The Gnostic gospels are writings by early "Christian" Gnostics. After the first century of Christianity, two primary divisions developed – the orthodox and the Gnostics. The orthodox Christians held to books we now have in the Bible and to what is today considered orthodox theology. The Gnostic Christians, if they can truly be described as Christians, held a distinctly different view of the Bible, of Jesus Christ, of salvation – and virtually every other major Christian doctrine. However, they did not have any writings by the apostles to give legitimacy to their beliefs.

That is why and how the Gnostic gospels were created. The Gnostics fraudulently attached the names of famous Christians to their writings, such as the gospel of Thomas, the gospel of Philip, the gospel of Mary, etc. The discovery of the Nag Hammadi library in northern Egypt in 1945 represented a major discovery of Gnostic gospels. These Gnostic gospels are often pointed to as supposed "lost books of the Bible."

The gnostic gospels contain nonhistorical as well as completely foolish sayings that are attributed to Christ. Take for example this quote from the Gospel of Thomas, one of the most famous of the Gnostic Gospels:

Jesus [Yeshua] said, "Blessings on the lion if a human eats it, making the lion human. Foul is the human if a lion eats it, making the lion human."

Sounds just like something Jesus would say right?

So what about all the important names like Thomas, Mary and Judas? Since they have Biblical names can't we just accept them as valid? That would be a great big no considering the fact that the gnostics, using their speculative ideas, sought to tie their teachings to Jesus and the apostles to give their speculations legitimacy.

So, what are we to make of the Gnostic gospels? Should some or all of them be in the Bible? No, they should not. First, as we pointed out above, the Gnostic gospels are forgeries. The Gnostic gospels were fraudulently written in their names in order to give them a legitimacy in the early church. Thankfully, the early church fathers were nearly unanimous in recognize the Gnostic gospels as promoting false doctrines about virtually every key Christian doctrine. There are countless contradictions between the Gnostic gospels and the true Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. The Gnostic gospels can be a good source to study early Christian heresies, but they should be rejected outright as not belonging in the Bible and not representing the genuine Christian faith.

Dates of the Gnostic bible

Even scholars that try their best to give gnostic writings any shred of credibility say that the very earliest date of any of the texts is around AD 150 – at least 100, or more likely, one 150 years after Jesus' crucifixion. Contrast this with the canonical Gospels (the Protestant New Testament) which was written by credible eye witnesses and completed before AD 70. (The Gospel of John may have been written as late as AD 95.)

Parts of this article were taken by permission from gotquestions.org.

Gospel of Judas

Jay — Sat, 08 Apr 2006 13:31:17 +0000

The Gospel of Judas has been getting some media attention lately thanks to NBC and the National Geographic Channel. I pulled together a brief little bit of information about it so we can all be well informed on its gnostic background and reasons why these types of gnostic writings are not included in our canon….

Sometime in the 1970's, in a cave in Egypt, a copy of the “gospel of Judas” was discovered. The circumstances of the discovery have been described as shady, with those who possessed the copy asking for exorbitant amounts of money for the codex. For decades, no institution was willing to pay for the purchase due to its dubious origins. Eventually the codex of the gospel of Judas was purchased by a foundation in Switzerland. The existence of the gospel of Judas codex was made public in 2004, but the actual release of the content of the codex has been repeatedly delayed, with the now expected release date of April, 2006. The dating of the gospel of Judas codex is likely the 5th century A.D. Up to one-third of the codex is missing or illegible.

Prior to this discovery, the only reference to the gospel of Judas was in the writings of a 2nd century Christian named Irenaeus. Irenaeus essentially wrote that the gospel of Judas was the “invented history” of a long line of heretics and rebels against God. The essential message of the gospel of Judas is that Jesus wanted Judas to betray Him because it was necessary to fulfill Jesus' plan. If it was Jesus' plan for Judas to betray Him, why would Jesus label Judas the "son of perdition" (John 17:12), and state that it would have been better if Judas had never been born (Matthew 26:24). If Judas was simply following Jesus' instructions, why would he commit suicide once he saw that Jesus was condemned (Matthew 27:5)?

The gospel of Judas is a Gnostic gospel, espousing a Gnostic viewpoint of Christianity. The gospel of Judas is simply a heretical forgery, much the same as the gospel of Thomas, the gospel of Mary, and the gospel of Philip. Just as Judas Iscariot rejected Jesus and betrayed Him with a kiss, the gospel of Judas rejects the true Gospel and truth of God with a fraudulent appearance of validity.

Much of the book and upcoming movie "The DaVinci Code" revolves around Gnostic beliefs and their writings. I'm putting together some information we'll be able to share and discuss in our class that will touch on some of the major topics of the book and how we as Christians can best answer the questions of others that may come to us confused by the book/movie.

I'm no expert in this so with the help of Donna and some great resources I think we'll be able to have some great discussions on these contemporary (and historical) issues. If anything, the DaVinci Code and the latest media attention on the gospel of Judas will cause Christians to have a healthy interest in church history!

DaVinci Code: Here’s Your Decoder Ring

Jay — Thu, 16 Mar 2006 23:16:52 +0000

With the DaVinci code coming out soon there has been so much hooha on the topic. Let's face it – it's a fiction novel. We all know this. Christians strong in their faith will see the book and movie as just that. However, non-Christians who do not have a good grasp of the faith, or babes in Christ with little knowledge of Christian history could in fact be swayed by this novel. Here is an excellent commentary I found on the net that answers several key points that the novel makes that are conclusively fiction. In my opinion, we as Christians will be approached by those seeking answers to this film and we should be able to answer them theologically.

The questions and doubts the novel has raised are an indication of how ahistorical our culture has become. It also indicates how uninformed many Christians are about early church history.

This article is a response to questions that people have asked us in regards to the novel, The Da Vinci Code, by Dan Brown. The novel was published in 2003 and has sold millions of copies. The novel, which is fiction, claims that the New Testament of the Bible is false and that Christianity, as we know it today, is radically different from the "original" Christianity. This article seeks to explain that the theory behind The Da Vinci Code, is false.

1. Fiction: Mary Magdalene was married to Jesus.
This claim is the backbone of Brown's novel. The The Da Vinci Code claims that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married, that they had children, and that their descendants included a line of kings in France, as well as some of the main characters in Brown's novel.

Despite Brown's claims, however, there are no historical documents that claim that Jesus was married – not even the "Gnostic gospels" that Brown mentions in his novel. (The Gnostic texts were written a century or more after the New Testament. The Gnostic texts borrow some names and ideas from Christianity but the texts are not Christian and they are not used by Christians.)

The only specific evidence that Brown cites to support this claim of a marriage is a passage from one of the Gnostic texts – the so-called "gospel of Phillip." And that lone piece of evidence actually undermines Brown's claim.

The main problem with the "Phillip" passage is that it clearly shows that even in the context of this Gnostic text, Mary Magdalene and Jesus could not have been married. If you read the passage, as shown on page 246 of the hardcopy version of The Da Vinci Code, you'll see for yourself:

"the companion of the Savior is Mary Magdalene. Christ loved her more than all the disciples and used to kiss her often on her mouth. The rest of the disciples were offended by it and expressed disapproval. They said to him, 'Why do you love her more than all of us?'"

If, in the context of this Gnostic text, the Savior and Magdalene were supposedly married, then why would the disciples bother to ask why he loved her more than them?

Can you imagine a scenario in which a group of men would ask a married man, "Why do you love your wife more than us? And, for that matter, why do you keep kissing your wife?" Such a question wouldn't make any sense. In fact, it wouldn't make any sense even if the two were merely engaged or simply dating.

The only way that the question would make sense in the Gnostic text is if there was no reason for Mary Magdalene to be treated any differently than the men. And the only way that this could be true is if Mary Magdalene was supposed to have the exact same relationship with the "Savior" as did the "other disciples." In other words, only if she was not married, or otherwise intimately involved.

There are other problems with Brown's marriage theory:

• Despite Brown's "translation" of that key passage from the Gnostic gospel of Phillip, the word "mouth" doesn't actually appear in the original text. According to page 49 of The Da Vinci Deception, by Erwin W. Lutzer: "You should know that because of the poor quality of the papyrus, a word or two is missing in the original. The text reads, 'Jesus kissed her often on the [blank].' So scholars fill in the blank with the word mouth, face, or forehead, etc. Actually, for all we know the text might have said 'the hand' or even 'the cheek' since the statement implies that he also kissed his other students – presumably on the cheek as is still done in the Middle East."

• Brown claims that the Aramaic word for "companion" literally meant "spouse." That is not true according to various Aramaic scholars. And, even more importantly, the Gnostic gospel of Phillip was not written in Aramaic. It was written in Coptic.

• None of the Gnostic gospels ever claimed that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married. Even the so-called Gnostic gospel of Mary Magdalene fails to makes such a claim.

• Finally, consider this from page 41 of The Truth Behind The Da Vinci Code, by Richard Abanes, in regards to the Gnostic Phillip text: Ironically, if this text does anything, it cuts out the very heart of any assertion about Mary and Jesus being wed. It does so by adhering to one of the basic tenets of ancient Gnosticism, which declares that all physical matter was inherently evil. Consequently, sexual relations were intrinsically debasing! The Gospel of Phillip goes so far as to say that marital relations defile a woman.

2. Fiction: The Gnostic gospels and the Dead Sea Scrolls are "the earliest Christian records."
The The Da Vinci Code claims that the New Testament is a forgery and that the Gnostic gospels and the Dead Sea Scrolls are the original Christian texts.

This claim, however, is flatly contradicted by an overwhelming amount of scholarship by Christians and non-Christians. Many scholars believe that the New Testament was written during the first century and that the Gnostic texts were written no sooner than the second century. And, the Dead Sea Scrolls don't contain any gospels of any kind. In fact, the Dead Sea Scrolls do not contain any Christian writings of any kind.

There are four New Testament Gospels, which are named Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Many scholars believe that these were written during the century in which Jesus lived. The Gnostic gospels are generally believed to have been written later – about 100 to 300 years later. These Gnostic texts borrow some elements from Christianity, including the names of Jesus and his apostles, but these writings are not Christian.

There are major differences between the New Testament Gospels and the Gnostic gospels. The New Testament Gospels contain details about life in the land of Israel during the first century. They also contain several references to Old Testament passages, prophecies and theological concepts. For Christians, the New Testament is the continuation of the Old Testament. In contrast, the Gnostic texts contain very little detail to suggest that their authors had ever been to the land of Israel, or that they were even alive during the first century. And the theological concepts of the Gnostic texts sharply contradict those that are found in the Old Testament.

Consider this from pages 26 and 27 of The Truth Behind the Da Vinci Code, by Richard Abanes:

"But were the Gnostic gospels written prior to the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John? Most scholars, Christian and non-Christian, would answer no. They date the Gnostic gospels (for example, those in the Nag Hammadi collection) to about A.D. 150 to 250. Although many of these texts are Coptic translation of earlier Greek texts (that are no longer extant), most scholars agree that the material itself still does not date previous to the mid 100s to the early 200s.

"In other words, the Gnostic texts were written after the books of Matthew (about 65 to 100), Mark (about 40 to 75), Luke (about 60 to 80), and John (about 90). They [the Gnostic texts] were late arrivals, which is one reason why church leaders rejected them. … These Gnostic gospels not only disagreed with the older [New Testament] Gospels, which were already accepted by Christians, but they lacked authority since their authors were neither a) apostles of Jesus nor b) persons associated with apostles of Jesus. … No one really knows who wrote the [Gnostic] texts."

As for Brown's claim about the Dead Sea Scrolls – these scrolls were found in 1947, not in the 1950s as Brown mistakenly claims on page 234 of The Da Vinci Code. The Dead Sea Scrolls contain copies and fragments of Old Testament books and various religious and secular writings. But they do not contain any gospels, and they do not contain any references to Jesus. In fact, many of the Dead Sea Scrolls were written centuries before the time of Jesus.

3. Fiction: Christianity stole its ideas and concepts from paganism.
The Da Vinci Code, on page 232: claims: "Nothing in Christianity is original. The pre-Christian god Mithras – called the Son of God and the Light of the World – was born on December 25, died, was buried in a rock tomb, and then resurrected in three days. By the way, December 25 was also the birthday of Osiris, Adonis, and Dionysus. The newborn Krishna was presented with gold, frankincense, and myrrh."

This sequence of claims has puzzled many critics of Brown's book as to their possible origin, if indeed they have an origin outside of the author's imagination.

Serious scholars who have studied the Mithraic traditions, including Franz Cumont, paint a very different portrayal. They don't mention any death of Mithra, and they certainly don't mention any type of resurrection for Mithra.

Some Christians do celebrate Christmas on December 25 as a time of year to commemorate the birth and life of Jesus. But that doesn't mean that they believe that Jesus was born on that particular date. In fact, the Bible does not mention a specific birth date for Jesus.

For comparison, consider the American holiday called "Presidents Day." The holiday occurs on a day in February, but that doesn't mean that Americans believe that all presidents were born on that particular day in February. Of course not. It is simply a day that is set aside to commemorate American presidents.

As for the claim that the myths known as Osiris, Adonis and Dionysus were born on December 25, I have been unable to track down any scholarly source that actually makes that claim.

In regards to some of the other claims involving Mithra and Christianity, consider the following from page 87 of de-coding Da Vinci: The facts behind the fiction of The Da Vinci Code by Amy Welborn:

"Mithras was a god with many forms. By the centuries after Christ, his cult was primarily a mystery religion, popular among men, especially soldiers. Mithraic studies do not find any attribution of the titles 'Son of God' or 'Light of the World,' as Brown claims. There is also no mention of a death-resurrection motif in Mithraic mythology. Brown seems to have picked this up from a discredited nineteenth-century historian, who provided no documentation for his assertion. The same historian is the source for the Krishna connection to which Brown alludes. There is not a single story in actual Hindu mythology of Krishna being presented with gold, frankincense, and myrrh at his birth (see Miesel and Olsen, Cracking the Anti-Catholic Code)."

4. Fiction: The sacred name for God has a paganistic origin.
The Da Vinci Code, on page 309, claims: "The Jewish Tetragrammaton YHWH – the sacred name of God – in fact derived from Jehovah, an androgynous physical union between the masculine Jah and the pre-Hebraic name for Eve, Havah"

This is perhaps one of the most embarrassing errors within Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code. The word Jehovah isn't the name for God. In fact, that word doesn't appear in the Bible in either the Hebrew text of the Old Testament or in the Greek text of the New Testament. The word Jehovah is a made-up English word.

The ancient Jews began a tradition that they would not pronounce the name of God (YHWH), as a way of showing respect. Instead, when they read aloud from the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament), and they came across the name for God (YHWH), they would substitute another word – the Hebrew word for "Lord," which is "Adonah." This is similar to the practice of addressing a king as "Lord," rather than as "king."

Over time, the vowel sounds for the Hebrew word "Adonah" were fused with the consonants for the name of God (YHWH), and a new word was created – "Yehovah." (This hybrid word, which didn't exist until roughly 500 years ago, was often mistakenly pronounced by English speakers as "Jehovah," even though there is no J sound in the Hebrew language).

Therefore, any theory, however ill-intentioned or well-intentioned, that involves either the word "Jehovah" or the word "Yehovah" is completely meaningless, because there is no such word in the Hebrew text of the Old Testament or in the Greek text of the New Testament.

Brown, however, isn't the first person to mistakenly think that Jehovah was an actual word. And given the popularity of his novel, he won't be the last.

5. Fiction: The Vatican killed an "astounding 5 million women" during the witch hunts
This is important to Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code, because in order for novel's storyline to work, the Catholic Church must be portrayed as an evil, oppressive institution that hates, oppresses and feels threatened by women.

But, despite Brown's claims that there were 5 million women burned to death by the Vatican, the fact is many scholars, including those who are not Christian, say that the witch hunts were generally done by local governments and individuals. Many scholarly sources estimate that the number of people killed by the witch hunts is between 20,000 to 100,000. And, some sources estimate that 20 to 25 percent of the victims were men.

Here are some additional details from page 36 of The Truth Behind the Da Vinci Code:

It also should be noted that these persecutions were actually "a collaborative enterprise between men and women at the local level." Adam Jones, professor of international studies at the Center for Research and Teaching Economics (Mexico City), has cited many sources showing that most of the accusations of witchcraft "originated in 'conflicts [that] normally opposed one woman to another.'"

For instance, Jones quotes Robin Briggs (author of Witches & Neighbours: The Social and Cultural Context of European Witchcraft) as saying that "most informal accusations were made by women against other women." In Malevolent Nurture, Deborah Willis of the University of California, Riverside, confirms that "women were actively involved in making witchcraft accusations against their female neighbors." She adds, "To a considerable extent, then, village-level witch-hunting was women's work."

6. Fiction: Emperor Constantine shaped the New Testament.
This is essential to the plot in The Da Vinci Code because it requires that the reader can believe that Constantine replaced the Gnostic writings with what we now call the New Testament. But, Constantine could not have had a hand in shaping the New Testament for two reasons: He wasn't born soon enough and he didn't live long enough. Based on writings from early church leaders, which date from the year 96 through the year 112, 24 of the 27 books that are part of today's New Testament were already regarded by early Christians as being authoritative, a full 213 years before Constantine convened the Council of Nicea. And, the Council of Nicea didn't canonize anything. The canonization process occurred a full 70 years later, on a different continent. In addition, there were several writings by early church leaders, who died long before Constantine was even born, that collectively quote thousands of New Testament passages.

7. Fiction: The Vatican demonized pagan worship.
The Da Vinci Code, page 37: "As part of the Vatican's campaign to eradicate pagan religions and convert the masses to Christianity, the church launched a smear campaign against the pagan gods and goddesses, recasting their divine symbols as evil…. Venus' pentacle became the sign of the devil."

Many people might not realize this, but there is a great deal of historical evidence that shows that pagans tried to eradicate Christianity and that pagans copied Christian symbols and ceremonies in the hopes of surviving the rapid spread of Christianity, especially during the first three centuries after the time of Jesus. During that era, the pagans had tremendous resources, including the support of emperors, who by default, where designated as high priests of pagan religions. Their efforts to eradicate Christianity were remarkably unsuccessful, and Christianity was able to become the first religion to spread to followers worldwide. Even today, it can be argued that Christianity is still the only worldwide religion.

As for Brown's claim about the pentacle, even that contradicts historical evidence. The fact is, many Christians actually embraced the pentacle! "The truth is, during the later medieval era (the 1100s to the 1500s), Christians used the pentagram and pentacle as a reminder of Christ's five wounds (hands, feet, side, back, head). They also used it as a symbol for "the five books of Moses" and "the five stones used by David against Goliath," according to page 32 of The Truth Behind the Da Vinci Code.

There is nothing about a symbol, such as the pentacle or pentagram, that is inherently good or evil. Its meaning depends on who is using it and for what purpose they are using it. Some school teachers will mark a student's homework assignment with a star (a pentacle) to show that the student did excellent work. In this context, there is nothing demonic about the pentacle, it simply represents "stellar" work. But, when the founder of the Church of Satan needed a symbol for his religion during the 1960s he chose to use a pentacle, which he turned upside down. A pentacle, then, is what one makes of it.

So who "demonized" the pentacle? According to some scholars, and according to some modern pagan sources, it was a French occultist who lived during the 1800s. In other words, it was a pagan who "demonized" the symbol.

8. Fiction: Constantine and the Vatican demonized Mary Magdalene and sought to degrade women as part of a "power grab."
These claims are very important to Dan Brown's storyline. The historical evidence, however, strongly contradicts Brown's claim. Mary Magdalene is held in special regard by the Catholic Church, in part because she was the first person to witness the resurrection of Jesus Christ. If the Catholic Church wanted to tarnish the image of Mary Magdalene, and if it was willing to rewrite scripture to do it, then why would it allow Mary Magdalene to be the first person to have witnessed the most important event in all of Christianity, which is the resurrection?

Another problem for Brown's theory is that the Vatican exalts Mary Magdalene – as a saint! In fact, several churches are named in honor of Mary Magdalene, who is also honored with an annual celebration by Catholics.

And if someone can still think that Brown's theory is somehow true, that the Vatican allegedly hates women, then consider its regard for another woman named Mary – the mother of Jesus. And when you're finished contemplating that, apologize to yourself if you even momentarily thought that Dan Brown was on to something.

9. Fiction: "Christianity's weekly holy day was stolen from the pagans."
Da Vinci Code, pages 232-233: "Christianity's weekly holy day was stolen from the pagans. Christianity honored the Jewish Sabbath of Saturday, but Constantine shifted it to coincide with the pagan's veneration day of the sun."

Actually, long before Constantine was even born, there were Christian writings that made it clear that there was a Sabbath, which corresponds to Saturday, and a "Lord's Day," which corresponds to Sunday. Since the early beginnings of Christianity, Christians had an affection for the first day of the week (Sunday) because this is the day on which Jesus was resurrected. Early references to the "Lord's Day" include Acts 20:7 and 1 Corinthians 16:2, which are books in the New Testament. These were written during the first century and predate the birth of Constantine by more than 200 years! Outside of the New Testament, there are early Christian writings that confirm that Christians celebrated a "Lord's Day" (Sunday). These writings include those by Justin Martyr and Melito of Sardis. Both lived during the Second Century (during the 100s), and both had already died before Constantine was even born.