|
|
Debunking The Da Vinci
Code's Attack on the
Bible
|
|
|
Dan
Brown's "fact based fiction"
|
There continue to be false teachers in our
day who attack the teachings of scripture and
even the foundations of Christianity itself. One
such book which I address in this section is a
book written by Dan Brown in April of 2003,
entitled "The Da Vinci Code" which was later
made into a movie directed by Ron Howard
(released in May of 2006). On the surface, "The
Da Vinci Code" is a well written action
adventure story that keeps you on the edge of
your seat. But one does not have to read very
far to see that Dan Brown had more in mind than
just a good work of fiction. As you will see in
the material that follows, he clearly seeks to
undermine the foundations of our Christian
faith. Many of the challenges that he raises in
this "fictional" work have already been
addressed in my article on
How God Produced the Bible,
so by rebutting Dan Brown's assertions (as given
through his fictional characters) we will be, in
effect, reinforcing the material presented
there on how God produced the Bible. I am greatly indebted to James White for much
of the information in this last section as I
borrow extensively (even shamelessly quoting
some of his jokes) from an article on his
website that deals with this subject.
[1]
Question:
Are we making a mountain out
of a mole-hill? Should we just laugh at the The
Da Vinci Code, enjoy the story, and ignore the
statements it makes about the Scriptures,
Christ, the apostles, the Church, etc.?
Answer:
It is important to keep in mind that The Da Vinci Code is presented as fiction based on facts. The book itself begins by stating that what it says about art, architecture, and documents, is accurate.
It is important to keep in mind that The Da
Vinci Code is presented as fiction based on
facts. The book itself begins by stating that
what it says about art, architecture, and
documents, is accurate.
|
Note the “fact” page in
the front Dan Brown’s work of “fiction”:
|
|
“Accurate” is not a word we normally use when
we are talking about "fiction“! And that brings
us to the key issue: no one is arguing that Langdon
or Teabing actually exist. They are the
fictional characters. But the
assertions
these characters make in the story are presented
not as fiction, but as unquestioned historical
facts
.
On his web page, Dan Brown makes the
following statement which, I believe, shows that
he fully believes the things that the characters
in his book state. He said:
"I am not the first person to tell the story
of Mary Magdalene and the Holy Grail. This
idea is centuries old. I am one in a long
line of people who has offered up this
alternative history.
The Da Vinci Code
describes history as I have come to
understand it through many years of travel,
research, reading, interviews, exploration
."
These are not the words of someone who is merely
offering fiction without factual basis. He
presents his assertions regarding the
untrustworthiness of the Scriptures as
historical facts: and he clearly believes this
to be true, and the movie presents these
accusations as historical facts as well.
|
|
DVD cover for "The Da
Vinci Code" movie starring Tom Hanks.
|
The Da Vinci Code is not one big long
attack upon the Christian faith. In fact, if
you fall asleep for about ten minutes in the
film...ok, and run to the bathroom a little
later for another couple of minutes...you'll
probably miss the main objectionable
portions.
But the problem is that the anti-Christian
material in the book is
absolutely central
to the plot.
And since it is central to the theme, it is
the main thing the reader, or the
movie-goer, takes from the experience. "What
if...?"
The main part of the book/movie in which
this anti-Christian material is found comes
as Langdon and Sophie are running from the
police, bearing the cryptex, the key to the
location of the Holy Grail. They go to Leigh
Teabing's residence. Teabing is an eccentric
old man, an expert on the Grail legends, and
far more involved in the entire story than
Langdon and Sophie know.
In any case, they enter into Teabing's
library and there “educate” Sophie, who we
later find out is actually a descendant of
Mary Magdalene and Jesus and therefore part
of the “royal bloodline”.
The fundamental nature of the book's
attack upon the Christian faith can be seen
when Teabing and Langdon begin weaving their
conspiracy theory in an attempt to
“enlighten” Sophie.
|
|
A scene from
The Da Vinci
Code
where Teabing (center) with
some help from Langdon (played by
Tom Hanks on the left) "enlightens"
Sophie with his ideas on how the
Bible originated.
|
"And everything you need to know about
the Bible can be summed up by the great
canon doctor Martyn Percy." Teabing cleared
his throat and declared, "The Bible did not
arrive by fax from heaven." "I beg your
pardon?" "The Bible is a product of man, my
dear. Not of God. The Bible did not fall
magically from the clouds. Man created it as
a historical record of tumultuous times, and
it has evolved through countless
translations, additions, and revisions.
History has never had a definitive version
of the book."
[2]
He is not even arguing against the true
Christian view of the Scriptures! This is
what we call a “straw man” argument. God did
not, in fact, "fax" the Bible down. He did
not produce it through automatic writing,
either. As Peter put it, "For no prophecy
was ever produced by the will of man, but
men spoke from God as they were carried
along by the Holy Spirit" (2 Peter 1:21).
No Christian argues that the Bible
fell “magically from the clouds”. Nor
does anyone deny that God used men
(apostles and prophets) to produce the
scriptures. But what the Bible does
claim is that God sovereignly controlled
the writing of these men in such a way
that the words which they wrote were the
very words of God – i.e. “God breathed”
(2 Tim 3:16). Dan Brown seeks to deny
this, but so far he has offered no
evidence.
The Bible is a historical record –
but it is much more than that. The Bible
has been translated into many languages
so that people can read it in their own
tongue. What he implies here is that
somehow the Bible has significantly
changed (“evolved”) over time and that
somehow translations have something to
do with that. This is not the case. God
has preserved thousands of ancient
manuscripts so that we can determine
what the original writings say with
great accuracy. All good translations
are based on these manuscripts and are
therefore accurate representations of
God’s words.
Christians throughout the world
today all use the same definitive
version of the Bible that was largely
defined within less than 100 years of
when it was originally written. By 367
A.D. it was explicitly defined to the
point that Athanasius lists the exact
books that we still have in our Bibles
today.
|
|
Statue of the Emperor Augustus
[3]
|
Painting of the Council of Nicaea
[4]
|
Before dealing with the next two attacks
on the Bible by
The Da Vinci Code
, it is important that
we take a brief look at the history of the
early church. Brown's characters make a
number of assertions about the history of
this period and much of it is demonstrably
inaccurate as we will show.
|
Map of the Roman Empire at
its Greatest Extent
[5]
|
|
The “birth” of New Testament
Christianity (marked by the
incarnation and ministry of Jesus
Christ) took place in the Roman
Empire.
The initial spread of the
Christian church (brought about
primarily by the missionary journeys
of the Apostle Paul as recorded in
the book of Acts) also took place in
the Roman Empire.
The Roman Empire remained in
place (though in varying forms)
throughout the first 1400 years of
church history – eventually becoming
controlled by the Roman Catholic
Church – a gradual spin-off of true
Christianity.
Through much of its history, the
Roman Empire was ruled by a series
of emperors. As we are about to see,
these emperors impacted the church
in a variety of ways.
|
|
An artist's depiction of early Christian martyrs -
The Christian Martyrs Last Prayer
by Leon Gerome (1824-1904)
|
In its first three
centuries, the Christian church
endured regular persecution at the
hands of Roman authorities.
But the persecution was not
constant from the time of Christ
until 300 A.D. Persecution came in
waves.
The Roman Empire was generally quite
tolerant in its treatment of other
religions. The imperial policy was
generally one of incorporation - the
local gods of a newly conquered area
were simply added to the Roman
pantheon and often given Roman
names. Even the Jews, with their one
God, were generally tolerated.
But religious beliefs were valid
only if they could be shown to be
old and in line with ancient
customs; new and innovative
teachings were regarded with
distrust.
Because Judaism was so opposed
to idolatry and were unwilling to
worship other gods – it seemed to
outsiders (at first) that
Christianity was just another sect
of Judaism. This provided
Christianity with a certain level of
protection up until the middle of
the second century.
As it became more evident over
time that Christianity was distinct
from Judaism (due in part to the
large number of Gentiles coming into
the church), the Romans began to see
it as an outside religion.
It has been customary to count
ten major persecutions in the early
church. These ten persecutions are:
-
Persecution under Nero (64-68)Persecution under Domitian (81-96)
-
Persecution under Trajan (112-117)
-
Persecution under Marcus Aurelius (161-180)
-
Persecution under Septimus Severus (202-210)
-
Persecution under Maximinus the Thracian (235-38)
-
Persecution under Decius (250-251)
-
Persecution under Valerian (257-59)
-
Persecution under Aurelian (270–275)
-
Severe persecution under Diocletian and Galerius (303-324)
-
Christian persecution ended under the reign of Constantine I
|
|
Bronze statue of Constantine I
in York, England, near the spot
where he was proclaimed Emperor
in 306
|
Constantine I (AD 280-337), son
of a Roman general (who later became
a Western Roman Emperor) was
proclaimed emperor by his troops in
306, and ruled an ever-growing
portion of the Roman Empire until
his death.
His mother, Helena, was a Christian
and played a very influential role
throughout her son's life. Scholars
debate whether Constantine adopted his
mother’s Christianity in his youth, or
whether he adopted it gradually over the
course of his life.
Constantine was over 40 when he
finally declared himself a
Christian. Writing to Christians,
Constantine made it clear that he
believed he owed his successes to
the protection of the Christian God
alone.
Constantine is perhaps best known
for being the first Christian Roman
Emperor. His reign was a turning point
for the Christian Church.
In 313 Constantine announced
toleration of Christianity in the
Edict of Milan, which removed
penalties for professing
Christianity (under which many had
been martyred in previous
persecutions of Christians).
Throughout his rule, Constantine
supported the Church financially, built
various church buildings, granted
privileges (e.g. exemption from certain
taxes) to clergy, promoted Christians to
high ranking offices, and returned
property confiscated during the Great
Persecution of Diocletian.
Although the changes put in
place by Constantine were a relief
to the early Christians, Constantine
set a bad precedent for the
relationship between church and
state.
To his credit, Constantine believed
that the emperor did not decide
doctrine – he believed that was the
responsibility of the bishops. But
Constantine believed that it was his
role to enforce, by the power of the
sword if necessary, the decisions
made by the bishops.
Constantine was mistaken in taking
on this role: true Christianity cannot
be produced by the power of the sword!
In later centuries this power was
greatly abused by the so-called “church”
and resulted in the persecution and
death of many true Christians by
unbelieving religious authorities.
|
|
Ruins of Hagia Sophia in
present-day Iznik, Turkey, where
the Council of Nicaea met
[6]
|
Constantine is also known for
having called the first “universal
council” (a meeting in which all the
major church leaders gather together
to resolve serious issues) since the
council of Jerusalem that is
described in Acts 15.
The Council of Nicaea is often
misrepresented by cults and other
religious movements.
To understand why the first
universal council was called, we
must go back to around A.D. 318.
A popular preacher in the city of
Alexandria by the name of Arius
began teaching that Christ, though
highly exalted, was nevertheless a
created being and therefore "there
was a time when the Son was not”.
About three years later (in 321),
Arius was declared a heretic by a
local council.
But this did not end the matter.
Arius simply moved to Palestine and
began promoting his ideas there.
Arius found an audience for his
teachings, and over the course of the
next few years the debate became so
heated that it came to the attention of
Constantine, the Emperor.
Constantine recognized that a major
division like this in the Christian
church could cause problems in his
empire.
So in the summer of 325, Constantine
called for a meeting or council of
church leaders from churches throughout
the empire to meet in Nicaea, (now known
as Iznik, in modern-day Turkey), a place
easily accessible to the majority of
them.
Leading bishops in the various churches
agreed to come because they recognized
the serious nature of the issue being
discussed.
|
Location of the
Council of Nicaea
|
|
Approximately 300 bishops attended the
Council of Nicaea, from every region of the
Empire except Britain.
Constantine had invited all 1800 bishops of the
Christian church (about 1000 in the east and 800
in the west), but only 250 to 320 bishops
actually participated.
The participating bishops were given free travel
from their home churches to the council (and
back), as well as free lodging during their stay
– courtesy of Constantine and the Roman
government!
These bishops did not travel alone; each one had
permission to bring with him two priests and
three deacons; so the total number of attendees
would have been above 1500.
While a few other minor issues were discussed at
the Council of Nicaea (such as what date they
should celebrate Easter) the
major
issue
discussed was
the deity of Jesus Christ
.
Note it was only recently that Christ’s deity
had been questioned – Arius’ teacher Lucian (AD
240 – 312) is said to be the real author of idea
that Christ was a created being.
Prior to this time the early church had believed
the teachings of scripture which tell us that
Christ is co-equal and co-eternal with the
Father. And this was the majority view of the
bishops who attended Nicaea as the final vote on
this topic would later show.
Note also that a topic that was
not
in question
at the council of Nicaea was which books
belonged in the New Testament.
When arguing over the deity of Christ, the
delegates at
this council quoted from the same
books of the New Testament that we use today
!
There is no record of this ever being questioned
during the council.
Nor is there any record of delegates quoting
from the “Gnostic gospels” that have become so
popular among heretics in our day.
|
The Nicene Creed
of A.D. 325
|
|
|
We believe in
one God, the Father Almighty, Maker
of all things visible and invisible.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the
Son of God, begotten of the Father
the only-begotten; that is, of the
essence of the Father, God of God,
Light of Light, very God of very
God, begotten, not made, being of
one substance with the Father;
by whom all things were made both in
heaven and on earth;
who for us men, and for our
salvation, came down and was
incarnate and was made man;
he suffered, and the third day he
rose again, ascended into heaven;
from thence he shall come to judge
the quick and the dead.
And in the Holy Ghost.
But those who say: 'There was a time
when he was not;' and 'He was not
before he was made;' and 'He was
made out of nothing,' or 'He is of
another substance' or 'essence,' or
'The Son of God is created,' or
'changeable,' or 'alterable' — they
are condemned by the holy catholic
and apostolic Church.
|
With the above information in mind we now
resume our response to extracts from
The Da Vinci Code
:
|
|
Teabing as
portrayed in
The Da Vinci Code
movie.
|
"Jesus Christ was a
historical figure of staggering influence,
perhaps the most enigmatic and inspirational
leader the world has ever seen. As the
prophesied Messiah, Jesus toppled kings,
inspired millions, and founded new
philosophies. As a descendant of the lines
of King Solomon and King David, Jesus
possessed a rightful claim to the throne of
the King of the Jews. Understandably, His
life was recorded by thousands of followers
across the land….More than eighty gospels
were considered for the New Testament, and
yet only a relative few were chosen for
inclusion—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John
among them. “Who chose which gospels to
include?” Sophie asked. “Aha!” Teabing burst
in with enthusiasm. “The fundamental irony
of Christianity! The Bible, as we know it
today, was collated by the pagan Roman
emperor Constantine the Great.”
[7]
Brown says Jesus was the "prophesied
Messiah".
Is Brown admitting here that the
OT contains valid prophecy - divine
prediction of future events - and that
Christ fulfilled those prophecies? Would it
not follow then that God could protect the
New Testament as well? Brown needs to listen
to the words Jesus spoke to his disciples
soon after His crucifixion:
And [Jesus] said to [his disciples], "O
foolish men and slow of heart to believe in
all that the prophets have spoken! Was it
not necessary for the Christ to suffer these
things and to enter into His glory?" Then
beginning with Moses and with all the
prophets, He explained to them the things
concerning Himself in all the Scriptures.
(Luke 24:25-27)
Jesus “toppled kings”?
As sovereign God He
has certainly done so, but Jesus' earthly
ministry was only noticed by men as high as
Pilate and Herod, surely not Caesar in far
away Rome.
Jesus has indeed inspired hundreds of
millions, but only through the testimony of
His teachings as recorded in the very
documents Brown has already undercut and
will soon identify as little more than
politically-motivated lies.
More than eighty gospels were considered for
the New Testament?
This is an utterly bogus
claim – the four Gospels that we have in our
NT are the only ones written in the first
century. Even if we count all the Gnostic
gospels (written after the first century),
there were far less than this. But still,
one wonders what happened to the “thousands”
of others recorded by these anonymous
followers of Jesus? Brown here seems to
contradict his own claims!
We have to almost chuckle at the next line:
“yet only a relative few were chosen for
inclusion—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John
among them.”
Matthew, Mark, Luke and John
among them? Hmm...what others once were in
these relative “few” that were “chosen”
outside of the four canonical gospels? We
aren't told. This is probably just a mistake
that the copy editors did not catch (since
it would require some level of biblical
knowledge to recognize it, and that is
surely not something that marks off The Da
Vinci Code).
Between the death and resurrection of Christ
(appx. AD 33) and the Council of Nicaea (AD
325) almost a full three centuries passed.
During the vast majority of that time the
Christian church was an illegal or banned
religion, under the persecution of the
Empire.
But early Christians were writing during
this time, and we have sufficient amounts of
their writings to get a pretty good idea of
what they believed and what they viewed as
Scripture.
Brown will ignore all of this material and
simply make things up as he goes along when
it comes to this topic and especially to the
issue of the deity of Christ.
The claim that Constantine “collated” the
Christian Scriptures, though tremendously
common, is likewise just as tremendously
wrong.
There isn't a shred of historical
basis for making such a claim. The closest
you can possibly come is to note that
Constantine paid to have a number of Bibles
copied. The fact of the matter is the canon
was not an issue of discussion at Nicaea –
the Deity of Christ was. And this issue was
settled using the New Testament as we know
it today – not the Gnostic writings.
Brown calls Constantine a pagan.
But
Constantine did not remain a pagan - he
converted to Christianity and put a stop to
Christian persecution that had been going on
for centuries prior.
|
|
The Council
of Nicaea as
portrayed in
The Da Vinci Code
movie.
|
“Constantine needed
to strengthen the new Christian
tradition, and held a famous ecumenical
gathering known as the council of
Nicaea.”
Sophie had heard of it only insofar as
its being the birthplace of the Nicene
Creed.
“At this gathering,” Teabing said, “many
aspects of Christianity were debated and
voted upon – the date of Easter, the
role of bishops, the administration of
sacraments, and, of course, the divinity
of Jesus.”
“I don’t follow. His divinity?”
“My dear,” Teabing declared, “until that
moment in history, Jesus was viewed by
his followers as a mortal prophet. . .a
great and powerful man, but a man
nonetheless. A mortal.”
“Not the Son of God?”
“Right,” Teabing said. “Jesus’
establishment as ‘the Son of God’ was
officially proposed and voted on by the
Council of Nicaea.”
"Hold on. You're saying Jesus' divinity
was the result of a vote?" "A relatively
close vote at that," Teabing added.
[8]
What!? “Until that moment in history
(A.D.325), Jesus was viewed by his
followers as a mortal prophet. . . Not
the Son of God”?! This is utterly false,
as the both the New Testament writers,
(writing long before A.D.325 - see chart
below) and a number of the early church
fathers (also writing A.D.325 - see the
chart below) identified Jesus as both
the "Son of God" and "God" on a number
of occasions as the citations below
clearly demonstrate:
|
Timeline
demonstrating that the New Testament
which identifies Jesus as both
the Son of God and God was written long before the Council
of Nicaea in A.D. 325
|
|
|
Jesus identified as the
Son of
God
in the New Testament (long
before The Council of Nicaea in A.D.325):
Matthew 14:33 - Then those [Jesus’ disciples]
who were in the boat worshiped
him, saying, “Truly you are the
Son of God
.”
(written between
A.D. 50-70)
Mark 14:61-64 - the high priest
asked him,
“Are you the Christ,
the Son of the Blessed One?” “I
am,” said Jesus
. “And you will
see the Son of Man sitting at
the right hand of the Mighty One
and coming on the clouds of
heaven.” The high priest tore
his clothes. "Why do we need any
more witnesses?" he asked. "You
have heard the blasphemy. What
do you think?" They all
condemned him as worthy of
death.
(written between A.D.
50-70)
Luke 1:34-35 - “How will this be,”
Mary asked the angel, “since I
am a virgin?” The angel
answered, “The Holy Spirit will
come upon you, and the power of
the Most High will overshadow
you. So the holy one to be born
will be called the
Son of God.
”
(written between A.D. 50-70)
John 1:32-34 - Then John gave this
testimony: “I saw the Spirit
come down from heaven as a dove
and remain on him. I would not
have known him, except that the
one who sent me to baptize with
water told me, ‘The man on whom
you see the Spirit come down and
remain is he who will baptize
with the Holy Spirit.’ I have
seen and I testify that this is
the
Son of God
.”
(written no
later than 85 A.D.)
John 20:31 - But these are written
that you may believe that Jesus
is the Christ, the
Son of God
,
and that by believing you may
have life in his name.
Jesus identified as the
God
in
the New Testament (long before The
Council of Nicaea in A.D.325):
John 1:1 - In the beginning
was the Word, and the Word was
with God, and the
Word
[=Jesus
cf. vs.14]
was God
.
John 1:18 - No one has ever seen
God, but
God the One and Only
,
who is at the Father's side, has
made him known
John 20:28 - Thomas said to him
[Jesus], "
My Lord and my God
!"
Romans 9:5
-
Christ, who is God
over all, forever praised!
Titus 2:13b - Our great
God
and
Savior, Jesus Christ
Hebrews 1:8 - But about the Son he
[the Father] says, "Your throne,
O
God
, will last for ever and
ever
1 John 5:20 - And we are in him
who is true-- even in his Son
Jesus Christ. He is
the true God
and eternal life
|
Timeline
showing a number of church fathers
who identified Jesus as the Son of God before the Council
of Nicaea in A.D. 325
|
|
|
Jesus identified as
the Son of God
by a number of early church fathers (before The Council of Nicaea in A.D.325):
-
A.D. 108
- Jesus Christ, who was
of the seed of David according to
the flesh, being both the Son of man
and the
Son of God
. . . that we
should live for ever in Jesus
Christ.
[9]
-
A.D.120-140
- But may the God and
Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and
Jesus Christ Himself, who is the
Son
of God
, and our everlasting High
Priest, build you up in faith and
truth, and in all meekness,
gentleness, patience,
long-suffering, forbearance, and
purity;
[10]
-
A.D.150-155
- In these books, then,
of the prophets we found Jesus our
Christ foretold as coming, born of a
virgin, growing up to man’s estate,
and healing every disease and every
sickness, and raising the dead, and
being hated, and unrecognised, and
crucified, and dying, and rising
again, and ascending into heaven,
and being, and being called, the
Son
of God
.
[11]
-
A.D. 180
- And others39 of them,
with great craftiness, adapted such
parts of Scripture to their own
figments, lead away captive from the
truth those who do not retain a stedfast faith in one God, the
Father Almighty, and in one Lord
Jesus
Christ, the Son of God
.
[12]
|
Timeline
showing a number of church fathers
who clearly identified Jesus as God before the Council
of Nicaea in A.D. 325
|
|
|
Jesus clearly identified as
God
by
the church fathers (before The Council of Nicaea in A.D.325):
Ignatius of Antioch –
A.D. 108
Ignatius, who is also called
Theophorus, to her who has been
blessed in greatness through the
fulness of God the Father, ordained
before time to be always resulting
in permanent glory, unchangeably
united and chosen in true passion,
by the will of the Father and of
Jesus Christ, our God, to the church
which is in Ephesus of Asia, worthy
of felicitation: abundant greetings
in
Jesus Christ and in blameless
joy.
[13]
For our God, Jesus the Christ,
was conceived by Mary according to a
dispensation of God, from the seed
of David, yes, but of the Holy
Spirit as well.
[14]
Ignatius, who is also Theophorus,
unto her that hath found mercy in
the bountifulness of the Father Most
High and of Jesus Christ His only
Son; to the church that is beloved
and enlightened through the will of
Him who willed all things that are,
by faith and love towards Jesus
Christ our God.
[15]
I give glory to Jesus Christ the
God who bestowed such wisdom upon
you; for I have perceived that ye
are established in faith immovable,
being as it were nailed to the cross
of the Lord Jesus Christ, in flesh
and in spirit, and firmly grounded
in love in the blood of Christ,
fully persuaded as touching our Lord
that He is truly of the race of
David according to the flesh, but
Son of God by the Divine will and
power, truly born of a virgin and
baptized by John that all
righteousness might be fulfilled by
Him, truly nailed up in the flesh
for our sakes under Pontius Pilate
and Herod the tetrarch (of which
fruit are we--that is, of His most
blessed passion); that He might set
up an ensign unto all the ages
through His resurrection, for His
saints and faithful people, whether
among Jews or among Gentiles, in one
body of His Church....Let no man be
deceived. Even the heavenly beings
and the glory of the angels and the
rulers visible and invisible, if
they believe not in the blood of
Christ [who is God], judgment
awaiteth them also.
[16]
Melito Bishop of Sardis, Sermon –
A.D. 180
And so he was lifted up upon a tree and
an inscription was attached indicating
who was being killed. Who was it? It is
a grievous thing to tell, but a most
fearful thing to refrain from telling.
But listen, as you tremble before him on
whose account the earth trembled!
He who hung the earth in place is
hanged.
He who fixed the heavens in place is
fixed in place.
He who made all things fast is made fast
on a tree.
The Sovereign is insulted.
God is murdered.
The King of Israel is destroyed by an
Israelite hand.
This is the One who made the heavens and
the earth,
and formed mankind in the beginning,
The One proclaimed by the Law and the
Prophets,
The One enfleshed in a virgin,
The One hanged on a tree,
The One buried in the earth,
The One raised from the dead and who
went up into the heights of heaven,
The One sitting at the right hand of the
Father,
The One having all authority to judge
and save,
Through Whom the Father made the things
which exist from the beginning of time.
This One is “the Alpha and the Omega,”
This One is “the beginning and the end”
—the beginning indescribable and the end
incomprehensible.
This One is the Christ. This One is the
King.
This One is Jesus. This One is the
Leader.
This One is the Lord.
This One is the One who rose from the
dead.
This One is the One sitting on the right
hand of the Father.
He bears the Father and is borne by the
Father.
“To him be the glory and the power
forever. Amen.”
[17]
Concerning the last assertion of Brown's
character (Teabing) that “Jesus' divinity
was the result of a vote... A relatively
close vote at that.” Here are the facts:
-
Almost all the bishops agreed with
and signed the creed affirming the
deity of Jesus Christ.
-
Only two Egyptian bishops, Theonas
and Secundus, persistently refused
to sign, and were banished with
Arius to Illyria.
-
We do not know exactly how many
bishops were at Nicaea, but
estimates range from about 250 to
320.
If we take the smallest number, 250
– that would make the vote 247 to 3
-
That would be 98.8% for, 1.2%
against!
-
This is "relatively close"?
|
|