01-18-2009, 01:54 PM
I found an interesting article on the DaVinci Code - the first part of the article I quoted here, for the rest of it, click on the link at the end.
Quote:Da Vinci’s Sacred Feminine and Gnosticism
----------------------------------------------------
Author: Russ Wise
Date: 4/14/2006 12:55:00 PM
By Russ Wise
Leonardo’s secret is out! His Code has been broken and the “true” meaning of his work is now known. To date the writing about The Da Vinci Code has largely been centered on the presupposed Facts or “truths” offered by Dan Brown in the beginning of his book – The Priory of Scion and Opus Dei. However, there is a much deeper concern that should arrest the interest of the Christian community: the linkage between the teachings found in The Da Vinci Code and those taught in Gnosticism.
The critical issues that should alarm the Christian are as follows: Brown offers his reader a different Jesus than the one found in the Scriptures, his Jesus never claimed to be Divine, nor did he ever resurrect from the dead. Brown’s Jesus was a married man who fathered a child and later created a movement – Christianity – based on lies and deception. Brown’s novel more closely reflects ancient Gnosticism than early Christianity. The focus of our discussion will center on Brown’s use of Gnosticism as a tool by which he can reconstruct authentic Christianity. Brown’s message is clear; he wants to reinvent the Christian faith by going back to the early writings of the Apostles and rewrite or reinterpret their message to suit his purposes. The test is simple for the modern Christian - will the 21st century Christian be able to adequately discern the heresies of our day as the early Church Fathers were able to recognize the heresies of theirs? Our ability to correctly do so is central to the future of Christianity.
The Gnostics held several views that were opposed to biblical Christianity. They believed there was a “sacred relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene.”1 They also accepted the idea that Goddess worship was central to understanding man’s spiritual destiny and that the ‘sacred feminine’ (or the ‘divine goddess’ as Brown puts it), is the foundation stone that Christianity is built on, even though it has been obscured. This knowledge is gained by attaining wisdom through the teachings of Sophia – the Goddess of Wisdom – and her counterparts within the church.
Christian Gnosticism is said to have emerged in the seventh century and it has gained a growing popularity over the centuries. It is currently known as Sophian Gnosticism2 and has found followers among many of the churches of our day.
The Goddess Sophia has gained notice in recent years through the Re-Imaging Movement.3 This movement has made inroads into many Christian denominations: United Methodist, Lutheran, Roman Catholic, United Church of Christ, Baptist, Episcopalian, Mennonite, United Church of Canada, the church of the Brethren and the Church Women United. This movement to establish the Goddess Sophia as a co-equal to God has its origin in ancient Gnosticism and is now being reintroduced to a new audience through the literary work of Dan Brown.
The Da Vinci Code is just another attempt to further the idea that women hold the keys to true spirituality and that mankind would be better served if they returned to the pre-Christian order of spiritual observance. At the very least, the goddess as the consort of God is recognized as a co-creator and co-equal.
Before we can understand the connection between The Da Vinci Code and Gnosticism it would serve our interests to more fully understand the teachings of Gnosticism.*
__________________________________________
*If you have previously read The Da Vinci Code an understanding of Gnosticism will help you recognize the Pagan/Occult influence of the novel. If you have not yet read it this paper will help you see the non-Christian influence the novel may have on the biblically naive.
http://www.christianinformation.org/arti...?artID=105
) as is his structural descriptions of the Louvre. (it does NOT have 666 glass panes in the area he describes). and his views on renaissance art, as well as in everygthing else he writes about are those of an ignorant dabbler with an axe to grind
