|
Prior to the premier of Ron Howard's movie, The DaVinci Code, there was a whirlwind media blitz that stirred the Body of Christ. The media was reporting the coming of the movie whose premise was that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and that they had a baby girl named Sarah. The Body of Christ flew into action, preparing for the disruption of people's faith as a result of the movie. Armed with the Word of God, sources from Church History and Apologetics, the Body of Christ said, "Bring it on, Devil! We've got something for you!"
Shortly after the movie opened, the controversy suddenly ended, as if it had been a fire suddenly quenched by water. To my knowledge there are no reports of masses of people whose faith have been shaken as a result of seeing the movie. What happened?
Maybe after seeing the movie, many people realized as I did that the whole thing was much ado about nothing. Although to us Christians, the notion that Jesus had a wife and baby is ridiculously offensive, the movie storyline supporting this notion is equally (if not more) ridiculous and also hilarious (but not as offensive). In the movie, one of the objectives of one of the main characters is to find the remains of Mary Magdalene so that a DNA test could be run using those remains and the DNA of her living descendant. This DNA test would then prove that Christianity was a lie, because Jesus had married Mary Magdalene and had a baby.
The problem with this idea is that paternity cannot be proven using the DNA of the mother. Paternity can only be proven using the DNA of the father. In the movie storyline, there was no effort made to recover the remains of Jesus. We Christians know there are no remains to recover, because Jesus was resurrected from the dead. But if the movie's premise was to be believed, why was there no effort made to recover something from which Jesus' "DNA" could be extracted to run a test that would prove paternity? No such effort was made.
During the media blitz, Ron Howard stated that the movie is not theology, but entertainment. He was right. For all the offense that the movie's premise caused, and the disappointment that Ron Howard was chosen to make the movie (because everyone loves Opie Taylor), he was in fact probably the best choice. Ron did an excellent job of laying bare the storyline's fallacy of trying to prove paternity using a mother's DNA. Any rational, thinking person could have seen it.
I have not read the book, The DaVinci Code. Therefore I cannot and will not comment on it. But having seen the movie, I can honestly say, there is nothing in the movie that would shake anyone's faith in Jesus Christ. Persons who would use The DaVinci Code movie as an excuse to reject the Gospel of Jesus Christ either 1) do not understand the message of the Gospel or 2) prior to the movie, had already made a decision to reject Jesus.
The good news is that the Body of Christ, in anticipation of the movie's aftermath, prepared itself to minister to those whose faith might be shaken. The other good news is it wasn't necessary. The only thing Hollywood can say to the Body of Christ is, "Made you look!"
"Some indeed preach Christ even from envy and strife, and some also from goodwill: The former preach Christ from selfish amition, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my chains; but the latter out of love, knowing I am appointed for the defense of the gospel. What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is preached; and in this I rejoice, yes, and will rejoice." Philippians 1:15-18
|
