[ Home | Eschatology | Bible Studies | Classics | Articles | Sermons | Apologetics | Search | F.A.Q. ]

Author Topic: The DaVinci Code  (Read 12239 times)

curious-jack

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: The DaVinci Code
« Reply #15 on: December 05, 2006, 01:30:44 PM »
It was not my intent to belittle anyone who sees a threat in Brown's work, rather I simply indicate there must be a separation between scripture and books ABOUT the scripture. Dan Brown's book is a fiction ABOUT scripture.

The reason this is so important to me is that this is also the reason so many denominations exist. Too many "Godly men" write books ABOUT the scripture instead of simply teaching what the scripture teaches. We know them as "commentaries." They belong in the same closet with Dan Brown's fiction account.

And I agree with your assessment that Jesus is NOT a subject for fiction; yet doctrinal issues abound with fictictious accounts of Jesus which do not correlate with scripture. I will give you just one example so you will see what I mean.

I have heard expressed as doctrine, "Jesus made Peter admit three times he loved him, because Peter denied him three times." This is so far removed from the real Jesus, yet is doctrine in many churches because the teachers do not know the scriptures, but read books about the scriptures.

Look in John chapter 21 for the account wherein Jesus asks Peter if he loves Jesus:
verse 15] Jesus asks Peter "Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these?" He (Peter) saith unto him, yea Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He (Jesus) saith unto him (Peter), feed my lambs."

verse 16] He saith to him again the second time, "Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, yea Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, feed my sheep.

verse 17] He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time "Lovest thou me?" And he said unto him, yea Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, feed my sheep."

The king James version is used to show simply that the translations do not express even close to what the spirit inspired story really is.

Look now at the same reference material with understanding from the Greek:
verse 15]  Jesus asks Peter "Simon, son of Jonas, agape thou me more than these?" He (Peter) saith unto him, yea Lord; thou knowest that I phileo thee. He (Jesus) saith unto him (Peter), feed my lambs."

First notice, Peter evaded the question, and gave an unrelated answer. Jesus has asked him if he is devoted more to Jesus than he is to "these" ("These" being the things Peter is familiar with, fishing instruments and equipment). Peter responds "Ye Lord, you know I have affection for you.

verse 16] He saith to him again the second time, "Simon, son of Jonas, agape thou me? He saith unto him, yea Lord, thou knowest that I phileo thee. He saith unto him, feed my sheep.

This second time, Jesus repeats his question, and Peter evades the question to respond again with an assertion of affection. Notice now, Jesus tells him "feed my sheep." No longer is Peter trusted to feed the lambs, but only the sheep.

verse 17] He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, phileo thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time "phileo thou me?" And he said unto him, yea Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I phileo thee. Jesus saith unto him, feed my sheep."

Peter was grieved because the third time Jesus asked Peter a question, he asked with Peter's own previous response, "Phileo" instead of Agape. He no longer questions Peter's devotiion, but now questions his affection. And why? Because if you have affection for Jesus, and after a reasonable time it does not develope into devotion, Jesus will question your affection. Peter did not like to examine his own brand of affection, which obviously had stopped in its developmental process, and it grieved him. But you will not find this teaching in any of the "books about the bible" - only in the scriptures themselves. And that is my humble opinion about doctrines being works of fiction.

Thank you for your remarks.

Go with God.


curious-jack

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: The DaVinci Code
« Reply #16 on: December 06, 2006, 06:41:11 AM »
The problem with so many Christians (Don't mean to bash Christians, but if the shoe fits...) is that they are not prepared to teach non-Christians. Teachers at one time were not afraid to train their replacements. Try getting a pastor or "Sunday-school teacher"of today to do so.

Did you know Paul never wrote a letter addressed to non-Christians? He always wrote to believers. If he wanted to send a message to unbelievers he would send them a Christian and say "Here is what it is all about - read him/her." How do I know this is so? Paul sent Timothy to Corinth to remind them of those things Paul had taught them. [I Cor 4:16-17]

And it was Paul who taught that we are to live so much like Jesus that when others see us they will see Christ crucified rather than our own sinful self."I am crucified with Christ, nevertheless I live, yet, not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me." [Gsl 2:20]

Did you notice that quaint turn of phrase "I live By the faith of the son of God?" He does not say "I live by MY faith IN the son of God." What is the significance of living by the faith OF the son of God? Jesus had faith like no other man; he trusted completely in God's word, and accepted the promises given in God's word in prophecy to that Messiah of promise, and he trusted that God would keep his word as published in the old testament. And his faith was complete. And his faith was neither flippant nor spoken quickly with no prayer-life to sustain it.

We, however, tend to think of our particular denomination as "our faith." "What is your faith?" Oh I'm a Catholic, Baptist, Methodist, Episcopalian, or whatever "faith" we choose to use in filling in that blank. But Christianity and its denominations is NOT our faith. Our faith is in God THROUGH his son Jesus Christ; and it should be the faith OF Jesus Christ expressed in his desciples so that others will see something in us that they want more than they want  to continue living their own selfish lives.

THAT is why non-Christians see nothing in our churches to make them want in. We mostly consider them "our churches" set up by "our standards" (You see where this is going?) When the reality is, it is Christ's church, HIS body of called-out people; called by HIS gospel, to live to HIS standard.

I love your expression of "I submitted." So like what Christ would have us all do. Wives are to submit to their husbands, but all Christians are to be submissive to all Christians. I have yet to see THAT in practice. This has nothing to do with testing one another's faith with outrageous demands, but rather it has to do with that humility that makes us fit to serve the Lord and represent him as priests among mankind.

Thank you for your kind words.

Reformer

  • Affiliate Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1560
  • Reformed and Evangelical
Re: The DaVinci Code
« Reply #17 on: December 06, 2006, 08:08:55 AM »
(yes - I do know that it was a fictional account). But for me fictional or not, it is not Scriptural and therefore not true and to me that is heresy.

                                                                           Abbiegirl

Amen




That is exactly right. Curiousity killed the cat. There is absolutely no rreason for any real christian to waste his time and money going to see this garbage film. We are to be good stewards of what God has given us, not only money, but that includes common sense.

curious-jack

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: The DaVinci Code
« Reply #18 on: December 06, 2006, 09:52:17 AM »
Please tell me you are not going to define a "Real" Christian for us by determining what movies he can watch. And please, tell us what other kind of Christian you perceive.

Reformer

  • Affiliate Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1560
  • Reformed and Evangelical
Re: The DaVinci Code
« Reply #19 on: December 06, 2006, 10:55:30 AM »
Please tell me you are not going to define a "Real" Christian for us by determining what movies he can watch. And please, tell us what other kind of Christian you perceive.

Are you a Christian? It is a relevant question that will determine the type answer I give so that you'll understand.

Penne

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 308
  • Gender: Female
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: The DaVinci Code
« Reply #20 on: December 06, 2006, 11:04:07 AM »
I do not find Dan Brown's work threatening, it's an absolute lie!

Rev. 21:8
"But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death."

1Tim. 1:10
4  "Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.
5  Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned:
6  From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling;
7  Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.
8  But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;
9  Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10  For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;"

I would not choose to watch a fictional movie about my beloved grandmother portrayed as a lesbian prostitute. 


curious-jack

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: The DaVinci Code
« Reply #21 on: December 06, 2006, 11:09:53 AM »

Are you a Christian? It is a relevant question that will determine the type answer I give so that you'll understand.

I am a Christian

Penne

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 308
  • Gender: Female
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: The DaVinci Code
« Reply #22 on: December 06, 2006, 11:30:39 AM »
Philippians 4:8
  "Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things."

Hmmm.... how is the DaVinci Code true, honest, just, pure, lovely, of good report, with virtue, or praise worthy?

curious-jack

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: The DaVinci Code
« Reply #23 on: December 06, 2006, 03:12:09 PM »
evading the issue is not a viable response.

Reformer

  • Affiliate Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1560
  • Reformed and Evangelical
Re: The DaVinci Code
« Reply #24 on: December 06, 2006, 05:58:44 PM »
I do not find Dan Brown's work threatening, it's an absolute lie!

I would not choose to watch a fictional movie about my beloved grandmother portrayed as a lesbian prostitute. 

That's my point also. In the same way, what would be the purpose of a Christian going to see such filth?  It doesn't make sense to me, but I'm usually in the minority here.

Reformer

  • Affiliate Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1560
  • Reformed and Evangelical
Re: The DaVinci Code
« Reply #25 on: December 06, 2006, 06:06:25 PM »
Please tell me you are not going to define a "Real" Christian for us by determining what movies he can watch. And please, tell us what other kind of Christian you perceive.

No I will not define a Christian by the movies he watches. Yes, I will define a "real" Christian. It is someone who has been born from above, so that he has the spirit of God living within him. Thus his desire is to not only read the word of God, but to hear it and do the will of God. As Christ put it, a tree is known by it's fruits. Real christians don't spend all their time on earth with the world living like hell, and think that they are going to heaven. Anyone can call themselves Christian, but they are not "real" christians unless they have the spirit. That's a fact.

Reformer

  • Affiliate Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1560
  • Reformed and Evangelical
Re: The DaVinci Code
« Reply #26 on: December 06, 2006, 06:11:51 PM »
Quote

Hmmm.... how is the DaVinci Code true, honest, just, pure, lovely, of good report, with virtue, or praise worthy?


evading the issue is not a viable response.


But that is the issue. Christian behavior is always at the forefront of all these type questions.  Most Christians choose to ignore it.



curious-jack

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: The DaVinci Code
« Reply #27 on: December 06, 2006, 08:30:32 PM »
Haleleuyah! AMEN! What more needs be said?

curious-jack

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: The DaVinci Code
« Reply #28 on: December 06, 2006, 08:37:39 PM »
Quote


Please tell me you are not going to define a "Real" Christian for us by determining what movies he can watch

But that is the issue. Christian behavior is always at the forefront of all these type questions.  Most Christians choose to ignore it.


WE do not define Christianity. Jesus already did that once and for all time. We can only imitate it or not. Those who do are Christians. Those who fail to do so are not Christians. It is that simple.

Now, of those who imitate Christ, can they falter? Sure they can and do. But they get right up and repent, and pray and try again. They are still Christians.

Those who do not imitate Christ, even though they mouth the rhetoric, are not Christians. They are simply imitations, not imitators.

Matrix

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 73
  • Gender: Male
  • Neo
Re: The DaVinci Code
« Reply #29 on: December 06, 2006, 09:00:22 PM »

WE do not define Christianity. Jesus already did that once and for all time.


I agree with Reformer. The whole bible defines Christianity. We are witnesses to Christianity, and if we can't define it or don't know the definition of it, we are perfect simpletons, ripe for the great deceiver! Satan loves Christians saying we can't define Christianity! He loves people playing fast and loose with the bible. If you can't define Christianity, how can you be a christian? You don't even know what it is.  So your comments may seem cute to you, but they are really foolish. Christianity is not a variable that is subject to your personal opinion. A Christian is one born of the spirit of God. If you don't like that, too bad!



 


[ Home | Eschatology | Bible Studies | Classics | Articles | Sermons | Apologetics | Search | F.A.Q. ]