May 13, 2006

Resurrection of the Son of God

February 9, 2004
fax: 508 829-5984

Dan Brown’s blockbuster, The Da Vinci Code, has implications for Christians, so Ria Megnin’s article on the book reading was timely for those who seek their own path; hopefully the path of Jesus. Brown’s fiction has as its premise the idea that early Christians invented the historical Jesus Christ in 325 AD. In effect, Brown denies that Jesus physically and bodily rose from the dead, so Christianity is false. Should we believe the Gospels or Brown?

Brown’s research is based on the apocryphal Gnostic Gospels, 150-250AD. The Christian Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, written between 42-69AD, give historical detail from Jesus’ life, death, miracles and bodily resurrection. Historians Josephus, Tacitus and Pliney the Younger all write of Jesus.

N.T. Wright, in “The Resurrection of the Son of God”, concludes that the only reasonable explanation for the rapid growth of Christianity, was that the Resurrection took place. Being a Christian in the 1st Century was not a good career move; people don’t go to their deaths to defend a metaphoric resurrection.

The New Testament is quoted so often by ancient sources that it could be reconstructed from those sources. J. B. Lightfoot proved that early Christian writings from Ignatius and Clement dated from 80-107AD. The Dead Sea Scrolls, 67AD, contain parts of Mark’s Gospel. Hershel Shanks, Jewish editor of Biblical Archaeology Review, said the scrolls publication was "without the slightest shake of or shock to the church's foundations." John A.T. Robinson noted that in 70 AD, Emperor Titus destroyed the Temple in Jerusalem, and with it the Jewish priesthood, yet there is no mention of this single most catastrophic event in the history of Judaism in any of the Gospels. Everything takes place as if the Four Gospels had been written at a time when the Temple was still standing. Archeological finds in the 20th century confirm this.


Jay G


alban B. said...

Some have said that this book is "just a piece of fiction" so why all the fuss. Well, it is not fiction, that is entirely a novel based on complete fantasy or "imagination". In this case the people involved, the institutions involved are "real". There is no doubt whatsovever that the author is "responsible" for serious wrong doing. He is responsible for defaming, blaspheming, degrading, distorting what is Holy and Sacred. Truth will prevail.

JayG said...

From Stephen Graydamus:

Catholic writer Mark Shea tells an anecdote about a college bull session among students at Central Washington University over The Da Vinci Code. “Even if it’s just fiction,” a student opined, “it’s still interesting to think about.”
To which another student replied: “Your mother’s a whore.” And then, to the first student’s stunned incredulity, he added, “And even if that’s just fiction, it’s still interesting to think about.”