Breaking the

DA VINCI CODEHow does the DaVinci Code stack up against the Truth?

ORIGINAL SERMON BY

by

DR. ARNOLD LASTINGER[www.lastinger.us]

UPLOADED TO SLIDE SHARE

BY

THE VIRTUAL PREACEHR[www.virtualpreacher.org]

PLOTLINE of the Da Vinci Code(Author Dan Brown)

A Harvard professor, Robert Langdon attempts to unravel the murder of the curator of the Louvre museum in Paris.

He discovers a centuries-old conspiracy to delude the world into believing that Jesus was divine

Present-day Christianity is based on that lie. The Catholic Church is willing to murder in

order to protect this conspiracy.

BROWN’S ALLEGATIONS: “Lost Books Of the Bible” have been

found that contradict the N.T. accounts Jesus was a mere mortal and could not

have been resurrected Jesus married Mary Magdalene and had

children to carry on the royal line He appointed Mary Magdalene to

organize and build his Church on earth The above “facts” were well-known

and accepted by the early church before the time of Constantine.

BROWN’S ALLEGATIONS: Constantine revised history, fabricating

the deity of Christ, the resurrection, and downplaying the role of Mary.

Constantine destroyed any documents that disagreed with his version of history.

Leonardo DaVinci, Isaac Newton, and Victor Hugo were all members of a secret society who knew “the truth” but were afraid to voice it, so DaVinci encoded it into his paintings.

BROWN’S ALLEGATIONS: Opus Dei, a Catholic lay organization is

dedicated to prevent the discovery of the world-wide conspiracy at all costs.

He claims that his “facts” are based on scientific research and accurate documents.

Everything that Christianity has taught about Christ is false.

The Bible as we know it is a distorted fabrication and does not correlate with the true facts.

THE BOTTOM LINE…

Do we believe Brown’s “facts”, or do we believe what

the Bible says?

Two Big Questions…

1. How do we know that the Bible of today is even close to the original?

2. How did we get our present Bible?

Two Kinds ofBIBLICAL CRITICISM

HIGHER Criticism: authorship, dating, occasion, literary structure, contents

LOWER Criticism: (Textual Criticism) the attempt to determine how true the copies are to the original autographs

Reliability of the Old Testament Manuscripts

With no printing presses, every copy had to be manually produced by scribes.

The Scribes were professionals. They believed they were

transcribing the Word of God and were therefore very careful.

The earliest complete copy of the Old Testament is the Masoretic Text, written in Hebrew, from around 900 A.D.

Reliability of the Old Testament Manuscripts

When the Masoretes copied a book, they would add up the letters and find the middle letter. If it didn’t match the original, they tore it up and made a new one.

Reliability of the Old Testament Manuscripts

Birth of Christ

Destruction of Jerusalem 70 A.D.

Jews Scattered

900 A.D.

Masoretes PROBLEM: The potential

for corruption of the copied text over 900 years!

PROBLEM: The potential for corruption of the

copied text over 900 years!

150 B.C.

Dead Sea

Scrolls

AMAZING! The Masoretic Text of 900 A.D. was 95% accurate when compared to the Dead Sea Scrolls!

Location of theDEAD SEA SCROLLS± 20 km. E. of Jerusalem

Location of the first scrolls found

Location of the first scrolls found

Plateau on which the shepherd

boy stood

Plateau on which the shepherd

boy stood

Significance of The

Dead Sea Scrolls

They verify the accuracy of our existing OT translations

They verify the accuracy of the LXX (Septuagint)

They include one complete copy of Isaiah and thousands of fragments, representing every OT book but Esther.

4 Developmental Stages ofTHE OLD TESTAMENT CANON

1. THE PENTATEUCH: first recognized as authoritative by Joshua (14th century, BC)

2. THE PROPHETS and THE WRITINGS: 600 years BC, circulated as authoritative

3. EARLIEST FULL CANON: In use by Ezra & Nehemiah (400-500 BC)

4. FINAL CANON: 300 BC, referred to in an apocryphal book, Ecclesiasticus

Conclusion“We can now be sure that copyists worked with

great care and accuracy on the Old Testament, even back to 225 B.C. . . . indeed, it would be rash skepticism that would now deny that we have our Old Testament in a form very close to that used by Ezra when he taught the word of the Lord to those who had returned from the Babylonian captivity.”

(R. Laird Harris, Can I Trust My Bible)

The New Testament There are more than 5,000 different

ancient Greek manuscripts containing all or portions of the New Testament that have survived to our time. These are written on different materials.

Other Manuscripts There are over 1,000 copies and fragments

of the New Testament in Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Gothic, and Ethiopic and 8,000 copies of the Latin Vulgate, some dating as far back as Jerome’s original in AD 384-400.

The entire New Testament can be reconstructed from quotations in the writings of the Church Fathers (AD 95 – 400) except for 15-20 verses.

WAYS OF DATING MANUSCRIPTSWAYS OF DATING MANUSCRIPTS

Letters connected like today

Cursive9th to 16th centuries

small lettersMiniscules

3rd to 10th centuriesALLCAPITALLETTERSNOSPACESUncials

KINDS OF WRITING USED

2nd & 3rd CenturiesBook made of sheets of paper,

folded and sewn togetherCodex

To third centuryA roll of papyrus or parchmentScroll

FORM USED

1st Cent. To Middle Ages

Polished sheepskins or goatskins

Parchment

First centuryMade from reeds, highly

durablePapyrus

TIME OF USEWRITING MATERIALS

Quantity of Ancient Historical Manuscripts

Quantity of Ancient Historical Manuscripts

± 40 years± 24,000NT

Manuscripts

1,000 years643Homer’s Iliad

1,300 years8Herodotus’

History

1,300 years8Thucydides’

History

1,000 years2Tacitus’ Annals

900 years10Caesar’s

Gallic Wars

ELAPSED TIMECOPIESWRITING

Greek manuscripts c. 5,686 Latin Vulgate 10,000 Ethiopic, Slavic and Armenian 8,000

TOTAL --------------------------------c. 24,000

Plus c. 32,000 citations from pre-Nicene church Fathers

Quantity of NT ManuscriptsQuantity of NT Manuscripts

Bibliographic TestTime Gap––Originals v. Copies

New Testament–written between A.D. 50-100

Earliest Fragment (John Ryland’s Papyrus of John’s Gospel) A.D. 130

Earliest Book A.D. 200

Most of NT A.D. 250

Complete NT (Codex Sinaiticus) A.D. 325

Conclusion

“In no other case is the interval of time between the composition of the book and the date of the earliest manuscripts so short as in that of the New Testament.”

Sir Frederic Kenyon

Additional Evidence For theAuthenticity of the NT Scriptures

1. Apostolic Fathers quoted extensively from the New Testament (AD 90-160)

2. Even enemies of the church (Valentinus the Gnostic) quoted the New Testament

3. 2193 known LECTIONARIES, daily devotionals based on the New Testament

4. 3 versions (translations) into Coptic, Syriac, and Latin

WHICH BOOKS BELONG IN THE BIBLE?

CANON (Gr): The 66 books of the Bible as we know it today

ETYMOLOGY OF THE WORD: The Greek word canon, meant a “rod” (for measuring straightness) or a “measuring stick”

GLOSSARY OF WORDSIN THIS STUDY

1. CANON: the list of books recognized as scripture

2. APOCRYPHA: books of “doubtful” or suspicious origin or value

3. PSEUDIPIGRAPHA: books written by someone pretending to be an apostle

4. KERYGMA: the oral gospel preached during the first ±20 years

Developmental Stages ofTHE NEW TESTAMENT CANON1. THE APOSTOLIC AGE: 2 Peter 3:15 implies a

collection of writings2. THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS: Clement,

Polycarp, et.al. quote from Matt., Luke and Paul

3. MARCION’S CANON: Only Luke and some of Paul’s epistles; rejected OT

4. MURATORIAN CANON: AD 180, the first official attempt to form a canon

5. FINAL CANON: 397 AD, Council of Carthage

WORTHY OF NOTEThe church of the 4th century was

already dividing into two wings;EASTERN: influenced by Greek culture (Greek Orthodox)WESTERN: influenced by Roman culture (Roman Catholic)

Yet, independently of each other, they both arrived at the same NT canon!

Criteria for theNEW TESTAMENT CANON

1.APOSTOLICITY: Was it written by or endorsed by an apostle?

2.COMPATIBILITY: Was it in agreement with the known scriptures?

3.ACCEPTABILITY: Was it universally accepted by the early church leaders?

REFUTING BROWN’S PREMISES: “Lost Books Of the Bible” have

been found that contradict the N.T. accounts1. These books were found at Nag Hammadi,

Egypt in 19452. Excluded from the Canon because they did

not pass the tests of canonicity3. Written too late to have been authentic,

eye-witness accounts4. Content is incompatible with what we know

to be scripture5. Not quoted by early church fathers

REFUTING BROWN’S PREMISES: Jesus was a mere mortal and

could not have been resurrected1. Most of the N.T. writers attest to the

validity of the resurrection story2. Paul taught that it is essential to the

gospel (1 Cor. 15:14) “And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.”

3. 11 disciples died because they would not recant the resurrection story; would they have died for a lie?

REFUTING BROWN’S PREMISES: Jesus married Mary Magdalene and

had children to carry on the royal line (Mary was the “Holy Grail”)1. There is not even a hint of such a thing in

all the New Testament2. At the cross, Jesus showed no special

concern for Mary Magdalene as He surely would have for a wife

3. Why is there no mention of the marriage or any offspring by the contemporaneous historians of the day?

4. The “Holy Grail” was first introduced in a 12th century legend about King Arthur and Camelot.

REFUTING BROWN’S PREMISES: He left Mary Magdalene to

organize and build his Church on earth1. There is not even a hint of such a thing in

all the New Testament2. No historical records make any mention of

Mary as the leader of the Church3. The N.T. History book (Acts) refers to James

as the leader of the Jerusalem church and Peter as the Senior Apostle of the universal church.

REFUTING BROWN’S PREMISES: The above “facts” were well-known

and accepted by the early church before the time of Constantine.1. Exactly the opposite is true: Early

manuscripts of the N.T. (pre-dating Constantine) document the male leadership of the Church

2. The idea of Constantine revising history is a figment of Brown’s overactive imagination that is not supported in fact.

3. Any attempt by Constantine to revise history would have collapsed because of the sheer size of the conspiracy.

REFUTING BROWN’S PREMISES: Leonardo DaVinci, Isaac Newton,

and Victor Hugo were all members of a secret society who knew “the truth” but were afraid to voice it, so DaVinci encoded it into his paintings.1. A distortion based on a seed of truth:

DaVinci did disagree with some of the scientific theories of his day and he did encode some of this thinking into his art

2. The Priory of Sion was concocted in the 1960’s by a convicted French fraud, Pierre Plantard who later renounced his theories

REFUTING BROWN’S PREMISES: Opus Dei, a Catholic lay

organization is dedicated to prevent the discovery of the world-wide conspiracy at all costs.1. Opus Dei is a Roman Catholic lay

organization that emphasizes piety and good works

2. It was founded in 1902 as an effort to empower lay people in the Catholic church

3. The organization as portrayed in the Da Vinci Code has no basis in fact whatsoever.

REFUTING BROWN’S PREMISES: He claims that his “facts” are

based on scientific research and accurate documents.1. His “facts” will not stand close scrutiny and

have been shown to be, at best a distortion of half-truths, and at worst downright lies.

2. His book is a very interesting, cleverly written novel which may have Satanic origins.

3. Unfortunately, uninformed minds will possibly fall for his alleged “facts” and will accept them as truth