I can still see the excitement in Brent's eyes. The zeal of the newly converted. He was sharing his discovery with anyone who would listen. I was a tough sell, but that didn't bother him. How could he remain silent? He'd found Jesus.
Or so he thought.
We sat down to talk over lunch. As I listened to "facts" and "evidence" flow from his lips I realized that he hadn't found Jesus at all. At least not the Jesus of the Bible. Not Jesus according to Mathew, Mark, Luke and John. This was Jesus according to Dan Brown -- a contemporary writer with zero scholarly credentials. The source for the alternative Jesus was a mystery novel Brown had penned called The Da Vinci Code. For Brent it was the new gospel truth.
That was nearly three years ago. At the time, The Da Vinci Code was climbing best-seller lists, but had yet to reach the level of public consciousness. As you know, soon after, it did. Today the book is everywhere. Walk into almost any public space -- a park, coffee shop or airport -- and you're sure to spot someone absorbed in the novel. To date, The Da Vinci Code has sold over 40 million copies, making it one of the most widely read books of all time.
Interest in Jesus is usually a good thing. But what would seem like a golden opportunity sometimes feels like a recurring nightmare. A non-Christian neighbor, co-worker or relative reads The Da Vinci Code and becomes an instant expert on Jesus. Suddenly the Christian is the one being evangelized. "Did you know that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene? Are you aware that the church covered up the true history?"
The Christian tries to refute each outlandish claim only to find the unbelieving friend strangely resistant. Afire with conspiratorial zeal and buoyed by the thrill of discovery, the Da Vinci Code fan is in no mood to listen. The frustrated Christian is dismissed as a hapless dupe or, worse yet, part of the Church's "ongoing cover-up." Now with Hollywood cashing in on the buzz (the movie version, starring Tom Hanks, opens in May), these exchanges will likely become even more frequent.
So what's a Christian to do? Is there a "teachable moment" here? Can a bogus book help bring about meaningful conversations about the real Jesus?
That depends. The story can serve to spark fruitful discussions on faith. But meaningful interactions don't usually happen by accident. Christians who successfully engage readers of the book are intentional about their approach. They are both sensitive and knowledgeable. In other words, they love people and they are willing to do some homework. Let me explain.
Lead with your ears
I have to confess, when I heard Brent's diatribe, my first impulse wasn't one of love. I was angry. I don't know why. My faith had been challenged before. But this felt different. Hearing the ludicrous theories about Jesus' identity evoked a visceral response. How could he be so gullible? I wondered. I was particularly irritated because I knew the real reason behind Brent's credulity: a mortal Messiah lined up neatly with his agnostic beliefs. Though Brent confessed he had "never actually read the Bible" he announced that he couldn't accept Christianity because, it was "irrational." Now, here he was, championing some of the most superstitious nonsense this side of the enlightenment.
Had the world gone crazy? I repressed my irritation but was in no mood for nuance. My reaction wasn't exactly politic. "That's absolute garbage," I interrupted. Brent countered with more "facts" from the novel. I launched into church history 101. Stalemate.
What went wrong? The first mistake was leading with my mouth instead of my ears. How did I expect Brent to listen to me, if I hadn't heard him out first? Letting people talk doesn't mean validating their ideas. It means validating them. Besides, when you begin fielding objections before you hear them, there's a good chance you'll be giving answers to questions that weren't there in the first place. Sometimes the details of the debate aren't the real issue anyway. I knew Brent was opposed to orthodox Christian belief. A more fruitful discussion would have centered on talking about why he was really attracted to the theories in The Da Vinci Code. What about the story appealed to him? Why was he intrigued? Perhaps posing such questions would have opened him up to hearing my opinions, rather than putting him on the defensive.
Defending the Truth
Being sensitive is vital. Until you hear others, they can't hear you. Unless you understand their interests you won't be able to speak into their lives effectively. But Christians must also speak up for truth when the time is right. Some people are honestly confused by the claims of the novel. They are not like Brent -- merely adding the book to their agnostic arsenal. They're genuinely taken in. Hank Hanegraaff tells the story of a distraught young woman who approached him in a coffee shop with tears welling in her eyes. She and a group of friends had read The Da Vinci Code and needed reassurance that Christianity was still valid.
The Da Vinci Code takes aim at some of the core tenets of Christian faith, namely the divinity of Jesus and the authority of the Bible. And it does so with half-truths, exaggerations and blatant lies.
Some have defended the book on the grounds that it is a work of fiction and therefore harmless. However, judging from Brown's comments, he views his novel as much more than a fictional story. In an interview with Matt Lauer on NBC's Today Show, Brown was asked "How much of this is based on reality in terms of things that actually occurred?" Brown's reply was unequivocal: "Absolutely all of it."
Unfortunately for Brown there's scarcely a historian alive who shares his confidence. When it comes to the facts presented in the novel, the jury is not out -- they never even made it to court, at least not in the world of academic scholarship. John Thompson, an authority on historical theology, compares looking for errors in the Da Vinci Code to "shooting fish in a barrel." "Some pages have so many errors you don't know where to start. You get compounded errors. It is wrong in so many layers it leaves one speechless."
Of course the problem isn't that academics are being fooled by the novel; it's that less informed readers are. The vast majority of readers lack the tools or the desire to separate fact from fiction. That is why Christians must be prepared to respond with solid refutations.
Given the sheer volumes of blunders, a successful critique seeks to counter the book's larger assertions. One of those issues is Brown's handling of the so-called Gnostic gospels (later writings about Jesus). When it comes to these texts Brown gets it exactly wrong. Far from highlighting the humanity of Jesus (as the novel claims) Gnostics denied that Jesus was human at all. That was the Gnostic heresy -- that Jesus was God, but not really man.
The list of key issues that the novel distorts goes on: Mary Magdalene, the Council of Nicaea, Constantine, and early Christian view of Christ, just to mention a few. Each of these topics is grossly misrepresented by The Da Vinci Code. By talking unbelieving friends through these issues, you counter the mistakes of the novel and utilize an opportunity to tell the true story of Christ. Dr. Erwin Lutzer, the author of The DaVinci Deception, sees an opportunity in the upcoming Da Vinci Movie:
The movie will confuse lots of people, but Jesus will become the centerpiece of many conversations. For those who are prepared to explain that Christianity rests on solid foundations, the opportunity will be tremendous.
Christians who are interested should read at least one book critiquing the novel. It's worth taking the time. After all, there's much at stake. It's good to remember that when people approach you about The Da Vinci Code you have an exciting opportunity. Listen well, love much and be ready to lead them to the true Jesus. Only He can satisfy their longing and unlock the real Code to life's meaning.