|
|
|
-
Preaching the Living WORD through the Written WORD - 2 Tim 4:2 - |
|
|
|
UNLOCKING THE DA VINCI CODE (ATTACK ON THE IMAGE OF CHRIST
- PART 5) Pastor Daryl Hilbert I.
LEONARDO DA VINCI A. TDC 1.
[Leonardo] kept mysterious journals in
illegible reverse handwriting; 2.
… he believed he possessed the alchemic power
to turn lead into gold 3.
… and even cheat God by creating an elixir
to postpone death; 4.
… and his inventions included horrific,
never-before-imagined weapons of war and torture. (TDC, pg. 45) B. Fact 1. Leonardo da Vinci was a genius –
brilliant, talented, and contemplative. He was also enigmatic, concealing his
true self in cryptic notebook messages and subtle images in his art. Much has
been written about Leonardo, yet only now are scholars beginning to
understand the more puzzling aspects of his life. Sadly, some people who
understand little about the man and his art have taken advantage of the
mystique surrounding him. They recreate him into what they think he should
have been -- namely, one who shares their take on life. But as the artist
himself said, “Truth at last cannot be hidden.” (Abanes,
The Truth Behind the DaVinci Code; pg. 63) 2. Special references in Leonardo’s
notebooks to *alchemy and alchemists
are quite mocking. He loathed superstition, a category into which he heartily
lumped *necromancy (a practice believed by “small wits”) and alchemy (the
“sister” of necromancy). (Abanes, The Truth Behind the DaVinci Code; pg.
64) a) *Alchemy is
the mixing of metals to produce a panacea. b) *Necromancy
is the practice attempting to communicate with dead spirits. II.
LEONARDO DA VINCI AND THE
PRIORY OF SION? A.
TDC 1. Da Vinci presided over the Priory
between 1510 and 1519 as the brotherhood's Grand Master (TDC, pg.
113) B.
Fact 1. The Priory of Sion was originally
founded in 1956 by Pierre Plantard and Andre Bonhomme - all organizations in
France are legally required to register with the local authorities to comply
with the French 1901 Law of Associations, and the original 1956 Registration
Documents and 1956 Statutes of the Priory of Sion were submitted on 7 May
1956 at the Sub Prefecture of St Julien-en-Genevois.
(Wikipedia.com, cp. Abanes, Bock, Garlow, Meisel) III.
LEONARDO DA VINCI AND THE
CHURCH A.
TDC 1. Da Vinci was a prankster who often
amused himself by quietly gnawing at the hand that fed him. He incorporated
in many of his Christian paintings hidden symbolism that was anything but
Christian--tributes to his own beliefs and a subtle thumbing of his nose at the
Church. (TDC, pg. 45-46) 2. Leonardo was a well-documented devotee
of the ancient ways of the goddess. (TDC, pg. 96) B.
Fact 1. [Leonardo] probably was not a very
good Roman Catholic. He was terribly offended by priests, who, he said,
“produce many words, receive much wealth, and promise paradise.” (Abanes,
The Truth Behind the DaVinci Code; pg. 65) 2. Near the end of his life, however,
Leonardo apparently returned to the Church…. [in a] document, dictated before
witnesses, the artist “commends his soul to Almighty God” (not the goddess),
“to the Blessed Virgin Mary” (not Magdalene), and “to Saint Michael and all
the angels and saints in paradise.” (Abanes, The Truth Behind the DaVinci Code;
pg. 65) IV.
LEONARDO DA VINCI AND HIS
PAINTINGS A.
The Mona Lisa 1. TDC a) Da Vinci was a prankster, and
computerized analysis of the Mona Lisa and Da Vinci's self-portraits confirm
some startling points of congruency in their faces. (TDC, pg.
120) b) Mona Lisa is neither male nor female.
It carries a subtle message of androgyny. It is a fusing of both. (TDC, pg.
120) c) Gentlemen, not only does the face of
Mona Lisa look androgynous, but her name is an anagram of the divine union of
male and female. (TDC, pg. 121) 2. Fact a) As for the “startling points of
congruency” between the face of Mona
Lisa and the face of Leonardo in his
“self-portraits” (plural, indicating several), these would be difficult to
obtain since there only exists one uncontested self-portrait of the artist.
It was sketched… (Abanes, The Truth Behind the DaVinci Code; pg.
67) b) X-rays of the Mona Lisa have revealed
only that the original form of her face was, overall, “more oval and less
spherical..no trace of the smile…shows repeated reworking by the painter. (Abanes,
The Truth Behind the DaVinci Code; pg. 67) c) The woman pictured in the Mona Lisa is
just that – a woman. Although her identity cannot be conclusively proved, she
is thought to be Lisa Gherardini del Giocondo, the wife of Francesco del
Giocondo. (Abanes, The Truth Behind the DaVinci Code; pg. 66) d) In “Leonardo: The Artist and The Man”,
biographer Serge Bramly remarks, “The most far-fetched theory is that this is
a portrait of a man, or indeed a self-portrait by the artist.” (Abanes,
The Truth Behind the DaVinci Code; pg. 66) e) …Leonardo himself did not even name
his painting. He never titled any of his works. (Abanes,
The Truth Behind the DaVinci Code; pg. 67) B.
The Last Supper 1. Mary
Magdalene vs. the Apostle John a) TDC (1) As it turns out, the Holy Grail does
indeed make an appearance in The Last Supper. Leonardo included her
prominently. (TDC, pg. 243) (2) The woman to Jesus' right was young
and pious-looking, with a demure face, beautiful red hair, and hands folded
quietly. This is the woman who single handedly could crumble the Church?
"Who is she?" Sophie asked. "That, my dear," Teabing
replied, "is Mary Magdalene.” (TDC, pg. 243) (3) This fresco, in fact, is the entire
key to the Holy Grail mystery. Da Vinci lays it all out in the open in The
Last Supper. (TDC, pg. 236) b) Fact (1) … the figure next to Jesus [in Da Vinci’s Last Supper] – historically identified as the apostle John – is not “obviously” a
woman. It could easily be a man. (Brown uses the word, “hint”) (Abanes,
The Truth Behind the DaVinci Code; pg. 71) (2) John appears decidedly non-masculine. Why?... According to Bruce Boucher –
Curator of European Decorative Arts and Sculpture at the Art Institute of
Chicago – John’s appearance reflects the way Florentine artists traditionally
depicted Jesus’ favorite disciple:… (ibid. pg. 72) (3)
“St. John was invariably represented as a beautiful young man whose
special affinity with Jesus was expressed by his being seated at Jesus’
right.” (ibid. pg. 72) (4) Moreover, if the figure next to Christ
is not John, then we need to know where the apostle really is. It is highly
doubtful that Leonardo would have left John out of the picture since he is
known as the “beloved” disciple and is considered the author of the Gospel
(Joh 13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 20, 24). (Abanes, The Truth
Behind the DaVinci Code; pg. 71) (5) Observations: (a) Jesus is
“obviously” Leonardo’s visual center of
attention. The rest are clusters of disciples. (b) Even if it
were Mary, she is off to the right among those clusters of disciples. (c) Both of
these visuals are opposed to Brown’s jaded views. 2. The Letter
“M” a) TDC (1) "Finally," Teabing said,
"if you view Jesus and Magdalene as compositional elements rather than as
people, you will see another obvious shape leap out at you." He paused.
"A letter of the alphabet.“… Glaring in the center of the painting was
the unquestionable outline of an enormous, flawlessly formed letter “M”. (TDC, pg.
243) (2) Teabing shrugged. "Conspiracy
theorists will tell you it stands for Matrimonio or Mary Magdalene. To be
honest, nobody is certain. The only certainty is that the hidden M is no
mistake. (TDC, pg. 243) b) Fact (1) There is no clear “M” is the
Last Supper. It is more like a lightening bolt. (2) Actually
the painting is very obvious in trying to draw attention to Christ by
separating the disciples on both sides. 3. The Hand
and the Dagger a) TDC (1) "And Peter had a problem with
that," Langdon said, pointing to The Last Supper. "That's Peter
there. You can see that Da Vinci was well aware of how Peter felt about Mary
Magdalene." (2) Again, Sophie was speechless. In the painting,
Peter was leaning menacingly toward Mary Magdalene and slicing his blade-like
hand across her neck. (TDC, pg. 248) (3) Sophie squinted and saw a hand
emerging from the crowd of disciples. "Is that hand wielding a
dagger?" "Yes. Stranger still, if you count the arms, you'll see
that this hand belongs to... no one at all. It's disembodied. Anonymous.” (TDC, pg. 243) b) Fact (1) It is
obvious that Peter’s
hand is pointing to Christ in discussion of Christ’s statement, not
gesturing to slice John’s neck. (2) In reality, it is Peter’s right
hand….First he rises from being seated, then turns left to speak with
John.... He moves the knife he is holding downward…, turning his
arm clockwise…wrist bent and upside down. (Abanes, The Truth
Behind the DaVinci Code; pg. 75) (3) This explanation of Peter’s arm
positioning is supported by a Last Supper study sketch that Leonardo made for
Peter’s right arm. The sketch matches perfectly the arm in the painting… (ibid; pg.
75) (4) Art experts see it as a foreshadowing
of the sword that Peter will draw in the Garden of Gethsemane in an attempt
to defend Jesus. (ibid; pg. 75 cp. Mat 26:51; Mar 14:47; Joh
18:10) V.
CONCLUSION A. It would be very easy to dismiss “The Da Vinci Code” as a novel,
if in fact, Dan Brown did not include the “fact page” which states, all descriptions of artwork, architecture,
documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate. Or perhaps “The
Da Vinci Code” would be easy to dismiss if the book did not attack the
Scriptures, Christ’s deity, and deify Mary Magdalene. B. But the fact remains that Dan Brown is incorrect in his
historical research and his descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents,
and secret rituals. Furthermore, Dan Brown could not farther from the truth
in regard to his denunciation of the infallibility of Scripture and Christ’s
deity, not to mention his deification of Mary Magdalene. C. Therefore it must be concluded that “The Da Vinci Code” is a
well-crafted attack against Christianity. D.
How is it that such false
teaching could become popular even among some professing Christians? Some
professing Christians are not grounded in sound doctrine, and they will trade
the truth for myths (2Ti 4:3-4). Some professing Christians are not grounded
in sound doctrine and are blown by every wind of doctrine (Eph 4:14).
Therefore, some professing Christians will reject the traditional and embrace
the novel regardless if it coincides with biblical truth. Jefrey Breshears
writes, Ours is an intellectually
schizophrenic age of great skepticism matched only by its gullibility.
Fastidiously skeptical when it comes to almost anything traditional and
orthodox, yet indiscriminately gullible regarding almost anything new or
novel, sensationalistic or iconoclastic. Hence, in the realm of religious
faith, many people are fascinated with anything extra-biblical and esoteric,
especially if it is tied to something salacious or conspiratorial. E.
What might Leonardo think of Dan Brown’s DaVinci
Code? If Leonardo (and not Mary Magdalene), could be heard, whispering up from the chasms of the
earth, might he not be saying, the truth of things is the chief nutrient
of superior intellects, though not of wandering wits (Leonardo Da Vinci, “Morals”)? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
