013 Dan Brown

(Note: Maybe my personal opinion on Dan Brown at this time was a bit harsh & possibly off. As everything I write, one must take this one also with a grain of salt)

Tue 16 May 2006 06:46 PM CEST

While reading "Breaking The Da Vinci Code" (Darrell L. Bock), which provides one with enough info about the Dan Brown novel without having to read it (or watch the movie), in which the author tries to prove why Jesus wasn't married, a few more reasons came to my mind, why Jesus wouldn't have married, which are not in the book:

First of all, He knew that His main purpose was to die for the sins of mankind. His crucifixion wasn't just a matter of bad luck he fell upon, nor a result of His failure as some have put it, nor a defeat at all, but, as He said Himself: "for this hour I came into the world," it was His greatest victory. He also told His disciples repeatedly that He was going to die, even indicating in which manner ("If I be lifted up from the earth, I will draw all men unto Me"), and that He would rise again after 3 days. He also announced that this would happen when He would be going to Jerusalem. That for me is one of the biggest reasons why He wouldn't have chosen a wife, to either leave behind as a widow, or, after His resurrection and ascension, the mother of a child whom she would have to tell, "your Daddy flew away to Heaven..."

Besides, and that's reason no.2 I came up with, we ARE His wife - or Bride - as the Bible puts it. The church IS the Bride of Christ. Just like Jesus wasn't just a normal, average guy (as Dan Brown and his likes would have us believe), He wasn't just looking for a normal average bride. But since He was the universal Savior, Price & Son of God & Bridegroom, He also needed a universal Bride, consisting of each & every one of His believers, not just one special, single one of them, however special I'm sure Mary Magdalene may have been.

Coincidentally, according to Fritz Springmeyer, it happens to be long standing Illuminati doctrine that Jesus was married and produced offspring, resulting in the "royal bloodline" of which certain European nobles would like to make themselves believe to be descended.

Coincidentally, Dan Brown also wrote the book "Illuminati," which makes the "enlightened ones" look just like another myth and fairy-tale. One recognizes the pattern: create new "facts" to feed and brainwash the masses with out of totally obscure myths (like Evolution, & now "Jesus was married & had kids"), and twist truths & facts we're not supposed to know into myths.

Looks like some people have learned a lot from their master, the father of lies.

There's also this tendency since years, to cast a shroud of secrecy over all of Christianity, as if Christians were the true conspirators responsible for the evils of the world, and "there are many things they haven't told you!" But in reality, Jesus made it clear that: "I spoke openly to the world; and in secret I have said nothing" (John 18:20).

So, it seems to me that this whole attack is just another clever attempt of the Devil to accuse his enemies of the very things he himself is the most guilty of. Looks like when the "accuser of the saints" runs out of actual sins to accuse us of, he just makes some up or "borrows" from his own pack.

Anyway, that's my take on Dan Brown.

P.S.: Check out this article on the Da Vinci Code hype:
http://www.christianitytoday.com/history/newsletter/2003/nov7.html