Just read the Da Vinci Code

I read it because it's selling well internationally and it contains, as part of the plot, a number of ideas about the church and Chrsitian origins that are ill-founded in fact. THose who have seen stigmata will know the kind of thing. If you have read that book about the bloodline of Christ through Mary Magdalene then you will recognise that this novel does a "what if this was true and there were some political figures in the RC Church and the Priory of Sion who wanted to sort things out ...."

Positively I must say that it is a fun read and quite entertaining and even gripping. On the other hand, it is obviously written by a USAmerican and the little explanations that go with that get a little wearing at times as well as little missed details. The fact that it was written in English but purports to report French conversations at times wears thin [as in -how would that be said in French and why would that etymology or pun work in French?].

More majorly, of course, we see the repitition of the allegations that major points of Christian doctrine [incarnation and atonement] were inventions of Constantine's era and without foundation in the church's history thitherto. It is repeated that gnostic and similar gospels are as historically 'viable' as the ones on the canon and that the canon was invented de novo in Constantinian times. These ideas are well known and the truth is actually pretty different [check out this site designed to deal with the same kind of issues from Muslim challengers].

Yes: it is a work of fiction and so we shouldn't take these things too seriously; on the other hand a lot of people don't know any better and given the climate of hostility to orthodox Christian claims [in favour of the allegedly powerless victims of past orthodoxy] of and the urge for novelty and for newAgery it is not hard to see how these allegations will uncritically be taken to be gospel truth [or at least mostly true] by many and be reeled out in conversations and spiritual debate all over the place. This would be reinforced by the way the book keeps stressing how this is all well accepted by scholars and indeed by most 'sensible' [not the books phrase] Christians. Sheesh.

The real apologetics of today are being carried out in 'fiction' and 'we' are losing the struggle for hearts and minds. Perhaps we need to a savvy rapid rebuttal team who can do the rebuttals in a way that is engaging and winsome?