There are 46 million copies of The Da Vinci Code in print. The paperback version was released at the end of March and 6 million copies of those are already in print.   As of this writing, it’s the #1 best selling fiction paperback on the New York Times Best Sellers List. With the Ron Howard movie, starring Tom Hanks, coming out worldwide between 17 and 19 May, Dan Brown’s historically-based (or not!) thriller will further solidify its role as a pop culture juggernaut. And the recent National Geographic media splash announcing the translation of The Gospel of Judas served to heighten interest in alternative first century Christian histories

In striking contrast, some Protestant Christian leaders are positively encouraging Christians to read Dan Brown’s novel and/or view the film. Darrell Bock, Research Professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary, writes on the Sony-sponsored Da Vinci Dialogue site, “…this novel presents an opportunity. The novel raises questions that allow one to discuss who the real Jesus was. It also provides an opportunity to explain how people over the centuries came to appreciate him as the unique salvation figure he both was and is.” Similarly, Fuller Theological Seminary President Richard J. Mouwnotes, “I hope many Christians will join me in taking this cultural phenomenon seriously. Read the novel and see the film! …The bad news is that Dan Brown has presented a seriously distorted view of who Jesus is. The good news is that because of what he has written many people are talking about Jesus. We all need to be prepared to join the conversation. There is no more important topic!” in an article on the same site

Dr. Ben Witherington, Professor of New Testament Interpretation at Asbury Theological Seminary, also is an advocate for Christian engagement with others around The Da Vinci Code. On his blog, Witherington comments, “My suggestion is that the church has a teaching moment and it needs to do its homework on the Da Vinci Code issues and be prepared to give a reason for the hope within them.“ 

Christian scholars seem to have almost uniformly agreed – irrespective of ideology – that Brown has badly represented early Christianity. For example, Dr. Harold Attridge, who is the dean of Yale’s Divinity School (hardly a bastion of conservative Christianity), characterizes Brown’s effort as one that “wildly misinterprets” the early period of Christianity. The Da Vinci Code has precipitated a cottage industry of articles, blogs, books, websites, conferences, and publications comprising a symphony of correction ranging from agnostic University of North Carolina’s Professor of Religions Studies Dr. Bart Ehrman’s Truth and Fiction in the Da Vinci Code to Opus Dei’s own online response to Brown’s book. 

Most Christian treatments of The Da Vinci Code that advocate studying it for the purpose of evangelistic engagement focus on its inaccuracies and ideological influences. A few voices, such as that of Scot McKnight, Professor of Religious Studies at North Park University and one of the editors of the Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, are also sounding somewhat different notes. In a recent post on his Jesus Creed blog, McKnight wonders, “Why is it that so many, in spite of repeatedly hearing about the historical implausibilities and the impossible scenario Dan Brown created for history, want to believe the inherent story of this book?” McKnight continues, “My contention is that we live in a culture that does not believe the Church for a variety of reasons: it uses a hermeneutic of suspicion; it learns that there are parts of the Church’s history that are not pretty; it hears facts about the priests and the pastors who have abused their calling and turned spirituality into crime; it knows of Christians who are hypocrites — and it simply says, “Well, maybe all along they’ve been a bunch of power-suppressing liars.”

There are some responses to each of these, but this is what I’m hearing, and I hope we use this movie to press the Church to learn to be more credible, trustworthy and full of integrity.”

Witherington has written, “America is a Jesus-haunted culture, but at the same time, it's a biblically illiterate culture. When you have that odd combination, almost anything can pass for knowledge of the historical Jesus." 

While a worshipful decision to ignore the book and the movie must be respected, for those who have decided to engage Brown’s work we suggest that in its response to the Da Vinci Code the Church does best when she addresses both of the deficiencies highlighted by Witherington: The most effective response will combine accurate biblical and historical information with something that also addresses the spiritual hunger that drives some to look anywhere for solid answers. As the Indigo Girls sang some years ago, we’ve got to starve the emptiness and feed the hunger.  

We do well to respond to errors especially when it addresses such serious matters as those covered by Brown’s novel. Paul advice to his protégé might be relevant here:   “The Lord's bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth,” (2 Timothy 2:24,25, The New American Standard Bible, emphasis mine). And one might see a connection to Paul’s note to the church in Corinth when he wrote, “We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God,” (2 Corinthians 10:5a, English Standard Version). 

But that can be too easy. 

In our contemporary situation where the cost of information is steadily decreasing, marshalling all the facts and arguments against the many Da Vinci Code errors is not difficult. But in an age when spiritual formation is too often collapsed to mere information transfer, putting together outstanding refutations to The Da Vinci Code is simply not enough. Just as information transfer is not the all-encompassing mode of spiritual formation, so also it does not adequately address The Da Vinci Code phenomenon. Something else is needed.

The reason is that having such great information at our disposal doesn’t do us much good if people really don’t care. 

And what makes them care is how we Christians live our lives. 

When we live lives characterized by an obvious and abundant love for God and others motivated by our being overwhelmed by Christ’s love for us (2 Cor. 5:14,15), then we are precisely in the position where someone might really ask us “for a reason for the hope that is in you “ and we have the opportunity “to make a defense” (1 Peter 3:15b, English Standard Version). People are attracted to optimism and hope; they crave it. When they see a peace in us that transcends our surroundings and circumstance, they often become genuinely curious as to why. And then The Da Vinci Code, the Gospel of Judas, etc provide us with opportunities to give them the reason for our joy and confidence. 

There will be those situations where, outside of the context of an ongoing relationship, an amazing conversation can lead to someone deciding to become a Jesus-follower. And those conversations can also occur around The Da Vinci Code. But perhaps most of the time with most believers, the finest transformational conversations precipitated by The Da Vinci Code or The Gospel of Judas occur within the context of an ongoing friendship where folks actually get the fragrant aroma of Jesus in the life of His follower. 

It is the evidence of our lives that turns folks from being merely Jesus-haunted to being witnesses of the Christ that lives in us (Gal. 2:20). 

Then they will ask and then we can tell.  

Suggested Resources for Da Vinci Code Conversations

Stephen Shields