Its Number One on Amazon, and has gone to the top of several best seller lists, and the reviews are pouring in for Dan Brown's latest blockbuster novel, sure to be made into a movie. But even Mr. Brown's fans, reviewing the book on Amazon, are about equally divided as to whether this novel makes Mr. Brown a dude or a dud.
Witherington comments on the book's literary worth, its historical accuracy (or inaccuracy), and Brown's treatment of the Bible and orthodox Christianity. On this, Witherington offers an important critique:
In his attempt to explain why the Bible has endured through the ages Peter Solomon, Robert Langdon's mentor and a Mason says the following: "The reason...is that there exist powerful secrets hidden in the pages of this ancient book... a vast collection of untapped wisdom waiting to be unveiled." (p. 489) The hidden meanings in the Bible are the reasons why the finest minds have pondered this book for so long.
The contrast to this is made plain by quoting Thomas Paine -- Paine warned there is a great danger in interpreting the Bible literally. (p. 490). Then the familiar story of Thomas Jefferson's edited and expurgated version of the NT is presented to us as well (p. 491).
The justification then for allegorizing and deconstructing the Bible comes from the Founding Fathers, on this theory. Langdon, as he listens to Peter Solomon has questions about this. How could the Ancient Mysteries that the Masons talk of, and the Bible be one and the same? The Ancient Mysteries are about the latent power of the human mind... a formula for personal deification of the self-help sort (p. 491). The answer given is that the Bible fell into the hands of those who did not understand its true character and the Word was lost, and became 'the lost Word' , 'the lost Symbol'. The Bible then rightly interpreted, in a Masonic kind of way, becomes a human self-help manual, so we can all realize our potential and through human effort and human science, we can realize that all religions are one--- all point to the same 'higher truth' of human divinity.
There are of course many things wrong with this analysis, but here we must concentrate on the hermeneutical problems. Firstly the Bible is not a Gnostic text full of coded secrets. And even when we are dealing with the apocalyptic visions of an Ezekiel or a John of Patmos the point is not obsfuscation but revelation--- the unveiling of the secrets, not their hiding. Indeed this is the meaning of apocalyptic-- the unveiling of secrets. And unlike the later Gnostic approach, this is said to be for any and all who are prepared to be disciples, not merely those with the most intellectual wattage.
Secondly, the Bible has to be interpreted with sensitivity to its various genre or types of literature. You don't interpret parables the same way you interpret historical narratives or psalms which are songs, or law codes, and so on. Each type of literature requires a certain approach, and some literary sensitivity. There are parts that must be interpreted literally, and there are parts that require recognition that metaphor and figure are involved, even if it is referential, as is often the case. Apocalyptic literature is in fact not helpfully interpreted as fiction because while it uses dramatic metaphors and hyperbole, it does intend to be referential to things in history, in space and time, as well as in eternity.
In other words, Brown's attempt to turn the whole Bible into some kind of coded document requiring insider information to understand is a serious error. Of course the main reason he takes this approach is to avoid what is often called the 'scandal of particularity'
-- the notion that God has revealed himself to a particular people at particular times and places and that salvation comes through a particular means, not through all religions means and avatars. What is especially lost in the 'browning' of the Bible is its historical substance, having to do with the story of God's people, Israel, and their Messiah, Jesus, and then later those who are 'in Christ--- both Jew and Gentile.
A classic example of how not to interpret the book of Revelation comes in a Peter Solomon lecture we are privy to, on pp. 407-08. Here again we are regaled with the Gnostic idea that the Bible is written in code so the 'unworthy' could not understand its wisdom. Its all symbols and metaphors of a deeper secretive truth about ourselves that only the worthy can unravel (p. 407). Can you say Elitest? I knew you could.
Solomon goes on to say that what Revelation is all about is the great enlightenment of humankind that is coming-- coming through things like Noetic Science, but also by studying the ancient symbols in books like the Bible. "We are in that narrow window of time during which we will bear witness to our ultimate renaissance. After millenia of darkness, we will see our sciences, our minds and even our religions unveil the truth....The Book of Revelation is a vibrant example of our shared truth. The last book of the Bible tells the identical story as countless other traditions. They all predict the coming unveiling of great wisdom." (pp. 409-10).
Of course despite Mr. Solomon's confidence, what the Book of Revelation really refers to is Christ's judging of the world, both before and after he returns in the flesh. It refers to a time when good will prevail and evil will be vanquished. It refers to a time when some will go to the lake of fire and others to everlasting life here on terra firma in the new earth which has had a corporate merger with the new heaven, as Christ and the saints return from heaven. Of course these visions involve analogies and metaphors, but they do indeed intend to describe future historical realities. We may disagree with what the text says, but it is quite impossible to turn it into a book of proverbial wisdom about how we all have the truth and divine potential deep within us. And of course the Bible Mr. Solomon refers to is the Masonic Bible, the Bible with Masonic reinterpretations and allegorizations.
Sadly most of this is missed by Dan Brown, or ignored, or trivialized, or distorted on the way to producing his own gumbo, his own new syncretistic approach to religion and the divine. And at the bottom of the well of Dan Brown's thinking are these words--- 'ye shall become as gods', the heady message of human apotheosis, human self-deification. It is a message as old as the serpent, and new as the Lost Symbol and it hasn't changed all that much over the years. It appeals well to human pride, especially human intellectual pride.
It is interesting how very differently the psalmist reacts, when confronted with all of creation including all that humans are able to do, reflecting on the very same things Dan Brown spends time on.
He puts it this way " when I consider the sun, the moon and the stars, the works of God's hands, I ask, what is man that thou art mindful of him, and the son of man that you should care. But you have crowned him with glory and honor, made him a little lower than the angels" (Ps. 8).
This leads not to a hymn of self praise, but rather to the conclusion "O Lord, our Lord, how magnificence is your name in all the earth". It is God who crowns humans with ability and glory and honor. We are both unable and unworthy to put such crowns on our own heads. And it is God who should be praised, who made us in his image. Laus Deo is not merely a saying on top of the Washington Monument. It is the essence of what the Bible calls us all to recognize--- that God is God, and we are not. We are merely created in the image of God, and whatever potential we have, we owe it to our Maker, the Supreme Architect. There are no self-made men in this world, only God-made ones who have a choice as to whether they will be good and godly in recognizing they are not God, or whether they will listen to the siren song of the Serpent-- "ye shall be as gods".