More Flap over the DaVinci Code

Now, according to Reuters, an Archbishop and an executive secretary to the president in the Philippines have expressed the opinion that the movie should be banned in that country.

Once again the religious among us demonstrate the intolerance of religion for anything which might cause any members of the oft fleeced flock to reconsider. I guess I’m not really certain what the problem is nor why some folks are calling the film blasphemous.

Let’s think about this for a second. The Christian pitch is that Jesus of Nazareth was both God and man right? Well, I can’t say much about being God as it’s beyond my experience, but I do know something about being a man. Jesus was supposedly in his early thirties when he was crucified which means he was, and had been for about 18 years or so, a sexually mature male. That means that either (a) he engaged in sexual relations, (b) he masturbated or (c) he experienced wet dreams on a regular basis or else he would have been in such agony he wouldn’t have been able to walk. If somehow suppressing his sexuality was part of his being God, then I contend that he wasn’t truly man, and therefore the Christian claim is false by definition.

It also would have been highly unusual, possible, but highly unusual, for a Jewish male in his thirties in 1st century Palestine to be unmarried. Marrying, and fathering children, was considered something of a religious obligation.

Wouldn't it be a hoot if Jesus was sexually active and all those priests, through all those centuries, had to be celibate? Or at least claim to be celibate. I think that would be the greatest joke of all time.

What would be the big deal if Jesus was married and did father children? I can understand the evangelists not bothering to mention this in the gospels. I mean, I’m sure some of the disciples were married, but I don’t recall seeing any mention of that either. I’m going to use one of the Christian Apologists favorite arguments, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. All of the canonical gospels, with the interesting exception of John, make it plain that there were women in Jesus’ entourage that had come with him from Galilee (Mark 15:40-41, Matthew 27:55 and Luke 23:49). Some of these were probably wives or girlfriends yet Mark, Matthew and Luke are all silent about any such relationships. Just because wives aren’t identified, doesn’t mean they weren’t traveling around with Jesus and the disciples.

I am surprised that it’s the Catholic Church making all the noise and not the fundamentalist fruitcakes. I’m also surprised that all the complaints have come from someplace other than the U.S. Then again, I guess it’s still early. As for me, now I’m counting the days until this movie is out. I may go see it the first weekend.