Sex in “The Da Vinci Code”

The mundane theme, “married with children” broke the record in book sales and created a torrid controversy. Dan Brown did it with his book, The Da Vinci Code. This time, it doesn´t feature Al Bundy, a misanthropic women´s shoe salesman with a miserable life in the TV sitcom series of the last decade, but it casts the most controversial figure in human history, Jesus of the Gospel. The author's smashing success comes from his solid adherence to the immutable marketing rule, “sex sells.” Indeed, the book is all about sex and nothing but sex, asking its readers to stretch their speculative imaginations.

Wait a second here. Based on this initial information, some readers might rush to a theater to watch the movie adaptation of the book. You may want to hold the thought for a moment because the movie won´t show an iota of steamy sex scene between Tom Hanks (Professor Robert Langdon) and Audrey Tautou (the police cryptologist Sophie Neveu). The lack of sex scene comes from the nature of the book that doesn´t explore about a XXX quality deep throat sex type but the two thousand years old question: Was Jesus human being? If so, was he married with children?

From its beginning, the question of Jesus´ dual nature, divinity and humanity, has never disappeared from Christian religion. Setting aside the divine nature of Jesus on the shelf, Dan Brown created a scenario where Jesus plays a role of humane father who flirts with Mary Magdalene. The ramification that the earthly Jesus had an active sex life has disturbed the nerve system of the conservative Christian camp. It has raised their blood pressure by opening the forbidden door where the human side of Jesus has been kept tight. By placing Jesus on par with us, in terms of “married with children” it opened the floodgate of possible speculations in his sexual activities. In today´s street language, they are:

Did he ever get laid?

Did he have a wet dream and wash his panties by himself out of shame and bewilderment?

Did he ever masturbate as a teenager?

Did he make out with girls around him?

Did he marry, have kids?

Was he gay?

Simply put, these questions are asking whether Jesus was a full time human being. Though the New Testament talks nothing about Jesus´ personal sex life, we can deduce that he was a sexual being because Jesus was depicted as man just like us. For example, Jesus was described as “born according to the flesh” (Romans 1.4) and he was “in all things like his brethren” (Hebrews 2.17). Furthermore, since Jesus himself considered his disciples as his brothers and included tax collectors and sinners in his friendship circle, he would have known what was entailed in their extracurricular activities, that is, man behaving badly.

Also the book of Hebrews says: “For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin” (Hebrews 4.15). Again, even though the Bible offers no specific example of Jesus being sexually tempted, we can safely assume that the phrase “in all things” should include sexual temptation. To stretch a bit further, since Jesus is “without sin,” whenever he was sexually tempted, it can´t be considered as sin. That means all of his natural and wild daydream, for example, having sex with a beautiful woman, cannot be categorized as sin. But in other places in the Gospel, Jesus declared, “I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Matthew 5.28).

How do we reconcile the seeming contradiction? According to Milton Wolpin, Professor Emeritus of Psychology at USC, as a necessary part of life, people daydream most about sex, money and power–the things people usually care about most. If we say Jesus didn´t daydream, then he is not qualified as a full time human being. If we say that Jesus has committed sin, then he needs to renounce his highly acclaimed divine nature. Only possible solution to the dilemma is to change the categorical definition of sin. Thus sin cannot be an action that violates some laws or rules. Rather it is a state or condition in which we´re being alienated from the authentic mode of existence. Hence, sin simply means alienation or estrangement. The implication here is that so-called “sexual sin–adultery, homosexuality, or fornication, etc.” is not sin in actuality but manifestation of who we are, how we have estranged from the authentic self. Even Jesus was an estranged being when he was born as human being and carried the full load of human stigma.

However, some religious fanatics and fundamentalists do not want to acknowledge the human Jesus in its full extension and freak out when it comes to speculate about the implications of the humanity of Jesus. Had he not experienced the ecstasy of lovemaking or angst of the relationship, the most intense way to show our existence and the greatest intimacy between lovers, how then could he sympathize the deepest joy or the unfathomable fear of being a human? If he was indifferent from us as a sexual being, then he must be disqualified to be described as “in all things like his brethren.” Besides, the Gospel is not a historical record nor a biography but a theologically motivated document to promote a cohesive faith community. From the first century Gospel to the present, The Da Vinci Code, the inklings, are the human endeavor to quench our thirst in searching the meaning of our human existence. And Jesus happens to be one of many gurus who took the less traveled road to show what could have been done in our quest.

Either in a theological narrative or fiction, regardless of its format, we have created Jesus according to our own image and need as Dr. Albert Schweitzer claimed in his book, The Quest of the Historical Jesus: “Each successive epoch of theology found its own thoughts in Jesus; that was, indeed, the only way in which it could make Him live, each individual created Him in accordance with is own character.” Accordingly, for some, Jesus became their crutch, opium, or power control tool, and still for others, a wheel of fortune.

That means you can create your own image of Jesus as Dan Brown has done. Which Jesus would you want to create today? You might have a chance to sell another 40 million copies. This is my speculative image of Jesus: He could have been an Asian woman. How and why? It is because:

• He knew how to feed a crowd, at a moment´s notice, when there was no food.
• He kept trying to get the message across to a group of men who just didn´t get it.
• Even dead, he had to get up early in the morning because there was still more work for him to do.
• He lived with his parents until the age of 30.
• He lived in a country which is controlled by a foreign power.
• When he was young, he had to help his father´s business.
• He believed in feng sui. According to a new theory, the cross of Jesus is the hidden feng sui that signifies life cycle, the burial and the resurrection, from which love overflows.
• He learned his teaching style from Lao-tzu who said in the Tao Te Ching:

“Some say that my teaching is nonsense,
Others call it lofty but impractical.
But to those who have looked inside themselves,
this nonsense makes perfect sense.
And to those who put it into practice,
this loftiness has roots that go deep.”

Daniel Hong was born and raised in Korea. He studied psychology and philosophy at UCLA and Oxford University (UK), respectively. He has owned and operated his own business, and taught in college. He currently works as a freelance researcher in Seattle.