A post on the Fifth Column blog, Pagan Flesh, Protestant Bones, caught my attention the other day.

It suggests that Protestant anti-Catholic tendencies are what have resulted in the current attempt by secularists in America to wipe Christmas from the calendar.  They were the first to attack Christmas; the anti-Christians are just finishing what they started.  He has another article on that particular topic here - How the Christians Stole Christmas.

Similarly, the Da Vinci Code book/movie by Dan Brown is, in fact, a form of Protestant view of Christian history.  This is the main focus of this post.

Under the following subjects, Steve Kellmeyer compares the Da Vinci Code's revision of history with the Protestant ... revision of history.

1. "The Roman Emperor Constantine invented the Catholic Church in order to crush True Believers!"
2. "The failure to find True Believers in ancient history is due to the fact that the winners write history."
3. (Catholics) change(d) the Bible
4. "Peter isn't the true head of the Church!
            (Protestants: Paul was. Dan Brown: Mary Magdalene was.)
5. "Jesus was not celibate."

The Da Vinci Code, it seems, has very little to do with Gnosticism.  Steve Kellmeyer has another fascinating article on this topic in an article on the Gospel of Judas (which IS a Gnostic text.)

Is this where Protestantism, at least some of it, is heading?

Here is an interesting - and detailed - letter of resignation from the Adventist church.  Tesa Beem's Letter of Resignation

Most of you know by now that Arthur and I have removed our membership from the Seventh-day Adventist Church. This has caused much pain for us as we have gone through the process. We are also aware of the disappointment and hurt it has caused you, our dear family. For this we are truly sorry and we hope that you will continue to pray for us. The official letter is attached at the end.

It discusses Adventism's positions on everything frm abortion to the Sabbath to the Clear Word Bible.

Adventists and others often use Isaiah 28:10 to promote a truly absurd way to interpret the Bible.  It allows them to take snippets here and snippets there, piece them together, and come to conclusions that none of the original passages support.

+ For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little (Isaiah 28:10, KJV)

An Adventist pastor has some insight into this method on his blog, showing what the text is really likely to mean.

The context of this passage is an oracle against drunken priests who are unable to teach even infants, who cannot even speak properly. And verse 13 makes it abundantly clear that "precept upon precept..." is something detrimental, not a principle of Biblical interpretation. Taken alone verse 12 might sound like a reasonable teaching, but in context we realize that it is the product of drunkenness.

A comment tells us that in developing their principle of hermeneutics, they have used terrible hermeneutics.

People who use the text as a guide to how to interpret the Bible have turned a mockery of drunkards into wisdom to emulate.

Paul Brydson of the Church of God in Williamstown says:

The NIV Study Bible footnote calls the verses "The mocking response of Isaiah's hearers."

Concerning Isaiah's response in verse 11 he says:

So Isaiah says that this is their condemnation. The word of God will continue to be nothing but "precept upon precept, line upon line" - simplistic, unintelligible babble to their destruction.

"Misquotes - Here a Little, There a Little" and "Acts 17:11 Sacred Cow - Precept Upon Precept, Line Upon Line? Commentary on Isaiah 28:10,13" are some useful studies of this verse and its misuse.