History or Heresy

I know that all the hype will die down in a few weeks when the Da Vinci Code film has run its course, but in the mean time, I'm particularly frustrated. When will the snot-nosed hearsay-mongerers in the ignorant, dollar-hungry media stop producing rubbish like this and begin to understand that the Gnostic gospels are to Christianity what Marvel comic books are to genetic research? For example, this quote from the second page:

Yet from the earliest hours of Christianity, there were other voices, too, those determined to present a fuller picture of the Magdalene. In several Gnostic Gospels, texts whose dissemination in the past 50 years has turned the study of Christian origins on its head, she is not the wallflower of the New Testament but rather a favored, perhaps favorite, follower of Christ. In the Gospel of Thomas, she and another woman, Salome, are one of six (not 12) true disciples of Jesus. In the Gnostic Dialogue of the Savior, she is referred to "as the woman who understood all things." Most compelling is the Gospel of Mary, not just for its portrait of the Magdalene as a strong, willful woman but also for its radical ideas about gender[...]

Turned the study of Christian origins on its head? Is anyone else astonished that the same media establishment that will deftly attempt to point out that Usama bin Laden and Abu Musaab al-Zarqawi are heretics according to Islamic law (whether that's true or not is another post entirely) fail completely to understand that Gnosticism was a heresy that preexisted Christianity and had nothing to do with Christian origins? Are journalists really so stupid that they can't comprehend this, or do any research to confirm the words they type?

If you ask me, the only legitimate journalist out there, other than Michael Medved, is Manda (who has recently gone into a blog version of hiding, hence no link to her new digital digs).

For crying out loud.