Leonardo da Vinci (1495-1497)
(for a larger version of this image click here)
The Da Vinci Code Discussed
Text Size
Feed for this entry
Trackback Address
Email Newsletter... Enter your email address to receive the newsletter.
- Darren Hewer commented on Did Leonardo da Vinci hate the Bible?
- Briana commented on Did Leonardo da Vinci hate the Bible?
- shin hyunseung commented on Terms of Use
- Darren Hewer commented on The Da Vinci Code DVD: Release Date November 14th
- galia commented on The Da Vinci Code DVD: Release Date November 14th
May 6th, 2006 at 5:22 am
With all the latest buzz surrounding the release of the film The Da Vinci Code we thought it
was time to share with you our Special Vision.
REVELATIONS… The Da Vinci Code is true…The flame of the Magdelene is
awakening the Roses…Our White Bride from Heaven returns with the
New Dawn of Flowers.
The Holy Grail ‘neath
ancient Roslin waits.The
Blade and Chalice guarding
o’er her gates. Adorned
in masters loving art, she l
ies. She rests at last
beneath the starry skies.
On the 26th May 2006 and into the new moon the first Gate of Dreams and
Abundance is opening, the Mayan “Breakthrough Celebrations” are beginning…
We have recovered her “Cyrstal Sphere” and the “Blue Starseed of Enlightnment” to
be planted and nurtured within our Mothers Flowering Earth.
Our Mothership is on the horizon ” She rests at last beneath the
starry skies”. She returns with the “Sword of Truth…Excalbur” and
the “Galactic Shield of the Rainbow Nation”.
We are uniting the tribes under the Sacred Tree of Peace.
2013 is Here and Now !
May the Flowering Tree take root and begin to blossom with you Heart
Peace and blessings to all, much love the Sacred Rose.
http://www.thesacredrose.co.uk/
May 7th, 2006 at 10:57 am
I was looking at the picture of “The Last Supper” and i know De Vinci was into anomoty and i was quite alerted by the way everyone in the picture are making hand sugestions so i was wondering does it mean anything and as i went through it it seemed so be a message made up of fingers ‘Eg: 1 finger for A, 2 for B etc etc…. but as i looked more closley some were acculey making shapes of letters with their fingers so after hours of study i came up wit this “DE JOLIE BEUH” and i was wondering could someone tell me if it might mean anything in some lanugage you can email me at Raymo956@yahoo.ie.It might be old italian i dont know. But im very interested in finding out Thank You. Ps… Sorry about the spelling.
May 8th, 2006 at 10:22 am
The Da Vinci Code has caused much anger in my family. It is the source of heated discussions and strong convictions. I just read it last month and found it spellbounding. My question is this… did Leo approach the Church and ask them to buy some paintings or did the Church approach Leo and ask him to paint religious artwork? Was there not one solid Bible believing Christian in the Church that they could have asked and trusted to paint the “right” picture?
May 15th, 2006 at 1:19 pm
Can we find a larger view of this painting?
May 16th, 2006 at 12:14 pm
I found a larger picture of this painting in my parent’s kitchen. Oddly enough. I finally took it down and took a closer look. But that doesn’t help your situation, sorry.
May 16th, 2006 at 12:38 pm
thanks MJ, but no need to bother your parents anymore! i’ve add a link to a larger version on the wikipedia site just under the image at the top of this post.
May 16th, 2006 at 7:24 pm
I was born to bother my parents. He-he!
So, what do you guys think? Is the Church to blame for asking Leo to paint this picture? I guess they just didn’t realize the impact it would have centuries later. Wow! Centuries later?!?! That’s incredible, isn’t it? I think I need to go outside for a smoke and ponder.
May 17th, 2006 at 7:58 pm
Not for nothin but Jesus looks just as much female as the person on his right!! I don’t see any evidence that it was Mary Magdalene next to him.
May 19th, 2006 at 2:50 am
help me!!! i was told that leo painting the last supper on to a dry plaster wall with oil paints cause he was experimenting with color.the wall then crumbled and the painting was lost and it took 20 yrs for someone to re create it. so i guess the pic we see is not leos version cause in his mary was on jesus left leaning on his shoulder. can anyone help cause i dont know what to believe any more
May 19th, 2006 at 12:46 pm
Take a deep breath, Shelley. Calm yourself down. I’m sorry if this shakes you up a bit.
Prove to yourself and the world that you’re strong in God’s unconditional love for you.
May 21st, 2006 at 5:17 pm
(If any of you have seen the Da Vinci Code movie yet, you’ll know what mean.) Have you noticed, in the last supper, if you take Mary Magdelene’s (or “john’s”) picture, cut it out, and place it to the right side of Jesus, it appears that she is resting her head on his shoulder.and he is resting his head on hers. it’s a perfect fit. there’s no way Leo did it by accindent. and their clothing is very similar.
May 21st, 2006 at 6:46 pm
Jesus sighs and whispers into her ear… “We’ll leave soon, Mary”….
May 26th, 2006 at 4:30 pm
Did you ever hear the theory that it is Mary/John and he/she has a big long gorrilla arm. Look very closely. Now when i look at the picture that’s how i see it.
May 26th, 2006 at 4:32 pm
What i mean is that John/Mary has the knife and his/her arm is being held by peter.
May 27th, 2006 at 10:23 am
im just wondering, did they really found the body of mary magdalene? if infact they found it where is it now? i just wanted to see mary magdalene if ever they found it already. and what about this holy grail they were talking about? they say, that it is the chalice which was used in the last supper, but why is it that i can never see any chalice at the last supper? tell me please and kuindly please give me a thourough explanation..thank you
May 27th, 2006 at 3:36 pm
they say that the holy grail isnt the chalice but a person. in fact they say it is mary magdalene. they say that in her grave is the diary that jesus himself kept amd mary magdalenes diary. it is only know to a few where she is buried and they promised to keep it a secret if the church left them alone.. hope this helps
May 27th, 2006 at 4:17 pm
I’m sorry Dan, the painting I refer to is printed by ABRAMS “Complete Paintings of Leonardo Da Vinci” (I can no longer refer to the painting my parents had hanging in their kitchen because my mother thought it would be best to throw it out; needless to say, I went outside and screamed on the top of my lungs. However, it only confirms what I already know.)
What I see in that painting is that “Mary-John’s” hands are in fact clasped together. Sorry, I see no evidence of a “big long gorrilla arm”. I see Peter’s left arm making a threatening gesture to Mary-John’s throat and his right arm is painted in such a way that Peter is actually holding the dagger. If you try to position yourself with him, you’ll see that is it pausible. The grey haired man with a beard beside Peter is holding up his two hands as if he is squeezing a pair of melons. Sexual innuendo… possibly.
May 28th, 2006 at 11:32 am
hey people i jus wanna knw tat wat is da proof tat mary magdalene waz carryin a child n she waz jesus ’s wife ? PLS NE EXPLANATION IS WELCOMED …
May 28th, 2006 at 2:42 pm
AKASH, interesting shorthand. Did you anagram something? ;-)
The bottom line is that it is a theory, a story, a tale that really is unfounded. The rumors have probably been around since the days of Jesus. “Anyone seen Mary?” “Oh, you haven’t heard? She’s pregnant and you’ll never guess with who!” Sensational tales can stand the test of time but it doesn’t make it any more valid than a rumor I could start today about anyone.
Recently some documents surfaced in the French “Library of Congress” as it were that have proven to be a hoax. Those documents brought the tales back up again and many books, including DVC, have been written about it. Some have said, “It has been said that…”, others have said, “Oh, it’s fact”.
The hoax was busted when they realized that the guy who “found” the documents was the same guy who put them there years ago and as it turned out, the documents said that he was the very bloodline of Jesus! How convenient.
So there’s no proof that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, nor is there any proof that she was pregnant with His child.
May 29th, 2006 at 9:17 am
hmmmm wel so still a mystery huh ! wel n ya DAN BROWN also people have said tat da vinci story is true story ! n if tats da case den they must c wats beneath the la louvre , i guess or check da templer’s church !
May 29th, 2006 at 2:05 pm
Very good observation Alexis
May 30th, 2006 at 10:48 am
really guys i really don’t know what to think
i’m so confus please explain something that it will make me fill better. thank you
May 30th, 2006 at 11:59 am
aillyn, what is it you’re confused about? There’s a couple of things to keep in mind:
1. This is a painting created 1400 years after the actual event
2. This painting, just like all artwork, is subject only to the artist’s interpretation
3. We are allowed to interpret this piece of fine art any way we please, however, any interpretation is ours alone (though it may be shared)
4. This painting depicts the actual event of the Lord’s Supper in which you can read in the four Gospel accounts in the Bible.
5. Our conclusions of what truly happened at that Supper should be shaped by writings recorded within years of the actual event by people who were at the event (most were anyway) rather than a painting created centuries after the event
6. But art is art, and it’s fun to enjoy and take in. Ultimately, this is how the artist wanted to present this event to the world. That makes it neither more true nor false as to what actually happened.
June 1st, 2006 at 3:10 pm
You’ll find this interesting… link http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/504271.html . That is not John! It never was, I always believed that when I was a child, no one told me, I just knew it was not!! Look at the lips, the eyes, the hands, the hair… she and jesus are painted with the most care, than anyone else in the painting. Both wear identical clothing.
I’ve never seen these paintings in real life, nor probably will never see them, but from what discoveries that have been made, it’s hard to accept, the findings seem to be solid and the facts blatently placed for someone to discover it. It’s not a secret, if clues are being placed to be found.
I’ve always believed the church to be the largest conspiracy known to man, attempting to cover up the truth and preach what the ‘Church’ believes is true. Today, the church may be open minded, but from what history tells, the church has never been open minded. Non the less being very selective of what is entered into the bible and what is taught. Scriptures taken out of context, and missing pages…… Besides, how in the world would anyone living today or yesterday know if the church, during that time, destroyed pertinent scripture that they thought may destroy christianity!
Personally, I believe that there is a higher power known as Jesus, God and the holy spirit; but not what the church preaches. Besides, the church is always ready to convict anyone who attempts to solve the puzzles of such existance.
History speaks for itself.
June 1st, 2006 at 3:20 pm
1. This is a painting created 1400 years after the actual event
You’re correct, however, if you look through history each painting, involved with Jesus, leaves a trail of evidence behind, waiting to be discovered. Remember the saying, “A picture is worth a thousand words.” It’s true, but when detailed information blatently presented beneath or throughout a painting, no such theory can be used, it was purposely placed there. Apparently, there is a much larger story taking place, and that story needs to be told, but the church has convinced the sheep to believe in falsehoods in history.
June 1st, 2006 at 4:09 pm
Sacrifice, I would agree that the person in the painting looks feminine. However, in a previous article here, I list several reasons why I think it is not:
# Leonardo often drew androgynous looking men (men with feminine qualities); for example, see his painting of John the Baptist.
# It was common convention at that time to paint John the disciple with feminine qualities, so Leonardo likely followed the conventions of his time
# It makes sense to have John (called ?the beloved disciple? or ?the one that Jesus loved?) sitting to Jesus? right (for example, John 13:23 has John the disciple sitting beside Jesus)
# The person to Jesus? right seems to be wearing men?s style clothing
# Surely when the picture was first painted, someone would have noticed it was a woman if indeed it was intended to be a woman. After all it is ?among the most famous paintings in the world?; it seems unlikely that this would just be coming to light now … the painting was on public display for hundreds of years
# The painting is meant to capture the moment when Jesus tells His disciples He will be betrayed, so all the disciples should be there. But if that is a woman in the painting, then one of the disciples is missing. Remember that at the time of the last supper, Judas has not yet betrayed Jesus so all twelve disciples would have been present.
# Even if da Vinci painted a woman sitting next to Jesus, that?s no reason to believe that da Vinci was accurate; he was painting over 1,400 years after the incident occurred
# We know that many details in this painting are not accurate (such as the fact that they are all sitting on one side of the table like in a TV sitcom) so why trust Leonardo\\\’s painting as historically accurate, instead of just a great work of art?
(I added the last one just now as I thought of it.) You seem 100% sure that it is a woman in the painting, but would you agree that the points above suggest it is likely not? Is there other evidence that it is a woman except that the person has feminine qualities?
June 1st, 2006 at 4:28 pm
Who is Leonardo Da Vinci that he feels worthy of saying who exactly Jesus was? He can paint whatever he wants, but does Leonardo have any real evidence to back up what he painted all those years ago? He was not there at the last supper, he is merely painting his own interpretation of what happened. Does he know what Jesus was wearing, or where Mary Magdalene was? What position she was in?
Are we really basing our belief about God an artist’s ideas or an authors carefully woven story?
How is the DaVinci code different from any other book or movie that has taken historical events and made an exciting story out of them? After all, the best fiction has some element of truth. How is the DaVinci code different from the recent movie National Treasure. They both take historical characters and events and make them say what they want them to.
The difference with the Davinci Code is that is messes with one of the most controversial and best loved characters in history–Jesus Christ. This in the reason for all the hooplah if you will over this book…but, the fact remains that the Davinci Code is fiction. Ingenious and interesting, but fiction.
The Davinci Code in no way unsettles my faith in who Christ was, and what He did on earth. God can still be fully man and fully God.
Whether he was married or not, (which i sincerely doubt that he was considering there is no evidence to the affirmative) he was still God.
I think all the discussion and anticipation and argument about the book is the worse than the actual content of the book.
I would encourage reading the book to know what it says, but I believe that it should in no way weaken your faith unless it was weak to begin with. And those who were not sure of who Christ truly was, those with no evidence of a relationship with Him, those who never truly knew Him, or had evidence of His working in and changing their lives will be shaken and disillusioned by it. And if it wasn’t the Davinci Code that shook them up it would be something else. Since the beginning of time there has always been an idea or discovery out to destroy the divinity of Christ. Because if Christ was NOT God, he could not have died, rose again, and atoned for the sins of the world. The argument of the Davinci Code is not new. It is an old, old, attack and will fade away like all the others against the light of the REAL Truth about who Jesus was– fully God, fully man, and Savior of the World.
June 1st, 2006 at 5:38 pm
I would also like to add, that I am excited about the interest the DaVinci Code has created about who Jesus really was, and what exactly happened in history. People have been ignorant and uninterested for far to long about these matters. Some passion and interest in these matter is better than none at all, and I would encourage anyone who is in doubt about these matter to seek, seek, seek the REAL TRUTH and never stop until you have settled in your heart who Jesus was and what His purpose was.
June 2nd, 2006 at 3:12 am
Forgive me if I linger off subject, in places. I am no prophet, but The Da Vinci Code was not intended to destroy anyone’s faith, discredit scripture, or slander Jesus, more or less to open up the doors that were long forgotten. It’s a known fact that the majority of people are taking it out of context as much as the fact as taking scriptures out of context. If you find yourself believing that any of this is to slander God or weaken your faith, then you should ask yourself, how strong is your faith?
There is more evidence to support that Jesus had companionship, besides, what is so ungodly about, the fact, Jesus ‘did’ have a companion? Was it not, as stated in scripture’s, God’s intention to obtain companionship of a woman (NOT MAN)? Does, Jesus, having companionship, compel you to feel insecure about your faith? Do you feel appalled by the idea that Jesus preferred woman’s companionship and preferred her over men? Do you feel unworthy, compelled to abolish the opposite sex?
“Da Vinci painted John as a women, because during his time it was popular?”
I doubt very much, men and women are finely distinct in paintings during that period… You need a good eye for translating artistic work and understand the characteristics. Take the Mona Lisa, for example, history tells that it was originally painted as a man, however, later it was change to depict a woman. Where in history does it state that men were often painted as women? If anywhere, whomever quoted that, had a deprived taste in artistic culture.
Going back to the Lords Supper, Mary Magdalene, John, as some may think, was drawn with ‘breasts’, also indicated a woman, she was also wearing the exact robe as depicted in the painting, as Jesus is wearing… identical. Look at the cheeks, chin, jaw, and hair, the closed eyes, compared to the rest of the disciples. The details of the painting depict it clearly as a women.
The Catholic church denied, the painting of the lords supper, for a reason, a poor one in fact. History has witnessed the church, as most others, slandered Da Vinci’s painting, of the last supper, stating it was blasphemous of Christ. How would the church know it was blasphemous? Was it not the Catholic church that crucified Jesus? Was it not the Catholic Church that prosecuted and condemned his followers? Let?s not point fingers, but history has shown the wrong in plain sight, though it seems it?s being long forgotten.
How would the disciples know, because they were there, followed Jesus and protected Jesus and were willing to die for Christ and their belief, unlike false prophets would. Is it not true that Jesus, himself, was crucified by the ignorance and fear, of others, stating that Jesus himself was blasphemous for stating he was such ‘God’? Where do you obtain your faith? Where was your faith learned from? I would presume your faith was learned from scriptures, but scripture was composed by the Catholic Church. What scriptures were not allowed to appear, that made Jesus look as if he were not divine? What is ungodly about scripture stating Jesus was an ordinary man? Oh, but he was, he was a carpenter, not a businessman or clergy, some may say he was a clerical order, but how so? Is it not a fact Jesus was sent to open the eyes of those who choose to close them and to ignore moral values, life was meant to live in peace and fulfillment; not to discriminate, kill, profit off others ignorance, being self righteous and horde everything for your own personal gain. God willed you to have a mind of your own, and to scrupulously value his existence, the church has no such right to condemn you for believing otherwise, which they have in the past and present.
How would Da Vinci know more facts? To say the least more documents were publically available, not hidden under lock and key, as they are today. Fact, Da Vinci living in the 1400’s, does not constitute a right to say he is incorrect or a trickster. Da Vinci was a great artistic individual and surprisingly of the Catholic Church. Da Vinci had an open mind and was not obscured by the prejudices of men or the church. The question that could be asked; Was Da Vinci part of a Protective Cult? Did the Church come to Da Vinci and ask to paint a painting of the Lords Supper? (historically speaking the church did, but denied his work and involvement, because of the fact that there was a female painted in it), Was Da Vinci asked, besides the church, to paint the Lords Supper, but with very distinct features obscured to the ill eye? What is the Pentacle and why is the Rose Line being cared for? Why is it structures were geometrically placed to form the Pentacle, was it a coincidence? Is the Pentacle, structures placed in ideal locations all fabricated and a lie? (Nope, they are physically there, with obscured importance.)
Why is it that females have always been rejected from the Church? Why is it that a female has never been appointed a high honor or a minister or yet the Pope…? Why is it that women values were never openly accepted without hesitation, denial, and conviction? Why is it that women were surprised and convicted of having an open mind? Why is it that women were given the same treatment as slaves? The questions are infinitive, but only one answer lies in plain sight…. Women were abolished from society. Today, the same treatment is applied, but day by day being lifted.
So, we living 2000 years after Christ?s death, gives us the absolute right to convict others of being ill educated, ignorant is scholastics and scripture? I think it is we who are ignorant, because we are so blinded and believe the church more than what the truth is.
The only question you have to ask yourself is, Is the church fundamentally true or has it over time, ignorantly, taught gospel that was prepared to be taught? You?re faith should only be the acceptance of Jesus as your maker and to morally live a life as he would.
I see this as a revolution in faith, for many, and will open the doors for many. There is no reason to seek the ‘Truth’ for the truth is beside you.
June 2nd, 2006 at 7:16 am
1. This seems like it is contradicting itself. It is either taken out of context or it is a revolution in faith.
2. My wife’s cat is right beside me and trust me… if it was the truth, I’d like to set it free.
June 2nd, 2006 at 11:51 am
Let me make one thing clear since there seems to be a horrendous amount of confusion and error in the so called ‘facts’ that people are discussing on this site.
1) No one is debating the fact that Jesus existed, or the presence of God. Not the book, not Da Vinci, not supporters of the hypothesis of the book. What is being debated is the manipulation of history by an organisation for gain, either spiritual, political or personal. The organisation in this particular case is the Vatican, not all of the church, since there are a number of different churches.
2) Faith is believing in something with out cause or evidence, you just believe. Like you just believe from the beginning that your parents love you, your dog loves you and that killing someone has really bad consequences! You don’t want to go out and try and see what the consequences are, you just know.
3)Moving along, there was a conference of NiCea at which all the people who were going to form the first Vatican / Organised Church sat down and decided how to thread a plausible, story that teaches truth and justice and all that good stuff together and ‘market’ it to the general populace. They tried to include as many of the Gospels as possible, but at the end two Gospels had to be thrown out because they did not fit into the general story and scheme of things. These Gospels not included in the Bible came to be known as the Gnostic documents. I don’t know how familiar any of you are with your church history, but there was massive killing and burning and general eradication of ‘heretics’ in France and Spain. These heretics that were hunted down were Cathars, people who believed in everything the bible said with one difference, they believed that Jesus Christ had human remains, and was human despite his divinity. They were killed, mercilessly. The Gnostic Documents, also often reffered to as the Dead Sea scrolls have been written about extensively. There is a school of belief that these are what the Templars found in Solomon’s temple and what gave them such enormous power over the church. It is a widely believed fact that the Templars were hunted down by the church for harbouring a secret of this nature that would shake the extensive and lucrative marketing campaign that was catholisism.
4) Leo. Da Vinci never knew Christ, was not around, did not know anyone who knew him. The book poses a viable THEORY that he was part of a secret society, the Priory of Scion, that helped with the protection of this secret. The Templars were hunted down and killed to a person, but re emerged from the few fleeing and surviving knights and it was them who formed the Priory to help pass on the secret through the years of the truth to the faith. Leo. Da Vinci is THEORISED to have been a member and as such is passing on clues through his paintings. This is why they are all in seated sitcom style, why there are inuendos, and why only the people who know what they are looking for can find it and the rest of us have discussion groups. It’s kind of a puzzle picture where you have to find the clues by looking at the picture.
5) In the end all the book, the picture and the conjecture is doing is providing an opposing counsel, if you will, with a story that is as plausible as the one put together by the organised church
One must not forget that the Vatican, is just another political organisatiion with voting, and ceremony and a marketing need. Questioning and organisation is not questioning a faith, just like questioning the Government does not mean you don’t believe in or love your country, you’re just not very sure of the people running it.
June 2nd, 2006 at 1:26 pm
Haramin, thank you for taking the time to comment. I agree with some things you suggest, but claiming many of the ideas are indisputable fact is not correct. (The #\’s below correspond to your numbered points in Haramin\’s post above.)
2) I do not agree that faith is belief without any cause or evidence. Good faith cannot ignore evidence. For example, one of the reasons I believe that God exists is that there are solid philosophical arguments for God\’s existence, like the Kalam argument. One of the reasons I believe the New Testament is that there is good evidence that it is historically reliable. Faith in spite of evidence is what some call \”blind faith\”, and I don\’t think that kind of faith is healthy.
3) There\’s several points I disagree with here. First, the Council of Nicaea\’s main purpose was to debate the exact nature of Jesus\’ divinity (the Arian controversy). This was debated at length, along with other early church practices. The canon of the Bible however was not debated here … see this page for a full discussion of the canon at Nicaea:
http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/nicaea.html
The conclusion is that \”there appears almost no evidence that the council of Nicaea made any pronouncements on which books go in the Bible, with the ambivalent exception of Jerome, or about the destruction of heretical writings\”.
On another point, the Dead Sea Scrolls did not contain gnostic documents. They contain almost entirely Hebrew (Old Testament) texts and do not mention Jesus. You probably meant the Nag Hammadi Library, which do contain gnostic texts. As above, however, none of the gnostic texts were ever given serious consideration as part of the church canon, especially not at as late a date as the Nicaean council. The Gospel of Thomas, by far the oldest of the gnostic gospels we possess, is usually dated to 120AD at earliest, so they were written much later than the canonical gospels.
With regards to the Templars, their secret roles may be \”widely believed\” but, as far as I know, not among scholars who have made it their specialty studying the Templars.
4) The idea that Leonardo was a member of the Priory of Sion is dependent on the idea that the Priory of Sion really existed; in fact it was a hoax: \”Since its actual foundation in 1956, it has been characterized as anything from the most influential secret society in Western history to a modern Rosicrucian-esque ludibrium, but, ultimately, has been shown to be a hoax created by Pierre Plantard.\” Extensive information about the hoax (including the confessions of its perpetrators and copies of relevant documents) can be found at Paul Smith\’s site here:
http://www.priory-of-sion.com/
Unfortunately, the book Brown chose to base The Da Vinci Code on, \”Holy Blood, Holy Grail\” was published before the hoax was widely known. And if there was no secret society, there was no secret to pass on. There is no evidence from Leonardo\’s life that he was involved in any type of secret society.
5) I do not find the picture put forward by The Da Vinci Code to be at all persuasive due to its many errors in what it puports to be fact (or in some cases what Brown intended to be fiction). A brief list of some of the criticisms can be found here (I did not read the entire site so I cannot say how accurate it is in its entirety):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticisms_of_The_Da_Vinci_Code
I do agree about the Vatican though; people need to be careful about equating any organization with the proper \”church\”, that is, the unified body of all believers. :)
June 2nd, 2006 at 7:14 pm
In the painting there are only 13 people. 12 deciples and Jesus. If theat is Mary, where is the other deciple?
June 11th, 2006 at 8:50 pm
AKASH
May 29th, 2006 at 9:17 am
hmmmm wel so still a mystery huh ! wel n ya DAN BROWN also people have said tat da vinci story is true story ! n if tats da case den they must c wats beneath the la louvre , i guess or check da templer?s church !
____________________________________
There have been several DVD’s put out now exposing The DaVinci Code and one of them actually took the time to go to that spot, and showed the camera what was beneath the la louvre–NOTHING!
_____________________________________
“That is not John! It never was, I always believed that when I was a child, no one told me, I just knew it was not!! Look at the lips, the eyes, the hands, the hair? she and jesus are painted with the most care, than anyone else in the painting. Both wear identical clothing.”
Look at the picture again…do you see anymore “female looking” folks in the picture?
“I?ve always believed the church to be the largest conspiracy known to man, attempting to cover up the truth and preach what the ?Church? believes is true. Today, the church may be open minded, but from what history tells, the church has never been open minded. Non the less being very selective of what is entered into the bible and what is taught. Scriptures taken out of context, and missing pages?? Besides, how in the world would anyone living today or yesterday know if the church, during that time, destroyed pertinent scripture that they thought may destroy christianity!”
Lol–the main thing I know is that one of the lies in the movie is that “Christianity took over Rome” bit!
One thing Jesus promised His disciples was that they would be persecuted for believing Him and they are to this day. People are literally getting KILLED for becoming Christians, people are thrown out of their HOMES for being Christians, and people are hunted down by the law because they became an “enemy of the state” when they became a Christian.
And that’s what happened in Rome–the great fire happened and Nero found a scapegoat. The Christians–they were tortured, maimed, sawed in half, became burning lightposts for Nero’s palace, thrown to the lions, got their heads chopped off, etc…
It was only through God’s mercy that they survived through all that–they were victimized by the Romans not the other way around.
It’s History–and you can even read about it on Wikipedia!
“Personally, I believe that there is a higher power known as Jesus, God and the holy spirit; but not what the church preaches. Besides, the church is always ready to convict anyone who attempts to solve the puzzles of such existance.”
Did Jesus really come to the earth in the flesh? Is He God in the flesh? Isn’t He more then a good man?
I’ll tell you one thing though; you’re right in saying that we have, at one point in time or another, done bad stuff. And you know, I apologize for them–I’m sorry whenever they killed a bunch of innocent people in the Crusades. I’m sorry when they killed a bunch of innocent Jews during the Inquisition. I apologize for them, ok?
We’re sorry; will you forgive us for all the times we hurt innocent people?
–JD
November 15th, 2006 at 4:58 pm
Ok is it me are what if u look at the Last Supper ok if u look at JESUS look at the right side of Jesus u can see that all the disciples are looking at him ok. But if u look at Mary M. u will see the Disciples to the Laft of Her u will see that all of theme are looking at her and not him for what i see out of it in that way the one’s looking at him was prising him and looking at him and not her and the one’s looking at her is prising and looking at her i do not know maybe i am the one person who see’s that in a way. A Maybe not Maybe i am right look at this pic in that way and Email me at (Dauzat65@hotmail.com) And tell me what u Think of it .
August 3rd, 2007 at 4:03 pm
this revelation is exciting. i found a site that has really good high resolution images and you can clearly see the hidden figures. check it out. http://www.thelastsuppertheory.com/
August 19th, 2007 at 4:19 pm
a boy in my art class painted this pic and it turnned out really good……well done Da Vinci!
October 31st, 2007 at 12:56 pm
To crush ones faith is not my intention, but our eyes simply do not lie. The debate of the human being to the right of jesus is profoundly difficult to decipher, as to determine wether or not it is, or is not, mary magdalene. jesus himself looks feminine in this painting, yes, but if you notice the man to the right of this mysteriously vague person, you will observe a man with his hand laying upon the chin of the vague human being. He or she appears to be nuzzling, or resting on the mans hand, which seems very feminine to me. in which i am led to believe that the person is in fact, mary magdalene.
November 28th, 2007 at 5:09 pm
I have always thought that the figure to the left of Jesus was female but my whole life people have told me that it wasn’t.
To say that Jesus was married and had a child, does that question his divinity? I think not. To have sex, while married, is not sinful… or atleast the scriptures teach.
The movie and book were controversial and thought-provoking, but I still have my faith in what I believed beforehand.