the da vinci code (page 2)

Seeker4

Da Vinci's painting was done centuries after Christ. It doesn't offer "proof" of anything.

Think about it!

S4

Sam87

yeah thats what i was thinking seeker, just i couldnt get the point accross to my girlfriends sister, oh well.

Sam87.

I do not know if the picture is any proof, I do not think so, but many of my friends do. That picture is the strongest point in the whole movie. The person standing next to Jesus does look like a woman to me.

becca1

Movie was good, book was better. Pure fantasy with a historical background. Dan Brown's: Angels and Demons was better though.

Borgia

Pictures used are all part of the renaissance. And basically they are proof. Question is: proof of what?

I liked the book very much, encouraged me to do some digging. I even read a book about guys who discerned from de geometric in some paintings the burial place of Jesus and the Magdalene in the Languedoc.

However, these groups all have some things in common: talk about Jesus not being resurrected on the third day literally but in a more gnostic sense and living out the days of his live to one extend or another. Now, to discern how much of that is gossip, evil talk or plain truth, that is a matter of hot debate.

Another point of interest is: lot´s of the religious and gnostic have borrowed from eachhother freely and used the same symbols and ideas. What a blessing copyright is......

Does not make the fact go away that Dan Brown wrote a nice novel and Tom Hanks provided a few hours of diversion.

Cheers

Borgia

funkyderek

Sam87:

From what i can gather she is coming to this conclusion because da vinci painted a picture of the last supper and it has hidden messages in it.

It doesn't really. Some very poorly qualified "historians" postulated that it did, used all sorts of poor scholarship and forged documents to support their claims, and then had it ripped off by some third-rate thriller writer.

What does one persons paintings have to do with whether Jesus was married?

Nothing, of course. Even if there were such hidden messages in Leonardo's art - and there most assuredly aren't - that wouldn't tell us anything about the actual historcial facts, only about what Leonardo himself believed.

I know this movie apparently has some facts in it, but it is mostly fiction

I haven't seen the movie, but have read the book. Much more of it is fiction than the author claims. When reading it, don't assume the author's historical asides are in any way accurate. He even gets a few quite mundane facts wrong.

stillajwexelder:

read the movie and seen the movie - but it is not totally original - that is why he was sued. The Holy Blood and The Holy Grail published in 1982 published the theory about Jesus and Mary Magdalene getting married and fathering kids including the Merovingian Blood line of French Kings

I thought it was really funny the way they sued him for copying their idea, when theirs was supposed to be historical fact. If it had been, they wouldn't have even thought of suing someone for using it as a backdrop.

skyking:

That picture is the strongest point in the whole movie. The person standing next to Jesus does look like a woman to me.

It's the apostle John. John was often painted with feminine features in medieval paintings. I think it's because he was supposed to be younger than the other apostles, or because he was "the disciple that Jesus loved".

fullofdoubtnow

We read the book then saw the film, both very entertaining. I would advise reading the book first though.

LittleToe

There's no direct evidence to support the claim. The indirect evidence is as Carmel mentioned; Rabbis were expected to be wed, and in that culture it would be unlikely that a 30 yr old man would be a bachelor.

The question that I've posed to a number of my Christian friends who have expressed outrage about this is: what would that change??

All I've received back so far is a frown of consternation...

Seeker4

Hey, skyking, we actually agree on something! That sure looks like a woman next to Jesus to me in that painting too! People can say it's a feminized John, but I think it's a woman.

S4

XJW4EVR

Good book. Haven't seen the movie. However, The DaVinci Code has about as much historical accuracy as The Lord of the Rings Trilogy.

the da vinci code

Share this