The Invisible Things

Articles in Apologetics

The Last Supper

with 35 comments

One of the central images used by Dan Brown in The Da Vinci Code is the mural Leonardo painted at Santa Maria delle Grazie, which depicts Jesus and the twelve disciples gathering for the Passover meal prior to His crucifixion, The Last Supper. It was at this gathering that Jesus shared with the twelve his coming betrayal by one of them, as well as the practice of sharing communion with one another in remembrance of Him. However, Brown's character Sir Leigh Teabing alleges that the painting provides clues within an elaborate conspiracy to conceal a relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene:

"'It's a matter of historical record,' Teabing said, 'and Da Vinci was certainly aware of that fact. The Last Supper practically shouts to the viewer that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were a pair.'"

Leonardo, beginning work on the mural in 1495, was known for his desire to depict images in a realistic fashion and his criticism of other artists for embellishing imagery. Yet some conspiracy theorists, like the character of Teabing, argue that Leonardo's painting is an elaborate clue to a secret he was under charge to protect as a member of the Priory of Sion. It might be helpful to point out at the outset that lacing a very public work with overt clues to a secret he was supposed to protect might be a conflict of interest. It would seem to me that a better motive would need to be suggested for Leonardo to want to reveal the "secret" but only through cryptic symbolism in his paintings. Nevertheless, many allege that the incriminating symbols are in fact there.

The famous allegation is that the figure to the right of Jesus, appearing to swoon in the direction of Peter, standing to his right, is actually Mary Magdalene, not John, as was traditionally understood by the Church and art historians alike. The theory cites the feminine appearance of this figure as obvious evidence that Leonardo was intending to paint a woman, rather than a man. Some indicate that Jesus and the figure to His right are painted as mirror images of each other with symmetrically matching clothing, forming a 'V' shape, which represents a female womb and thus homage to the "divine feminine." Additionally, the shape of Jesus and the mysterious figure to His right are also said to form the shape of the letter "M," perhaps for the word "matrimony" or "Magdalene." I think that such interpretations require far too much of the presupposition that Leonardo had some sort of secret agenda with the painting, which ultimately begs the question. However, the claims of Teabing get even more farfetched. He says, "Oddly, Da Vinci appears to have forgotten to paint the cup of Christ," indicating that the absence of an actual cup in front of Christ proves that the grail is something other than a literal cup- perhaps the bloodline of Jesus Himself!

Such theories are ultimately fantasy. In fact, they seem to rely upon the assumption that Leonardo was a reliable source regarding the event of the last supper, as if he had himself been there. However, Leonardo depicted the scene over 1400 years after it occurred, presumably relying upon the Gospel accounts themselves to do so. Given the likely reliance upon the Gospels, it is no surprise that the cup is not a central element of the depiction as it was certainly not in the Biblical narrative. The legend of the Grail having supernatural power resulting from Jesus' use came much later and has no scriptural precedent. Moreover, the assumption that Leonardo would have even been motivated to lace the painting with clues to a conspiracy is based upon his membership in the Priory of Sion, a legendary secret society which has been proven to have been a hoax invented in the 20th century. Without the Priory connection, there really is no substance to the theory.

Art historians, however, have consistently approached The Last Supper as being both typical of Leonardo and typical of contemporary Florentine trends. They interpret the figures and their expressions as follows: From left, Bartholomew, James the Lesser, and Andrew (his hands up as if to say 'stop!') form a group and are surprised. Judas Iscariot, Peter, and John form the next group. Judas is depicted as withdrawn and somewhat sinister as he holds a small bag presumably carrying the silver he received as payment for his betrayal. He appears to be in shadow, symbolizing his spiritual lostness. Peter wields a knife, pointing toward Bartholomew (some say to reference Bartholomew’s future martyrdom, others to foreshadow Peter's actions at Gethsemane), while John swoons in Peter's direction. Thomas, James and Philip are the next group to Jesus' left. Thomas shows distress, while James throws his arms out in dismay. Philip seems to ask for clarification. Finally, Matthew, Jude, and Simon the Zealot form the last group, the former two appearing to consult Simon. Incidentally, this interpretive scheme was confirmed by the discovery of a document known as The Notebooks of Leonardo Da Vinci, found in the 19th century.

The feminine appearance of the figure historians almost unanimously interpret to be John is no surprise given that it was typical of Leonardo's depiction of young men, as well as the Florentine tradition of painting John as beardless and youthful. What's more, this character appears to be wearing men's clothing, not those of a woman. The traditional interpretation of art historians seems a much more likely explanation than Teabing's, which relies on too many assumptions to be justifiable. Another problem raised by interpreting this figure as Magdalene is that her presence would reduce the count of the disciples to eleven, with one missing, which contradicts the Biblical and traditional accounts.

While Brown creates a compelling narrative around the imagery of Leonardo, conspiracies and esoteric knowledge, the historical credibility is just not there. However, even if Leonardo had been a member of a secret society with fantastic ideas about Jesus and Mary Magdalene, which he decided to hide in his paintings, there is no supporting evidence to suggest that anyone should take him seriously in this regard. Even the recently proven hoax of the Priory of Sion set its date of establishment at 1099, a millennium after Christ! Leonardo, painting four-hundred years later, likely did not have accurate insight into the details of the real "last supper," nor does it seem that he had any feasible esoteric agenda.

About these ads

35 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Your criticism of Dan Brown is good as far as it goes, but it does not go far enough. Take a closer look at da Vinci’s painting. Jesus’ right hand is stretched toward and nearly touches a cup of wine, and his left hand is stretched towards a piece of bread.

    “Oddly, Da Vinci appears to have forgotten to paint the cup of Christ”.
    That is simply a false statement, there is no need to explain why da Vinci forgot to paint the cup; he didn’t.

    Michael

    June 10, 2006 at 1:57 am

    • No he hasn’t!

      Dan Brown (a mix of red and green ) is a pied piper leading you all on a mis-trail by weaving concocted stories leading you to a spiritual death (he’s probably a zionist posing as a gnostic! Brown contains NWO or n-ew w-orld o-rder r-obert b-ruce.
      Bruce also spelt de Bruce, Brus, Bruis, Brix, Brusse and Brux as in Brux_elles, Brus-s-els > el is god in hebrew)

      Read the Bible – when you get enough knowledge of it you can crack the Jews made-up “dream-works” ie “Land of Oz”
      (muppets = frank (old word for a mason – jews covertly run the masons) Oz a zionist jew-elitist taking the pee/pulling the strings of the dumb GOYS > Frank Richard Oznowicz; born May 25, 1944)
      Then you properly “Wake UP”

      In 2007 an Italian photographer reported in press that by using photoshop and reversing/reflecting artworks in an certain occult way it produces hidden pictures ie of The Graal Cup
      Several Grand Masters contain occultly ‘hidden’ pictures of images of Satan esp. Ones pictured on UK Stately Mansion websites such as Artwork at Chatsworth!
      From 1400 G.M’s used to cheat using lenses projecting the images on chia-ros-curo walls to do their perspective accurate paintings (in those times an act of witchcraft)
      Chia > a ‘living’ (in hebrew ‘chaya’ ‘chayyim’) image
      > ‘Chai’ means ‘life’ in Hebrew

      Have fun,
      Don’t forget to read your Bibles!
      As Jesus promised us “Nothing is hidden” – once you suss the Keys to their codes!

      Troofer

      February 3, 2014 at 11:09 pm

  2. Hi Michael,

    Thanks for your comment. You’re right! I agree that the statement made by Brown’s character is incorrect. I didn’t mean to suggest that there is no cup of wine. In fact, there are many cups of wine on the table in the painting! However, as I pointed out above, our primary concern should be to remember that regardless of the painting, Da Vinci was not an authority on matters of church history, and, painting over 1400 years later, one should not treat his image as documentary evidence (or almost as a photograph) of the actual last supper!

    Thanks,

    CB

    CB

    June 12, 2006 at 11:30 am

  3. I have almost finished the book, Da Vinci Code…I must say…I have almost been in tears. I am not sure what to believe anymore. I have always known one thing and now I am being told, sorry, what we told you before was a fabricated cover-up of the truth.
    They were not saying Da Vinci was there was there, witnessing the last supper, they specifically said he was a truth protector; a member of the secret society…
    You tell me how, now, I can find a way to believe any different than what all the clues bring to my eyes.

    Michelle

    July 31, 2006 at 7:32 am

  4. The Da Vinci code is lies. Just because “The Last Temptation of Christ” has Jesus wanting to have sex with Mary Magdelene, it does not mean it is fact.

    The earliest and most reliable historical sources concerning Christianity mention nothing of Jesus having sexual relationships or anything of the source.

    Check out http://www.wikipedia.org/historical_Jesus

    That will give you a more accurate picture.

    Quique Trujillo

    August 1, 2006 at 3:49 am

  5. Michael:

    Very interesting stuff. I am in over my head on some of this, which I think is common. How many people know church history? I do believe that part of the appeal is that it touches on mistreatment of women in the church, a true historical fact, even though it’s not always pervasive. (I have not read the book or seen the movie, so I’m basing this on what I overhear.)

    As I say in my blog entry,
    “..part of the appeal seems to be the statement it makes about oppression of women by the church. I agree that has happened historically and still does in many parts of society. That was not Christ. Christ respects women as I know Him. He didn’t have to marry a “fallen woman” to prove that.”

    A lot of the information presented as historical fact in Dan Brown’s book is bits of information with only a fraction of the necessary reasoning and information.

    Jenn

    August 10, 2006 at 1:04 am

  6. Michelle,

    I can understand how The Da Vinci Code can leave even a strong believer feeling confused and frustrated. It is a manipulative piece of fiction, to say the least. Please take a look at some of the materials here on this blog, and the links to great materials elsewhere. Start with this post, which was a compilation of what I had written and links to other materials:

    https://christopherbutler.wordpress.com/2006/05/02/the-claims-of-the-davinci-code/

    CB

    CB

    August 10, 2006 at 8:16 am

  7. Sorry to be picky, Quique Trujillo, but how do you know they are the most reliable?

    I’m not being an idiot, but are you basing that on them being the oldest sources. If you are, then that’s cool. But is there another reason?

    Chris

    Chris

    September 25, 2006 at 4:53 am

  8. hi,

    i am quite lost here, you see i’ve started reading the book and stucked at the page where robert langdon was accompanied in the museum to help solve the murder, that’s why i buy a DVD copy of the movie to fast track everything.

    my question is this, would it be possible that jesus spend some time to mary magdalene and eventually had a child? my follow up question is if it’s true does the church protect the truth to come out because of such certain reasons?

    after reading some part of the book and watching the movie my faith in christ didn’t change, even if dan brown’s novel is true, what bogging me is the church. here in the philippines, we had a bad experience from the catholic church dated when the spanish came and introduced christianity. that’s why i’m asking that questions.

    thanks in advance.

    Ronald

    November 4, 2006 at 10:07 pm

  9. It’s really all about possibilities. Is it Possible? Are there secrets? Truths? Whatever the truth may be, it is apparent that things are not working as they are. It’s about thinking outside the box. Each person will learn to trust themselves to believe what rings true to them. There was a time when someone told you Santa Claus didin;t exist, and you fought tooth and nail that they lied and yes, he does exist, and then you come to a logical conclusion on your own that the concept was a story, a tradition, to teach morals and lessons, and then you move on. As a recovering Catholic, I have no doubt that the MACHINE that is the Catholic church and much of CHristiananity as a whole, has it’s own agenda. There will always be the brainwashing of mindless sheep who need someone to lead them, who take no resposibility for their own actions, and keeping blinder on ignoring anything they don’t AGREE with. True or not, these types of literature stir something inside us, TO WAKE US UP, at least to start asking questions.

    donna

    November 20, 2006 at 12:57 am

  10. I can’t believe how anxious I was to see this movie, and how disappointed in it I was. Sorry Ronnie and Tommy, you have a real dud on your hands.I did however find “Sophie” to be quite refreshing…

    Miles

    November 24, 2006 at 5:32 pm

  11. I don’t want to tread on anyone’s beliefs or faith, but we are discussing a matter, that like anything else in church doctrine, is based in faith. And if you have faith, then it really doesn’t matter if Jesus and Mary were a couple, had a child, etc.
    If you believe; we are all children of God. And by focusing on the all powerful science of DNA, we miss the greatest opportunity for faith we have.
    I could be mistaken, but it seems the only reason to believe people who were not present at the time of Jesus and Mary, is to give credence to the idea that some of us are better than others because we have the same DNA markers as Jesus. That is as obnoxious and whole wrong as saying that those who are of one race are better or worse than another and is little better than the theory that Hitler postulated. With the multiple interpretations and translations that have been circulated, even the Bible is not a reporter’s report to the nation.
    If you don’t believe in God and Jesus initially, it is easy to become confused and frightened over all of the conflicting information that is being bandied about with regard to this matter. The best place for evil to grow is in confusion and fear. If you do believe, think of this; I wasn’t there to know if Jesus and Mary Magdaline had a child or not. Just remember, God gave each of us the free will to decide for ourselves.
    For me, my biological make up is not nearly as important as what I hold in my heart. I am a child of God, whether by birth or by re-birth, adoption, or whatever label society wants to apply. I know that, in my heart, when I live my life being good to others, being forgiving, and caring about my fellow human, I feel better inside. That is what makes each of us a child of God. And I don’t need DNA to prove it.

    Laura

    December 18, 2006 at 8:02 am

    • It is of utmost importance above all that Jesus was SIN FREE – it blaphmeous for anyone to say he was married and had a child, its a lie. The devil wants to lead you to belive in everything BUT the truth.

      Read the HOly Bible, form a relationship with Jesus Christ – dont get carried away with all these false prophets and false teachers – the bible says in the last days there will be many and dan brown is just one of the many -

      Davinci was not even a christian and he was gay – study the life of the painter – then study the editor of the book – then go to the only book with the truth and words of LIFE and look back and see how they are trying the best they can to lead you to hell by beliveing a lie -

      Jesus Christ the son of God is sin free – he took upon the sins of the world and died on the cross for our sins and even for davinci’s sins and dan browns sins but God also gave men freewill to choose whom they will serve – God or the devil – there are only two you can choose to serve.

      Please pray and seek the truth.

      Michelle

      January 27, 2010 at 4:33 am

      • My Lord! Do you realise that you just compaired Dan Brown to Satan?And as for your critism of Leanordo Da Vinci’s sexuality? Open your mind, please. Being gay did NOT make him a bad person. When they created there work i’m rather sure they wern’t thinking “everyonewho reads or sees this will go to hell” Im not a christian and I know that God exists. I also know my God wont send people to hell for writing a novel or not going to a church. You claim a sin-free Jesus, yet you all claim he is human. Your bible further claims that no man is sin-free. If he got married and had a child, so what? How can bringing a baby into the world be a sinful thing?

        bella

        December 18, 2011 at 10:18 am

  12. I don’t want to be the bearer of bad/good tidings, but as Dan Brown himself said after publication of The Da Vinci Code – “All I do is live in New Hampshire and write fiction”. We all took “The Passion of the Christ” and “The Last Temptation of Christ” as a work of fiction/fact. We will never prove, ever! if Jesus did marry, and if He did, who’s to say the Wife was/is Mary Magdelene? I read the book of fiction, and that is what Dan Brown calls it, F I C T I O N. Had Dan Brown wanted us to really consider that Mary Magdelene is the real Wife of Jesus, he would still be writing and researching The Da Vinci Code. From a different point of view, Dan Brown’s “The Da Vinci Code” is about 350 pages long and is a work of just fiction. Now 40 years earlier, Alex Haley started to write, as he researched his ancestors in “Roots” which is about 3 X the length of the Da Vinci Code. Now if Dan Brown wanted go for non-fiction work of “The Davinci Code”, he would have started research a very, VERY long LONG time ago, and the book would not hit the market until about 2100. I am a Catholic, and I believe that with or without DNA, I am a descendant of Adam & Eve, and Jesus, and all the Saints at the Last Supper, and some who were not invited to the Last Supper, and even Mary Magdelene. And, IF She is actually entombed under the Louvre in Paris, we will never know, because “The Da Vinci Code” is a book of fiction, which was later made into a movie that is also a work of fiction.

    Jim

    December 18, 2006 at 12:50 pm

  13. do a little research and ask yourself a few questions. where was john the baptist at during the last supper? when was he beheaded? when did he baptize jesus? when did jesus begin his ministry? sure Leonardo wasnt there so whether there were cups in the drawing should that matter? another thing if you’re paying attention Judas has the knife in his right hand with the back of his wrist against his hip.read john 20:1-18. he came to her first. “Mary stood crying outside the tomb.” Now I’m not a smart man but I know 2 and 2 is not 22.

    chris

    December 31, 2006 at 8:59 am

  14. It is indeed true, christ was merely a human being. Matter of fact history has altered its original text so much that now we blindly follow facts which does not support any form of evidence. I’ve done extensive research and the gaps on periodic time tables explains the lack of understanding. There was a huge miscommunication with this data, in all ancient manuscripts jesus never declared the son of god, he brought the teachings from god and declared what god himself has said. It is the mere act of other mortal humans that upgraded his speech to text and basically put words in his mouth that did long belong there. No disrespect to loyal followers, but jesus is a messenger if anything, not a god.

    sean

    January 7, 2007 at 6:49 pm

  15. I believe it is possible that the Priory of Scion exists, just as the Knights Templar existed. I also believe that it is possible that Mary Magdalene and Jesus had an intimate relationship. Whether or not Jesus has physical human descendants does not necessarily negate his divinity for those who believe in his dual nature. However, it does negate the Catholic popes’ claims to be the heir to Peter’s authority as the head of the Church (“ex cathedra” – from the throne of Peter). If Jesus did intend Mary Magdalene to found his church, rather than Peter, the degradation of women during the Inquisition, the celibacy of clergy, the virginity of Mary, and the exclusion of women from the priesthood all have no ecclesiastical or liturgical basis. Evidence for Mary Magdalene as Jesus’ foremost disciple not only exists in the section from the Gospel of Phillip that Tealing quoted in “The da Vinci Code,” it also exists in the “Gospel of Mary,” which is part of the Nag Hammadi library (ancient Coptic texts). Check it out. In faith, Dorchie

    Dorchie

    January 22, 2007 at 2:20 pm

  16. Hi Dorchie,

    Actually, I am familiar with these texts. See this post (https://christopherbutler.wordpress.com/2006/04/11/what-about-all-the-other-gospels-part-2/) for an examination of both the “Gospel” of Philip and the “Gospel” of Mary.

    You say that you believe that it is possible that Mary Magdalene and Jesus had an intimate relationship. I would ask, on the basis of what evidence? As I discuss in the above post, both texts that have been often used to back up this claim are not only vague in regard to the claim itself, but also historically dubious and far removed from the event they purport to describe.

    Though the particular Catholic doctrines you mention may be disagreeable to you, their validity has little to do with whether or not the claims of the New Testament are true. They are merely secondary doctrinal tenets of a particular tradition, not core fundamental tenets of Christian orthodoxy.

    CB

    CB

    January 22, 2007 at 9:20 pm

  17. so how does da vinci know all this then
    just cuz he was guardian of the priory. doesnt mean he knows it all.

    most of religious history is guesswork and made up. jesus was only the king of jews he didnt do any harry potter magic did he

    jess

    May 9, 2007 at 7:11 pm

    • Jesus did many miracles (what you very disrespectfully call “Harry Potter magic) such as raising the dead and turning water to wine. The greatest miracle was Jesus Himself being raised from the dead after dying on the cross to atone for the sins of the world. There is much evidence of Jesus’ existance and very good evidence the bible can be considered not only the inspired word of God but also an historical account of the times.

      tnmusicman

      March 2, 2012 at 1:50 am

  18. i read the Davinci code some time ago and I must say that regardless the extint of your faith any well or poorly sourced documentation of something believed to impact culture and lifestyles of a group of people is going to raise some important questions. i dont know how much of the novel i believeand it certainly doesnt make mequestion my religon because one i’m not catholic and two i feel that faith and spirituality are not made by the bible itself or by priests and popes rather faith is created by the person it inhibits. i think for along time the chuch has looked down and cast out women and i also agree that it seems to me they have been finding a way to silence us and prove that we are not a necessity, so it wouldnt suprise me if we find the thingsabout mary magdaline true. iwould like to say to CB: “you seem very earnest and unswerving in your convictions but i do not believe that even your answers remove peoples doubtit seems tht you are quite vague at times and i dont understand how one can be so sure about something when you yourself said Davinci couldnt possibly be knowledgable onn something 1400 yrs ago. i would also like to know if there is any historical text that explains why the church down plays women?” in short idont know ifJesus is he son of God or married to Mary Magdaline but i know it would certainly explain that emaculate conception theory they have now!!!

    Jasmine

    June 17, 2007 at 6:43 am

  19. I think the focus on Da Vinci and his painting of The Last Supper is irrelevent to those seeking to justify their faith in Christ, or to those seeking to denounce Christianity. The REAL question we should be asking is, when and how was the divinity of Christ created? To those of us living in the 21st century, we’ve been taught to believe that the divinity of Jesus Christ was made known 3 days after His crucifixion, when He rose from His tomb and reunited with His disciples for a brief time, before ascending into heaven. But according to Dan Brown, the church established the divinity of Christ LONG after His death. Did the world believe Jesus was divine prior to this council? What did people think of Jesus before then? Was He considered a great man, like other modern day great men, men like Gandhi and Martin Luther King? Or was He thought to have risen from the grave with new life and worshipped as a deity from the time shortly after His death until this very day? If the Catholic Church TRULY created the divinity of Christ, centuries after He died, as Brown suggests, then I believe that knowledge would do far more damage to the faith than whether the figure sitting to the right of Jesus was Mary Magdalene or John in Da Vinci’s depiction. The thought of a group of old men sitting in council, in essence “creating” the image of Christ as a God figure, scares me. I think I’d focus my attention on finding out more about this council than I would studying Da Vinci’s works of art, but that’s me.

    Ken

    July 1, 2007 at 7:11 am

  20. Not only did jesus have sex with Mary, (although that wasn’t his name anyway, becuase the letter J didn’t exsist then), not only did jesus sleep with mary but he had homosexual relations with each of his male followers as well!!!

    jack from New York

    July 28, 2007 at 3:06 am

    • Why do you believe what you wrote and is there any proof whatsoever of your claim?

      tnmusicman

      March 1, 2012 at 10:55 am

  21. If you liked the book ‘The DaVinci Code’, you will absolutely love another great book of fiction, ‘The Bible’.

    eric

    July 28, 2007 at 9:15 am

  22. Da Vinci DID paint the chalice. It rests right on top of St. Bartholomews head. And once you see the chalice staring right out in front of your eyes…you’ll never look at the painting again the same way. …AND right above the Chalice, and behind the Chalice…a familiar face is staring right back at the viewer. The face is VERY well known..now figure what Da Vinci was saying. Remember…Da Vinci was not just a skilled artist, but skilled in mathematics…and, well seek and you will find.

    Donald Inks

    July 30, 2007 at 2:22 am

  23. Here is a clue…it was a painting within a painting. In those times of church persecution artists were foreced to incorperate what they wanted to convey…in secret. They HID things within their works. Da Vinci was not fond of the church nor the church of him.

    Donald Inks

    July 30, 2007 at 2:28 am

  24. I have to object to the theory stated as fact that the Priory is or has been proven as fake, in fact it has been proven as fact and is well documented by the order itself, vanishing into the mist in 1984 when its last perhaps self appointed Grand Master Pierre Plantard died – however this link may enlighten people if the link comes out http://www.fiu.edu/~mizrachs/poseur3.html

    SR

    February 7, 2008 at 2:48 am

  25. Ok, hopefull I wont offend anyone here, but I’m bound to…lol. But it’s not intentional. You either believe in the complete authority of the Word (the bible), and are therefore indwelt by the Spirit of God, and called ‘the sons/daughters of God’ or you don’t, and therefore don’t have the indwelling of the Spirit and are referred to biblically as ‘sons/daughters of disobedience’. Personally, I believe the bible is infallible, divinely inspired by God Himself, and without error. Are we to believe Dan Brown? Leonardo Da Vinci? Who are they???? Or anyone else for that matter, so long after the event? I mean, even if I didn’t believe the bible was divinely inspired, my common sense certainly tells me the accuracy of any particular account is going to be greater from people who were actually there versus people who weren’t!

    Cheers.

    Michaela

    May 27, 2008 at 9:35 pm

  26. guys, CHILL! geez, it’s just a book
    Dan Brown wrote all that stuff to make the book just more interesting
    not to manipulate people
    cause we all know history isn’t the funnest subject in the world,
    he was prolly thinking to throw in some twists to make the book a best seller
    not to throw down the whole Church system or whatever
    he’s got better things to do, like make millions of his book
    than spend years researching the Bible, DaVinci, etc

    Buddy

    July 13, 2008 at 12:49 pm

  27. Hi!

    I have lot of queries with this picture. I am an Indian, not a christian but things do ring in my head for the globe.

    1) Why is jesus and most of the men dressed in blue and red? Why is the (Mary or John) wearing the red outside and blue inside exactly opposite of Jesus?

    2) The ones who are not wearing blue and red, what color is it and who are they?

    3) The ceiling of this painting is against the laws of geometry and construction. The vertical walls do not join the ceiling at the shown edges, why?

    4) The surrondings show 11 doors, why?

    5) Does the table have any legs? cant see in the picture I have.

    6) What is the chair like picture just before the table(it looks like the top backside of any chair), could it be of the 12th deciple, who seems to have got up from the seat and shot the picture?

    7) Just between the V of (Mary or John) and Jesus there is a pillar intersecting at the background which seems to have a white board like thing what is it? The other pillar intersects on his left side which forms a V with the man not in blue and red, why?

    8) If you leave the doors and count the pillars at the back ground in x and y direction, there are exactly 12 pillars why?

    9) I have queries even on the food on the table but, need to see the picture more clearly? Will ask when I get the reply

    Ameet

    November 25, 2008 at 11:50 pm

  28. I will immediately take hold of your rss feed as I can’t in finding your email subscription hyperlink or newsletter service. Do you have any? Kindly let me recognize in order that I could subscribe. Thanks.

  29. this all seems very weird to me. what if this is all true and we r just misinterpreting da vinci.
    what if the duke that made him paint this painting knew the truth about jesus and was apart of an organization made to keep it a secret that jesus had sexual relations with mary. i dont see why god would send his son, a man, and not expect him to have feelings for women. i kno that dan brown wrote this to be a fiction but he had to get the idea from somewhere. he could be a little off, sure, but some things can be right.
    what if jesus had a chid with mary magdelene.

    jesse from san antonio texas

    February 25, 2012 at 12:23 pm

  30. […] This article gives radio some kudos for innovation that’s nice to see, for a change.  It also recognizes that these consumer-generated innovations are smart, necessary moves for terrestrial radio to implement as top-down programming becomes even more antiquated.   Hats off to those who are forging ahead, and giving listeners that all-important seat at the table. […]

    Jacobs Dev » My Radio

    February 4, 2014 at 7:38 am


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: