The last supper / The Da Vinci Code

cog on 2004-08-24T11:36:04

A friend of mine read The Da Vinci Code and started telling us about it...

One of the things he told us was that on the Last Supper, by Da Vinci, there were a couple of "mistakes" (read "subliminal messages"). The one he could remember was an arm, grabbing the neck of whoever was standing on the right side of Jesus... the arm, supposedly, didn't belong to anyone... whoooo...

Now, I supposed arm... However, I believe it's very clear to whom that arms belongs to... to the guy talking to him :-)

Anyone here ever read that book? Can anyone tell me more about this?

---

da vinci code

rjbs on 2004-08-24T11:46:10

The book is a work of fiction. Early on, the author repeated, "Look, it's a work of fiction! It's a story I wrote!" As more and more people start saying, "This book reveals the secrets of the ages!" the author is saying less and less. His web site has a FAQ for the book that is /really/ equivocating. It just irritates me, enough that I am less and less interested in reading the book. It's a shame, since I think I'd probably enjoy it.

Re:da vinci code

cog on 2004-08-24T11:56:21

I see :-)

Unfortunately, some of my friends now say "Of course it's a work of fiction, but what he wrote is true!"

Somehow, that sentence does not compile... :-)

Counting Hands

davorg on 2004-08-24T12:08:36

I think that there are definitely too many hands in the picture if you count them up but, of course, it's impossible to tell which is the extra one.

Another interesting theory about the painting is that the person to the left of Jesus looks a lot like a woman. People have postulated that it is actually Mary Magdelene. Then you get into the whole can of worms about whether she was married to Jesus and whether she was "the disciple who Jesus loved" from John's gospel and all that stuff.

I've written elsewhere about my thoughts on the book, but to summarise - it's an incredibly badly written book which is based on an alternative view of the church which has been pretty common knowledge since the publication of The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail over twenty years ago. There's nothing new here at all, but it seems to be bringing those theories to a whole new audience. Which can only be a good thing.

Re:Counting Hands

cog on 2004-08-24T12:17:23

Interesting thoughts :-)

I think that there are definitely too many hands in the picture if you count them up

Funny... I counted 23 hands... I may have miscounted... :-) There should be 26 hands at the most, right?

Re:Counting Hands

zatoichi on 2004-08-24T12:46:57

I don't think there is a "can of worms" in the case of whether they were married or not. There is no historical and no biblical evidence that it was so. In fact, if you read the Bible it is pretty clear that Jesus was not married nor could have been. However, even if it were so, it does not change anything. But that is a big, unsubstantiated if.

Re:Counting Hands

davorg on 2004-08-24T12:54:14

if you read the Bible it is pretty clear that Jesus was not married nor could have been

Oh really? Care to list references?

If it's "pretty clear" that it couldn't have happened why has it been such a persistant rumour over the last few centuries :)

Re:Counting Hands

schwern on 2004-08-25T22:26:52

If it's "pretty clear" that it couldn't have happened why has it been such a persistant rumour over the last few centuries :)

People do not make sense and will believe almost anything especially if its on TV.

Re:Counting Hands

KLB on 2004-10-12T13:55:24

Why couldn't Jesus be married. maybe the Chruh doesn't want us to know??!!

Re:Counting Hands

Whistler on 2006-06-24T16:29:14

Let's not forget that this painting is not a photograph... merely Da Vinci's portrayal.

I always pictured the last supper at a round table.