LAST SUPPER Painting isn't that a.....

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by Frenchy, Apr 6, 2006.

  1. Frenchy

    Frenchy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0
    Women (possible Mary) on the left hand upper right. You know how those catholics are?

    Leonardo De Vinci's Last Supper painting

    Last Supper Link

    [ April 07, 2006, 08:56 AM: Message edited by: Bible-boy ]
     
  2. DeeJay

    DeeJay
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,916
    Likes Received:
    0
    Its John
     
  3. mioque

    mioque
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's John the apostle. [​IMG]
     
  4. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sounds like you are advocating the Di Vinci Code nonsense. This is exactly what it claims. However, the Di Vinci Code claims it is Mary Magdalene that is the one closest to Christ (because she was really his wife and carrying his child). Thus, the Holy Grail was not the cup that Christ used at the Last Supper; rather, the Holy Grail was the heir of Christ (his child with Mary Magdalene).

    The problem with this (besides the total lack of biblical support and historical evidence) is that if you look at the picture another one of the figures appears very feminine (one standing on the far left behind the old grey bearded bald man).

    [ April 06, 2006, 08:54 AM: Message edited by: Bible-boy ]
     
  5. Emily25069

    Emily25069
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2005
    Messages:
    251
    Likes Received:
    0
    Im not saying that its Mary, but the face sure looks feminine.
     
  6. DeeJay

    DeeJay
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,916
    Likes Received:
    0
    John was young.
     
  7. BruceB

    BruceB
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2004
    Messages:
    199
    Likes Received:
    0
    John does look like a woman in this painting, but the painter wasn't there - it is his interpretation (it is not a Kodak!)
     
  8. JGrubbs

    JGrubbs
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Messages:
    4,761
    Likes Received:
    0
    hmmmmm....

    [​IMG]
     
  9. PJ

    PJ
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2003
    Messages:
    3,952
    Likes Received:
    0
  10. donnA

    donnA
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2000
    Messages:
    23,354
    Likes Received:
    0
    You have to think of the time period it was painted also, many paintings looked like that, with men looking fairly feminine, and not extremely masculine. I agree, John was pretty young, we don't know his age, but he lived to write revelation in the 90's (date, not age), that would make him pretty young when he was with Jesus.
     
  11. Dustin

    Dustin
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Messages:
    696
    Likes Received:
    0
    You mean THAT is what this whole DaVinci thing is about? psshhh. :rolleyes:
     
  12. mnw

    mnw
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2006
    Messages:
    1,221
    Likes Received:
    0
    It does appear that in some copies of the Last Supper I have seen the figure is a woman.

    However, it makes no difference whether it is a man or a woman. All it shows is whether Da Vinci had some looney ideas or not.

    It makes no difference to the Christian belief. The one danger is that is a lie that many unsaved and weak believers may swallow hook, line and sinker.
     
  13. mcdirector

    mcdirector
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    8,292
    Likes Received:
    10
    Well, we are in a mess when we start questioning biblical accounts based on DaVinci paintings ;)
     
  14. Dustin

    Dustin
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Messages:
    696
    Likes Received:
    0
    Psalm 118:8 It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man.
     
  15. Scarlett O.

    Scarlett O.
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2002
    Messages:
    9,833
    Likes Received:
    114
    Come on now, people....

    You all don't really believe that Leonardo Da Vinci has anything at all to do the book called "The Da Vinci Code" do you?

    Leonardo was artist who, among his secular works, also painted some biblical imagery.

    He painted in the style of the day and also created his own style. There was no trying to paint androgynous people in the Last Supper. If you look at other works of other people from the same time, you will find many paintings of people's faces that looked this way.

    Leonardo Da Vinci was not trying to "disguise" a man as a woman.

    He was trying to give "innocence" to the face. John was young and he was called, the Beloved. He was simply trying to convey that message.

    Leonoard Da Vinci was not looney.

    Dan Brown, the author of The Da Vinci Code is looney.

    I say that only because he is trying to push his fictional account as fact. And because he is trying to support his historical inaccuracies as fact. The book is a murder mystery...you will find it in the fiction section of any bookstore.

    Anyone who can look at the painting of The Last Supper and claim to see imagery that supports a doctrine or creates a new doctrine that they disagree with is not wise. Leonardo Da Vinci did not paint any secrets or hidden doctrine into the Last Supper, The Virgin of the Rocks, or the Mona Lisa.

    People can be deceived...be they lost people who believe Dan Brown's book or be they people on the Baptist Board who believe Dan Brown's lies about Leonardo Da Vinci.

    Peace-
    Scarlett O.
    <><
     
  16. mcdirector

    mcdirector
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    8,292
    Likes Received:
    10
    I don't believe DaVinci was a looney -- but I do see where people could think that person (the young John) was feminine. And I could see where anyone looking for something other than the truth (such as support for Dan Brown's fantasies) would use that as proof.

    I think people are awfully quick to look to things other than God for truth. (could be that old nasty sinful nature thingy)
     
  17. tinytim

    tinytim
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    OK, now it's personal... my mother's maiden name was "Looney" their family came from Ireland..

    Please don't insult the clan of "looney" by including Dan Brown!! [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  18. Frenchy

    Frenchy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bible-Boy
    To tell you the truth i know NOTHING about the Di Vinci Code thing and could care less, i know it's bunk just from the little i have heard.

    I noticed this 7 years back after looking at a few paintings in church, and thought "hey that looks like a women" and knowing that the artist was Catholic i assume it was one of their ways of worshipping Mary.
     
  19. mnw

    mnw
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2006
    Messages:
    1,221
    Likes Received:
    0
    Having researched this several years ago, before the Dan Brown saga, there is a common thread in much art that seems to suggest certain ideas.

    I do not buy into all the conspiracy theories, but there does seem to be something.

    A book called the Arcadian Cipher gives a bit more of an academic look at common themes in famous works of art. It ties in the patrons, artists, religious leaders and political leaders.

    The apostle Paul wrote that we are not ignorant of Satan's devices. All down through history we have seen great preachers deal with the attacks of the day on Christ.

    I am not saying everyone should do a detailed study on the Da Vinci code, but knowing the underlying attack on Christ and being prepared with the appropriate Scriptural defense is necessary.

    If someone comes to you and puts to you one of the lies in the book how will you react? Just replying with, "Oh, its rubbish just ignore it" is not going to deal with the situation. Perhaps by saying, "Okay, Dan Brown does say that, but this is what the Bible actually says. This is what is actually historically accurate. Here are some blatant lies and mistakes Dan Brown makes." Perhaps with that approach you will be able to give an answet to the "gainsayers" rather than appearing detached and unprepared.

    I realise that Da Vinci was a very intelligent individual, but he did have some very unusual ideas and practices.

    I'll refrain from the references to any loonies... [​IMG] It does make me wonder where the accusation originally came from... [​IMG]
     
  20. Salamander

    Salamander
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ok, who's Dan Brown? Is he in the painting?
     

Share This Page

Loading...