New Christian Discovery found in Da Vinci's Last Supper. The Holes in His Hands..

reply to post by badmedia


Its the final answer to the Da Vinci Code. The Book/movie was bas based on the wrong meal Jesus Had with his disciples.

ur going to believe theres a hole in the drawing...id like to believe there is but i dont see a hole.

The Scena that Leonardo was instructed to paint on the wall of the refectory of Santa Maria della Grazie in Milano was the moment R. Yehoshua bar Yosef states : ONE OF YOU SHALL HAND ME OVER TO THE GENTILES....

Which is a play on words: R. Yehuda bar Shimeon (Judas son of Simon) was according to the 4th gospel writer the 'bursar, who handed out the money to the poor' in Aramaic Ish-Keyriah.

'The man who hands me over' is Ish-Keyriotah (i.e. Iscariot) in Aramaic--a way according to the gospel narratives of fingering the cuprit before he did his nasties.

Either way, there are no hands/wrist holes in the palms of R. Yehoshua in the Leonardo secco-fresco of La Cena Ultima: but one of the hands of 'Iesus' is turned up to 'suggest the crucifixion to come' just as the sketches for R. Yehudah bar Shimeon ('Iscariot') shew bulging veins in his neck 'as if he is being hanged already'; in fact a lot of the disciples betray a foreshadowing of their fate in this mysterious panel.

Interestingly the hands symbol of R. Yehoshua at the center of La Cena Ultima is 'one up one down' like the sun (sun rise, sun set) and you can see from the perspective of the ceiling and the floor tiles that the 'vanishing point' is right behind 'Iesus' right eye (where Leonardo had carefully placed a small nail, in order to wrap threads outward from that central point in the picture to the outer walls to get the perspective just so.

The image Leonardo was playing with had to do with sunlight ---using one of the most famous poses of Mitra (the Persian Intermediary and later Sun God, one hand up one hand down, like his two torch bearers--notice Nathaniel Bar-Ptolomeo stands at the left hand side of the table like one of the Torchbearers (Cauthes) who is always grouped standing in the same position of the feet with statues of the Roman Mithras !) and his 12 constellations, all grouped in groups of 3 (i.e. the Four Seasons of three months' duration each) --i.e. the unconquerable Sun (cf: the scroll of the book of the Prophet 'Malachi' (i.e. DeuteroZechariah): 'the Sun of Righteousness with healing in his wings shall arise...')

Also the Highest Figure (Phillipos) looks 'right smack through' Iesus' right eye and down to the Lowest Figure, Yehudah bar Shimeon.

But the confusion on the faces of the '12' suggest this is BEFORE the arrest and execution of their leader--despite there being LEAVENED BREAD on a TABLE (when at Pesach/Passover, unleavened bread is a MUST HAVE ingredient AND 1st century Judaeans typically RECLINED like the Greeks this one night of the year...)

What was Leonardo up to?



[edit on 9-9-2009 by Sigismundus]

reply to post by platipus


Look at the scene and read the ending of each of the four gospels, you dont have to see the holes to know what Leonardo painted even though you can. The scene is of the last meal Jesus had with his disciples and Leonardo knew that meal was eaten after Jesus had risen from the dead. The facts are found in the word of God.

reply to post by Sigismundus


Look at the scene and read the ending of each of the four gospels, you dont have to see the holes to know what Leonardo painted even though you can. The scene is of the last meal Jesus had with his disciples and Leonardo knew that meal was eaten after Jesus had risen from the dead. The facts are found in the word of God.

Originally posted by JesusVine
reply to post by badmedia

 

as a believer do you see the significance?

Not really. I can only say that the way in which you and Christianity in general see's Jesus and the father is not the same way I see things.

I don't believe in blood sacrifices, and I don't believe his death saves anyone. People IMO have to walk the path and keep the commandments, and understanding is required to do that.

Psalm 111:10 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: a good understanding have all they that do his commandments: his praise endureth for ever.

Jesus to me represents the truth, the way and the life. He gives the understanding needed for people to keep and do the commandments. When he is betrayed and talks about it at the last supper, he is referring in the big picture to those who have betrayed the understanding and worked towards the manipulating people with the lie.

So, IMO to worship the death of Jesus and to find salvation in the death of Jesus is not different than saying the truth had to die in order for the lie of this world to live. Which is to me satanic and of this world, not of the father.

This is also basically what happens in the garden. When they eat the from the tree of knowledge, they are to learn both good and evil. The only way evil can exist at all is through the sacrifice of truth. In this way, understanding of good and evil is obtained, just as we need to experience hot and cold to understand them. But this only means that in the end, all things serve the father and a higher purpose. As Jesus only represents the truth and understanding, which is being sacrificed for this lesson. IE: While "evil" may in the end be a part of the learning process, and in this way it is "justified" for existing on a higher plane - it is still not the correct path, and wisdom is the ability to make the correct choice towards the good, or towards the example of Jesus. Thus why he likens those who do as he says as to being wise men who build their house on a rock in Matthew 7, which ties in to Peter and the rock in John 20).

I have never in my life meet anyone named Jesus, but I do know the father. The father gave me these understandings, and when I read Jesus I recognize the father within him. I recognize he is giving the understanding that I know comes from the father. And in this manner, I am a believer of Jesus, but I am not a believer of Christianity, which I think is the anti-christ religion.

Not that I have anything against if he lived or not or still exists in the least. The father just showed me that it was the father the entire time in the first place, and that "Jesus" - and others like him are just tools(not in a bad way at all, not in terms of = that guy is such a tool etc) who were used for a purpose.

It's not about accepting anything, it's all about understanding what is being expressed. Anyone can accept 1+1=2 is true because a man or book told them so. But only the man who understands math really knows what it means and how to use/apply it to their life. Thus why knowledge of the holy is understanding, and why acceptance of things is considered bad in the OT.

So to be quite honest, if a painting has holes in him or not has no change of being significant to me. The father is within, and the point is to find the father. The father rewards those who find him with wisdom and understanding, and it is that one must seek. Holes or not is just a ploy towards acceptance and belief.

I mentioned proverbs 9 before, but check out proverbs 8. It says these things exactly. The entire chapter is good, but I'm just going to highlight a few places to save space.

Proverbs 8

8All the words of my mouth are in righteousness; there is nothing froward or perverse in them.

9They are all plain to him that understandeth, and right to them that find knowledge.

10Receive my instruction, and not silver; and knowledge rather than choice gold.

11For wisdom is better than rubies; and all the things that may be desired are not to be compared to it.

...

17I love them that love me; and those that seek me early shall find me.

18Riches and honour are with me; yea, durable riches and righteousness.

19My fruit is better than gold, yea, than fine gold; and my revenue than choice silver.

20I lead in the way of righteousness, in the midst of the paths of judgment:

21That I may cause those that love me to inherit substance; and I will fill their treasures.

So here's a real world example of the difference between me and a Christian.

John 14:6Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Popular verse for Christians. But when a christian reads that, they see only by "Jesus" can they come by that. In that sense, "Jesus" is just an idol. But when I read that sentence, I see him defining that he is the way, the truth and life for a reason, and he is saying that by those things can one come to the father. Not by the idol of Jesus, but by someone seeking out the truth, the way and the life.

To continue further:

John 14

13And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.

14If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.

15If ye love me, keep my commandments.

Does this mean if I ask Jesus to kill my brother it will be done? No. Why not? Because it is not in line with the truth, the way and the life. It is those things which you ask for in that manner - that is what will be done.

And this is important because people think only by "Jesus" can one come to the father, but they do not realize it is actually be seeking those things. But Jesus even says this himself.

Same chapter still:

John 14

24He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.

25These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you.

26But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

If it is by "Jesus" that one comes to the father, then how is it possible for them to hear the father? Again, in his name - in the name of the truth, the way and so forth. So it is available and always has been to those who seek understanding, who seek the truth and so forth. Regardless of race, sex, nation and so forth.

So I don't see things in the same light as Christians. I am not at all a believer in Christianity.

reply to post by badmedia


Hey badmedia,


Look at MissSmartypants, response, She gets it. The truth is simple

"Yes, that makes perfect sense. Jesus is looking down at his hand (as well, the disciiple sitting next to Jesus is looking at Jesus' hand also) while he is telling Thomas to touch it. And the reason why the disciple on His other side looks like a woman is because she is. "

[edit on 9/9/2009 by MissSmartypants]

[edit on 9-9-2009 by JesusVine]

reply to post by JesusVine


Sorry, I would never take the word of a man or book over the father. I am not looking for what you are selling, I don't need replacements for the father.

I was just letting you know that I do not see things in the same manner as you do, and so what you might think is important, I think is probably beside the point.

I personally don't even see the holes to begin with. Never mind that we are talking about a painting that came years after and at best would be based on 1 man's beliefs. I think you are seeing what you want to see in it to be honest.

reply to post by badmedia


that's what i think aswell, im not against the belief it was a painting after the crucifiction...i just dont see the hole on the hand. :x

Originally posted by JesusVine
reply to post by badmedia

 

And it does matter when Non Believers use the movie/book (The Da Vinci Code) as proof although fiction to disprove the Deity of Christ...

That is simply a clever novel inspired by another book called Holy Blood and the Holy Grail. Anybody who actually cites the DaVinci Code as evidence of anything is a fool. The root story is more interesting...but I have no problem with your premise so far.

First, let me say that I know Jesus is the anointed Messiah. Next, I have to tell you that some of the things that led you to your conclusions are just wrong.

I have this huge book by a man named Frank Zoller, titled "Da Vinci: The Complete Paintings and Drawings." It has a close up of Jesus and the hand in question - and I'm not seeing a hole. Neither do I see a hole in the picture you provided.

Also, I'm not sure what point you are making about the fish, but the account you cited from the Gospel of John took place on the shore of the sea. The account John gives of the Last Supper does not focus at all, on the "supper" it'self but of the act of foot washing and a huge discourse on the Holy Spirit and the Son of Man.

The Holy Grail - You bring up the book/movie "The Da Vinci Code." You understand the concept of the Holy Grail being a cup and rightly so but it's much deeper than that and way more mystical.

In the movie the vessel that is the grail is Sophie. At the end of the movie she tries to walk on water - like Jesus did but can't but earlier in the movie, she took her hands and placed them on Langdon and was able to remove his phobia of confined spaces - the implication being she actually does have some supernatural powers - just like her mother before her. Jesus himself referred to "wisdom" as feminine and he said she is proved right by her children. Something that is proven right - is evidence. As a side note "Sophia" is the name given to Jesus' wisdom in the texts found at Nag Hammadi.

In real life, the mystical grail is not found at the Last Supper. Jesus himself said, he wouldn't drink of the fruit of the vine until he did it anew in the kingdom.

From the beginning of his ministry (and John the Baptist before him) he preached the kingdom is at hand or near.

He died, resurrected and then ascended.

Those who witnessed it were told that he would return the exact same way he left.

Remember we are talking supernatural things and one of the functions of the Holy Spirit is to bring things into remembrance. There is absolutely no fun in just blurting out the answer, so I want you to really think hard, as to where else a cup is mentioned.

When you find the cup, you will know where it is located.

When you know where it is located - you will instantly see the mystery.

When you see the mystery, you can then try to do what he asked others to do but they were not able.

That's a lot of hints.


[edit on 9-9-2009 by Myrtales Instinct]

This is fantasy.

It was not customary to eat at a table with chairs but rather they reclined or sat on the ground.

To believe that the painting is in any way accurate you would have to hold that this was the customary way for Jews to eat at the time of Jesus and as far as I have researched it isn't.

Reply to post by badmedia

Your take is particularly enlightening. I do see how christianity can get it misconstrued. They do tend to glorify the life and death of Jesus, whom said himself the glory goes to the Father.

You have really opened my eyes in a brilliant manner. Thank you for that friend.

Although I have never wholly agreed with the church and modern christianity, I have never really noticed what you mention.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by JesusVine

Hi Jesus Vine--

The endings of the 4 Nicene Approved canonical gospels are all different. The crucifixion narratives were 'midrashically guided' by Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53 and can be compared closely enough with each other in columns. but the resurrection accounts in the canonically approved Greek gospels DO NOT MATCH EACH OTHER AT ALL.

The Greek (clearly non-palestinian, since he gets his geography all muddled up) author of the 2nd Canonical Nicene-approved Gospel (aka the Gospel of 'Mark', whoever he was) ends his own 'gospel' without a resurrectioin appearance at all; the 'women flee from the tomb' in fear (of the Judaeans ?) and the account ends at chapter 16:8 in the middle of a sentence (Gk. Ephobounto gar 'the women were afraid because...' which is an imposisble Greek howler, grammatically)

Maybe the ending was 'supressed' by later copyists because it did not jibe with later Nicene creeds, or maybe, like Professor Burkitt suggests, the end of the scroll or the last pages of the codex of his gospel was lost over time through wear and tear (both were common enough occurances in antiquity when dealing with hand-written copies, then hand written copies of copies of copies of copies)...

Also, R. Yehudah bar Shimeon (later, Ish Keryiotah aka Judas Iscarioth) is seen still very much alive, so it cannot be a post-execution 'resurrection' appearance.

Despite Leonardo's historically inaccurate depictioin of cloth covered tables and benches (and no recliners !) at Pesach, and the presence of leavened bread on the table - an historical impossibility--(was Davinci poking fun at the Jews?), this 'event' depicted (albeit very timelessly and mystically by Leonardo) is shewn to have occurred BEFORE 'Judas' leaves the 12 (hangs himself, or throws himself off a precipice, or just plain vanishes from the Community), since he is sitting there still with the bag of coins clutched in his hand (and knocking over the saltcellar as he cowers into the lowest position of all of the 13 persons present).

Anyway, don't drag the confused and contradicory Nicene Approved Canonical Greek Gospel accounts of the so-called 'resurrection' into this secco fresco of Leonardo: it has to do with the Pesach Meal (?) before the arrest and execution for armed sedition in 36 CE, the 100th anniversary of the invasion of the Romans in BCE 63 by Pompey into Jerusalem (interestingly, these greek gospels never mention, that literally 'he rose' in the active tense, at least if you look at the original language of the Greek gospels in the canon: they consistently use words like 'he appeared unto', 'he was manifested unto' the disciples, 'but some doubted...' i.e. not a physical resurrection, but an 'epiphania' like the gods who appear to mortals in the passive voice in the Greek) into this discussion; we are not talking about redaction criticism, we are talking about whether or not Leonardo put holes into the writsts or hands of his main subject in La Cena Ultima for the Refectory of Santa Maria Delle Grazie in Milano in 1495-1496.



[edit on 10-9-2009 by Sigismundus]

reply to post by Sigismundus


I did not post this information to debate the gospel and or Christianity. I am merely stated a fact per the word of God as to the intent and inspiration of Leonardo Da Vinci when he was commissioned to paint a scene of the Last Meal Jesus had with His Disciples. Whether or not one can see the holes that Leonardo originally painted in the scene makes no difference if one is willing to read the bible. It absolutely appears that Leonardo knew his bible and painted a scene that depicted events of the risen Christ. If someone takes the time to read the account of the risen Christ at the end of each of the four gospels, (Matt, Luke , Mark and John) they will see the true intent of Leonardo Da Vinci at which time it is much easier to see the holes that were originally placed in the painting but have faded away over the years.

Hi Jesus-Vine

I thought I made it perfectly clear in my last post that Mark's gospel has NO RESURRECTION APPEARANCES. Period. If you think it does you have a better imagination than Leonardo ever had. It ENDS IN THE MIDDLE OF A SENTENCE in very bad Greek.

The other 3 Canonical 'gospels' have resurrection type appearances that DO NOT MATCH EACH OTHER at all.

Read the socalled Resurrection Appearance Accounts in the 3 remaining gospels in the New Testament Approved Canon side by side in English if that is all you can read. You should see that JUDAS IS QUITE DEAD (or at least 'missing' from the 12, having lost his 30 sheckles according to the story) from these tattered contradictory accounts, and therefore could not be present at any post-resurrection meal, real or imaginary. In the Secco Fresco of Leonardo, JUDAS IS ALIVE AND STILL CLUTCHING HIS COINS.
So it is a pre-execution for armed sedition by Roman Crucifixion during the 100-year Jewish Insurrection moment that is being depicted "one of you sitting here breaking bread with me SHALL betray the Bar-Enasha (son of Man)'

So best to leave the Bible out of it...since you are clearly not very familiar with the Resurrection accounts (even in English !) within some of the books of the canonical Gospel material at any rate.

Leonardo in his Cena Ultima was clearly 'playing fast and loose' with Pesach Passover meal ingredients with his Benches and his cloth covered Tables and his Leavened Bread on the table.

Pre- not Post- Execution...and still...no holes in the wrists either, although the hands of R. Yehoshua ARE pointing to BREAD and WINE....as Eucharistic foreshadowing elements deliberately arranged by the painter.

reply to post by Sigismundus


Mark 16

He Is Risen

1 Now when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices, that they might come and anoint Him. 2 Very early in the morning, on the first day of the week, they came to the tomb when the sun had risen. 3 And they said among themselves, “Who will roll away the stone from the door of the tomb for us?” 4 But when they looked up, they saw that the stone had been rolled away—for it was very large. 5 And entering the tomb, they saw a young man clothed in a long white robe sitting on the right side; and they were alarmed.
6 But he said to them, “Do not be alarmed. You seek Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He is risen! He is not here. See the place where they laid Him. 7 But go, tell His disciples—and Peter—that He is going before you into Galilee; there you will see Him, as He said to you.”
8 So they went out quickly[a] and fled from the tomb, for they trembled and were amazed. And they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.

Mary Magdalene Sees the Risen Lord

9 Now when He rose early on the first day of the week, He appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom He had cast seven demons. 10 She went and told those who had been with Him, as they mourned and wept. 11 And when they heard that He was alive and had been seen by her, they did not believe.

Jesus Appears to Two Disciples

12 After that, He appeared in another form to two of them as they walked and went into the country. 13 And they went and told it to the rest, but they did not believe them either.

The Great Commission

14 Later He appeared to the eleven as they sat at the table; and He rebuked their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those who had seen Him after He had risen.

I believe what was being stated to you Jesusvine was that the earliest copies end abruptly at 16:8 so the Resurrection piece was most likely added to the later manuscripts.

Originally posted by JesusVine
reply to post by Sigismundus

 

I did not post this information to debate the gospel and or Christianity. I am merely stated a fact per the word of God as to the intent and inspiration of Leonardo Da Vinci when he was commissioned to paint a scene of the Last Meal Jesus had with His Disciples. Whether or not one can see the holes that Leonardo originally painted in the scene makes no difference if one is willing to read the bible. It absolutely appears that Leonardo knew his bible and painted a scene that depicted events of the risen Christ. If someone takes the time to read the account of the risen Christ at the end of each of the four gospels, (Matt, Luke , Mark and John) they will see the true intent of Leonardo Da Vinci at which time it is much easier to see the holes that were originally placed in the painting but have faded away over the years.

A typical meal during Jesus time, and for time after, was not eaten with table and chair as we do today.

The reclined or laid down for their meals so this painting, as beautiful and inspiring as it is, in no way depicts a meal from Biblical times.