Who's got the knife?

Who's got the knife? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Real0ne -> Who's got the knife? (4/21/2006 6:06:25 PM)
a friend of mine sent me this and asked me who has got the knife LOL http://milano.arounder.com/da_vinci_last_supper/fullscreen.html Click the last supper just above the word delle as seen below. Santa Maria delle Grazie church then start from the left and between man 3 and 4 there is a knife that does not appear to have a matching body. Anyone look into this?

wytchywoman -> RE: Who's got the knife? (4/21/2006 6:24:40 PM)
Hmmm. I can't find a body that goes with the hand holding the knife either. Edited to add: I used the zoom option that's available on the site and still can't figure it out. [:(]

Rule -> RE: Who's got the knife? (4/21/2006 6:42:53 PM)
According to Lynn Picknett in her book "Mary Magdalene" (recommended) on page 21/22 it is Mary Magdalene. I agree. The unnatural lengthening of her knife-arm is artistic privilege. According to my interpretation she is cutting up the brains of John the Baptist - the white lump in front of her. The guy holding her knife arm in a grip, preventing her cutting up those brains, and threatening her with his hand at her throat, presumably is Peter, I guess. According to Picknett's and my interpretation also, Jesus came to preach another religion entirely, in which the incarnation of the god Serapis was passed along from one incarnation (John the Baptist) to another (Jesus) by a cannibalistic ritual. The thing was twisted into christianity by the miracle of Jesus' resurrection.

MHOO314 -> RE: Who's got the knife? (4/21/2006 7:12:43 PM)
OMG R1 that gave Me chills! I forwarded to My teen as she is so into this whole concept, thanks for another stellar school paper!

feastie -> RE: Who's got the knife? (4/21/2006 7:32:36 PM)
If you look closely at the person sitting to the right of Jesus, which many have decided may actually be Mary Magdalene, her hands are clasped together. If it is indeed Mary holding the knife, she has sprouted a very manly third hand. Also, looking at the gentleman whom the knife is directly in front of, you'll notice his hands are raised in what is a gesture of surrender and his eyes, though his face is turned toward Jesus and registers a look of surprise, are actually glancing down at the blade. Curiouser and curiouser.

Rule -> RE: Who's got the knife? (4/21/2006 7:48:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: feastie If you look closely at the person sitting to the right of Jesus, which many have decided may actually be Mary Magdalene, her hands are clasped together. No, those hands are a clever illusion. That white lump in fact does not represent a pair of clasped hands, but the brains of John the Baptist. (I do wonder where her left hand is, though.) quote: ORIGINAL: feastie Also, looking at the gentleman whom the knife is directly in front of, you'll notice his hands are raised in what is a gesture of surrender No. In a gesture of surrender the hands are raised above the shoulders. This is a gesture of abhorrence. quote: ORIGINAL: feastie and his eyes, though his face is turned toward Jesus and registers a look of surprise, are actually glancing down at the blade. The look is not one of surprise, but one saying: "I want nothing to do with this".

Chaingang -> RE: Who's got the knife? (4/21/2006 8:41:46 PM)
The arm is being held akimbo with the back of the wrist resting upon the hip of the man, the knife points backward along the buttocks. Seems very obvious to me. Just do the action yourself and you shall see that while it may look awkward, it's actually a perfectly realistic pose for a human figure to maintain. Here is the arm: [img]http://www.cassiopaea.org/images/last_supper_peter_hand_2.jpg[/img] http://www.cassiopaea.org/images/last_supper_peter_hand_2.jpg Some people say that Peter is also making a cutting gesture at the neck of the woman seated next to Jesus with his other hand. Kill the gnostics! [8\|]

feastie -> RE: Who's got the knife? (4/21/2006 8:46:46 PM)
I don't agree. In fact, on closer observation, I can agree that the knife is held on the hip of the gentleman who is also making the slashing motion across Mary Magdalene's neck with his other hand.

Rule -> RE: Who's got the knife? (4/21/2006 9:12:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chaingang The arm is being held akimbo with the back of the wrist resting upon the hip of the man, the knife points backward along the buttocks. Seems very obvious to me. Just do the action yourself and you shall see that while it may look awkward, it's actually a perfectly realistic pose for a human figure to maintain. Here is the arm: [image]http://www.cassiopaea.org/images/last_supper_peter_hand_2.jpg[/image] http://www.cassiopaea.org/images/last_supper_peter_hand_2.jpg Some people say that Peter is also making a cutting gesture at the neck of the woman seated next to Jesus with his other hand. Kill the gnostics! [8\|] You are right. Nevertheless, I maintain that I am also right, indeed more right. The image only appears innocent when examined with an eye for a matter of fact depiction of events. In fact, though, Leonardo - supergenius that he was - exercised artistic licence. His painting should be examined with an eye for that aspect of his talent. There is a hidden message. You will notice that Leonardo pays extreme attention to the shape of all hands except those of Mary: her 'hands' are indistinct. That is because that white lump is not a pair of clasped hands at all, but the brains of John the Baptist.

Chaingang -> RE: Who's got the knife? (4/21/2006 9:28:03 PM)
It is a well known fact that Leonardo was experimenting with media - "The Last Supper" is not he result of tradional methods of fresco, hence the advanced deterioration of the piece. Why would the indistinct hands be the brains of John the Baptist? The face of Jesus was left indistinct also - do you likewise claim some reason beyond poor fresco application and the possible refusal on the part of Leonardo to depict in detail the face of god?

Real0ne -> RE: Who's got the knife? (4/21/2006 9:34:57 PM)
Brains! good point! i do not know why i did not see that! at first glance i too thought she had both her hands cupped or clasped then after zooming in and out many times i noticed what she has in her left hand is not the same color as the bread laying around and it is definitely lighter in color. the whole right side of the table as one would sit at it everyone is jumping up from their seats as if to jump on someone or lets just say get seriously proactive and they all look like they are arguing. i read somewhere that once upon a very long time ago that sons would eat their fathers if he was a god to gain his power or take it away. memory somewhat fails me on this but i do not think any of the jewish tribes practiced this. maybe someone can clarify this. without what is said below i do not think the catholic church would be in existance today as this is the foundation of the catholic mass. If i remember right the official catholic approved portrait of the last supper does not have mary m in it and everyone is happily pigging out on stale bread. That would fit in what i believed i knew about the situation where christ wanted to create a bunch of gods in a bloodless manner and the catholic church later created the word transubstantiation to support it. Interesting to believe that they are the brains of john the baptist because i thought that his beheading occured at an earlier time and they did not have refrigerators, but then to take it to literally may be a fatal error also as it may be a symbolic representation rather than a literal one. Here is a little quick write up i found on the net and i have no idea as to the credibility of the source which was of extreme concern to me once upon a time so for what its worth: eating other humans (sometimes called anthropophagy), Cannibalism has been attributed to many different tribes and races in the past, but the degree to which it has actually occurred and been socially sanctioned is an extremely controversial in anthropology (The social science that studies the origins and social relationships of human beings) Cannibal themes in myth or religion On a primitive level, ritually eating part of the slaughtered enemy is a way of assuming the life-spirit of the departed, In a funeral ritual this may also be done with a respected member of one's own clan, ensuring immortality Cannibal ogresses appear in folklore around the world, the witch in 'Hansel and Gretel being the most immediate example, On the mythological level the cannibal mother is magnified to a universal principle, such as the Hindu goddess Kali the Black One, In one such tale, the Gods are up against the demons led by Raktabeeja found that each time he was killed, more demons arose from each blood that dropped to the ground, Durga cornered and killed Raktabeeja, while Kali drank his blood to ensure none of it falls to the ground, The story of Cronos in Greek mythology also demonstrates the theme of cannibalism, Some authorities have detected allusions to cannibalism in the earliest religious writings of the ancient Egyptian The opening of Hell the Zoroastrian contribution to Western mythology, is a mouth, According to Catholic dogma, bread and wine are transubstantiated (According to roman catholic dogma, transubstantiation is the change of the substance of the eucharistic...) bread and wine are transubstantiated into the real flesh and blood of Jesus which is then distributed by the priest to the faithful, For this reason, Catholics in pagan times were sometimes accused of cannibalism by suspicious non-Christians. This is a subset of the general idea of eating a totem to absorb its distinctive power, much like tiger penis is eaten to promote virility, By eating our enemy, we take his power into ourselves, Some also consider this idea to be at the root of the Catholic dogma of transubstantiation (The Roman Catholic doctrine that the whole substance of the bread and the wine changes into the substance of the body and blood of Christ when consecrated in the Eucharist) this idea to be at the root of the Catholic dogma of transubstantiation to acquire divinity (immortality and sinlessnes) by absorption, by eating the flesh of God (However the more likely Biblical theological and historical roots of this are pertaining to the sacrificial offering of Christ and its reference to the representations in the Jewish Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which was being celebrated during the Last Supper) more at: http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/ref/cannibalism

Rule -> RE: Who's got the knife? (4/21/2006 9:44:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chaingang Why would the indistinct hands be the brains of John the Baptist? Because they look like brains. You get food served on a platter. The gospel states that it was specifically requested to present the head of John the Baptist on a platter: i.e. it was meant to be eaten. Jesus stated: this flesh is my flesh, this blood is my blood. He was referring to the substance of John the Baptist, but his Jewish disciples could not stomach that cannibalism and got the smart idea to claim that Jesus referred to bread and wine. Since I read Picknett's book I always wondered why the brains of John the Baptist were not visible on the table. Now I know why: they were disguised as the clasped hands of Mary. quote: ORIGINAL: Chaingang The face of Jesus was left indistinct also - The face of Jesus is clearly and distinctively visible. quote: ORIGINAL: Chaingang do you likewise claim some reason beyond poor fresco application and the possible refusal on the part of Leonardo to depict in detail the face of god? Leonardo did not consider Jesus to be god. He considered him to be a murderer and a cannibal.

feastie -> RE: Who's got the knife? (4/21/2006 10:20:38 PM)
Well, they don't look like brains at all. There are clearly defined fingers, not to mention, each side does end at her sleeves. You know, like yours. Where are her hands, if not folded in front of her? Also, LDV studied many cadavers to learn about anatomy. Knowing such, one would imagine, if representing the brains of anyone, it would indeed resemble a brain more so than fingers. He'd also know that the brain is gray, not white. Certain tribes of Native Americans believed that consuming the flesh and/or blood of their enemy would help them defeat their enemy. However, the bread and wine were not representative of his actual body and blood, they were, instead, a reminder of his sacrifice for the sins of man. From the New International Version of the Bible New International Version (NIV) Luke 22:19 Listen to this passage View commentary related to this passage 19And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me." So the bread is "my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me." Jesus is not arguing that the bread becomes his body, the view called transubstantiation. Nor is he arguing that he surrounds and enters the bread with his presence, a view known as consubstantiation. Like the Passover, the bread pictures his death and represents his self-sacrifice as his body is broken for the disciples on the cross. The Lord is present, but the elements serve to remind and proclaim; the elements are not transformed (1 Cor 10:15-18). In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you." The new covenant is a major theme of the New Testament (see Jer 31:31; Mt 26:28; Lk 24:49, the Father's promise; Acts 2:14-39; 2 Cor 3--4; Heb 8--10). Jesus' blood is shed for his followers. By it he purchases the church (Acts 20:28). The foundation for a new era is laid. A new sacrifice brings an era of fresh fulfillment. That new era starts with Jesus' death and the distribution of the Spirit. Two features are key to this understanding of the sacrifice of Jesus as pictured by the cup. First, his death takes our place in paying for sin. Paul says this most explicitly in Romans 3:20-26. Luke's language only leaves it implied, though he is aware of the teaching, as Acts 20:28 shows. Second, Jesus notes that his death is inseparably connected to the establishment of the new covenant. A covenant is always inaugurated with the shedding of blood. By far the most eloquent explanation of this new covenant idea is found in Hebrews 8--10 Other references can be found at biblegateway.com, in many other versions. All of the ones I checked retained the same message.

Chaingang -> RE: Who's got the knife? (4/21/2006 11:52:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: feastie However, the bread and wine were not representative of his actual body and blood, they were, instead, a reminder of his sacrifice for the sins of man. Jesus was a practicing Jew by all accounts. He even taught in the Temple. So what was this mysterious feast of bread and wine? The Passover, of course. The reason there is no lamb is because Jesus is himself the sacrifice. BTW, I am not a religious person. I just find it odd when people stretch so hard to find esoteric meanings to things that probably had very ordinary meanings from the first.

Real0ne -> RE: Who's got the knife? (4/22/2006 12:02:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: feastie Well, they don't look like brains at all. There are clearly defined fingers, not to mention, each side does end at her sleeves. You know, like yours. Where are her hands, if not folded in front of her? if i may bud into your debate here check this out. when i looked at it i noticed that her fingers are clearly defined on the right but not on the left. i seen clearly 4 fingers and what appeared to be a thumb ontop with the supposed brains on top of that yet. notice the difference in color between the fingers and the what the fingers appear to be holding. THen one last thing that i noticed is that if you look at her left shoulder you see it comes straight down as expected but look at the other shoulder. if one takes a straight edge you can see the angle of the top of her right sleeve is in perfect alignment with the hand with the knife and at the same time her robe is draped such that it can equally appear that her hands could be clasped. but when i looed really closely i could not see a definitive right hand in the supposed clasp but easily could see a definitive left hand. Since its a photo of the original i would not expect the color to be a perfect replica of whats exactly there and to the best of my knowledge the paint has been falling off for years and this picture needed to be pain stakingly repainted with more modern paint and it is my understanding that every effort has been made to keep it as perfect as possible. The left is obvious but do you see distinct fingers from the right hand of M M in the assumed clasp?

willowspirit -> RE: Who's got the knife? (4/22/2006 12:53:32 AM)
LOL --- RealOne makes sense, and is completely on target IMHO. Rule is enjoying pushing people's buttons. Feastie, you can't use a version of the Bible not approved by the Catholic church to prove or disprove Catholic doctrine. RealOne is correct -- that IS the offical doctrine of Catholicism. IE. the bread and wine after being blessed by the priest Literally becomes the body and blood of Christ. Like it or not, that's the doctrine. ( I was subjected to all eight grades plus Catholic college, back in the era when Catholics weren't so afraid they'd not be seen as "politically correct", so they taught the actual doctrine -- rather than the p.c. version kids are being told today). Yes, John the Baptist was beheaded earlier. Brains (a less dense organ) decay quickly, much faster than muscles. Reading the account of what led up to his beheading, you'll see why his head being placed on a platter was for dramatic presentation and to mock him. Not to be served as food to be eaten! LOL -- too funny! (shaking my head and rolling my eyes)

Rule -> RE: Who's got the knife? (4/22/2006 4:42:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Brains! good point! i do not know why i did not see that! If it was easy anyone might have noticed it. But it takes a genius to recognize a genius. And to recognize a supergenius like Leonardo... quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Interesting to believe that they are the brains of john the baptist because i thought that his beheading occured at an earlier time ...snip... (However the more likely Biblical theological and historical roots of this are pertaining to the sacrificial offering of Christ and its reference to the representations in the Jewish Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which was being celebrated during the Last Supper) The beheading of John the Baptist occurred during a feast, didn't it? The Last Supper also was a feast, you say. Conclusion: the brains were fresh, probably no more than one to three hours old. I wonder whether Mary had time to boil or roast them? Hm, they must have wanted them undamaged so as not to risk the transferral of the essence of the Creator from John to Jesus and his disciples. Those brains, therefore, probably were harvested no more than half an hour before Mary put them on the table. All this does not mean that christianity is a false religion. The sacrifice of Jesus was real, as was that of John the Baptist. The resurrection of Jesus has also been testified to, validating him as a true incarnation of the Creator. The christian ritual of the transsubstantion of bread and wine, is more humane than the cannibalistic ritual in the religion that Mary and Jesus preached. Christianity was an evolution in religious practice, and its success is proven by the fact that the nations, cultures and peoples that are dominant in the world today all are the heirs of christianity. However, christianity has been static for a long time. Anything static is de facto dead. Life is defined by evolution. It is time for a new evolution in religion.

feastie -> RE: Who's got the knife? (4/22/2006 5:27:25 AM)
The Catholic religion is not the only religion out there and it's certainly no more "Christian" than any other. Just because it doctrines transubstantiation doesn't mean that it is any more correct than any other religion. The point here is that we all know the Catholic belief, why not see what other religions and Bibles have to say about it.

Rule -> RE: Who's got the knife? (4/22/2006 5:47:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: feastie why not see what other religions and Bibles have to say about it. When examining evidence, one always looks for the oldest, most 'pristine' evidence. In this case those are the original catholic gospels and the apocryphal gospels and other very early texts. This is what Lynn Picknett did in her book "Mary Magdalene" (recommended reading). Nearly all other christian sects arose in the second millennium (we are now living in the third), so are not relevant. Anyhow, this is about an analysis of what the supergenius Leonardo - himself an incarnation of the Creator - had to say about what happened at the Last Supper. The Creator - in his time incarnated as Leonardo - always knows best.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125