I remember many years ago when everybody was saying Black Sabath put satanic lyrics in their music when played backwards. The show may have been on 60 minutes. In any event, the journalist had a tape recorder and said something pretty mundane like:”my mom makes apple pie” or “I love America” and it came back (when played in reverse) I salute the devil or some crap.

It’s just peoples fascination with the concept of a bogeyman.

I posted the article only because it is a legitimate news (and/or “entertainment”) story. (This story was covered by AP/Fox News, Reuters, etc., etc.)

My posts in the comment section are just that – personal comments related to the actual news story.

Mike, this stuff is written and ‘discovered’ by people who want it to be true. If Jesus were married it would mean all His teachings are false, and He isn’t the Son of God.

Believe what you will. Jesus gives you the choice.

Remember – Da Vinci was quite fascinated by mirror-opposites in all areas of his work in illustration. In fact, Da Vinci famously wrote his diaries “mirror”-style. At the time he died, no one could figure out what he has written in his texts. Turns out the only way to read his “code” was to hold it up to a mirror.

I’ll repeat: Leonardo was the genius of his time. The geometry and mathematics of art and illustration were his stock and trade. I doubt seriously that the mirror-image precision of The Last Supper was an accident.

Obviously, DaVinci was taught the theory of fractals by the same extra terrestrial force that parted the Red Sea, the prefered cleansing place of ancient Sang Royal.

Coincidence…?
*sheesh*

The film – produced by mega-gazillionaire James Cameron (who directed the movie ‘Titanic’), details the supposed archaeological discovery of Jesus’ tomb. The tomb was discovered in 1980 at a location in what is now modern Jerusalem. The tomb contained a set of family ossuaries inscribed with names like “Jesus of Nazareth, son of Joseph” “Mary Magdalene, wife of Jesus” “James, brother of Jesus”, etc.

While names like “Mary, James, Judah, Jesus (Yeshua)” etc., were common at the time, the odds (the PROBABILITY) that all these names would be found in the same family at the same time and in the same place are astronomical.

link 1, link 2

Obviously the fictional book “The Da Vinci Code” cannot be used as evidence of anything — except in so far as it introduces the reader to some well-established concepts in art history and religious symbolism.

In the CHOICE LINKS section on MND’s home page (column 5), you will see a link to Da Vinci Illustrations Animated. I put this link on the site a year or two ago – only because I think it’s fascinating. If you go to that site, then click on the ‘human figures in motion” link, you will see how Leonardo used techniques that are entirely consistent with modern film animation. Obviously Leonardo quite understood the dynamic – animated – aspects of nature, and applied suggested animation in his necessarily static figures. (Thus Mona Lisa appears to “look” at you as much as you look at her.)

Now – since you mentioned The Da Vinci Code and provided a link to the wikipedia entry above – you may wish to have a look at this detail of The Last Supper. Note the figure described by Dan Brown as Mary Magdalene.

Considering all of this, Pesci’s super-imposition here shows what may be construed as an “animation” of sorts, wherein the figure holding the baby on the left side of the image appears to be handing the baby to “Mary”, while the corresponding right side of the image may show the “baby” being taken away.

Yes, yes, I know: it’s speculation. So what? You must admit it’s interesting nonetheless.

I’ll drink to that.

I recognized it because this is the same image MND uses as its http icon:

http://mensnewsdaily.com/mndv3.ico

I use this symbol because, in my opinion, it encapsulates the notion of LIFE as a function of the two genders – male and female.

In EG’s “Trinity of Accomplishment” article, in comment # 20, I articulated a formula for life as implied (if not defined) by John Barrow and Frank Tipler in their classic text, The Anthropic Cosmological Principle, to whit: Life can be defined as “self-reproduction with error correction.”

“Note that a single human being does not satisfy the above sufficient condition to be considered living, but it is made up of cells some of which do satisfy it. A MALE-FEMALE PAIR would collectively be a system capable of self-reproduction, and so this system would satisfy the condition.” (emphasis mine)

-The Anthropic Cosmological Principle, John D. Barrow and Frank J. Tipler, 1986, OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, p. 515.

It seems obvious enough, doesn’t it? But I’ll bet this definition will stick in some people’s craw: for sexually reproducing creatures like us (not withstanding the occasional human birth by parthenogenesis) Life=Male+Female

I watched the film The Lost Tomb of Jesus with great initial skepticism, but, having seen it, I must say the evidence seems overwhelming.

If the Talpiot Tomb is indeed the lost tomb of Jesus – and if the secret teaching of the man Jesus were indeed systematically suppressed by early church fathers – then perhaps Dan Brown was on to something after all.