Did Leonardo Da Vinci create the Shroud of Turin, or is it really Jesus' burial cloth?
451413
Leonardo da Vinci lived from 1452 until 1519. \n\nThe Shroud of Turin is a relic believed to be the linen cloth used to wrap Christ's body in ready for burial. It bears impressions of a human body marked with wounds consistent with those supposed to be on Christ at the crucifixion. It has been kept in Turin since 1578 but there are gaps in it's history prior to the 14th century. It has been subject to a number of tests, some with surprising results,although none can be said to have confirmed or authenticated it's authenticity. Carbon dating of scraps of the Shroud indicate that it was probably made three hundred years after Christ's death although the Catholic Church always denies this as it earns vast amounts of revenue from donations and articles written about the Shroud. The reason for the imprint, which can only be seen with the use of ultra violet light, is ascribed to the fact that the Shroud was soaked in juice of the aloe plant, which has similar properties to the chemicals used in photographic developing, thus 'photographing' the imprint. There is  no doubt that the imprint does bear marks similar to those described in the Bible as being inflicted on Christ but as crucifixion was a very common method of execution in Roman times this is not unusual. Pontius Pilate, who is depicted in the Bible as rather a kindly man, once ordered the crucifixion of Jewish rebels, one every ten paces, between Jerusalem and the sea, a total of around two thousand men. All would have been buried and wrapped in shrouds just like the Turin one. There must have been thousand upon thousand crucifixions so the Shroud of Turin could have been used to wrap anyone. Naturally the Catholic Church encourages 'relics' as it keeps a steady stream of pilgrims visiting the places they are kept. I believe that there are at least twenty six nails from the cross, scattered across locations in churches in Europe that the Catholic Church authenticates as genuine. Since there were only three it is hard to see how the church upholds this misconception.\n\nThus it is impossible for Leonardo da Vinci to have created the Shroud of Turin and it is also extremely unlikely that it was Jesus' burial shroud.
688295
Sparky First let me say I appreciate the 10 pts. I don't know what I did to piss you off though. I told you to look up the work "Qumran" because it is one of the best documented archaeological finds in the world and I knew that there would be plenty of info online (which would be convenient for you). Would you rather me refer you to the dozens of books that I know of offhand or to an infinite # of archaeological reports that are incredibly boring to read? I studied Qumran under Jodi Magness at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and she is the foremost American Archaeologist in the world concerning the "holyland." In particular, she is definitely the foremost authority on Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found.  In case you don't know, archaeology is SCIENCE, not religion, and archaeological reports and finds are scientific and are not at all connected to the Church or any religion.  \n\nNothing in my answer to you dealt with religious dogma, I simply tried to answer your question as to why SOME Christians see a threat in the DaVinci code. Now, as for your claim that the bible was written 200 years after Christ, well that's true for some of the later NT books, but not of the Gospels. Some of the gnostic texts were much later than the gospels, which is part of the reason they were rejected by the church. \n\nAnd lastly, you claim that the bible has changed so many times that it's all crap. What do you have to support this? Go see the Dead Sea Scrolls some time, which were written between 2500-2000 yrs ago (as I visited a DSS exhibit about a month ago in Charlotte, NC). And then compare that to the KJV or the American Standard Bible.  The Old Testament found in the 1950s in the Caves near Qumran is nearly word for word with what we have today.  It is amazing that in 2000 or more years the Jewish text has changed so little!  This means that we should all reexamine the amount of credit we have granted the Jewish oral tradition that was so important to the early Christian Church.  IT IS ACCURATE, whether you want to admit it or not. SCIENCE and HISTORY support that.\n\nAgain, I answered your question rather well... Let me try one more time in FIVE SIMPLE SENTENCES that will be very easy for you to comprehend this time:\n\n1.  It wouldn't be so bad if Jesus was married.\n\n2.  Christians are NOT offended or threatened by the possibility that Jesus could have been married.\n\n3.  It's simply not historically true or believable, from the bible and from the writings of two Roman historians Tacitus and Josephus.\n\n4.  However, Some Christians ARE offended by the notion that Christ was not Divine; and the "The DaVinci Code" claims his having a child is proof that Jesus was NOT divine.\n\n5.  Such a claim can be damaging to the mission field because people like you believe anything and everything you read in a novel or see on TV and are therefore hostile toward Christianity.\n\nSo, that's why some Christians are offended by the DaVinci Code and by the notion that Christ might have been married to and had a child with Mary Magdalene.  Because of the hostility towards Christianity that such false belief creates.  People like you work directly against anyone trying to bring people to Christ.  \n\nPS.. the whole "MM was a whore" lost in translation thing.. do your history research man, you don't know what you are talking about at all.  You speak fiction and pass it off as truth. \n\nAnd you wonder why people would be offended?  maybe some people just like the truth?\n\nLet me ask you a question.  Why are you so offended by Christianity?  What are YOU afraid of?  The Truth?
1018115
I heard that it is a search for the holy grail, which is supposed to be the cup from the last supper, but the author of the book suggests that it is a box with some manuscripts in it that proves that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and had a daughter named Sarah.  It also says that many gospels were written but some council decided to use the four (Matt. Mark, Luke, and John) because it was the only ones that said Jesus was the son of God.  There is much more to it as well, but those are the ones I remember.\n\nIt is considered fiction but I heard that Dan Brown said that the fiction part is the murder and overlying story of the book, but he said that everything about Jesus was true.  I don't believe it.
689057
da vinci code is a novel written by the famous author dan brown. he states in his book that jesus was married to mary magdalene and their bloodline is still existing in the world. he also states that the holy grail is not a cup but was the code name of mary magdalene. the most important theme of the book is the most famous artist(all-rounder infact!)leonardo da vinci has shown this in most of his paintings including "the last supper".though it is work of fiction, many christian communities are against this bcoz according 2 them it is blasphemous.but the book is really good.sorry for the looooong explanation though.bye!
537153
no.  there was a show on a few weeks ago about his siblings, and how if he was holy, wouldn't they be to?  It was an interesting show, but there is no DNA from Jesus left today, not even on the shroud of Turin, which some claim is a fake anyway.
246491
All of the artwork and architecture is true and the Priory of Sion really was a secret society of which Leonardo da Vinci was a member, but the underlying story is fiction.  Read the fact page at the beginning of the book (it's right after the title page and before the prologue).
749462
he's not--his resurrection was ripped off from osiris--oh you said history--jesus is mythology
859660
Did it look like the Virgin Mary?
437615
Definitely fiction. Sorry for the lengthy explanation. It's cut and pasted from a ChristianityToday article. See link below.\n1. Was Jesus married to Mary Magdalene?\nNo. Mary Magdalene was certainly close to Jesus. She wept at Jesus' tomb (John 20). Jesus even entrusted her to return and tell the disciples about his resurrection. But we have no reason to believe they were married. Brown says that Leonardo da Vinci's Last Supper reveals the secret. He writes that the figure to Jesus' right, traditionally known as the apostle John, is actually Mary. Not true. Artists often gave characters feminine features to portray youth. John was the youngest of the disciples.\n\nBrown correctly observes that few Jewish men of Jesus' day did not marry. But why, then, did the apostle Paul, himself celibate, not mention Jesus and Mary when he argued that apostles could marry (1 Cor. 9:5)?\n\n2. What about these alternative gospels that aren't in the New Testament?\nIt's true that the Bible did not arrive as a "fax from heaven," as Brown writes. The New Testament canon in its current form was first formally attested in 367. Nevertheless, church leaders applied important standards when compiling the Bible. Authors of accepted writings needed to have walked and talked with Jesus, or at least with his leading disciples. Their teaching could not contradict what other apostles had written, and their documents must have been accepted by the entire church, from Jerusalem to Rome. Church leaders considered earlier letters and reports more credible than later documents. Finally, they prayed and trusted the Holy Spirit to guide their decisions. \n\nThe so-called Gnostic gospels, many discovered just last century, did not meet these criteria. Many appeared much later than the Bible and were dubiously attributed to major Christian leaders. Their teachings contrasted with what apostles like Paul had written. For example, many Gnostic writings argued that Jesus did not appear in the flesh, because flesh is evil, or they rejected the Old Testament. \n\n3. Were there really competing Christianities during the early church?\nYes—in the sense there were many disputes about the nature of Jesus. And the church has done its best to vanquish challengers to orthodoxy. Once the church decided against the Gnostic writings, they gathered and burned all the Gnostic manuscripts they could find. \n\nLater church councils convened to discuss other threats to Christian orthodoxy. Constantine, the first Roman emperor to make Christianity legal, called the most important of these meetings in 325. Leaders from around the Christian world gathered in Nicea, where they debated Arianism, which taught that God created Jesus. Brown writes that Constantine called this council so he could introduce a new divine Jesus on par with the Father. On the contrary, documents from before Nicea show that most followers of Jesus already called him LORD, the Yahweh of the Old Testament. The church leaders at Nicea rejected Arianism and affirmed that God and Jesus existed together from the beginning in the Trinity. This council produced the first drafts of what became the Nicene Creed, a landmark explanation of Christian belief. \n\n4. What is Opus Dei?\nA conservative religious group within the Roman Catholic Church. Opus Dei urges priests and laypeople to strenuously pursue sanctification through everyday discipline. The group has taken criticism for its conservative views, zeal, and secretive practices. There is no evidence that Opus Dei has resorted to murder; nor has the Vatican entrusted Opus Dei to violently guard the church's deepest secrets, as Dan Brown claims in The Da Vinci Code. \n\n5. Does the Priory of Sion really exist?\nYes, but not as described by Brown. Researchers suspect that members of the real-life Priory of Sion, founded in 1956, forged documents that placed major historical figures—such as Isaac Newton and Leonard da Vinci—in
580847
Okay, even if His DNA is on the Shroud of Turin, and even if science was far enough along to clone humans, we can't be sure than the clone would look like Jesus.  That cloned cat, CC, doesn't look like the original.  Also, how ethical would that be, really?  I don't know if God would allow it.\n\nAnd, Jesus probably looked Jewish.  Because He was a Jew.\n\nAnd, to the person directly below me, Jesus clearly EXISTED.  Even other religions admit that.  They just think that he was a "good man".  Christians, such as myself, believe that he was divine.\n\nBut, saying that he never existed is just idiotic.
1103052
Really now? Says who? Did Jesus Christ impart this knowledge, himself? Sounds a little kooky. \n\nWho is this God character? Why is he invisible? I suppose I am the image of the invisible Michael. I am also Michael. \n\nAre you sure Jesus wasn't some crazy cultist? \n\nSomebody once told me to find Jesus, but I always thought he was long dead. Where's he buried? Somebody also once told me he floated up to an invisible land of enchantment. I have no idea how I'm supposed to find some dead, mentally ill guy, whose body has somehow magically disappeared, and then how do I prove if it's him or not? There were no dental records millenia ago, let alone DNA files. \n\nHm, I think Jesus is lost forever, unless he's that guy on the on ramp holding that sign, looking like a serial killer. At least that guy LOOKS a lot like Jesus. Anyhow, nope, I did not know that Jesus Christ is the image of the invisible God, and is also God. \n\nHey, I got an idea. Why don't you tell me all about it? This sounds like a pretty wild story!
553568
no, the da vinci code is a fictional book, it is just a theory. no truth to it.
176603
It's a wonderful book, that teeters between reality, the unexplained and the WHAT IF.\n\nIn short it is about small clues left behind by the famous Artist Leonardo DaVince, it claims that certain paintings he made hold secret clues about Jesus.  It goes on to discuss the Priory of Sion, Secret Society the Dossier letters to be more clues, of Jesus being married to Mary Magdaline, and producing a female child, Sarah, who is the direct descendant of Jesus.\n\nYou should have watched the History Channel last night--Josh Bernstein, 'Diggin for the truth.'\n\nGood Luck and Prosper...;*!*;...
198026
It's about how there is some belief that one of Jesus' apostles was actually a woman and how there are clues to this being true within Leonardo DaVinci's artwork. Apparently this was a HUGE secret in the past because the church did not want to include women as important figures in the Bible, and supposedly an elite group in Italy knows the truth and passes it along through the generations in different ways (DaVinci passing along the info within his art)
1101116
wait for the next DBrown's book "Yet Another DaVinci Code" -- an answer is there!!\n\nalternatively, make your own research into Leonardo's paintings!!
1106865
I try not to think and according to wikipedia its authenticity is questioned, but you got me to learn something new, thankyou. :)\n\nThe fact that the Zohar was found by one lone individual, Moses de Leon, and that it refers to historical events of the post-Talmudical period, caused the authenticity of the work to be questioned from the outset.
585854
If you find a picture of "The Last Supper" by Da Vinci, you will notice that the person seated on Jesus' right side looks like a woman. The code suggests that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and that they had a child. \nThe whole thing is fictional, however, a recent documentary on National Geographic suggests that the whole thing might not be far from the truth. Dan Brown(Code author) did extensive research and wrote a fantastic novel about the whole mystery surrounding the subject. \nI would suggest that people who are really Christian avoid the subject and accept the fact that Jesus was perfect and that the 12 apostles were at the supper and the reason that the person on Jesus' right side is in fact John. It is known that he was very young and effeminate.