Was she really a prostitute? Or an unwanted bride by the Christians?

[img]http://3.bp..com/__PCbUvT-QUs/R-_y4E6JoVI/AAAAAAAAAU8/D7lxHqHkdnU/s1600/Cenacolo.jpg[/img]

there really is no tangent historical proof to all these (in or outside of the unverifiable claims and stories of the bible); just speculations

But is it possible that Jesus was never married?

Let's not forget that he was a Jew.

Davinci code was a finctional story. It's not based on truth

the painting of Leonardo Davinci misrepresents the real setting of a traditional jewish passover meal.
for instance:
-the jews sat around in a circle and not on a linear plan as depicted by the picture
-they reclined at the table.meaning,they leaned on their elbow at the table.but the picture shows a group of people sitting like westerners at a buffet.
-the youngest family member sat in his dad's laps (bosom);which means John (the youngest disciple) sat by jesus's side or like the bible says:he sat in jesus's bosom.it was not a woman but a young man.
-judas sat right next to jesus. judas was definately the most respected disciple by my analysis because:he held the money,he distributed it,and seemed like jesus's confidant.thats why nobody could have suspected him to be the traitor. he sat so close to jesus and the Lord was whispering in his ears.thats why the bible shows us that Peter was having a hard time hearing what jesus was saying,so he had to motion to john to ask the master to say it again. so,peter was not sitting next to jesus as depicted by Leonardo.

just to say that the image presented by Leonardo is a false representation of the real scene.
therefore the Davinci code is just a theory like what Charles Darwin published when he said:man evolved from an ape. if you beleive in the marriage between Jesus and Mary Magdalene, you might as well go ahead and beleive that there are Aliens on some unkown galaxies,or there was a creepy creature 100 million years ago who lived in caves called The Caveman,who is actually your ancestor.

michelin89:

But is it possible that Jesus was never married?

Let's not forget that he was a Jew.

there is no sense in this at all. What has his being a jew got to do with his marital status?

Many many jews in the bible never married . . . Paul, Samson, John the Baptist . . .

Though the book is a good read and all; speaking for myself

It's beggars belief why most dont notice the below excerpt copied out from the copyright page of Dan Brown's Da Vinci code

- the underlines are placed by me

[center][size=14pt]
Corgi edition published 2004

3 5 7 9 10 8 6 4 2

Copyright © Dan Brown 2003

The right of Dan Brown to be identified as the author of this
work has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78
of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988

In this work of fiction, the characters, places and events are
either the product of the author's imagination or they
are used [u]entirely fictitious[/u]ly

Condition of Sale

This book is sold subject to the condition that it shall . . . [/size][/center]

davidylan:

there is no sense in this at all. What has his being a jew got to do with his marital status?

Many many jews in the bible never married . . . Paul, Samson, John the Baptist . . .

But you didn't answer the question.

In The Last Super, the person sitting beside Jesus, claimed to be John the Baptist, is rumoured to be Mary Magdalene. Pay attention to the feminine features.

Leonardo wasn't a fool for sure. So I just want to know if he was just playing a joke on the Church or he had valid motives to assume Mary Magdalene was so important to Jesus to be represented among the other disciples.

Leave the Da Vinci Code out of this. I am talking about Leonardo da Vinci, and not Dan Brown.

michelin89:

But you didn't answer the question.

Because there is none. All you have here is conjecture and silly conspiracy theories.

michelin89:

In The Last Super, the person sitting beside Jesus, claimed to be John the Baptist, is rumoured to be Mary Magdalene. Pay attention to the feminine features.

This is absolute nonsense. Rumored to be Mary based exactly on WHAT evidence? First hand accounts of the last supper written by the apostles do NOT record the presence of a woman at the super. So exactly where did you get your "rumor" from?

michelin89:

Leonardo wasn't a fool for sure. So I just want to know if he was just playing a joke on the Church or he had valid motives to assume Mary Magdalene was so important to Jesus to be represented among the other disciples.

More absolute bull. Leonardo was not a fool sure but neither was he an eyewitness to the event he purported to draw. Leonardo never at any point claimed he was making a completely accurate representation of history in his drawings.

michelin89:

Leave the Da Vinci Code out of this. I am talking about Leonardo da Vinci, and not Dan Brown.

you dont know anything about him either.

For example . . . ALL bible records of the last supper record the 12 disciples as being present. The drawing above has 13 members including Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene (allegedly as there is no proof that is she since Leonardo never mentions this), where then is the last disciple?

michelin89:


Leonardo wasn't a fool for sure. So I just want to know if he was just playing a joke on the Church

or he had valid motives to assume Mary Magdalene was so important to Jesus to be represented among the other disciples.

Leave the Da Vinci Code out of this. I am talking about Leonardo da Vinci, and not Dan Brown.

@Michelin89

You are in Rome or there about, so you do probably know more than anyone else that Leonardo aint no fool

but rather is a genius; not limited to paintings alone but other fields such as science, medicine, encryption etc

Leonardo's jokes and pranks are well known and widely documented

they dont exclude numerous works and paintings commissioned by the Pope or church

He displayed his dillusionment and disgust of the hypocrisy of the church with treacherous and disguised paintings

He literally took money for the commissions, stuck two fingers up and screvved them all

The church no different to present day Penterascals are more concerned about the outside of the cup than the inside

Pristine, colorful and elegant on the outside but full of grime yuck and muck inside

- we wont delve into Leonardo's dark side

[size=14pt]Michelangelo hid anatomical sketches in Sistine Chapel in Church attack[/size]


^{According to two American neuroscientists,
the image of the brain is ingeniously hidden in the depiction of God's neck and chin}

Michelangelo concealed anatomical sketches in the robes and faces of the figures he painted on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel in a coded attack on the Church's disdain for science, researchers believe.

The cleverly disguised drawing of a human brain, which has remained unnoticed for 500 years, may have been a coded reference to the clash between science and religion.

The Renaissance master, who painted the frescoes in the Sistine Chapel between 1508 and 1512, would have been familiar with what a brain looked like – he was an accomplished anatomist who is known to have dissected many corpses.
     
According to two American neuroscientists, the image of the brain is ingeniously hidden in the depiction of God's neck and chin in "Separation of Light From Darkness", which depicts the first act performed by God in the creation of the universe.

It is one of nine panels on the Sistine Chapel's ceiling based on scenes from the Book of Genesis.

Art historians have long speculated that the strange, lumpy appearance of the figure's neck may represent a goiter.

But Ian Suk and Rafael Tamargo, of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore, Maryland, believe instead that it bears a striking resemblance to the crevices and creases of a human brain.

"Stunningly, following Michelangelo's outline, one can draw into God's neck and beard an anatomically correct ventral depiction of the brain," they write in the scientific journal "Neurosurgery".

"We propose that Michelangelo, a deeply religious man and an accomplished anatomist, intended to enhance the meaning of this ,  panel and possibly document his anatomic accomplishments by concealing this sophisticated neuro-anatomic rendering within the image of God."

They also believe that an odd-looking, vertical fold in the crimson robe worn by the figure of God represents the spinal cord, and that a mysterious Y-shaped fold at his waist may be an optic nerve.

Leonardo da Vinci had produced a detailed study of optic nerves 20 years previously in 1487, a study which Michelangelo may well have seen when the two worked in Florence at the same time.

The new thesis may explain something that has puzzled art critics for centuries – the peculiar lighting of God's neck.

Most of the fresco is illuminated from the lower left of the panel, but the neck is lit head-on and slightly from the right, casting different shadows.

Profs Suk and Tamargo argue that, far from being a clumsy error by Michelangelo, the peculiar angle deliberately enhanced the anatomical components of the brain.

By merging an image of God with a human brain, Michelangelo may have been seeking a covert outlet to show off his anatomical knowledge at a time when picking apart cadavers was frowned on by the Roman Catholic Church.

Alternatively, he may have been alluding to the wisdom of the Almighty or – more dangerously - hinting at his growing belief that ordinary Christians had the wit and intelligence to directly commune with God, rather than pray to Him indirectly through the Church.

That was an idea that would have been seen as heresy, particularly as the fresco is situated directly above the chapel altar.

Michelangelo's relationship with the Vatican became increasingly fraught during his career.

He fell out with Pope Julius II over payment for painting the Sistine Chapel, and came to loathe what he saw as the extravagance and vanity of the Church.

This is not the first time that medical experts have discerned hidden anatomical drawings in Michelangelo's work.

In 1990, an American doctor, Frank Meshberger, published a report in the Journal of the American Medical Association in which he suggested that a cross-section image of a brain was concealed in another of the Sistine Chapel panels, the "Creation of Adam".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/art-news/7833070/Michelangelo-hid-anatomical-sketches-in-Sistine-Chapel-in-Church-attack.html

^^^

As the OP said Da Vinci was no fool

For example Have you truly considered his Madonna on the Rocks painting?