Mary Magdalene

[dancus]

jimmy:

It is tough to not relate Mary of bethany to the woman who anointed the feet of Jesus considering that John10 specifically says it was her

2 (And Mary was she that anointed the Lord with ointment, and wiped his feet with her hair: whose brother Lazarus was sick.)

I’m sure you meant John 11. I am in total agreement. Now six days before the Passover, as related in John 12, we find another annointing by Mary. Here is where the contraversy begins. Judas complains the oil is worth 300 days wages. Which would be equivelent of 300 denarius. Where did that money come from? The household must have been far from wealthy. Marthas complaint to Jesus, Mary not helping, shows they didn’t have serving help. This brings us right back to Mary of Magdala, by legend a rich widow, who would have that sort of money. This whole thing seems circles within circles. Mary of Magdala has been my avocation the past 15 years, yet I’m no closer. I could make a very strong case for the two Marys being the same person. I’m 99.9% sure they aren’t, HOWEVER! Dan

 

[jimmy]

dancus:

I’m sure you meant John 11. I am in total agreement. Now six days before the Passover, as related in John 12, we find another annointing by Mary. Here is where the contraversy begins. Judas complains the oil is worth 300 days wages. Which would be equivelent of 300 denarius. Where did that money come from? The household must have been far from wealthy. Marthas complaint to Jesus, Mary not helping, shows they didn’t have serving help. This brings us right back to Mary of Magdala, by legend a rich widow, who would have that sort of money. This whole thing seems circles within circles. Mary of Magdala has been my avocation the past 15 years, yet I’m no closer. I could make a very strong case for the two Marys being the same person. I’m 99.9% sure they aren’t, HOWEVER! Dan

Yes I meant chapter 11.

Where does this idea come from that Mary was from a noble family. I have never heard this. Can you give me an early church document that shows this?

So are you saying that, even though John mentions that Mary of bethany annointed the feet of Jesus, he does not go on to tell the story, but goes on to tell the story of some other woman, whose name also happens to be Mary, who annoints His feet? I find that highly unlikely.

 

[rtiffany]

dancus:

More importantly no one seems to know who she was. The church has her as three people in one. The woman with the jar who annointed Christs feet. The woman with the seven demons and Mary of Bethany. The Greek Church lists them as three distinct persons. To farther complicate matters, Christian theologians accept the first two in agreement with the Church. However no ones going to shove Mary of Bethany down their throats.

Now the prostitute charge, Magdala is a Talmudic expression, ‘Curling womens hair,’ denoting an Adultress. I hasten add Magdala also means hill or fortress. Dan

You rock dan! This is very interesting stuff. I had always heard that the three mary’s were different people. I was also under the impression that when mary went to christ, she had no cover on her head, therefore she was a scorned worman… but further investigation shows that what was ment at the time was if she had her head shaved, that would mean she was a scorned woman. The fact that she had no cover on her head really means nothing - it does tell that she had hair.

Are there any documents that really support all of this??

Thanks again
Robert

 

[rtiffany]

Genesis315:

I hate to tell you, but the Church still is hardcore Catholic. What was that supposed to mean???

Anyway, her reputation is not destroyed by this story, but rather exalted. Her sinful past is what makes her one of the greatest saints.

The prostitute stuff also comes from her name Mary Magdalene (aka Mary of Magdala). Magdala housed a military encampment and so many prostitutes lived there.

I guess my comment about ‘hard core’ was more pointed at the times. These were times they still beheaded and flogged, spanish inquisition … hard core. The comment has nothing to do with the faith. Sorry to imply anyting different … it is never my intention to ‘faith bash’. As for Mary of Magdala - wasn’t she a rich widow?? Are these two the same?? This is the stuff I am looking for and the documents to back it up. My guess the folks that really know who she is won’t say and those who don’t will not find the answers … too bad.

 

[rtiffany]

jimmy:

Consider how much faith it takes to walk up to a man and kneel down on the ground and begin wiping his feet with your hair. She had such great faith. It is not a degradation of her.

I have a question for anyone who believes it is a destruction of her reputation; Who recieved the party when the prodigal son returned, the son who returned or the son who remained? Christ says there will be more rejoicing for the saving of one of those sheep which were lost than for all those who were not lost. Christ tells the parable of the sheperd who went searching for the one sheep that was lost. The parable of the woman that lost the coin and when she found it she threw a party and said, “lets rejoice, what was lost is found.”

Jimmy - didn’t the ‘uncovered’ part really mean shaved? My understanding of the time is that they shaved the heads of the scorned. Because she had hair, that would show she was not one of the scorned??? And just because she may not have been chased, does that mean she is a prostitute? Curious

 

[rtiffany]

jimmy:

The Catholic Church and its members have not destroyed her reputation. Gregory did not destroy her memory. John, in his gospel, when Jesus goes to raise Lazuarus from the dead declares that Mary, the sister of Martha, was the woman who wiped the feet of Jesus with her hair. You can see that this Mary is considered a great sinner from looking at Luke 7 when the pharisees look at her wiping His feet and think, “if he is a prophet then he would know what kind of woman this is.” It is perfectly resonable to consider this Mary to be Mary Magdalene.

Further, how is it destroying her reptuation? She repented, how does that destroy her reputation? If anyone says they have no sin they are a lier. No matter how great of a sinner she was, she became a great saint. It is a testament to her great faith that she went from nothing to something great. Peter denied Christ three times, yet he is considered as one of the greatest of the saints of the Church. Thomas doubted, yet he is a great saint. Francis of Assissi was a partier, yet he is one of the greatest of saints since the apostles. Augustine was a great sinner and became a great saint. Those who say that Mary was a great sinner exault her for her repentance. She went from the greatest depths to the heavens.

The Roman Church is still hard core Catholic and will remain hard core Catholic.

I couldn’t agree with you more! Mary is one of my heroins in life. I also believe her to be the deciple’s deciple … then why is it so hard to believe that she is at the righ hand of Joshua in the painting of the last supper??? Why is it so hard to believe that she was handed the reigns by Joshua?? I have looked at art from hundreds of different artists who have painted the last supper - most of them show Mary at Joshua’s side - why is this so hard for the christian relegion??? Confused …

 

[jimmy]

rtiffany:

I couldn’t agree with you more! Mary is one of my heroins in life. I also believe her to be the deciple’s deciple … then why is it so hard to believe that she is at the righ hand of Joshua in the painting of the last supper??? Why is it so hard to believe that she was handed the reigns by Joshua?? I have looked at art from hundreds of different artists who have painted the last supper - most of them show Mary at Joshua’s side - why is this so hard for the christian relegion??? Confused …

She wasn’t at the right hand of Jesus for several reasons. 1. The original painting has labels of who they are that can be seen with infrared light. 2. The painting is depicting what it says in the gospels. In the gospel of John 11;24 John specifically uses masculine terms, which in Greek can not denote a woman. The Greek language has masculine and feminine forms for words. It specifically says that Peter asked him. If you look at the picture below, you can see Peter leaning into John and asking him to ask Jesus. So you can see that this is the exact scene which is being depicted.

http://www.1st-art-gallery.com/artists/leonardo_da_vinci/last_supper.jpg

I would further ask where is disciple number 12 if it is Mary.

I don’t know why any Christian would want it to be Mary considering that Dan Brown is saying that Mary was Jesus’ lover. That is the whole point of Dan Brown even bringing this up, so he can claim her to be Christs lover.

 

[jimmy]

rtiffany:

Jimmy - didn’t the ‘uncovered’ part really mean shaved? My understanding of the time is that they shaved the heads of the scorned. Because she had hair, that would show she was not one of the scorned??? And just because she may not have been chased, does that mean she is a prostitute? Curious

Does it really matter whether she was a prostitute? All that really matters is that she was a great sinner now she is a great saint. Either way, she changed. That is what I admire, her great repentance and her great love. I think that one of the most moving parts of the bible is in the gospel of John where Mary shows up at the tomb of Jesus and she sees Him and thinks He is the gardener. Her love is pretty moving. I think that when she is wiping His feet is pretty moving too. To see her pain and suffering, and to see her self sacrifice. And then you see the compassion of Christ.

 

[rtiffany]

jimmy:

She wasn’t at the right hand of Jesus for several reasons. 1. The original painting has labels of who they are that can be seen with infrared light. 2. The painting is depicting what it says in the gospels. In the gospel of John 11;24 John specifically uses masculine terms, which in Greek can not denote a woman. The Greek language has masculine and feminine forms for words. It specifically says that Peter asked him. If you look at the picture below, you can see Peter leaning into John and asking him to ask Jesus. So you can see that this is the exact scene which is being depicted.

http://www.1st-art-gallery.com/artists/leonardo_da_vinci/last_supper.jpg

I would further ask where is disciple number 12 if it is Mary.

I don’t know why any Christian would want it to be Mary considering that Dan Brown is saying that Mary was Jesus’ lover. That is the whole point of Dan Brown even bringing this up, so he can claim her to be Christs lover.

Very cool info - I did not know the deciples were labled with infrared - but they did not have infrared when the painting was painted - who did the labeling?

The thought that Mary and Joshua were married is as old as I am - and thats old. This is not an invention or new thought from Dan Brown.

 

[jimmy]

rtiffany:

Very cool info - I did not know the deciples were labled with infrared - but they did not have infrared when the painting was painted - who did the labeling?

The thought that Mary and Joshua were married is as old as I am - and thats old. This is not an invention or new thought from Dan Brown.

They were labeled in ink or something. They can see it today by using infrared light.

Yes, it is taken from the 3rd century “Gospel according to Phillip” I believe it is. It is a gnostic gospel that was never accepted by any Christian authority. But Dan Brown is trying to affirm it by making this idea that Leonardo somehow had some secret knowledge that caused him to put Mary beside Jesus at the last supper. He is trying to do nothing but destroy Christianity. That is his whole hope and his whole goal.

 

[rtiffany]

jimmy:

They were labeled in ink or something. They can see it today by using infrared light.

Yes, it is taken from the 3rd century “Gospel according to Phillip” I believe it is. It is a gnostic gospel that was never accepted by any Christian authority. But Dan Brown is trying to affirm it by making this idea that Leonardo somehow had some secret knowledge that caused him to put Mary beside Jesus at the last supper. He is trying to do nothing but destroy Christianity. That is his whole hope and his whole goal.

I guess that is one way to look at it - I thought it was just a good fiction read with a few facts for effect. I would find it hard to believe that one man and one book could put an end to christianity - if he could, what would that say for christians and christianity - not much

By the way, when you reference ‘any christian authority’ what is your meaning there? I know the gospel was not accepted by the ruling authority at the time, but to say any christian authority - there was only one christian authority at that time!?

I will check into the infrared pen stuff - I have never heard of that in all my years of looking at depictions of the last supper.

ps - if Mary was the deciple’s deciple, why wouldn’t she be in the picture? These are all good questions

 

[jimmy]

rtiffany:

I guess that is one way to look at it - I thought it was just a good fiction read with a few facts for effect. I would find it hard to believe that one man and one book could put an end to christianity - if he could, what would that say for christians and christianity - not much

By the way, when you reference ‘any christian authority’ what is your meaning there? I know the gospel was not accepted by the ruling authority at the time, but to say any christian authority - there was only one christian authority at that time!?

I will check into the infrared pen stuff - I have never heard of that in all my years of looking at depictions of the last supper.

ps - if Mary was the deciple’s deciple, why wouldn’t she be in the picture? These are all good questions

I have actually been looking for the infrared thing but can’t find it. I retract it until I can find it. I have heard it before but can’t find it.

When I say “any Christian authority” I am refering to the early church fathers Ignatius, Irenaeus, Justin, Tertullian, Origen, Augustine, Chrysostom, and etc. Or of councils. None of them accepted any of the gnostic gospels. Further the gnostic gospels can’t be dated further back than the mid second century like the books of the new testament can.

Jesus had His relationship with the apostles and He had His relationship with Mary and the other women. Somethings were revealed to the apostles without Mary, and some things were revealed to Mary without the apostles. Like this instance in the gospel of John it was the apostles. Whereas Mary, on the other hand, was the first to see Jesus at the ressurection.

 

[jimmy]

rtiffany:

I guess my comment about ‘hard core’ was more pointed at the times. These were times they still beheaded and flogged, spanish inquisition … hard core. The comment has nothing to do with the faith. Sorry to imply anyting different … it is never my intention to ‘faith bash’. As for Mary of Magdala - wasn’t she a rich widow?? Are these two the same?? This is the stuff I am looking for and the documents to back it up. My guess the folks that really know who she is won’t say and those who don’t will not find the answers … too bad.

Many of the saints refrained from making a judgement on which way it was. While St. Gregory the Great thought that Mary of Bethany was the sinner and the woman who had seven demons cast out, St. Ambrose, St. Augustine, and St. Thomas Aquinas stay neutral. It still remains a humble opinion of many of the faithfull. It is and never was a teaching that was meant to be an official dogma.

 

[rtiffany]

jimmy:

I have actually been looking for the infrared thing but can’t find it. I retract it until I can find it. I have heard it before but can’t find it.

When I say “any Christian authority” I am refering to the early church fathers Ignatius, Irenaeus, Justin, Tertullian, Origen, Augustine, Chrysostom, and etc. Or of councils. None of them accepted any of the gnostic gospels. Further the gnostic gospels can’t be dated further back than the mid second century like the books of the new testament can.

Jesus had His relationship with the apostles and He had His relationship with Mary and the other women. Somethings were revealed to the apostles without Mary, and some things were revealed to Mary without the apostles. Like this instance in the gospel of John it was the apostles. Whereas Mary, on the other hand, was the first to see Jesus at the ressurection.

I would love to know more about “I am refering to the early church fathers Ignatius, Irenaeus, Justin, Tertullian, Origen, Augustine, Chrysostom”. Are these the ‘fathers’ of the catholic church??

Thanks again

 

[jimmy]

rtiffany:

I would love to know more about “I am refering to the early church fathers Ignatius, Irenaeus, Justin, Tertullian, Origen, Augustine, Chrysostom”. Are these the ‘fathers’ of the catholic church??

Thanks again

I don’t know if you like this answer, but they would be the fathers of Catholicism and Christianity as a whole, but their faith is more focused Catholic. They are what we have of the early Christian writers. They can be read at this site, along with many other church fathers.

Church Fathers

You can read about each of the saints by clicking on the name, you can read each of their writings by clicking on the writing below their name. If you would like to read them, I suggest starting with Ignatius of Antioch, disciple of John the apostle. He died around 107AD.

 

[rtiffany]

jimmy:

I don’t know if you like this answer, but they would be the fathers of Catholicism and Christianity as a whole, but their faith is more focused Catholic. They are what we have of the early Christian writers. They can be read at this site, along with many other church fathers.

Church Fathers

You can read about each of the saints by clicking on the name, you can read each of their writings by clicking on the writing below their name. If you would like to read them, I suggest starting with Ignatius of Antioch, disciple of John the apostle. He died around 107AD.

I love the answer - its an answer! As I stated before, I am just looking for the truth - thats it.
So these are all saints - cool - I will read up on them. As you may have guessed, I am not catholic - but I do have a very spiritual base and my beliefs are rock solid. I have a strong understanding of god but my process is more karmic than dogmatic. I am just trying to figure out why there is such termoil about Mary and this goofey book - very strange to me.

I have also looked into the whole christmas story thing and found much of it to be less than truthful. Just wondering why the churches (all christian churches) would promote such a story?? This always leads me back to “if this is a fabrication, then what else may be”? Again, back to looking for truth

 

[jimmy]

rtiffany:

I love the answer - its an answer! As I stated before, I am just looking for the truth - thats it.
So these are all saints - cool - I will read up on them. As you may have guessed, I am not catholic - but I do have a very spiritual base and my beliefs are rock solid. I have a strong understanding of god but my process is more karmic than dogmatic. I am just trying to figure out why there is such termoil about Mary and this goofey book - very strange to me.

I have also looked into the whole christmas story thing and found much of it to be less than truthful. Just wondering why the churches (all christian churches) would promote such a story?? This always leads me back to “if this is a fabrication, then what else may be”? Again, back to looking for truth

What Christmas story have you been looking into? What specifically are you struggling with? If you want, we can discuss this on a new thread.

 

[rtiffany]

jimmy:

What Christmas story have you been looking into? What specifically are you struggling with? If you want, we can discuss this on a new thread.

Primarily the fiction about Mary/Joseph and winter/snow, being poor (common misconception), December 25th being the birthday of Joshua - those sorts of things.

We could start a new thread on this if you want - might be interesting

 

[jimmy]

rtiffany:

Primarily the fiction about Mary/Joseph and winter/snow, being poor (common misconception), December 25th being the birthday of Joshua - those sorts of things.

We could start a new thread on this if you want - might be interesting

Those are not matters that the faith hinges on. December 25 for Jesus day isn’t necessarily the actual day, but that is not the point. The point is just to commemorate the birth of Christ. December was just the time that was settled upon to celibrate it. Same with all other holy days. The martyrdom of John the Baptist is commemorated in August, that doesn’t mean that is when it actually was.

It isn’t really much of a misconception to say that Mary and Joseph were poor. Whether they were actually poor or not, it is not a big issue.

 

[rtiffany]

jimmy:

Those are not matters that the faith hinges on. December 25 for Jesus day isn’t necessarily the actual day, but that is not the point. The point is just to commemorate the birth of Christ. December was just the time that was settled upon to celibrate it. Same with all other holy days. The martyrdom of John the Baptist is commemorated in August, that doesn’t mean that is when it actually was.

It isn’t really much of a misconception to say that Mary and Joseph were poor. Whether they were actually poor or not, it is not a big issue.

Many of the ‘holy’ days were created to cover over pagan holidays. This was one ploy used by religions to assimilate other religions (the original borg ). Way too many stories from the pulpit (not just catholic here - primarily christian) do portray the family as being poor - and that is a matter to understand. That has been the food for evangelists and other religions to prey on people for centuries. Again, if these stories from religions are untrue - what else may be untrue that we don’t know about?? That’s really where I am going with much of this search. It is rarely mentioned that Joshua was from the house of David - how poor could he have really been??? The fact that he turned to the poor masses and did not rely on his wealth is a great testimate, but again, that part of his life is rarely mentioned.