Why did the lord appear to Mary Magdalene first?

[ConstantLearner]

I would encourage you in your studies of our scriptures to read them first, whenever possible in one sitting before breaking them down. This allows all of the book to speak, rather than taking cues from singular passages here and there.

You had me on your side until the above.

I was a theology major for six years at a Catholic college. I can read Hebrew, Aramaic, and some Greek. I’ve studied the NT with theologians. That is what convinced me more that Judaism is correct.

But, I do not believe anyone is excluded from heaven. I do not believe one has to be Jewish to be included. I believe it all depends on how the person lives his life.

 

[ConstantLearner]

C.S. Lewis was a very good writer, but he was not a theologian.

 

[AugustTherese]

I was a theology major for six years at a Catholic college. I can read Hebrew, Aramaic, and some Greek. I’ve studied the NT with theologians

So, why quote National Geographic to attempt to substantiate your claims?

 

[ConstantLearner]

Your question makes no sense to me at all.

Maybe because I don’t have a Hebrew keyboard here.

 

[Onthisrock84]

This is an interesting thing.
Many historians and scholars argue about what Christianity would have ultimately looked like had Jerusalem not been sacked by the Roman’s in 70. There was a thriving Jewish Christian population there run by James who was beheaded in around 62. Josephus also mentions him and seems to hold much respect for him.
The end was Pauline Christianity prevailed and the majority of the Jewish elements or needs were lost. However I have always pondered if there was more friction between James and Paul than is ultimately led on in Acts. Some say when Paul says others were coming and teaching " a different gospel" which he gets all upset about in Acts, most Christian’s think it’s some heretics, but I remember having a professor who said it is just as conceivable that it was disciples James was sending to rebuke Paul’s misinterpretation of the gospel of Christ. I will say this, as a Christian, it is somewhat strange to me that Christ calls 12 disciples, is crucified and resurrected, and then instead of having his own disciples be the most influential of the church, chooses a pharisee who never even knew Jesus and persecuted them to spread the gospel. Like 13 letters are attributed to Paul, Hebrews has been in the past but most very highly doubt that now. So 13 out of the 27 canonical books of the New Testament are authored by Paul. Luke wrote his gospel and Acts and was a physician who followed Paul so obviously that was also influenced by Paul. In fact the whole second half of Acts ignores really the acts of everyone but Paul for the most part. So basically 15 out of the 27 books are Pauline influenced. 16 if you think Hebrews was authored by him. I wish half of the New Testament wasn’t written by someone who ultimately never even knew Jesus. I will say that. It has bothered me at times I admit. I believe Paul was genuine but I don’t know why Christ chose him and not someone who knew him and followed him during his ministry. It just never made sense to me.

However to your post, Jews were the first to accept Christ and in Jerusalem originally did while keeping Jewish tradition.

 

[ConstantLearner]

I agree with you. I wish other people would have written about him, but the NT written by those who knew him.

I mentioned Einstein before. Perhaps his wife or, in the case of Freud, his daughter, knew the most about him, but other people recorded their deeds.

I agree, the choice of Paul seems a little strange.

 

[woolycaterpillar]

Perhaps Jesus did appear to His mother and it wasn’t recorded. He may have seen her first.

 

[Onthisrock84]

I love the history of the church and even first century Palestine is awesome. And yes in Josephus Antiquities of the Jews, he names many who claimed to be messiahs in the era. It was a very messianic time. Simon of Peraea, Judas the Galilean, Athronges, Theudas, two unnamed only as the Egyptian and the Samaritan, Menahem, and more. Even John the Baptist was regarded as such by many. Judas and Theudas are named in Acts. Actually I’ve heard from some that Simon bar Kochba who revolted in 125 and created a Jewish state for a couple years is regarded more as an authentic messiah than Jesus ever would have been. I believe he even had a following and blessing from some rabbis. Moses of Crete a few hundred years later is a funny story.

The only difference is when these self proclaimed messiahs were killed their followers disbanded or died themselves and that was it of them.
Christs disciples all went to their deaths proclaiming the gospel and never did one recant. And none of them had anything to gain by doing this but death and heresy. Something must have happened in my view.
http://www.livius.org/articles/religion/messiah/

 

[Onthisrock84]

What is the Jewish view of Saint Paul aka Saul of Tarsus? He was a notable Jew taught by Gamaliel who was mentioned in other sources as a very respected teacher, rabbi.

 

[PetraG]

C.S. Lewis was a very good writer, but he was not a theologian.

Would you admit Pope St. John Paul II was a theologian?
Linked to the divine power of judgment about which we spoke in the previous reflection, Jesus Christ claimed the power of forgiving sins. The evangelists inform us of that, especially John. We have seen that the divine power of judging each and every person especially in the apocalyptic description of the last judgment is profoundly connected with the divine will to save humanity in Christ and through Christ. The first step in putting the plan of salvation into effect is the remission of sins.

It may be said that the revealed truth of the power of judgment has its continuation in all that the Gospel says about the power to forgive sins. This power belongs to God alone. If Jesus Christ ”the Son of Man" has that power, it means that he is God, according to what he himself said, “I and the Father are one” (Jn 10:30). From the beginning of his messianic mission, Jesus not only proclaimed the necessity of conversion (“Be converted and believe the Gospel,” Mk 1:15) and taught that the Father is ready to pardon repentant sinners, but he himself forgave sins.
Catechesis by Pope John Paul II on Jesus Christ
General Audience, Wednesday 7 October 1987

 

[JohnR77]

Does Emmerich’s vision show that it is false?

I never referred to Emmerich or her visions.

You claimed there was no exclusive and specific statement that MM was first in Scripture. That is false, so I provided a citation of a specific and exclusive statement.

Is that statement accurate?

NO! You did not provide that. You provided a faulty interpretation of Mark 16:9.

Yes, that passage teaches truth, but you do not correctly understand what it teaches. And you do not have the humility to accept that you could be wrong, and that Pope Saint John Paul II knows the Bible 1,000 times better than you.

What in your link “clearly refutes” it?

Just about all of it.

Sometimes by implication.

Sometimes explicitly

I broke down my article into sections below.

Sections :

Pope St. John Paul II Teaching

Where was Jesus at before Mary Magdalene saw Him ?

How do we explain Mary’s absence from the tomb on Easter morning ?

An Argument of Justice

Love Opens the Door to Understanding and Knowledge.

5. Historical Tradition

Magisterial Teaching

Mark 16:9-10 “he appeared first to Mary Magdalene” Meaning explained

So, why do Sacred Scriptures not record this event ?

Short summary : One-Page Pamphlet

John

 

[PetraG]

You had me on your side until the above.

I was a theology major for six years at a Catholic college. I can read Hebrew, Aramaic, and some Greek. I’ve studied the NT with theologians. That is what convinced me more that Judaism is correct.

You didn’t know that the friction between St. Paul and St. Peter was NOT because “Peter only wanted to speak with Jews.” You may have studied the NT with theologians, but I’m not buying that you haven’t let any bias slip in to cover the unfortunate loss of your faith.

What do you make of this passage from Acts, from the testimony of Peter on Pentecost?
God raised this Jesus; of this we are all witnesses.
Exalted at the right hand of God, he received the promise of the holy Spirit from the Father and poured it forth, as you (both) see and hear. For David did not go up into heaven, but he himself said:
‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand
until I make your enemies your footstool.”’
Therefore let the whole house of Israel know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Messiah, this Jesus whom you crucified.”
Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and they asked Peter and the other apostles, “What are we to do, my brothers?” (Acts 2:32-37)

If you cannot believe accounts that Jesus Christ was in fact the Messiah and did rise from the dead, how do you know anything about him? How is it that you hold him in great respect? What Jew of his time heralded him as a great teacher and rejected only the notion that he was God? Are there any? Produce one! Admit, then, that you have chosen to believe that the Gospel taught some things but not others with no evidence to back up your exclusion of the premise that Jesus thought he was the Son of God with a unique power to forgive sins.
There is far more evidence, is there not, that C.S. Lewis was right than that you are right in patronizing the Gospel of Christ by waiving it off as containing the words of a “great teacher”? Don’t you see that if you will not believe the accounts that he rose from the dead, you undermine the credibility of those same accounts concerning what he said and what he is credited with teaching? What do you have left that you don’t have from Hillel? What makes you think it is original to Jesus of Nazareth?

But, I do not believe anyone is excluded from heaven. I do not believe one has to be Jewish to be included. I believe it all depends on how the person lives his life.

Which way are you going to have it? Is no one excluded or are some excluded because they don’t live their life in “the right way”?
What happens to people who are excluded? Why do you believe that?
If no one is excluded, what difference does it make how people live their lives?

 

[Onthisrock84]

That’s the thing.
I have had it with people saying oh I think Jesus was a great guy.
If that’s all you think than no he wasn’t! He was a terrible person if he wasn’t in fact the son of God. It means he was a liar and a blasphemer.

 

[PetraG]

That’s the thing.
I have had it with people saying oh I think Jesus was a great guy.
If that’s all you think than no he wasn’t! He was a terrible person if he wasn’t in fact the son of God. It means he was a liar and a blasphemer.

Well, he could have been a misguided delusional, too.
Still, I don’t get how to get around the premise that either he was lying or his followers were lying or they were all deluded like all the other zealous messianic delusionals of the time. That wouldn’t have been uncommon at the time. There were a lot of very serious people who staked their hopes on something that didn’t pan out.

 

[Hodos]

I was a theology major for six years at a Catholic college. I can read Hebrew, Aramaic, and some Greek. I’ve studied the NT with theologians. That is what convinced me more that Judaism is correct.

Fair enough. Was just pointing out that you were making a statement based on isolated texts rather than a full reading of the works you were citing. Keep in mind that just because one attends a theology class does not mean the professor teaches theology faithfully. Bart Ehrman would be a great example of one who claims to be a professor of NT Greek studies who completely misses the point when reading the NT.

 

[Onthisrock84]

The thing is the concept of a person rising from the dead was an unheard of concept in Judaism. Hence why even his disciples didn’t understand at first.

 

[Dovekin]

You claimed there was no specific and exclusive statement in Scripture that Jesus appeared first to MM. i provided a counter example. Oddly, The link that claims to explain the verse says “the word first indicates not an absolute priority, but only a relative priority specifically and exclusively to the events Mark decides to include.” We could discuss whether it asserts an absolute or relative priority, but we should be able to agree it is a specific and exclusive statement from Scripture that asserts Jesus appeared first to Mary Magdalene. Which is all I said.

And you do not have the humility to accept that you could be wrong,

And your response is insults? And attempts to intimidate by citing JP2’s authority as your own? Indignation?

Clearly, you do not trust your position to stand on its own. You have to attack, misrepresent, and intimidate. I do not see any reason to consider it any further; if you are unconvinced, so am I.

 

[graciew]

On a side note, have you had the chance to read The Lord by Romano Guardini?
I have said this several times throughout the years,but he really approached Jesus in a way new to me at that time.
And every now and then,I plunge into the mystery of the person of Jesus in that book.
It is a thick book to be read slowly.

 

[kgmlg]

Edit: I do believe Jesus existed, and the letters of Paul exist. Paul mentions Peter and John, but he mentions no one else. So, I do definitely believe Jesus, Paul, Peter, John, and James existed, but I have my reservations about the others.

Not totally accurate: 1 Corinthians 15: 5 mentions the 12.

that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas,[b] and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7

 

[ConstantLearner]

What is the Jewish view of Saint Paul aka Saul of Tarsus? He was a notable Jew taught by Gamaliel who was mentioned in other sources as a very respected teacher, rabbi.

You have to realize, and I’m sure you do, though it’s easy to overlook, that we don’t accept all Paul said about himself or the Christian NT at all. Jewish views, for those who even think about him at all, vary. Some see him as a pitiful person, who simply suffered from epilepsy. Others see him as duped. Others think he was trying to do his best, but was simply misled. I realize he’s a towering figure in Christianity, but he’s not a part of Judaism at all since we do not accept Jesus as the messiah or put credence in the NT.

Richard Carrier, who I believe is now an atheist, gives Paul a lot of credit for the spread of Christianity. Carrier’s written books on how the Christian religion managed to take root and grow when other messianic cults did not. Whether one believes Carrier’s views or not, he is an expert in ancient cultures and worth reading for that alone.