RE: Mary, Mary?

RE: Mary, Mary? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Rule -> RE: Mary, Mary? (4/23/2010 10:22:15 PM)
Mary the Magdalene in various guises is just about everywhere in the gospels. I deem it possible, even likely, that she was the very Goddess of Slaves herself, come down from (her) Heaven. And if so, I wonder as to the identity of Martha and Lazarus.

Musicmystery -> RE: Mary, Mary? (4/24/2010 7:38:45 AM)
quote: New Testament scholarship has shown that this picture of Mary Magdalene is patently false and disparagingly misleading.... WHAT scholarship? Not to jump on you for this point, but Wiki is infamous for nebulous souces (the links give the illusion of substantiation). And we read repeatedly "studies show" with only the conclusion listed, rarely anything about the studies. All kinds of questionable "scholarship" draws nutty conclusions for self-serving purposes. I once read an analysis of "Stairway to Heaven," showing in detail the band's longing for and conversion to born again Christianity. Unfortunately, Robert Plant relates that it was written one night with Jimmy Page while enjoying some premium Moroccan dope, with no intent other than writing a cool sounding song with cool lyrics. Claims of scholarship alone aren't gonna do it. Now, that much of what has come down as "The" Bible has been pretty damn worked over for political purposes is well established, yes. I'm just saying individual claims about what's "really" true need better support than that. Sorry about the mini-side rant.

sunshinemiss -> RE: Mary, Mary? (4/24/2010 8:34:19 AM)
Dude, Are you seriously saying that there ISN'T a Stairway to Heaven? Crushed.

Musicmystery -> RE: Mary, Mary? (4/24/2010 8:37:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sunshinemiss Dude, Are you seriously saying that there ISN'T a Stairway to Heaven? Crushed. Silly. Of COURSE there is! Don't get your hedgerow in a bustle. You just need premium Moroccan dope to climb it...

MichiganHeadmast -> RE: Mary, Mary? (4/24/2010 11:37:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SohCahToa I don't know but I hear she had a little lamb. And some fava beans and a nice chianti.

vincentML -> RE: Mary, Mary? (4/24/2010 11:37:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Not a lot of people, very, very few I would venture think Mary Magdelene was a not a whore. [ Additionally, the wiki entry excerpted above begins by noting... In recent years there has been a great restoration of the New Testament figure of Mary Magdalene as a patron of women's preaching and ministry. Her new popularity has stemmed in part from the recognition that Mary Magdalene has been the victim of a historical defamation of character. She has been misidentified as a repentant prostitute in historical tradition, and depicted in art as a weeping sinner wiping Jesus' feet with her hair. New Testament scholarship has shown that this picture of Mary Magdalene is patently false and disparagingly misleading.... K. Agree. Due in part at least to the Gnostic Gospel of Mary mentioned in my post #14.

vincentML -> RE: Mary, Mary? (4/24/2010 11:45:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sunshinemiss Well, Vincent, some of us like to have something to back up our opinions. I am in the Mary Magdalene was a priestess of the Goddess. The DaVinci Code didn't present a new theory. It just made a known one better known. best, sunshine The OP asked about current belief not ancient fact. I referred to the Church's negative reaction to the DaVinci Code as an example of what Kirata later identifies as the "restoration" of Mary Magdelene. My opinion is that the Church fathers would rather she remain a denigrated figure. Speaking as you do of "somthing to back up our opinions" I wonder where you came up with "Mary Magdelene was a Priestess of the goddess." Curious.

Aneirin -> RE: Mary, Mary? (4/24/2010 6:27:17 PM)
As one who does not know very much about the bible, nor christian belief, I just have to say either Mary was a very,very common name, i.e. every other female was called Mary, or the Mary the OP refers to, is one in the same throughout. I suspect it is more the case of the latter, it was the same person reported by different perspectives and possibly different additives and negatives depending on the reporters point of view and politics.

stella41b -> RE: Mary, Mary? (4/25/2010 3:38:07 AM)
I think the only link would be astrological. The letter 'M' forms the basis for the astrological symbol of Virgo, the Virgin, personified by the woman holding the sheaf of wheat. Here we have the Virgin Mary, mother of Jesus, as we had Maya, virgin mother of Prince Siddharta Gatauma, or Buddha. But the letter 'M' also forms the basis for the astrological symbol of Scorpio, the eighth sign of the zodiac, associated with the power of life and death, the spiritual world, and more traditionally the underworld. Before the discovery of Pluto it was believed that Mars (also the ruler of Aries) was the ruler of Scorpio. This explains the popularity of female names beginning with 'M' in the Bible and other religious texts. This also explains the Church's opposition to the restoration of Mary Magdalene as a positive female figure as it may create confusion with Mary, the Virgin Mother of Jesus. This to me would be the only common feature of all of them - the symbolism of the letter 'M' found in the two astrological signs of Virgo and Scorpio.

sunshinemiss -> RE: Mary, Mary? (4/25/2010 7:39:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Speaking as you do of "somthing to back up our opinions" I wonder where you came up with "Mary Magdelene was a Priestess of the goddess." Curious. Oh goodness Vincent, I couldn't tell you! I did a lot of research (that was more than 20 years ago) into different religions, and somehow that gelled in my head and stuck. It's one of those things where, I trust the person that I was, set an opinion based on what I learned and thought through and until I see something to change it, I'll stick with what's been working a long time. I do remember feeling gobsmacked when I first read the theory. The research part of my brain is on a different channel now. Best, sunshine

GotSteel -> RE: Mary, Mary? (4/25/2010 8:25:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery WHAT scholarship? 1969 the Vatican, without commenting on Pope Gregory's reasoning, officially separated Luke's sinful woman, Mary of Bethany, and Mary Magdala. http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/week712/feature.html

Musicmystery -> RE: Mary, Mary? (4/25/2010 8:44:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery WHAT scholarship? 1969 the Vatican, without commenting on Pope Gregory's reasoning, officially separated Luke's sinful woman, Mary of Bethany, and Mary Magdala. http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/week712/feature.html Which begs the question.... quote: without commenting on Pope Gregory's reasoning quote: WHAT scholarship?

Kirata -> RE: Mary, Mary? (4/25/2010 1:21:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery WHAT scholarship? Well as you bring it up again, precisely what scholarship is required here? As far as I know, there is absolutely nothing in the Bible to establish her as a prostitute in the first place, let alone require "scholarship" to dispute. K.

Musicmystery -> RE: Mary, Mary? (4/25/2010 1:49:11 PM)
That's my point. Silly for folk to refer to this or that as evidence when all of it is indistinguishable from stuff just made up. As belief? OK, fair enough. To call it scholarship? No way.

vincentML -> RE: Mary, Mary? (4/25/2010 3:33:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery WHAT scholarship? Well as you bring it up again, precisely what scholarship is required here? As far as I know, there is absolutely nothing in the Bible to establish her as a prostitute in the first place, let alone require "scholarship" to dispute. K. I think you are right, K, that there is nothing in "the Bible" to establish MM as a prostitute. But there is plenty of scholarship because there were various bible sources and a great deal of controversy during the early centuries of Christianity. The four gospels of the canon contain contradictions that are not easily resolved. There were other "books" left out of the orthodox canon. There were other creeds ultimately rejected as heretical. The creed of the unity of the Trinity was not established until the Council of Nicea in 325. This was preceded by three centuries of doctrinal and political struggle which was recorded at least in the writings of the early church fathers. There are many contemporary writings that are extra-biblical. For some reason which I do not know the Council of Trent felt compelled to list the official books of the Canon as late as 1546. Mary's role is as interesting as it is hard to pin down. The Gnostic fragments reveal there was a controversy between Mary and Peter. The suggestion has been made recently that her reputation as a prostitute grew out of this controversy after the fact as subsequent writers took sides in that conflict between the apostolic man and apostolic woman. Here is another source in addition to the one given by GotSteel which lays the blame on Pope Gregory the Great in 591 ce. This article supplies a list of interesting scholarship, I think. My point is it is not all so simple and uncomplicated as to say well there's nothing in the Bible about it so case settled. There is human history as well and it was very contentious. The issue in my mind is not whether she was or was not a prostitute. The issue is whether and then why she has been perceived or painted as such. Personally, I think that is a much more interesting question.

kanina -> RE: Mary, Mary? (4/25/2010 5:42:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sunshinemiss quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Speaking as you do of "somthing to back up our opinions" I wonder where you came up with "Mary Magdelene was a Priestess of the goddess." Curious. Oh goodness Vincent, I couldn't tell you! I did a lot of research (that was more than 20 years ago) into different religions, and somehow that gelled in my head and stuck. It's one of those things where, I trust the person that I was, set an opinion based on what I learned and thought through and until I see something to change it, I'll stick with what's been working a long time. I do remember feeling gobsmacked when I first read the theory. The research part of my brain is on a different channel now. Best, sunshine This interpretation its very "dangerouse" with no basis for it... the name Mary was very popular in that time and it still is in some countries, like mine,every family has a Maria (portuguese version of Mary )[:D] i heard somewhere that it mean lady in hebrew, what would explain the wide usage... but nobody actually knows where it came from...

sunshinemiss -> RE: Mary, Mary? (4/25/2010 6:21:25 PM)
Hello kanina, So, you are saying that the things that are true now were true then and that we should use today's norms, standards, and realities to make decisions about that time? And... you might want to check on that whole "lady in Hebrew" thing. best, sunshine

vincentML -> RE: Mary, Mary? (4/25/2010 6:23:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sunshinemiss quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Speaking as you do of "somthing to back up our opinions" I wonder where you came up with "Mary Magdelene was a Priestess of the goddess." Curious. Oh goodness Vincent, I couldn't tell you! I did a lot of research (that was more than 20 years ago) into different religions, and somehow that gelled in my head and stuck. It's one of those things where, I trust the person that I was, set an opinion based on what I learned and thought through and until I see something to change it, I'll stick with what's been working a long time. I do remember feeling gobsmacked when I first read the theory. The research part of my brain is on a different channel now. Best, sunshine Don't mean to pile on here, sunshinemiss, but the notion that MM was a "Priestess to the Goddess" is so antithetical to the core beliefs of Christianity I have to wonder if you recall your early research correctly. You might wish to dig out those old papers and take a second look.

sunshinemiss -> RE: Mary, Mary? (4/25/2010 6:49:49 PM)
Well Vincent, I'm ok with maintaining what I said before. I'm not sure what Christianity has to do with it anyway besides them being the ones who wrote the history. And we all know who writes the history. Besides, it's not like any of this touches my daily life anymore since I'm no longer a Christian. quote: I did a lot of research (that was more than 20 years ago) into different religions, and somehow that gelled in my head and stuck. It's one of those things where, I trust the person that I was, set an opinion based on what I learned and thought through and until I see something to change it, I'll stick with what's been working a long time. I do remember feeling gobsmacked when I first read the theory. The research part of my brain is on a different channel now. I've yet to find anyone who has anything that makes sense as far as changing my mind. I have no interest in delving back into that. If you wish to provide me with actual research about the norms of the society of that time, I'm happy to reconsider. Meanwhile, the other channel calls. best, sunshine

vincentML -> RE: Mary, Mary? (4/25/2010 6:54:12 PM)
So you respond only to threads that touch your daily life, sunshinemiss? And you are not sure what Christianity has to do with it .... with a figure from the Gospels? Good night, sunshinemiss. sleep well.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875