Mary Magdalene & Jesus

A

Anonymous

Guest
i'm sure i read somewhere that there was a scroll that points to them 'getting it on' or at least kissing places other than feet.
am i getting confused?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
the Gospel of Thomas is pretty clear about their relationship, i understand... i haven't read it in a while so i couldn't give an exact quote, but somewhere it says something about jesus kissing mary more than the other disciples, because she was his 'special favourite' or something... at any rate, i find the idea of jesus having an relationship much more palatable than the whole white-light chastity thing i grew up with...

~c.
 

Hospitaller

Ephemeral Spectre
Joined
Aug 29, 2001
Messages
426
Reaction score
23
Points
49
Location
Ireland
In order to believe that Christ had a sexual relationship with mary magdelene, first of all you must believe that he was a living breathing man in the first place. This in itself is no small leap to take for the agnostic 21st century mindset, and requires much reading & research (not to mention faith) as its underpinning.

If one doesn't believe that Christ actually existed, then there's no point in engaging in conjecture on his relationships.

The gnostic belief systems which produced the 'suppressed' gospels (or 'apocryphal new testament') tended towards Christ as a spiritual being, human only in appearance. This was due to their underlying belief that the flesh was an evil creation of the god of this world. Therefore Christ could not take on the flesh, and certainly would not have been portrayed as getting it on with Mary Magdelene.

If, on the other hand, one takes the gospels as purely mythical - in the same way that Genesis, or the story of Osiris are mythical, then we have to ask ourselves the significance of Christ's chastity/virginity to the meaning and moral of the tale rather than getting bogged down in the specifics of an actual biography.
The significance then of the "white-light chastity" thing is similar in some ways to that of the mythical archetype of the sacred virgin in so much non-JudaeoChristian myth.
 

Philo_T

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Jun 10, 2002
Messages
1,211
Reaction score
16
Points
69
And were supposed to believe a statement on this subject from someone with the pseudonymn of "hospitaller" ? :rolleyes:

Shouldn't you be supporting the conjecture that Jesus and Mary Magdalane were more that 'just friends'? The whole 'protecting the bloodline' schtick kind of presupposes that! :p

Oh, wait, that was those 'other guys'.:eek:
 

rynner2

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Aug 7, 2001
Messages
55,233
Reaction score
9,134
Points
284
kamalktk said:
According to a top religion scholar, this 1,600-year-old text fragment suggests that some early Christians believed Jesus was married—possibly to Mary Magdalene

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/histo...nianmag/history-archaeology/archaeology+(Arch
Very interesting.

This is from Part 5 of the article:
The first claims of Jesus' celibacy did not appear until about a century after his death. Clement of Alexandria, a theologian and Church father who lived from A.D. 150 to A.D. 215, reported on a group of second-century Christians “who say outright that marriage is fornication and teach that it was introduced by the devil. They proudly say that they are imitating the Lord who neither married or had any possession in this world, boasting that they understand the gospel better than anyone else.”

...

Though King makes no claims for the value of the “Gospel of Jesus’s Wife” as, well, a marriage certificate, she says it “puts into greater question the assumption that Jesus wasn’t married, which has equally no evidence,” she told me. It casts doubt “on the whole Catholic claim of a celibate priesthood based on Jesus’ celibacy. They always say, ‘This is the tradition, this is the tradition.’ Now we see that this alternative tradition has been silenced.”
 

Pietro_Mercurios

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
12,016
Reaction score
189
Points
114

Zilch5

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
1,565
Reaction score
45
Points
54
Here's a bit of a bomb shell:

Harvard researcher Karen King today unveiled an ancient papyrus fragment with the phrase, “Jesus said to them, ‘My wife.’” The text also mentions “Mary,” arguably a reference to Mary Magdalene. The announcement at an academic conference in Rome is sure to send shock waves through the Christian world. The Smithsonian Channel will premiere a special documentary about the discovery on September 30 at 8 p.m. ET. And Smithsonian magazine reporter Ariel Sabar has been covering the story behind the scenes for weeks, tracing King’s steps from when a suspicious e-mail hit her in-box to the nerve-racking moment when she thought the entire presentation would fall apart. Read our exclusive coverage below.

Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-a ... z26xS59BDL
 

Analogue Boy

Bar 6
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
11,651
Reaction score
11,850
Points
309
Looks like it's a fake.

Gospel of Jesus's Wife is fake, claims expert.
Scholar says papyrus fragment believed to provide evidence that Jesus was married is a modern forgery

A New Testament scholar claims to have found evidence suggesting that the Gospel of Jesus's Wife is a modern forgery.

Professor Francis Watson, of Durham University, says the papyrus fragment, which caused a worldwide sensation when it appeared earlier this week because it appeared to refer to Jesus's wife, is a patchwork of texts from the genuine Coptic-language Gospel of Thomas, which have been copied and reassembled out of order to make a suggestive new whole.

In a paper published online, Watson argues that all of the sentence fragments found on the papyrus fragment have been copied, sometimes with small alterations, from printed editions of the Gospel of Thomas.

The discovery has already sparked fierce debate among academics, but Watson believes his new research may prove conclusive.

"I think it is more or less indisputable that I have shown how the thing was composed," he said. "I would be very surprised if it were not a modern forgery, although it is possible that it was composed in this way in the fourth century."

His paper claims the work was assembled by someone who was not a native speaker of Coptic, which is a polite way of saying that it is modern.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/se ... fe-forgery
 

rynner2

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Aug 7, 2001
Messages
55,233
Reaction score
9,134
Points
284
"I think it is more or less indisputable that I have shown how the thing was composed," he said.
He may have shown how it could have been composed - but is that the same as showing how it was composed?
He believes the papyrus itself may well date from the fourth century..
Hedging his bets, perhaps? ;)
 

Pietro_Mercurios

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
12,016
Reaction score
189
Points
114
Even if it was from the fourth century, that would be no guarantee of authenticity. There are quite a lot of dubious texts from the early to mid-First Millenium purported to be authentic gospels from various sources. Some of them are collections of popular folklore about Jesus, or to credit him with popular parables, or sayings of spiritual wisdom, or contain heretical beliefs, magical treatises, or claims of hidden wisdom. Some of them contain tales of Jesus's early life arranged to prove that prophecy foretold his coming as the true Messiah and some of them may even be scurrilous lampoons by critics of Christianity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnostic_texts
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/story/pagels.html
 

Analis

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
1,624
Reaction score
356
Points
99
But can't that be told of every Gospel ?
 

Mythopoeika

I am a meat popsicle
Joined
Sep 18, 2001
Messages
44,010
Reaction score
35,934
Points
309
Location
Inside a starship, watching puny humans from afar
Analis said:
But can't that be told of every Gospel ?
What, that they may be fake?

Yes.
 

Analogue Boy

Bar 6
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
11,651
Reaction score
11,850
Points
309
For Jesus to have a wife, he would have to exist in the first place and there's not much in the way of proof of that.
 

ramonmercado

CyberPunk
Joined
Aug 19, 2003
Messages
52,017
Reaction score
27,323
Points
309
Location
Eblana
jimv1 said:
For Jesus to have a wife, he would have to exist in the first place and there's not much in the way of proof of that.
I believe he was in civil partnership with John.
 

Zilch5

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
1,565
Reaction score
45
Points
54
rynner2 said:
"I think it is more or less indisputable that I have shown how the thing was composed," he said.
He may have shown how it could have been composed - but is that the same as showing how it was composed?
He believes the papyrus itself may well date from the fourth century..
Hedging his bets, perhaps? ;)
Well - which text isn't composed? That doesn't mean anything. And many of the "accepted" gospels in the bible are composed of bits and pieces of each other. There is very little original materiel in the NT.

And that last bit is just classic. "I think it's a fake - unless it isn't" He doesn't show much faith in his own judgement! :roll:
 

Monstrosa

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Nov 25, 2002
Messages
3,024
Reaction score
1,360
Points
184
He's just saying that the papyrus may be indeed from the 4th century, but that the writing was applied much later.
 

Zilch5

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
1,565
Reaction score
45
Points
54
Monstrosa said:
He's just saying that the papyrus may be indeed from the 4th century, but that the writing was applied much later.
Well no, not really - he's saying it may be a fake, or not. What does that mean? Nothing.
 

kamalktk

Antediluvian
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Messages
5,845
Reaction score
9,699
Points
294
Proper scientific method means the need to come up with possible alternative explanations. He may not think it's a fake, but it's up to the community of researchers to come up with explanations which can then be ruled out, leaving the correct one. Especially in unusual and controversial cases such as this.
 

Zilch5

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
1,565
Reaction score
45
Points
54
It is worth noting in the context that:

a) no one claims it is a contemporary account of JC - at best, it was written more than 300 years after his departure

b) the researcher who presented this fragment herself does not believe that JC actually was married to MM - merely, that some early churches thought so
 

EnolaGaia

I knew the job was dangerous when I took it ...
Staff member
Joined
Jul 19, 2004
Messages
21,786
Reaction score
31,141
Points
309
Location
Out of Bounds
... And the arguments are afoot ... :twisted:

"Gospel of Jesus' wife" fragment is a fake, Vatican says

By Naomi O'Leary | Reuters
VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - An ancient papyrus fragment which a Harvard scholar says contains the first recorded mention that Jesus may have had a wife is a fake, the Vatican said on Friday.

"Substantial reasons would lead one to conclude that the papyrus is indeed a clumsy forgery," the Vatican's newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano, said in an editorial by its editor, Gian Maria Vian. "In any case, it's a fake."

Joining a highly charged academic debate over the authenticity of the text, written in ancient Egyptian Coptic, the newspaper published a lengthy analysis by expert Alberto Camplani of Rome's La Sapienza university, outlining doubts about the manuscript and urging extreme caution.

The fragment, which reads "Jesus said to them, my wife" was unveiled by Harvard Professor Karen King as a text from the 4th century at a congress of Coptic Studies in Rome last week.

Her study divided the academic community, with some hailing it as a landmark discovery while others rapidly expressed their doubts [ID].

"It's really pretty unlikely that it's authentic," University of Durham Professor Francis Watson told Reuters after he published a paper arguing the words on the fragment were a rearrangement of phrases from a well known Coptic text.

Watson, who has previously worked on identifying forged gospels, said it was likely to be an ancient blank fragment that was written over in the 20th or 21st century by a forger seeking to make money.

Watson argues the words on the fragment do not fit grammatically into a larger text.

"It's possible to get hold of an old bit of un-written on papyrus and write some new stuff on it," Watson said. "There is a market for fake antiquities throughout the Middle East ... I would guess that in this case the motivation might have been a financial one."

ACADEMIC DEBATE

Manuscript experts who heard King's presentation quickly took to their blogs to express doubts, noting that the letters were clumsy, perhaps the script of someone unused to writing Coptic.

Writing from the conference, early Christian scholar Christian Askeland said specialists there were divided between two-thirds who were extremely skeptical, and one-third convinced the fragment was false.

"I have not met anyone who supports its authenticity," Askeland wrote from a session of the Tenth International Congress of Coptic Studies, where King gave her paper.

In an email to Reuters after the conference ended and before the Vatican editorial, King said: "Whether, in the end, the fragment will be shown to be authentic is still to be finally determined, but the serious conversation among scholars has begun."
During the conference King stressed that the fragment did not give "any evidence that Jesus was married, or not married" but that early Christians were talking about the possibility.

AnneMarie Luijendijk, associate professor of religion at Princeton University, said she concluded that the fragment was indeed an authentic, ancient text, written by a scribe in antiquity.

"We can see that by the way the ink is preserved on the papyrus and also the way the papyrus has faded and also the way the papyrus has become very fragmentary, which is actually in line with a lot of other papyri we have also from the New Testament," Luijendijk told Reuters during the conference.

The idea that Jesus was married resurfaces regularly in popular culture, notably with the 2003 publication of Dan Brown's best-seller "The Da Vinci Code," which angered the Vatican because, among other things, it was based on the idea that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and had children.

Christian tradition has long held that Jesus was not married and the Catholic Church, by far the largest in Christendom, says women cannot become priests because Christ chose only men as his apostles.

SOURCE: http://news.yahoo.com/gospel-jesus-wife ... 33725.html
 

Anome

Bibliomancer
Joined
May 23, 2002
Messages
5,560
Reaction score
650
Points
194
Location
Left, and to the Back
The problem is that the fragment ends with "My wife". It could well be Jesus opening with a couple of gags to lighten the mood.

"My wife went to the Middle East."
"Judea?"
"No, she went of her own...hang on that's not working..."
 

GNC

King-Sized Canary
Joined
Aug 25, 2001
Messages
32,012
Reaction score
19,267
Points
309
Anome_ said:
The problem is that the fragment ends with "My wife". It could well be Jesus opening with a couple of gags to lighten the mood.
It's the mother-in-law jokes that are the real giveaway.
 

Zilch5

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
1,565
Reaction score
45
Points
54
EnolaGaia said:
Christian tradition has long held that Jesus was not married and the Catholic Church, by far the largest in Christendom, says women cannot become priests because Christ chose only men as his apostles.
A couple of points:

a) of course the Vatican would roll out an expert saying it was a fake. Everyone assumed as much.

b) Christ chose only men as his apostles? I thought there is some pretty strong evidence even in the bible that she was an apostle? Or did I get that wrong?

But - this is what keeps it interesting! :D
 

ramonmercado

CyberPunk
Joined
Aug 19, 2003
Messages
52,017
Reaction score
27,323
Points
309
Location
Eblana
Smithsonian put documentary on hold.

'Jesus wife' documentary broadcast delayed amid doubts
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19796163

The fragment, written in ancient Egyptian Coptic, is no bigger than a business card

Related Stories
Ancient reference to 'Jesus wife'

A TV documentary about a 4th-Century papyrus fragment that makes reference to Jesus having a wife has been delayed amid doubts over its authenticity.

The Smithsonian Channel has pushed backed the broadcast to an unspecified date, while further tests on the Coptic script are carried out.

Scholars have questioned the fragment's authenticity on grammar and lack of known archaeological provenance.

Christian tradition has long held that Jesus was unmarried.

Karen King, the Harvard professor who published the research, has said the fragment only shows some early Christians believed Jesus was wed.

The Smithsonian Channel had billed the papyrus as "one of the most significant discoveries of all time".

The documentary was originally due to air on 30 September until scholars began raising questions about the fragment.

Tom Hayden, the Smithsonian Channel's general manager, said the show would "take into account the upcoming tests as well as the academic response to the initial announcement".

"This will enable us to present a richer and more complete story," he said, adding that a new broadcast date would be announced in the upcoming weeks.

The text contains a dialogue in which Jesus refers to "my wife". According to Prof King's research team, the text also quotes Jesus as telling his followers that she is worthy of being his disciple.

The fragment identifies the wife as Mary, prompting speculation the reference was to Mary Magdalene.
 

ramonmercado

CyberPunk
Joined
Aug 19, 2003
Messages
52,017
Reaction score
27,323
Points
309
Location
Eblana
Update: Now they say its not a forgery. Radiocarbon dating of the papyrus and a study of the ink using Micro-Raman spectroscopy was done by experts at Columbia University, Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

It will be interested to see the reactions of the various Christian Churchs'.

Scroll that mentions Jesus's wife is ancient, scientists confirm
April 10th, 2014 in Other Sciences / Archaeology & Fossils

A ancient piece of papyrus that contains a mention of Jesus' wife is not a forgery, according to a scientific analysis of the controversial text, US researchers said Thursday.

The fragment is believed to have come from Egypt and contains writing in the Coptic language that says, "Jesus said to them, 'My wife...'" Another part reads: "She will be able to be my disciple."

Its discovery in 2012 caused a stir. Since Christian tradition has long held that Jesus was not married, it renewed long-running debates over celibacy and the role of women in the church.

The Vatican's newspaper declared it a fake, along with other scholars who doubted its authenticity based on its poor grammar, blurred text and uncertain origin.

Never before has a gospel referred to Jesus being married, or having women as disciples.

But a new scientific analysis of the papyrus and the ink, as well as the handwriting and grammar, show that the document is ancient.
"No evidence of modern fabrication ("forgery") was found," the Harvard Divinity School said in a statement.

The palm-sized fragment likely dates to between the sixth and ninth centuries, and could have been written as early as the second century CE (common era), said the study results published in the Harvard Theological Review.

Radiocarbon dating of the papyrus and a study of the ink using Micro-Raman spectroscopy was done by experts at Columbia University, Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

"The team concluded the papyrus' chemical composition and patterns of oxidation are consistent with old papyrus by comparing the GJW (Gospel of Jesus' Wife) fragment with a fragment of the Gospel of John," said the study.

"Current testing thus supports the conclusion that the papyrus and ink of GJW are ancient."

Anonymous origins
The origin of the papyrus is unknown. Karen King, a historian at Harvard Divinity School, received it from a collector—who asked to remain anonymous—in 2012.

King, a historian of early Christianity, said the science showing the papyrus is ancient does not prove that Jesus was married.

"The main topic of the fragment is to affirm that women who are mothers and wives can be disciples of Jesus —- a topic that was hotly debated in early Christianity as celibate virginity increasingly became highly valued," King said in a statement.

"This gospel fragment provides a reason to reconsider what we thought we knew by asking what the role claims of Jesus's marital status played historically in early Christian controversies over marriage, celibacy, and family."
The fragment measures four by eight centimeters (1.6 by 3.2 inches).
King said its late date—written centuries after Jesus's death—means the author did not know Jesus personally.
Its crude appearance and grammatical errors suggest the writer had no more than an elementary education, she added.
Leo Depuydt, a professor of Egyptology at Brown University, wrote an article, also published in the Harvard Theological Review, describing why he believes the document is fake.

"The papyrus fragment seems ripe for a Monty Python sketch," he wrote.
He noted grammatical errors and that the words "my wife" appear to be emphasized in bold letters, which are not featured in other ancient Coptic texts.

"As a student of Coptic convinced that the fragment is a modern creation, I am unable to escape the impression that there is something almost hilarious about the use of bold letters," he wrote.

King published a rebuttal to Depuydt's criticisms, saying in part that blotted ink was common and that the letters below "my wife" are even darker.
© 2014 AFP

"Scroll that mentions Jesus's wife is ancient, scientists confirm." April 10th, 2014. http://phys.org/news/2014-04-scroll-men ... cient.html
 

Analogue Boy

Bar 6
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
11,651
Reaction score
11,850
Points
309
Uncovered tapestry reveals Jesus 'Mother-in-law' joke.

Scientists of Religiosity at Iowa State University have revealed a hidden code woven into a recently-discovered tapestry found beneath the foundations of the university dating back 2000 years.

Using the new technique of carbon pointing, Head of Religiosity Jim Shreed announced today that the sermons of Jesus actually did occur, but also went further to describe that there was also a 15 minute set at the end where Jesus not only mentions his marriage to Mary Magdalene but also the problematic relationship with his mother-in-law.
Although the edges of the tapestry were destroyed by a fire which occurred in 1956, there is still enough material for carbon pointing to reveal a sensational insight into the teachings of Jesus.

'And LO, he asked the multitude 'What is the perfect weight for a mother-in-law?'
And the multitude replied 'We knoweth not'. Whereupon the Saviour revealed the Line of Punch 'About 2.3lbs, including the urn'.

Although the tapestry is heavily damaged and interpretation of the data remains purely subjective at this stage, Shreed says there are further revelations held in the weave and is optimistic that more will be revealed in the near future.
''Pretty soon, we'll have the answer to the questions 'Why bury Mothers-in-Law 18ft down when normal people are only buried 6ft under?' and 'Why would you rather deal with a vicious dog than your Mother-in-Law?''
 

rynner2

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Aug 7, 2001
Messages
55,233
Reaction score
9,134
Points
284
A sticky story of honeycomb, blood and the fifth Gospel
A new book, 'The Lost Gospel', claims that Jesus was Mary Magdalene’s husband
By Christopher Howse
6:20AM GMT 12 Nov 2014

Is it possible that a fifth Gospel has been found, depicting Jesus as Mary Magdalene’s husband? That is the claim of Simcha Jacobovici and Barrie Wilson, whose new book, The Lost Gospel, comes out today.

They have translated a manuscript in the Syriac language from about AD570, which had been sitting quietly in the British Library since 1847. It is the tale of Joseph and his wife Aseneth. This is the Joseph from Genesis, with the coat of many colours. In the Bible, Aseneth is called Asenath, and she bears Joseph two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh.

Manuscripts of Joseph and Aseneth are familiar. An ancient Greek example was printed in 1889, a Syriac one in 1919. In 1900, an English translation came out, and a nice English edition published by Oxford in 1984 is online. The tale even exists as a medieval English poem called Asneth, beginning: “Pharao the famus kynge of Egipt land.”

This has interested only committed scholars. The great Joseph and Aseneth expert, Dr Mark Goodacre, of Duke University, North Carolina, is pretty certain it was first written in Greek, not the Syriac of The Lost Gospel.

Joseph and Aseneth does not mention Jesus and Mary Magdalene. Jacobovici and Wilson just insist that Joseph stands for Jesus and Aseneth for Mary Magdalene. Jacobovici has a thing about Mary Magdalene, and a few years ago said he’d found the burial place of Jesus’s family, with the ossuary of his wife Mary Magdalene. It’s very Dan Brown (or for those with long memories, The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, 1982). ;)

etc...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religio ... ospel.html
 

Anome

Bibliomancer
Joined
May 23, 2002
Messages
5,560
Reaction score
650
Points
194
Location
Left, and to the Back
Another one? There are dozens of "Fifth" gospels, many of them claiming Jesus married Mary Magdalene (or at least someone called Mary).
 
Top