Mary Magdalene

by I-follow-the-narrow-path 62 Replies latest jw experiences

• 

  BluesBrother

  If it was proven that Jesus, in fact, has a bloodline

  Why should that be proven, when all serious scholars dismiss such claims as fantasy and fiction? The danger is that people start to believe in stories just because they are interesting but with no facts behind them. Surely you want to know what is real and what is fiction?

  2112

  (Mark 6:1-3) . . .And he departed from there and came into his home territory, and his disciples followed him. 2

  When it became sabbath, he started teaching in the synagogue; and the greater number of those listening were astounded and said: "Where did this man get these things? And why should this wisdom have been given this man, and such powerful works be performed through his hands? 3 This is the carpenter the son of Mary and the brother of James and Joseph and Judas and Simon, is it not? And his sisters are here with us, are they not?" So they began to stumble at him. . .
• 

  XJW4EVR

  There are lots of facts in the Da Vinci Code. ; Such as:

  • The Mona Lisa is in the Louvre Museum.
  • Leonardo Da Vinci was once a famous ;painter.
  • Constantine was once emperor of Rome.
  • There are chateaus in France.
  • Isaac Newton is buried at Westminster Abbey.
  • There were books written about Jesus.
  • There was once a Spanish Inquisition.
  • The Catholic Church has been around for centuries.

  I could probably add a few dozen more.
• 

  Gamaliel

  My 12 year old, who has probably seen too many Law and Order episodes (or CSI) pointed out correctly, I think, that it would prove very little even if bones in a supposed crypt of Mary Magdalene could be carbon tested for "AD 30" and also DNA tested as a "proven match" to a character represented by the likes of P.S. in the story. Even this would not be proof of Jesus himself having a bloodline. Circumstantially, it might indicate that there had long been a cult of Mary Magdalene and that its followers were serious in their beliefs about her descendants. An ostensible blood connection to Jesus himself could have been introduced at a later time in the history of such a cult to sustain interest over two millenia.
  
  Let's say we had current fresh DNA records KNOWN to be from Jesus and current fresh DNA records KNOWN to be from Mary Magdalene (stored in separately labeled, monogamous mosquitoes; encased in amber, in ice, etc.). Even then, a modern descendency claimant with DNA similarities would be too far removed in generations for any conclusions to be drawn from DNA similarities. (Unless perhaps there was continuous incestual interbreeding between two children in each new generation who were also brother and sister. But 2000 years of fifty, 40-year generations of that kind would likely be lethal for other reasons.)
  
  Still, the claim itself would get enough attention so that many people would support it just to join in the attention. And the Catholic Church would then have to give up the line about Jesus' brothers actually being his cousins. They would now have to claim it was Jesus "twin" brother, Jude Thomas, who had a thing for Mary Magdalene from back when she was a prostitute, and before Thomas became a believer. (You can see this from the last verses in the Secret Gospel of Thomas.) They could claim that the rumor was started by the child, let's say Salome, whom Mary Magdalene had once given up for adoption, and who started these rumors as a disenchanted and disgruntled teenager who hated being ignored at a time when uncle James was now getting the royal treatment down in Jerusalem, instead of her biological father Thomas. (Extra-canonical references to a certain Salome are sufficiently sinister to fit the claim.) Some day she would show them! Or perhaps she would suggest to all her children (and ultimately descendants) to bide their time until there was sufficient money in the church coffers to make a more interesting movie plot out of the whole sordid mess.
  
  Gamaliel
• 

  jwfacts

  I can't see any contradiction, he had to be without sin so as to be equal to Adam.
• 

  glitter

  I don't see what difference it would make if Jesus had had children... I don't get this "If true it would bring the Catholic church to its knees" hype about it.
• 

  Blueblades

  The code is a work of fiction. Now, no one can prove the hearsay about anything written in the Bible or other wise. No one, and that means all the respected ones on here who paste all the works of the past. All you are doing is cut and paste what was written by so and so in the past. It means nothing to those of us who are are stuck in between all this. We all have to come to our own conclusions. The majority of people cannot do the research and are divided between the two camps, ( I'm right, they are wrong etc. ) I believe this and I believe that.

  It will never end, what is truth, if we are honest, we don't know.

  Blueblades
• 

  cruzanheart

  History is always written by the victors.

  Nina
• 

  Big Tex

  The vicars?

  Well that would explain a lot about Mary Magdalene . . . . . . . . .
• 

  Kenneson

  
  I agree with all those who say that the Da Vinci Code is fiction. However, I question the factoid at the very beginning of the book: "All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret ritual in this novel are accurate." Are they? I think there would be far less controversy if he had not included this one page. Consider one example--and that is the purported 666 windows in the Pyramid at the Lourvre put there at Mitterrand's explicit demand! Fact is there are windows, but there are more than 666. No Satanic conspiracy there. Do a search.

  Look at a picture of Leonardo's Last Supper. There are 13 people represented. If John is really Mary Magdalene as Brown claims, where is John? There should be 14 people if that were true. John would certainly not be excluded from the painting. Remember that John is the disciple whom Jesus loved and is depicted at Jesus' side and who leaned back against Jesus' chest in John 13:23-25. See also John 19:25-27. Besides, Leonardo left us a description of who is in this painting. It does not include Mary Magdalene.

  It is not only religious people who have objections to some of the things that are conveyed as truth in this book. See "Leonardo scholars remain faithful to the scientist. The Da Vinci Code does a disservice to one of the world's most creative thinkers and all his loyal fans."

  http://www.stnews.org/books_2833.htm

  In the Fact section Opus Dei is called a sect. False. It is accepted as a part of the Catholic Church as are the Franciscans, Dominicans, Jesuits, etc. How is it a sect? They are not a breakaway. Silas, one of the main actors is depicted as a monk. Fact is, they are not monks as they do not withdraw from the world, but rather work and live in it. The people who live at their headquarters are not monks. People might criticize them for unpopular practices of mortification but they are certainly not bloody as depicted by Brown. Whatever criticisms may be leveled at the members, murder is certainly not one of them. Yet, because of the Silas character that is what most people will associate them with. Let's give Opus Dei the opportunity to give their side of the story. http://www.opusdei.org/art.php?w=32&p=7017

  So, yes, it's fiction--but that introduction is what, it seems to me, has created an issue.
• 

  Tea4Two

  Just curious since I read the book though I have yet to see the movie. To what "facts" are you referring to?

  Wellllll let me seeeeeeeee, there are so many FACTS.....I will start with the Catholic church, the Louvre Museum that holds the Mona Lisa painting by De Vinci.... Oops somebody already said that so I will add one more, an arm of the Roman Catholic Church called Opus Dei.