agnawstick

One thing that is curious to me, is that it appears that of Jesus' followers, the only one who stayed true to him, even if you just accept Canonical text only, is Mary Magdalene. While the boys ran off in terror for their own hides when Jesus was sentenced, Mary Magdalene stayed to personally witness the injustice she thought was being done.

According to historians, the Romans would often beat, rape, and murder the female loved ones of rebels, in front of their eyes while they were slowly suffocating on the cross. This had the effect of thwarting future rebels who would consider the impact of their decision.

Mary Magdalene would have been quite aware, that unlike the disciples, who faced death, she would possibly face an even worse fate possibly of the humiliation of being stripped and raped in front of a crowd. The boys ran in terror. She witnessed.

She went to the tomb while the boys were still in hiding, and had to let them know Jesus' body dissapeared. This can be gathered just from a strict literal reading of the traditional canonical gospel.

Taking this is a literal sense, how could the early church deny the power of Mary Magdalene's witness in any honest way? She was the only one who truly believed. In the end, it appears, the only one who actually took Jesus at his word was Mary, but the church composed of those who ran to the hills, have cast her aside, even going so far as to insinuate that she was the prostitute, even though there is no justification for such barbs.

Knowing these things, does it affect one's evaluation of Phillip, and the Gospel of Mary?

I in no way believe that Jesus was the Son of God, but then again, some of the gnostic sects, including the ones who revered Mary Magdalene didn't believe that either. Was Mary the "beloved disciple"? Does it matter? Did a man named Jesus, preach a philosophical message, only to see it subverted, while his one faithful disciple got kicked out of "his church"?

Evangelion

Firstly, there is no evidence that Mary Magdalene (or any other woman) was present at the betrayal of Jesus. Secondly, the Gospel account has several women at the feet of the cross, including Jesus' own mother.

• John 19:25-27.
  Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene.
  When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son!
  Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home.

The Gospels argue that Jesus had broken no Roman laws and that the Romans themselves had judged him innocent of any crime.

There was, therefore, no incentive to molest his followers, whether male or female.

mark9950

ever seen ths contraversial movie?

last temptation of christ

It was very interesting.

http://us.imdb.com/Title?0095497

Evangelion

No.

Indeed.

EstherRose

And like so many other movies, fictional.

So mark9950, are you saying that you find it difficult to believe in the Gospel of Matthew, the Bible and the existence of God and Jesus, but you are willing to believe in a movie? Or are you just recommending a film?

Evangelion

I think he's just recommending a film.

agnawstick

If you believed Phillip and the gnostics that Mary Magdalene had a relationship of some sort with Jesus how would that be exactly wrong? Just curious. The gnostics can't speak for themselves today and they all didn't exactly die out because of peace and love of their rivals. Even in your scriptures, it is acknowledged that the first person Jesus chose to appear before was Mary Magdalene, not Peter, James, John... but her, a woman. It would seem logical for him to appear first before his most trusted disciple, not the last behind all the men.

Telling us that Mary didn't matter, because the one's who won the doctrinal debate said she didn't matter is kind of circular logic.
Many of the people of the gnostic tradition were not only persecuted by the other sects, but were lost in the fall of Jerusulem in 70. It doesn't make them wrong. I believe they are all "wrong" in a sense.

But, one has to ask oneself if there are two groups proclaiming to offer the truth of Jesus. One says, like any other Rabbi, he was not celibate, and that he loved a woman, and that women were to be considered teachers, writers, prophets, the other is what has become the mess that is the Roman Catholic Church.

Attaching oneself to Constantine is not exactly the sign of moral or historical correctness. It actually is a strike against. Any religionists of the earthly message of Jesus who could make accomidations with the beast that Constantine was, obviously were quite misdirected.

That is what is so terrifying to people about Mary Magdalene. There was no evidence, or no tradition oral or written in the first 4 centuries that she was "the prostitute". The church added that belief in later. I wonder who truly is heretical and apostate. Considering the view of women in society at the time, the fact that Jesus allegedly showed himself to Mary before the boys, tells one about the value he wanted placed in her, no matter how much the locker room towel snapping boys want to spin the matter.