DougP

Im sure this topic was done to death after The Da Vinci Code came out, however, I think this is interesting and you all might find it worth taking a peek at.

Here is a link to a picture of a stained glass window depicting Jesus standing next to a pregnant Mary Magdalene.

http://www.aniwilliams.com/magdalene.htm

seven8s

I''m sure the subject has been exhausted as well, but since I'm new to the boards I haven't read them so I'll start here..............

In art history one learns two things concerning historic art. The masses couldn't read and so art told the story to the masses (actually reinforced the story thru imagery). Also pregnancy, correctly,swollen belly, symbolized enlightenment.

But that doesn't answer the quesion of who was Mary Magdalene. I believe she is the sub-conscious. And I believe that the sub-conscious has the potential to be a saint or sinner. But even in that Mary Magdalene simply represents the lie. Thus her swollen belly, impregnated, saved if you will, by the reborn consciousness of the ego. When we drop the lie of magdalene we have left only Mary (virginal).

Having read the De Vinci Code I wondered at the stupidy of it's ending.........then realized that the author was intellectually debunking a story within a story.

Edited to add..........my current understanding

Magdlyn

What do you mean by that?

Whose lie? Why not the truth?

Chili

It is silly to think that Magdalene and Jesus were lovers and even sillier to claim that "there could be a Northern Celtic Holy Bloodline" if we can't even find any factual evidence that Jesus ever existed.

Magdalene was Eve in the Adamic (or human or rational) nature of Joseph to whom his own Christ identity was reborn and Mary (theotokos) was the woman who was betrothed to Joseph's new Christ identity. So here we have Eve and Adam of the human nature and Mary (as second Eve) and Christ (as second Adam) of the divine nature. These four identites are part of each and every human with Adam being the rational ego identity and Eve, Mary and Christ being the troika that motivates him (of which he thinks he is in charge nonetheless).

For easy distinction, Magdalene and Joseph were conscious mind and Mary and Christ were subconscious mind . . . and when Christ was born into the conscious mind Magdalene and Joseph were to be annihilated ("he [the Christ identity] must increase while I [the human identity] must decrease").

Magdalene is really the serpent of Gen.3 where Lord God placed emnity between the serpent and the woman. He said "she (the "woman" or Mary here) will strike at your head (Magdalene's the lesser serpent here), while you, (Magdalene) will strike at the heel of Joseph.

So the chain of command runs from Mary, through Magdalene to Joseph until Joseph is born again and then Magdalene is superfluous because Jesus AS the reborn Joseph is invited to the wedding in Cana where he meets his own heritage wherefore Mary was in charge of his destiny (if [predestined] virtue so willed it).

In this context is Magdalene the 'wife' of Jesus the reborn Jew who once was called Joseph, and Mary was betrothed to Joseph to become his bride after he was raised into heaven as Jesus where he will crown her queen of heaven and earth because she was the driving force behind this event. Notice that Joseph came for the body after Jesus died. Notice also that Joseph had hewn a tomb as if out of rock, etc.

Magdalene was out of place in the Gospels because it can be said that Joseph was out of character. From Coriolanus "know thou first: I loved the maid I married" speaks of the intimacy between Joseph and Magdalene and I can just see her suffer when Joseph (the human identity of Jesus) was crucified while Mary theotokos (together with JBap) stood triumphantly beneath the cross whereupon Jesus died. Don't forget here that Magdalene, in here turn, also thought that she as much as 'made' Joseph the hero he was.

Magdalene was Valeria (valor) in Coriolanus, Volumina (voluminous) was Mother Mary (or Elizabeth) and Virgilia was Virgin Mary.

Chili

In the above line we can detect where the woman gives birth to the child that becomes the father of the man she marries (I think).

Chili

Magdalene is temporal in the Tree of Knowledge which is outside the Tree of Life but inside Eden (your subconscious). Without a life of her own (no "living water") she is forever dissatisfied about the void in her existence and will always find a carrot to lead the Adam in Joseph.Reborn from above is through Mary and from below is through Magdalene. Coriolanus was reborn from above (in Rome) and MacBeth was reborn from below (in England).The lie is that while pregnant with the desire to be saved (just as Macbeth "wanted to be King hereafter") she gives birth to second beast of Rev.13 that came out of the old earth (is reborn from below = carnal = conscious = is saved sinner). The lie should never be part of our vocabulary so that salvation can come as a thief in the night. Ecstasy is from Magdalena and Parody is from Mary. Parody is when Joseph is beyond ecstasy to bring about the dark night of his soul = annunciation from Mary directly to Joseph and bypassing Magdalene.Nice!

PS Ecstacy and Parody is from Northrup Frye.

seven8s

# 1. Well, I attempted to read the gnostic texts a few years ago but never got past the first few chapters of Thomas. Seemed like the same old crap to me........... It was the De Vinci Code that got me reinterested in biblical text, coupled with a art history class I had taken years ago.

What I find interesting is this..........why so many Mary's in the NT. Mary is the common denominator in a host of different manisfestation. I do not believe that the bible is infallible, but of late I do wonder about the nuggets of wisdom it contains. So yes, I cherry pick. I do not refute science, I embrace it. I am simply defining the many Mary's through psychology, and to some extend medical science.

I link Mary Magdalene to Rebekah, wife of Isacc. Isacc (the ego) sent his servant (sub-counscious) to obtain him a wife from the Land of Mari (Mary), of his own faith (a false faith). He wanted a Virgin (what I call a new idea (?)= Ford got one maybe we should too). The servant promptly places a nose ring (oxen and bulls wear nose rings) and bracelets (slaves wore bracelets) upon Rebekah. Did Isacc get a new idea or did he simply fool himself with the old?

We tell ourselves one thing but truely desire another. Our egos are confused hence, our sub-conscious is confused, digs it's heels in bullish, stubborn (nose ring). Who's leading who?

# 2 Whose lie? Why not the truth?

First the churches lie. She is a prostitute. No she simply stands by her man. She was created for this purpose, as was he, meaning visa versa (think about that one). When he is set free, she is.

The lie of our fore fathers, but most specifically, the lie of our immediate parents teachers, ministers, and any other athority figure of our formative years. Friends become our secondary reinforcement of the lie. Yes birds of a feather do flock together. Lies are generational and go all the way back in time. I also suspect that lies are impressed upon our genes. Even science is discovering memory genes, and I find understanding genes, DNA, and cells the greatest hope of mankind.

So I would agree, why not the truth. Perhaps because we are bullish and stubborn by nature (genes).

I am not saying I'm right, but I do want a new idea and I believe it equally important to understand the old idea, to some degree or another.


If the lie is impressed upon our genes then the opposite is equally true, so you are right, why not the truth?

If you find flaws in my thoughts please point them out as I too am only learning, and would love the exchange. I hold no corner on truth. Seeds are spread everywhere, waiting to be watered. What are your thoughts, seeds?

seven8s

It is silly to think that Magdalene and Jesus were lovers and even sillier to claim that "there could be a Northern Celtic Holy Bloodline" if we can't even find any factual evidence that Jesus ever existed.

Hopefully I figured out how you guys chop up a quote to get a specific text. The above is a quote from Chili.....................anyway

Worse then silly, it is superioristic. I read some of the text in the OP link to Magdalene. If that is true (holy bloodline) it excludes how many through out the years. Silly? No. BUll****, yes! I would go so far as to say that if the Catholic Church, better, religious dogma corrupted the Magdalene, the Magdalene culture that came up with this are equally guilty. Now, I'll finish rading your thoughts, but I had to insert this...................And I must admit it may takes me days to figure out what you're trying to say (do you do that on purpose LOL) and by then this thread may be old........................

Chili

Nono, the Catholic Curch does not corrupt the Magdalene. She knows exactly who she is which is obvious is you compare de Madleine in Paris with the Notre Dame in Paris. Both are strikingly beautiful with the only difference that the Notre Dame is 'round' and de Madleine is 'flat' . . . but inspired nonetheless to make that point so obvious.

seven8s

Well Chili, I've seen better minds on these boards try to keep up with ya, but I'm willing to give it a whirl.................

The question before us, as I see it, is, Who corrupted the Magdalene, said she was a prostitute? I don't know.

I said "if" the Catholic Crurch, better, religious dogma...............don't know which, but I am inclined to date to say Catholic Church, perhaps as we know it, not as it was designed to be. Why? I'm not so certain Peter is the true pope though I am willing to acknowledge him as the first pope according to tradition. Who are all those other Mary's. Mary has not to my knowledge been designated as a mother of Peter (unless you care to correct me). matthew 27:56 refers to the other Mary, which I think is really the same Mary, Virgin. I believe that the reason these other Mary's seem plural is to designate that she had other son's, but she is referred to singularly in this text to lead the reader to the concluson that she is but one Mary, and the same Mary, Virgin. Mary's other son's?..............James and Jose, and Zebedees son's. More?

Tradition is important to me, it is part of ur psyche and must be as closely examined as religious dogma.

I find it interesting that Peter was crucified upside down (tradition). I ask why? Was his message upside down. Do we have two Catholic faiths running side by side? One flat, the other rounded? Who did Jesus charge with the care of his mother? I don't think it was Peter but correct me if I'm wrong. Wouldn't that person be the true designated Pope of the faith. I can't remember if the NT states that Peter was crucified, let alone upside down.

I don't fully understand the Magdalene, fact or fiction or the metaphysical. But I do think she is related to both Rebekah and yes I agree goes all the way back to Eve. I think she offers important understanding to women.

Anyway................it certanly all makes for interesting conversation.

Now let me try finishing my reading of your post..................I feel a headache coming on.............thonk (ouch) :rolling: