Mary Magdalene, 1st Apostle?

The upper-crust forum for scholarly, polite, and respectful discussions only. Heavily moderated. Rated G.
Post Reply
User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22376
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Mary Magdalene, 1st Apostle?

Post by moksha »

Mary traveled with Jesus and helped support his ministry out of her resources. In all four canonical gospels, she is a witness to the crucifixion of Jesus and, in the Synoptic Gospels, she is also present at his burial. All four gospels identify her, either alone or as a member of a larger group of women, as the first witness to the empty tomb, and the first to testify to Jesus's resurrection. For these reasons, she is known in many Christian traditions as the "apostle to the apostles". Mary is a central figure in later apocryphal Gnostic Christian writings, including the Dialogue of the Savior, the Pistis Sophia, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Philip, and the Gospel of Mary. She may have appeared in other lost Christian writings as well.

Was Mary Magdalene left off the list of recognized apostles because of subsequent male chauvinism?
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

User avatar
SPG
Stake High Council
Posts: 527
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2016 6:47 pm

Re: Mary Magdalene, 1st Apostle?

Post by SPG »

moksha wrote:Mary traveled with Jesus and helped support his ministry out of her resources. In all four canonical gospels, she is a witness to the crucifixion of Jesus and, in the Synoptic Gospels, she is also present at his burial. All four gospels identify her, either alone or as a member of a larger group of women, as the first witness to the empty tomb, and the first to testify to Jesus's resurrection. For these reasons, she is known in many Christian traditions as the "apostle to the apostles". Mary is a central figure in later apocryphal Gnostic Christian writings, including the Dialogue of the Savior, the Pistis Sophia, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Philip, and the Gospel of Mary. She may have appeared in other lost Christian writings as well.

Was Mary Magdalene left off the list of recognized apostles because of subsequent male chauvinism?


There was a Gospel of Mary found in the Nag Hammadi library.

Some scholars believe that Mark was actually Mary.

Nicolas Chauvin was closer to 1800 for it because of him.

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22376
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Mary Magdalene, 1st Apostle?

Post by moksha »

SPG wrote:Some scholars believe that Mark was actually Mary.

That is an interesting thought.

Nicolas Chauvin was closer to 1800 for it because of him.

Don't quite understand this point.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

User avatar
SPG
Stake High Council
Posts: 527
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2016 6:47 pm

Re: Mary Magdalene, 1st Apostle?

Post by SPG »

moksha wrote:
SPG wrote:Some scholars believe that Mark was actually Mary.

That is an interesting thought.

Nicolas Chauvin was closer to 1800 for it because of him.

Don't quite understand this point.

Before Nicolas Chauvin it was called the Will of God.

User avatar
Maksutov
God
Posts: 12480
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 2:19 pm

Re: Mary Magdalene, 1st Apostle?

Post by Maksutov »

Were there traditions of disciples of Jewish teachers being female before her?
"God" is the original deus ex machina. --Maksutov

User avatar
SPG
Stake High Council
Posts: 527
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2016 6:47 pm

Re: Mary Magdalene, 1st Apostle?

Post by SPG »

Maksutov wrote:Were there traditions of disciples of Jewish teachers being female before her?

Jesus was an Essense, sort of a fundamentalist Jew.

The idea that Jesus was the child of God, while Mary was still in the temple seems very pagan.

He wasn't like the others, that is for sure. But I'm not sure where Mary came from. She was thought to be a healer, accused of wrong doing, because her craft is easily misunderstood. If so, she was probably educated by some school of thought.

Amore
God
Posts: 1094
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2014 10:27 am

Re: Mary Magdalene, 1st Apostle?

Post by Amore »

Some scholars believe that Mark was actually Mary.

I’ve heard that the last supper painting was originally with Mary putting her head on Christ’s shoulder.
Image

User avatar
SPG
Stake High Council
Posts: 527
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2016 6:47 pm

Re: Mary Magdalene, 1st Apostle?

Post by SPG »

Amore wrote:
Some scholars believe that Mark was actually Mary.

I’ve heard that the last supper painting was originally with Mary putting her head on Christ’s shoulder.
Image

I have seen other expressions of this. Of course, where did the artist get the idea? Was it common thought in his time? Or did he suggest it himself?

In general, I accept that is was Mary, but impossible to prove.

User avatar
huckelberry
God
Posts: 4542
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:29 pm

Re: Mary Magdalene, 1st Apostle?

Post by huckelberry »

Amore wrote:
Some scholars believe that Mark was actually Mary.

I’ve heard that the last supper painting was originally with Mary putting her head on Christ’s shoulder.
Image

In the real painting the figure in question is on the other side of Jesus leaning over in close conversation with Peter. The above image has moved that exact figure to lean on Jesusfrom the other side. That transfer of an image wouuld be quite difficult on a plaster wall much easier with a digital image. There are copies of the painting made soon after its construction. They have the same design as the version on the wall. The painting has a very carefully arranged design to show a particular moment in time and for artistic ,visual effect. Having a person leaning on Jesus like the above image would wreck the design.
Last edited by huckelberry on Mon Apr 22, 2019 12:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
huckelberry
God
Posts: 4542
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:29 pm

Re: Mary Magdalene, 1st Apostle?

Post by huckelberry »

SPG wrote:
Maksutov wrote:Were there traditions of disciples of Jewish teachers being female before her?

Jesus was an Essense, sort of a fundamentalist Jew.

The idea that Jesus was the child of God, while Mary was still in the temple seems very pagan.

He wasn't like the others, that is for sure. But I'm not sure where Mary came from. She was thought to be a healer, accused of wrong doing, because her craft is easily misunderstood. If so, she was probably educated by some school of thought.


I have not seen any evidence beyond the words, what if, to indicate Jesus had a connection to the Essenes. It is true that both were Jewish and lived in the same general area and time. So did the pharisees who shared more with Jesus. The Essenes were acetic Jesus was much the opposite. Essenes seperated from others, Jesus did the opposite.

User avatar
SPG
Stake High Council
Posts: 527
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2016 6:47 pm

Re: Mary Magdalene, 1st Apostle?

Post by SPG »

huckelberry wrote:I have not seen any evidence beyond the words, what if, to indicate Jesus had a connection to the Essenes. It is true that both were Jewish and lived in the same general area and time. So did the pharisees who shared more with Jesus. The Essenes were acetic Jesus was much the opposite. Essenes seperated from others, Jesus did the opposite.

I am not a real scholar. I only play one on Mormon forums. I've read that Joseph and Mary were Essenes, and raised Jesus that way. Of course, Jesus disappeared at 13 and reappeared at 30. He was called the carpenter, which might have been related to a Masonic (builder) cult that was in Egypt.

These same builders might been the ones that moved about Europe building the great cathedrals. The knowledge eventually settling into a version of the modern Mason.

Mary was thought to have moved into South of France, possibly started a group called The Cathars. Some claimed that she had a child(ren) of Jesus and that is where the idea of the bloodline of Christ came from. Some also claim that Jesus, having survived his crucifixion, traveled with her.

User avatar
Physics Guy
God
Posts: 1316
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 4:38 pm

Re: Mary Magdalene, 1st Apostle?

Post by Physics Guy »

The New Testament does not pass the Bechdel test, which is a minimally low bar for gender bias: At any point in the entire work, do any two named female characters have a conversation about any subject other than a man?

(Some people say the New Testament passes because in Luke Mary (Jesus's mother) and Elizabeth converse about their unborn children or because in Mark the women on the way to the tomb ask each other how they'll move the stone. Since both pregnant women have sons, and are portrayed as knowing they will give birth to sons, I don't count the first one. The second one's iffy since it's the tomb of a man, it's hard to suppose the women were expecting another woman to move a stone they thought that they couldn't move, and in the event it's a male angel who moves it. This may be being rather strict, but that's the thing with the Bechdel test. Few works pass it even if you're not strict. If you're strict, a lot fewer pass. Reverse the genders and suddenly everything passes even if you are strict.)

The Bechdel test is a really important idea because although it's a ridiculously low bar—it's hard to imagine any work of art in which no two named men ever converse about anything other than women—it's shocking how few works pass the Bechdel test. Even books and films that are famous for their female characters often turn out, when you get down to it, to have exactly one significant female character who has all her conversations either with men or about men. Yet it's almost impossibly hard to find any film or book in which men never talk to each other except about women.

On the other hand I believe the New Testament assigns a lot more importance to women than most ancient documents. It brings some perspective to realize that under Roman law and custom women might have some property rights but they rarely had individual names. See the Wikipedia article on Roman naming conventions. It was evidently sufficient identification for a woman to say who her father was. So, yes, the New Testament set a precedent of women acquiring importance through their devotion to men. At least it gave women some status, and you really don't have to try all that hard to make it look subversive.

It makes women the first witnesses to the Resurrection. John's gospel has Mary Magdalene as the first human being to see the resurrected Jesus, and it records her conversation with him. The implication in John that the dying Jesus commits his mother Mary to John's care is also arguably profound, because it suggests that the whole Johannine theology of Jesus as co-eternal Word might have come from living with Jesus's mother. However the texts we have were actually made, "Mother behold your son" is the strongest claim that John's gospel makes for its own insider status. And if you can't justify calling Mary Magdalene the first apostle, I think you can make a decent case for her as apostle to the apostles, because they didn't become apostles until they heard about the Resurrection from her.

It's a glass-half-full or half-empty thing, I think. If you look at the New Testament one way, it's a historic turning point for gender justice. That's the way I try to look at it, anyway. If later Christians didn't follow that up, I think they dropped the ball.

Meadowchik
God
Posts: 1889
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 7:00 pm

Re: Mary Magdalene, 1st Apostle?

Post by Meadowchik »

"There is "overwhelming evidence" that women served as clergy in the early years of Christianity - and some of the evidence was deliberately hidden by the Vatican, according to ground-breaking new research."

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/g ... 77210.html

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests