If there's anyone that has gotten a raw deal it's her.

Apostle to the Apostles, the first witness to Jesus' Resurrection, and arguably, Jesus' favorite.

No thanks to Pope Gregory the Great for classifying her as "the prostitute". Yes, Gregory---you are the man!

https://www.smithsonianmag.com...magdalene-119565482/

http://www.uscatholic.org/arti...mary-magdalene-27585

She definitely was sexually harassed by the Roman Catholic Church.

I think one of the most interesting people in the story of the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth is Joseph of Arimathea.

He asked Pilate for the body of Jesus, purchased a linen shroud, and proceeded to Golgotha to take the body of Jesus down from the cross. There, with the help of Nicodemus, he took the body down, bound it in linen shroud with the spices that Nicodemus bought, and together they put the corpse into Joseph's own tomb.

He did this because it was the right thing to do.

Yes. As so often happens, the most interesting individuals are usually those wrapped in discreetness. Comparable to archeology, one must then collect the pieces to try to gain as much a complete picture as possible. A giant jigsaw puzzle.

One day we might complete the picture. But by then, the fun of the hunt might be over.

https://www.allaboutjesuschris...of-arimathea-faq.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_of_Arimathea

Have any y'all read Holy Blood Holy Grail?

The Cliffs notes.

To me, that's pushing it way, way, way too far. However, it's not as if believers in that story are not passionate about it.

Take for example, Michelangelo. His bozzetto of Pietà being found, it clearly showed a Cupid to the side, by Jesus' left hand (as seen from the back). In addition, the masterpiece shows a Mary that looks like a 15-year old.

The unveiling provoked quite a stir. Renaissance-style. Michelangelo explained that he saw Mother Mary as "eternal youth". If he hadn't come up with that explanation, he wouldn't have had much time left to explain anything else.



http://www.lineadiretta24.it/c...lo-per-la-pieta.html

After 2k so years, any evidence to support one theory or another is a bit suspect. lol

If you are talking about Jesus, no one has ever accused Him of being a bad Judge of character.

If you are talking about Mary of Magdala, the Catholic Church has softened its stance on her.

If you are talking about Michelangelo, nobody has ever hinted that he did things "on the fly".



If you are talking about Joseph of Arimathea, I leave that to Sig2340.

The Smithsonian article is thought-provoking, but without knowing more about James Carroll, the author, I tend to put the article in the same category as the History Channel telling you who Jesus really was. In other words, a secular interpretation of a sacred narrative.

This James Carroll.

Btw, this is the stuff nightmares are made of. Terrifying.

Terrific article. Both concerning Mary Magdalene specifically, and on the overall state of biblical scholarship. The point about the specific books of the New Testament being chosen from among many other worthy documents that were used by the early Christians (the Gospel of Thomas, for example) is one of my favorite issues.

quote:

Having created a myth, they would not remember that it was mythical.

True of so much biblical “analysis” handed down through the generations.

In general, pretty radical stuff from a member of the Roman Catholic clergy.

quote:

Originally posted by jehzsa:

If you are talking about Joseph of Arimathea

The most interesting account I've read about Joseph of Arimathea involves the story from the Apocrypha where Caiaphas and others tried to have him killed after the Resurrection of Jesus. The leaders were not happy with the stories the Resurrected Jesus had been seen after his Crucifixion, along with many resurrected saints, as the scriptures record. They did not appreciate Joseph lending him his tomb, so they tried to kill him, but the Lord intervened.

I do not know if the story is true, but based on the surrounding events it sounds plausible and I enjoy it every time I read it.

quote:

documents that were used by the early Christians (the Gospel of Thomas, for example) is one of my favorite issues

Same here. And the Gospel of Judas.

quote:

about Joseph of Arimathea involves the story from the Apocrypha... but based on the surrounding events it sounds plausible

What we now have is both fact and myth. Care needs to be taken when analyzing fact so that what is myth is not determined as a fact. Time and discoveries will sort it out because one thing is clear. If dealing with written accounts, a fact is that unless it was truly important, a scarce and expensive resource like writing materials was not expended. We know for a fact that Dunder Mifflin Paper Company, Inc. did not exist at the time.

For example, about Caiaphas. Two nails apparently used in a crucifixion were discovered in his tomb. It has been proposed that they are related to Jesus. Plausible.

Equally plausible is that they were related to someone else whom Caiaphas held dear. Or that the nails provided the role of a protective talisman totally unrelated to Jesus. We just don't know now.

The only thing we can do now is analyze what's available, try to tie loose strings and take it from there.

Still, it is quite clear that Pope Gregory the Great had an agenda, one that's worked as intended for centuries.