M Magdalena...

[Bandit]

above: Sister Luna Moth &
the bible, preaching
her first sermon .
(teasing)

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by Ghaniel

But what do we really know about Mary?

not a whole lot & not a lot i have not heard, but i am waiting to hear something new

[Ghaniel]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Easy, this is merely a thought excersise, not Gospel...And no, you can't say Christians can't think about weird stuff. It isn't your right, nor you authority. People can think as they wish. Learn from it, is what I would say...

v/r

Q

Calm down you.

So long as no one spreads false things people can say what they want. I wasn't asking for your 'not your right'-wisdom. It is my "right" to say what I want, just like people can theorise about MM.

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by Bandit

above: Sister Luna Moth &
the bible, preaching
her first sermon .
(teasing)

Oh my gosh Bandit I nearly spit coffee all over my keyboard!

(I guess I should post a picture of myself to try to redeem your image of me--or not... ).

cheers,
Sister luna

[pohaikawahine]

U.S. News and World Report just came out with an issue on "women in the bible" and has some interesting articles and here are a few excerpts that may relate to this discussion ....


from the article "a long miscast outcast" ....

"few characters in the New Testament have been so sorely miscast as Mary Magdalene, whose reputation as a fallen woman originated not in the Bible but in a sixth-centure sermon by Pope Gregory the Great"

"But arguments over whether Mary Magdalene was Jesus's wife, a reformed harlot, or the adulterous woman Jesus saved from stoning pale in comparision with the most rancorously disputed aspect of her legacy -- what exactly she witnessed at Jesus's Resurrection. In a new biography of Mary Magdalene, theologian Bruce Chilton contents that Mary witnessed not the resurrection of a flesh-and-blood Jesus but a spiritual visitation." .... "Mary has a vision in which Jesus tells her she witnessed his reborn image with her 'mind.' (from a fragmentary eight-page papyrus text in Coptic acquired by a German scholar in 1896 .... a second century gospel of mary) ....Mary Magdalene's nonphysical interpretation of resurrection was ultimately suppressed, says Chilton, because it came uncomfortabley close to the view of the Gnostics, a heretical sect of Christianity that flourished in the second and third centures."

and last but not least, "church teaching now maintains that the foundation for Mariology wasn't Mary's motherhood but her agreeing to carry the christ child...thus, the church says, she is to be honored as 'the perfect disciple.' "

aside from the possibility that the stories are all parables and have deeper meanings .... the idea of carrying the "christ seed" can be applied to each and everyone of us, both male and female .... the gnostics would, in my view, liken this to the concept of reaching that stage of visions and revelations and becoming whole or balanced in a spiritual sense .... the resurrection then becomes the concept of "being born again" .... we die to our old ways and are reborn to the new .... from other perspectives this is the "second coming" .... it is something that will happen within us and not outside, the blooming of the christ seed within each of us is one way to describe it ....

I think it depends on whether one reads these works literally or symbolically .... there are many roads to the mountaintop and we all walk different spiritual paths .... but basically we are looking for the same things .... Mary Magdalene was and is a powerful symbol .... personally I don't think it matters whether she was married or not or if she even existed .... as Nuestra Senora de Guadalupe she is the religious symbol for the poor and downtrodden .... her apparitions have been reported thousands of times and "Pope John Paul II credited her with saving his life when he was wounded in an assasination attempt on May 13, 1981 - the same day and hour Mary reported appeared to the three children at Fatima in Portugal 64 years earlier"
what a woman !!!!

he hawai'i au, pohaikawahine

[Thomas]

I think it depends on whether one reads these works literally or symbolically .... there are many roads to the mountaintop and we all walk different spiritual paths .... but basically we are looking for the same things .... Mary Magdalene was and is a powerful symbol .... personally I don't think it matters whether she was married or not or if she even existed ....

Many people express the same opinion, but this opens the way for the atheist to say that all of it is meaningless, and that whether one believe in the person, the symbol, the myth; whether one believes in Christ, or Buddha, or Mohammed, or Krisna, it's all a fantasy ... the 'many roads', the 'mountaintop' and the 'spiritual path' are all illusions that should be done away with.

Richard Dawkins, for example, would have you for breakfast!

Thomas

[pohaikawahine]

Originally Posted by Thomas

I think it depends on whether one reads these works literally or symbolically .... there are many roads to the mountaintop and we all walk different spiritual paths .... but basically we are looking for the same things .... Mary Magdalene was and is a powerful symbol .... personally I don't think it matters whether she was married or not or if she even existed ....

Many people express the same opinion, but this opens the way for the atheist to say that all of it is meaningless, and that whether one believe in the person, the symbol, the myth; whether one believes in Christ, or Buddha, or Mohammed, or Krisna, it's all a fantasy ... the 'many roads', the 'mountaintop' and the 'spiritual path' are all illusions that should be done away with.

Richard Dawkins, for example, would have you for breakfast!

Thomas

I don't believe that any of it is fantasy .... it is all very real and all very meaningful .... and I believe all are connected through the symbols .... I hope he will have me for breakfast as a guest .... but I really do think that 'many roads', the 'mountaintop' and the 'spiritual path' are what it is all about and not illusions.... that is why we are all here as this site called comparative religions, if we believed that our way is the only way we needn't check out the way of others .... in my culture we add that there are many paths to the mountaintop,but when we get there we see the same moon .... so these words are very cultural as well as spiritual for me .... aloha nui, pohaikawahine

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by lunamoth

Oh my gosh Bandit I nearly spit coffee all over my keyboard!

(I guess I should post a picture of myself to try to redeem your image of me--or not... ).

cheers,
Sister luna

very cool.
i dont know if i will make it another year talking about beliefs if i dont have a little fun doing it. since i will be doing your biography (with a twist), i will be a faithful student of the endearing Sister Luna -teacher, preacher, evangelist, minister, bishop & what not.

Cheers,
Brother Bandit

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Ghaniel

Calm down you.

So long as no one spreads false things people can say what they want. I wasn't asking for your 'not your right'-wisdom. It is my "right" to say what I want, just like people can theorise about MM.

OK, I'm calm...guess it touched a "Catholic" nerve. Or else I can be a arse (is that the right way of spelling it?), at times.

Sorry.

v/r

Q

[InChristAlways]

Originally Posted by Thomas
I think it depends on whether one reads these works literally or symbolically .... there are many roads to the mountaintop and we all walk different spiritual paths .... but basically we are looking for the same things .... Mary Magdalene was and is a powerful symbol .... personally I don't think it matters whether she was married or not or if she even existed ....

Many people express the same opinion, but this opens the way for the atheist to say that all of it is meaningless, and that whether one believe in the person, the symbol, the myth; whether one believes in Christ, or Buddha, or Mohammed, or Krisna, it's all a fantasy ... the 'many roads', the 'mountaintop' and the 'spiritual path' are all illusions that should be done away with.

Richard Dawkins, for example, would have you for breakfast!

Thomas

Hi Thomas. As Christians we believe everything in the NT is a type of fulfillment of the OT. M M is very prominent in the NT but I feel she had to be symbolizing something from the OT.

I have a few views, but it concerns Israel and Judah in the OT, since these are the ones Jesus came to first, so I would have to find something symbolic in the OT to relate to her.

One example being what Jesus wrote in the "dirt" while the jews were questioning Jesus about a prostitute. Some believe it was the same thing being written in Daniel 5:5 on the wall concerning "judgement". Just curious on your view. Thanks.

[Thomas]

Hi pohaikawahinee

I hope he will have me for breakfast as a guest
Believe me, you really do not want to meet him. He's had a TV programme here in the UK in which he posits that God and religion are all a fantasy and the source of all the evil in the world. He is highly intelligent and extremely aggressive.

.... but I really do think that 'many roads', the 'mountaintop' and the 'spiritual path' are what it is all about
agreed - if we are talking about the 'traditional ways' - ie those which are handed down.

... in my culture we add that there are many paths to the mountaintop, but when we get there we see the same moon

The rise of pluralism, often masking itself as benificent ecumenism, and egalitarianism, with its reduction of everything to a relativism, combined with man's overwheening sense of his own importance (a reaction to a culture that strips it away at every turn), is a trait of western civilisation.

The view that every traditional path leads to the top is then read as any and every path leads to the top, which is in reality not the case.

The next step, because man can see multiple paths, but rejects tradition, is the assumption that he is himself the path, with its meaningless mantra of modernity "I am spiritual, but not religious", so he is bound for the top, simply by virtue of the fact that he exists, and therefore it is his natural right, and can determine the nature of the spiritual as he so chooses (which anyone will see is according to his own apetites and limitations).

In metaphysical terms - the appearance of many paths is a sign of cosmological decline, of the fevor of a cosmic fin de siecle, the end of the age (this is spoken of in Scripture and in the Vedas), an attempt to 'use up' all the unrealised potential of the cosmic age in question.

What is missed is that adherence to the true path enfolds all that is good, whilst on the other hand the proliferation of multiple paths signifies a plethora of lesser goods under the guise of 'a personal way' which in the cold light of the real is simply 'my idea of good'.

In reality
Many paths lead to mountain,
fewer paths lead up the mountain,
a very few reach the peak.

Thomas

[pohaikawahine]

Originally Posted by Thomas

Hi pohaikawahinee


The next step, because man can see multiple paths, but rejects tradition, is the assumption that he is himself the path, with its meaningless mantra of modernity "I am spiritual, but not religious", so he is bound for the top, simply by virtue of the fact that he exists, and therefore it is his natural right, and can determine the nature of the spiritual as he so chooses (which anyone will see is according to his own apetites and limitations).

In metaphysical terms - the appearance of many paths is a sign of cosmological decline, of the fevor of a cosmic fin de siecle, the end of the age (this is spoken of in Scripture and in the Vedas), an attempt to 'use up' all the unrealised potential of the cosmic age in question.

What is missed is that adherence to the true path enfolds all that is good, whilst on the other hand the proliferation of multiple paths signifies a plethora of lesser goods under the guise of 'a personal way' which in the cold light of the real is simply 'my idea of good'.

hi thomas .... I can see that we will not agree on this one, but that is alright .... thanks for the reference on 'fin de siecle' (the end of the age), it may even explain the reason more people are interested in comparative faith and questioning whether there is only one true path .... again we will see it differently, you see it as cosmological decline and I see it as cosmological ascending (the end of the current age I am speaking of) .... and I do believe that each one of us is the true path and this thinking is very ancient and actually not part of "modernity" .... to realize one's self as "the path" is to live all that is good and to love, the concept that you speak of in the modern world is one of being self-centered with your ego in control and can certainly lead to some of the things that concern you .... the discussion of M. Magdalene has been of particular interest because she may have been an Essene, and some of the practices and views were woven into the way of the gnostics and the mystics .... in both gnosticism and mysticism the "inner path" is what one seeks and is considered to be the "true path" .... but least I forget I'm posting on the christian forum here and don't want to break any of the rules and protocols of what should and should not be discussed in the forum .... I wish you all the good you seek on your path thomas .... he hawai'i au, pohaikawahine

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by pohaikawahine

but least I forget I'm posting on the christian forum here and don't want to break any of the rules and protocols of what should and should not be discussed in the forum .... I wish you all the good you seek on your path thomas .... he hawai'i au, pohaikawahine

Hi pohaikawahine,

You are very welcome here in the Christian forum, as are all members! Respectful discussions of alternative views are always fine.

cheers,
lunamoth

[taijasi]

Cool! Then I would say to Poh, after following the recent discussion ....

Je suis d'accord! Rock on!

There are many ways to interpret Christ's oh-so-familiar, and oft-quoted words from John 14:6:

"I am the way, the truth, and the life:
no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

Amazingly, I notice that there is often a hesitancy to go beyond appearances, or to really just sit, and ponder these words. Rather, this wisdom is always approached from the presumed vantage point of having already figured out what the Master was saying. Hmmm ....

There are many who feel that imitation is the highest form of flattery. And likewise, to recognize the Divine Love & Light as revealed to us through the works & words of Christ ... is to evoke a recognition within us - to set up a resonance pattern (to speak scientifically), with the Christ within.

Though the seed may be sleeping for many, we have ample Biblical evidence that Christ's Mission was to awaken & nourish this latent spark of Good - within the heart of each human being. And rather than seek out those who were burdened by wealth - either material wealth, or the wealth of worldly thinking - Christ sought to stimulate the Good (educare = `to draw out') within the simple folk, who could respond much more easily. Perhaps Mary M. was one of those, and that is all we should consider. Certainly the Apostles - fishermen by trade & training - were also - simple. But this does not mean they were not ideal to receive & teach the Gospel, Mary alongside them - perhaps grasping Christ's Teachings as well as the Beloved (or as the Beloved!).

Again, it seems to me that to err on the side of inclusiveness and Ecumenism ... is better than to err on the side of self-righteousness & exclusiveness. Truly, Love is blind. She does not discriminate, and though the results of perfect, unconditional love are not always mushy & sentimental (as they demonstrate through Humanity) ... the rule of thumb is always to include, not discriminate. The latter faculty (Vivekha in the Sanskrit), is important for the wise mind, but in my book, Love transcends everything that we know of as mind, and bridges us with a Peace that passeth (even) Understanding ...

protokletos

[Thomas]

Hi pohaikawahine and taijasi -

Can we just pause for just a moment ... can I ask a question?

Can you explain Christ's words "not my will, but thine, be done."
Luke 22:42

This seems to utterly contradict your own positions in the discussion.

Thomas