The DaVinci Code Novel vs Historical Evidence: Why do some people think Jesus married Mary?
 |
| Noli Me Tangere by Antonio Allegri da Correggio (1489-1534) |
Mary Magdalene. One of Today's most controversial characters from history. For centuries, besides small pieces of reference, this woman went undetected in Biblical history. Now, many theorize that her real role in the life of Jesus was deliberately downplayed by the authors of the Canonized Gospel's, and that the newly discovered Gospel of Mary provides evidence that her relationship with Christ was far more intimate than the Early Church wanted us to know.
Since the publication of Dan Brown's thriller 'The Da Vinci Code' millions of people worldwide are now asking questions about her. Who was she really? What was their relationship? Why was she at Jesus' death and burial? Why did Jesus appear to her first? What was their relationship? Why did she wash Jesus' feet with her hair? And why do the Gospel's give little mention of her?
These are questions I'm willing to tackle here. It might be a bit of a tedious journey for some, but if you are genuinely seeking answers to the questions that plague millions....
Open your Bible.
Since the Four Canonized Gospel's are what all this controversy surrounds, we'll start by breaking these down. What do they say about Mary Magdalene, and why are these Four Gospel's included in the Bible but the Gospel of Mary is not?
Mary is mentioned within the Four Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) a total of 10 times. And there is no evidence to support the mainframe idea that Mary Magdalene was an adulteress, that she ever had a child fathered by Jesus, nor that she even washed Jesus feet.
Mary Magdalene was not even known for being a sinner. She was a victim. She had been possessed by seven demons until Jesus cast them out. (Luke 8:1-3, Mark 16:9) After that, she followed Him along with several other women, who supported Jesus and His disciples.
Because of her faithfulness even to following Him to the cross, along with other women (Mark 15:40-41, Luke 24:9-11 John 19:25), and her obedience to Jewish tradition which led her to the tomb on the third morning, she was blessed with the gift of being the first witness to Christ's resurrection. (Luke 20:1-18, Mark 16:1-10)
Jesus got anointed by women three different times. Once on His feet by a 'sinful' woman at a Pharisees house (Luke 7:36-50). Once on His feet at Lazarus' house by Lazarus' sister, Mary (John 12:1-8), and once on His head at the house of Simon the Leper (Mark 14:3, Matt 26:6-11)
We know there is no connection between the adulteress from John 8:1-11 and the Sinful Woman from Luke because Scripture clearly states that she was unfamiliar to Jesus. (Luke 7:39 ) He hadn't met her before. Also, she is only described as being 'a sinner.' Tax collectors were sinners. For all we know the woman was guilty of going against her people and marrying a Gentile. The Adultress' sin, however, was clearly identified to Jesus (John 8:4). But neither woman was identified with a name. Clearly there is no connections whatsoever between any of the three women who anointed Jesus, the forgiven adulteress, or Mary Magdalene.
The reason we know that the infamous Gospel of Mary Magdalene is not historically credible is because it was written around the third century A.D. nearly 200 years after the original witnesses and apostles were all dead. Therefore, without Mary nor any witness from that time living when the book was written, the book cannot be considered a credible source of information according to the laws of history.
One of the greatest reasons why the four Gospel's we have are credible is because they were written within the lifetime's of all the witnesses. (This can be determined by examining the information within the text that identifies the time and author.) Such information can hold up in a legal court of law. The other supposedly 'lost' gospels that are circulating now would never hold up in court because they lack proper evidence and eye witness accounts to support their authenticity.
The claim that Mary Madeline was a prostitute was an Early Church belief is also false. What history regards as the Early Church is literally the one that developed and grew [during the lifetimes] of the original witnesses. Rather, this belief really began during the Early Middle Ages when Pope Gregory promoted it around 951 A.D. (Nearly 1,000 years since Christ walked the earth.) He linked Mary to the 'sinful woman' and in turn identified the 'sinful woman' as a prostitute.
The idea that Mary was Jesus' wife didn't even begin until 1998 when Ramon K. Jusino announced it [based on the Gnostic gospels] in his blog on BelovedDisciple.org, July 13. But even those gospels never hinted at a sexual relationship between Jesus and Mary, nor that they had a child. It is 'opinions' based on inserting words where time has erased words from the Gospel of Mary, and inserting texts in the Canonized Gospels. (There are many different words that can be inserted. People see what they want to see.)
The idea that she had born Jesus' child didn't exist until the 21st Century when fictional author, Dan Brown, thought it would make a good story plot in his 2003 thriller 'The Da Vinci Code.' Despite that the book is a fictional thriller and every historian in the world discrediting all of his historical inaccuracies, millions of people developed the belief it is real.
So the belief that Mary was a prostitute developed almost 1,000 years after Christ, and the idea that she and Jesus were married and had a child developed 2,000 years after Christ. No historical evidence to support any of these beliefs (not even the Gnostic gospels) and yet there is a mainstream belief among non-Christian's that Mary was Jesus' wife and bore Him a son. What's worse, many Christian's are full of doubts regarding this new belief.
My biggest concern is that Christian's don't know how to reply to this information, and parents don't know how to guide their children in dealing with this. The result is a distortion of faith value's and confusion in the Church. The response has been to either accept it or vehemently reject it. Neither response is what the Lord would want from us. He wants us to be educated and informed in as much as we are able to be. For those of us born in Western culture, there is not a problem. We have easy access to internet, libraries and Bibles.
If this belief has shaken your faith, instead of simply adhering to this, and allowing it to put doubts in your faith, make the time and effort to learning the Truth for yourself. If you are confident that it is not true, praise God that your faith is solid. But you still need to know the truth about this belief so that you can inform others when it comes up. Simply insisting that it's not true, with no info to back yourself up, will not help those who are struggling nor the nor the world. We have to be ready to tackle these kinds of beliefs informed and with love.
Now take what I have given you and examine my information. Don't accept it just because I spouted out some info I claim to be credible. I'm glad if you trust me, but it is vitally important for you to know it for yourself. You should always be examining everything you are taught, Christian or not, or it will never be a true conviction. This is also how you grow in your relationship with the Lord. Make the time and effort to know Him, and to know His Truth.
Where to begin?
- First, pull out your Bible (It's a good place to start!) and find out what Scripture actually tells us about these mainstream beliefs. Pull out external info to help you be sure the translation is right if needed.
- Second, check your sources and find out where they came from.
- Third, learn who and what the 'Early Church' really was so that you can make a clear distinction of what they taught verses the Medieval Church.
Three simple steps.
Now start walking!
********************************
References & Sources:
References & Sources:
The Bible, ESV, NAS, KJV, NIV, Biblegateway.com
http://gnosis.org/library/marygosp.htm
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Gospel_of_Mary
https://www.encyclopedia.com/philosophy-and-religion/bible/new-testament/gospel-according-matthew
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Gospel_of_Matthew
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Mark,_Gospel_of
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Gospel_of_Luke
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Gospel_of_John
-“Gospel of Matthew: Authorship.” Zondervan Illustrated Bible Dictionary. 2011. p. 910. Print.-“Matthew. Gospel of Matthew.” Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary. 2003. p. 1091,1093. Print
-“Gospel of Matthew.” Nelson’s Illustrated Bible Dictionary. 2014. p. 730-731. Print
-“Gospel of Matthew: Date and Place of Origin.” Zondervan Illustrated Bible Dictionary. 2011. p. 909 & 911. Print.
-“Gospel of Matthew.” Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary. 2003. p. 1092-1093. Print
-“Gospel of Matthew.” Nelson’s Illustrated Bible Dictionary. 2014. p. 730-731. Print
-“Luke. Gospel of Luke: Authorship.” Homan Illustrated Bible Dictionary. 2004. p. 1056-1057. Print
-“Luke. Gospel of Luke: Authenticity.” Zondervan Illustrated Bible Dictionary. 1987. p. 863-865. Print
-“Gospel of Luke: Authenticity.” Zondervan Illustrated Bible Dictionary. 1987. p. 865. Print
-“Gospel of Luke: Date and Place of Writing.” Homan Illustrated Bible Dictionary. 2004. p. 1057. Print
-“John Mark.” Hollman Illustrated Bible Dictionary. 2003 p. 1080-1082. Print
-“Malick, David. An Introduction to the Gospel of Mark.” Bible.org, 3 July 2004. Web. 17 May 2016.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Christianity https://www.britannica.com/biography/Saint-Mary-Magdalene http://ramon_k_jusino.tripod.com/magdalene.html
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Saint-Gregory-VII
Comments
Post a Comment