Respected Document's Shocking Inference On The Lord And Mary Magda

[Eliakim]

Halfway down.  Control Find: Madgalene. 

I've heard of this stuff in gnostic accounts but this guy says even the Nestorians are heretics and seems completely orthodox on all other accounts. 

 

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/antiochus_strategos_capture.htm

[AugustineA]

I guess it just became less respected. 

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

I respect little to no christian literature that doesn't have the nihil obstat, imprimatur and or the impri potest attached to it. I won't even support our local catholic newspaper any more since they started advertising hollywood by reviewing movies. And no spell check i will not write hollywood with a capital H! Wan't to know what the rage really is check out documents with one or all of these 3 official vatican stamps.

Edited March 27, 2014 by Tab'le De'Bah-Rye

[Eliakim]

Don't think they had Nihil Obstat in the 7th century.  Very surprised to see this inference in a 7th century account where everything else in his eye witness account appears orthodox and reliable. 

 

Unless one can read it as Nicodemus buried his wife Mary...but have not heard of that tradition either. 

[Basilisa Marie]

Nope. 

 

See, there's this thing called "gnostic" texts. There's a good reason why things like this didn't make it into the canon of scripture or into popular Christian belief. There simply isn't enough evidence (and wasn't back then) to support the authenticity of these documents. There were lots of groups claiming to have "secret knowledge" of what really went down with Jesus, and none of those groups were in line with the greater Christian community headed up by the titular descendants of the apostles. 

 

Plus any attempt to make Mary Magdalene the wife of Jesus actually does damage to who she is as a figure in our faith. At that time most women were defined by the relationships with men - "Mary, wife of Cleopas," etc. Mary is identified by where she come from, meaning she was probably financially and/or socially independent.  Mary Magdalene had seven demons cast out of her and was the first witness of the resurrection; she's the apostle to the apostles. To cast her as Jesus' natural wife is a bit of a downgrade from that, and is really nothing more than an attempt by an ancient community to get more popular. 

[Nihil Obstat]

Don't think they had Nihil Obstat in the 7th century. Very surprised to see this inference in a 7th century account where everything else in his eye witness account appears orthodox and reliable.

Unless one can read it as Nicodemus buried his wife Mary...but have not heard of that tradition either.

I can confirm that they did not have me in the seventh century. Did not realize I was in such high demand though. :proud:

[Winchester]

I like when a thread title lets me know that the thread is going to be massively stupid.

[Eliakim]

Even so, Marie, this is the only account we have of Jerusalem's capture by the Persians.  Remarkable that it has such a reference.  Am aware of gnostic texts but didn't know that believe would have survived so robustly that it made its way into a 7th century account, which by all other standards is completely Orthodox.  It even calls Nestorius a heretic. 

 

E