Mary Magdalene – Prostitute or Pious?
07 Jan 2009 2 Comments
in religious ramblings Tags: bible, controversy, gossip, jesus, Mary Magdalene, prostitute, rumor, scripture, women
For quite a while, I have held the belief that the idea of Mary Magdalene being a prostitute was a wrongly held
“rumor.” But recently when I was faced with a situation where I had to stand up for this belief, I decided I should do a little more research.
I first have to ask the question, “Who was Mary Magdalene?” When I Googled the name Mary Magdalene I got an astounding array of over 1.6 million options to choose from. Apparently MM, as I will refer to her, is quite a popular figure. It’s amazing that a woman who is only mentioned 13 times in the Bible now warrants so much attention.
But, here is the root of the controversy…we don’t actually know how many times she was mentioned in the Bible due to the fact that it seems that everyone in those days was naming their daughter Mary. Mary was like the Jennifer of the 1970’s, or the Brittany of the 1990’s. The name Mary is used an estimated 51 times in the New Testament, and how many of those Mary’s were actually MM is up for interpretation.
So, who are all of these women? Well, there is obviously Mary the mother of Jesus, aka The Virgin Mary; then there is Mary of Bethany the sister of Lazarus and Martha; Mary the mother of Mark and sister of Barnabas; Mary wife of Cleops; Mary the mother of James and Joses; there is a Christian in Rome named Mary; and then there was Mary Magdalene. Are you confused yet? Sometimes the Biblical writers are clear about which Mary they are speaking, but sometimes, unfortunately, they aren’t.
MM was so named because she was from the town of Magdala north of Jerusalem. We don’t know details about her age, status, or family, but based on where and when she lived, it is likely that she and her family worked in the fish markets. It is also possible that because she carried the name of her origin, and not of a husband, that MM was not married. But, the Bible does not suggest that she was married, or a widow, or a mother – we only know what it doesn’t say.
Most Biblical scholars agree that MM is clearly the Mary being referred to as a woman who followed Jesus and his apostles throughout his ministry. She and several other women supported his work of spreading the “good news” around the area of Judea. It is also clear that MM was present at the foot of the cross with Jesus’ mother Mary and the apostle John. It is also clear that she was the first to see Jesus after he had arisen from the dead. She was actually the first to preach of this amazing occurrence!
These facts alone make MM a very important person in the history of Christianity. It is easy to see why people are so drawn to her story. But, the question remains, why does she also carry such a negative stigma as a woman of the night, or t
o put it bluntly, a whore?
When the Mary’s identities get blurry, so does MM’s persona. MM is most often confused with two other women: Mary, the sister of Martha and Lazarus; and an unnamed woman form Luke 7:36-50. The controversy surrounding MM’s background all started in the 6th century when Pope Gregory the Great made the assumption that these three ladies were one in the same. In one brief sermon, MM officially became a penitent sinner – a prostitute.
But, the question remains – was this an accurate assessment, or has MM been the victim of undeserved gossip for over 1400 years?
It was stated in Luke 8:2 that Jesus cast seven demons out of MM. But, does this cryptically refer to a life as a woman of the red light district? Did this exorcism heal her of the infliction of prostitution, or did she perhaps have a mental illness like depression or schizophrenia. Perhaps she had a physical illness, or a handicap, or a drug addiction. The fact is, we just don’t know. What we do know is that this exorcism leads MM to become a head cheerleader for Jesus’ spiritual movement.
It has also been suggested that perhaps Mary’s hometown gives her a bad rap. Magdala was referred to as a place of fornication in one Jewish text. Due to the Roman conquest, heavy taxation led many women to fall into less than noble means of employment. Perhaps this was MM’s fate – but, again, this is mere speculation. Perhaps the fact that MM was a single woman, well past the respectable marrying age, gave her a bad reputation. Rumors like this still plague our society today, unclaimed women are often labeled as either “loose” or lesbian.
MM has also incorrectly been associated with the woman in John 8:1-11 whom Jesus saves from stoning after she was identified as being an adulterer. This was a correlation made in the movie “The Passion of the Christ,” and holds no merit.
The most often used evidence for MM’s aberrant beginnings is the confusion of identities. First there is the unnamed “sinner” in Luke 7:36-38:
And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee’s house, brought an alabaster box of ointment, and stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment.
Then there is Mary of Bethany, the sister of Lazarus, in John 11:1-2:
Now there was a certain man sick, named Lazarus, of Bethania, of the town of Mary and Martha her sister. And Mary was she that anointed the Lord with ointment, and wiped his feet with her hair: whose brother Lazarus was sick.
Though they both wiped Jesus’ feet with their hair and anointed him with ointment, there is no direct reference to the fact that these were the same women. And to go a step further and associate MM with these two women is even more scripturally unfounded. There is simply no hard evidence that MM was a prostitute.
That leaves me with one final question – why does it matter? Why has the issue created so much controversy and heated debate? Does it make the story of early Christianity any different? And, if there is no evidence to support it, why did Christian leaders shoulder MM with this stigma?
Regardless of whether MM was a prostitute, a drug dealer, a murderer, or just your average run-of-the-mill sinner like you and me – the fact is that Jesus forgave her. He didn’t judge her. And the fact is, you and I continue to judge her (for what she may or may not have done) 2000 years later!
When you think of MM, you probably conjure images of a voluptuous, half naked, raving redhead with a look of longing, sensuous desire on her face. The fact is, maybe this is how Satan wants us to view Jesus’ first missionary. Perhaps we have, for centuries, let Satan’s ability to spread rumors and false information get in the way of seeing MM the way that Jesus saw her. 
We love labels. How many times have you referred to someone by a rumor you heard about them? There is your kid’s psycho friend, or that gay guy next door, or that slut you work with. Can you really sum up a person in one negative adjective? What if God could only know you based on one adjective. What would it be?
Maybe it’s time we stop thinking of MM as Mary Magdalene the Prostitute, and start thinking of her as Mary Magdalene, the Messenger of the greatest story ever told – Jesus’ Resurrection.
can I support homosexuality and still be a christian?
29 Dec 2008 Leave a Comment
in religious ramblings Tags: bible, christian, christianity, gay, god, homosexual, jesus, judgement, lesbian, prejudice, religion, sexuality, tolerance
While I’m obviously not gay, it seems that lately I am frequently confronted with issues about homosexuality which have caused me to deeply evaluate where I stand on the issue. I’ve always prided myself on being an open-minded, accepting person, but is that fact at odds with my moral and spiritual beliefs? Is it possible to be both a supporter of homosexuals and a Christian?
The first question I have to ask is this – “is homosexuality a sin?” It seems that in recent times, being gay has been equated to drug abuse or incest or even murder. Homosexuals have been clumped into a group that has been belittled, ostracized, mocked, and sometimes even beaten or killed. Is being gay an offense worthy of this punishment? Does God truly believe this, or is it just our cultural and spiritual leaders who believe this?
The only way to truly answer this, is to turn to the source – the Bible. First of all, contrary to what one might think, there are very few verses in the Bible which deal with this subject at all. With all the controversy and media coverage lately, one might believe that this was a very important subject, but apparently not so in Biblical times – or at least this is not reflected in the Bible. There are really only four scriptures that even mention homosexuality: the Levitical Laws, 1 Cor 6:9, Romans 1:26-27, and the story of Sodom and Gomorrah.
Leviticus
There are two versus from Leviticus which are often quoted:
Leviticus 18:22- “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.” (KJV)
Leviticus 20:13 – “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them” (KJV)
While it seems obvious that these versus condemn homosexual acts, one must look at the context with which they were written. The book of Leviticus was written to lay out a set of legal rules and priestly rituals. The above words were written in the Holiness Code of Leviticus which was a ritual manual for Israel’s priests. Unless you think of yourself as ancient Israeli priest, do the words apply to you?
Leviticus set up life rules to distinguish Jews from the Pagans of the time – who often indulged in male cult prostitutes and bestiality. Male homosexual prostitutes were commonly worshipped in the temples as a surrogate to the pagan gods. This act of “abomination” of worship was clearly looked down upon, but this was not the same as a relationship between two men or two women. Obviously, God didn’t want his people worshipping other gods, but sexuality outside of the temple was another matter.
The Levitical laws also prohibited eating pork, shellfish, and trimming one’s beard; while it condoned actions like killing a child who curses his parents! Adulterers were to be put to death, one couldn’t eat from a fruit tree for five years, and tattoos and certain haircuts were strictly forbidden. If you decide to obey these rules, than why is it okay to pick and choose which ones to follow? I personally believe that when Jesus arrived with a new covenant that these ancient commands became – for lack of a better word: obsolete.
Sodom and Gomorrah
Perhaps the most popular instance of homosexuality in the Bible comes from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. In this story, God appears to Abraham and tells him that he is going to destroy the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah due to their wickedness. Abraham makes a deal with God that he would not destroy the cities if a mere 10 righteous people could be found. Two angels of God visit the city of Sodom where they stay with Abraham’s nephew Lot. Eventually God does destroy the cities, but not before giving us the verses of much controversy.
Genesis 19:4 – “But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter: 5 – And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.”
The first question is what exactly did this mob mean by wanting to “know them.” At first glance one might think that the people of Sodom simply wanted to know who was in Lot’s house. Perhaps they were just being protective of their village and wanted to meet these strangers. Or, maybe they were just being overly hospitable.
But, as you continue reading, you see that Lot refuses to give up the angels to the men of the city, and rather offers up his two virgin daughters. Why would these girls make an adequate substitute if the townspeople simply wanted conversation? Lot says the townspeople are free to “know” his daughters as they see fit. It doesn’t appear that we are talking about a simple handshake here.
If we go back and look at the culture of the time, it was common to use rape as a way to humiliate and establish power over another person. This was done through heterosexual and homosexual means. It was not uncommon for a heterosexual male to rape another man as an act of violence – much like is seen in modern prisons today.
Most academics agree that throughout time, homosexuals generally make up about 10% of the population (Newsweek /15/93, Fortune, 1991, Washington Times, 11/19/91, etc.). It is pretty apparent in the reading that more than a mere 10% of the city was surrounding Lot’s house, therefore it seems likely that this type of power rape or pederastry was what they had in mind. They didn’t want a loving relationship with these men, they wanted domination over them. It seems possible that God destroyed the city, not because they were all gay, but because they were power hungry, violent, and morally deficient.
A similar event occurred in Gilbeah in Judges 19. The people accepted concubine women in place of a man. A concubine was raped until she died and the city was destroyed – for heterosexual rape. The same thing happens to Sheckem’s home town in Genesis 34 when Jacob’s daughter, Dinah is raped. It seems that God is clearly angered by heterosexual rape.
1 Corinthians 6:9
1 Corinthians 6:9 “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.” (KJV)
The main controversy surrounding this passage is in its translation and implied meanings. As the Bible was not originally written in English, obviously the word homosexuality was never used. The KJV version translates the Greek word malakoi into effeminate. There is considerable debate over just what this word means. The same word is translated in both Matthew and Luke to mean soft or fine – as related to clothing. It could also mean loose or pliable, easily influenced or without courage or stability. Our current culture has many connotations associated with the word effeminate that simply didn’t apply in ancient times.
Another argument is that if Paul wanted to refer directly to homosexual behavior, he would have used the word paiderasste, which was the standard Greek term for sexual behavior between males.
Abusers of themselves with mankind could also be interpreted to speak about homosexuality, but that is very vague. This might refer to abusers of slaves, prostitutes, young boy sexual slaves, pedophiles or hebephiles, or women but most surely he was not referring to a loving relationship between two people.
It is generally accepted by many religious scholars that Paul was speaking about catamites – young boys who were kept for the purpose of prostitution, a practice not uncommon in the Greco-Roman world. This again is not referring to a loving, consenting relationship between two adults of equal status.
Romans 1:26
Romans 1:26 “For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet”
In Romans 1, Paul warns against worshipping man instead of God. The love for an idol, which could be another human, is called an unnatural act or lust. He warns against allowing sex to become one’s god, or allowing sex to become something unnatural. He does not specifically discuss what this unnatural conduct would be, but it is likely that he is again talking about the sex god and goddess prostitute worship in the pagan temples.
Paul describes men whose natural preference is for women, and to have sex with a man would violate this. Again he is referring to the act of pederastry. Paul uses the term katergazomai, which would infer that the act would take extreme energy or will to complete. It was common for heterosexual males to rape men captured in battle so as to degrade them. Obviously this would take much anger and vile energy to complete, as it would not be something naturally enjoyable, as is the case with homosexual couples.
Additionally all of these scriptures refer to physical, sexual acts. Nowhere in the Bible does God speak of “being” homosexual. It would be wrong for a man to physically take a woman in a violent act of sexuality. But, is it sinful for the man to be attracted to a woman and not act on it? Is that not the definition of heterosexuality? There is a big difference between loving one woman and being in a commited relationship and sleeping around and engaging in all kinds of licentious acts. This applies to gay and straight people.
Conclusion
We Christians use the Bible to define our moral code. With many issues, it is black and white – the Bible clearly says don’t steal – so we know that is wrong. It isn’t an issue that needs much interpretation. The issue of homosexuality is much more complicated.
None of the scriptures that might, or might not refer to homosexuality, refer to a loving, consenting relationship between two men or two women. The Bible doesn’t clarify for us the issue of whether gays and lesbians are afflicted with sin, or a sort of curse, or perhaps they are just born with a different sexual orientation.
The Bible never refers directly to a homosexual relationship, which is odd because of the relative commonality of the occurrence in Biblical times. It has been suggested by some that the story in Matthew 8 and Luke 7 where Jesus heals a servant of a centurion was about a gay couple. The Greek word used in Matthew’s account to refer to the servant was pais. This could be translated to mean “his master’s male lover.” It was not uncommon for an older, gay man to purchase a “spouse” through a financial transaction, just as men purchased wives. A servant purchased to serve this purpose was often called a pais. And, just like many heterosexual couples, this was often a loving relationship.
Perhaps Jesus didn’t verbalize support for this couple, but it is obvious that he didn’t condemn, or judge them. This was perhaps the first recorded evidence of a Christian displaying tolerance. Jesus didn’t say, “I’m not going to heal you because you are living in sin.” He simply said, “I will come and heal him.”
The most important point here is this: we don’t know exactly where God stands on homosexuality, but we do know where he stands on tolerance. The Bible is very clear on this issue:
- Matthew 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
- Matthew 9:10 And it came to pass, as Jesus sat at meat in the house, behold, many publicans and sinners came and sat down with him and his disciples.
- Mark 9:38 And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.
- Mark 9:39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.
- Luke 9:49 And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us.
- Luke 9:50 And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us.
- 1 Corinthians 13:3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed [the poor], and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.
- 1 Corinthians 13:4 Charity suffereth long, [and] is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, {vaunteth…: or, is not rash}
- Philippians 1:17 But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel.
- Philippians 1:18 What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.
- Philippians 2:2 Fulfil ye my joy, that ye be likeminded, having the same love, [being] of one accord, of one mind.
- James 2:1 My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, [the Lord] of glory, with respect of persons.
- James 2:2 For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment; {assembly: Gr. synagogue}
- James 2:3 And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool: {in…: or, well, or, seemly}
- James 2:4 Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts?
- James 2:8 If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well:
- James 2:9 But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.
This list could go on and on, but we know, without a doubt that God does not want us to judge or hold prejudice against each other. We were clearly commanded to “love one another,” and this includes blacks, whites, Christians, Arabs, addicts, the obese, the diseased, the elderly, the poor, and….homosexuals.
If being homosexual is a sin, then making them feel unwelcome in church is not going to lead them to a righteous path. If we are unsure of God’s purpose for gays or lesbians, are we not the sinners when we shun them? God created all of us: some have addiction issues, some have physical handicaps, some have lower intelligence, some have mental health problems – we are all different – but we are all God’s children.
To say that a gay man can’t give witness or testimony is to belittle God’s work. If a lesbian woman can sing a hymn in a way that touches your heart, but you choose not to listen because she’s gay, are you not tuning out God’s voice? God works in mysterious ways, and perhaps his intent is for some homosexuals is to bring his message to the gay and lesbian community. How better to do this than through one of their own? After all, it often isn’t those of us sitting in the pews on Sunday that need to hear God’s message.
The Bible is somewhat vague on the issues of homosexuality, but Jesus said loud and clear:
Mark 12:28 “One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, “Of all the commandments, which is the most important?”
29 “The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. 30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength’
31 The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.‘ There is no commandment greater than these.”
answered prayers
28 Jun 2006 Leave a Comment
in religious ramblings Tags: death, faith, family, finding love, funeral, god, love, marriage, relationships, religion, true love
This is an excerpt from my journal that I wrote the week my beloved grandfather died. I met my husband, Sam about a week later…..
Alright, I think I am officially depressed now. No, I’m sure its just PMS and fatigue. This has been a rough week! Papa died Tuesday. That’s a simple statement for an un-simple occurrence. We all thought he was recovering well from his heart surgery, but suddenly he took a turn for the worse and ended up crashing. They couldn’t bring him back. It amazes me sometimes just how very thin that line between life and death can be.
Just a week ago, we were all just sitting around the table eating chinese food and laughing. I’ll never forget Papa’s request for his “last meal” before he went to the hospital. It was the Chinese dish called Happy Family. We never imagined it might be his last meal ever. But how fitting…..a happy family was his last request.
Everyone in the family was a basket case. I felt it necessary to step up and be a support person. I had to help pick out caskets and music and other crazy decisions I never even contemplated before. I even wrote and gave a speech at the funeral. I guess you could say I’ve had a good learning experience from all of this, but I’m tired.
I don’t think I really cried at all until I got back home. I just didn’t feel like I could – I had to be strong for everyone else. But now I’m tired. I don’t even want to think. I have to go to the dentist next week and they are going to sedate me – and I’m looking forward to it! Who the hell looks forward to going to the dentist? I just want to numb my brain for a while though!
Honestly, what I really want is a warm body to curl up with. I want someone to take care of me for a little while. I want to go to sleep while “he” rubs my back and kisses my neck.
Being around all of these old couples this week made me see something that I didn’t even realize I wanted. I would really like a real marriage, with real two-way love. Someone to do fun things with. Someone who will spoil me, but withough treating me like a trophy or a prize. Someone that I truly want to lie beside evernight. Someone that I am proud of, and who will push me to be someone I’m proud of also. Someone who my family loves, and who loves my family as well, despite their shortcomings. Someone who takes my worries away. Someone who’s there for me in bad times like these.
I really didn’t think this existed until I talked to my grandmother and some of the other couples this week. Some of them have been married for 50 and 60 years. And they are still happy. My own grandparents were married for almost 60 years and they looked like newlyweds up until the end. They held hands and kissed. He treated her like a princess, and she nearly worshipped him. My Marni is a tough lady, but I really don’t know how she is going to function without him. I’ve been blessed to have known them. And I know that true love does exist, because I’ve seen it – it just might not be as perfect as I make it sound.
I just don’t know how to find it. I don’t know. I used to think marriage was like a job…..that if you studied on it and worked hard enough at it, you could make it work. But now I think there’s more to it than that. Maybe years ago people were simpler and closer to God, so they were blessed with true love more often than we are today. Perhaps we are so preoccupied these days, that when God shows us true love, we don’t listen – then we think we can go out there and create it on our own. But we can’t accomplish much of anything without God. so I guess I’ll just pray, and hope I’m listening when love speaks.
About a week later, I met the man who would become my true love…. and I WAS listening!!!
comments