| Author | Message | ||
| Freeatlast Registered user Username: Freeatlast Post Number: 338 Registered: 5-2002 |
Last night I watched the NBC Nighline documentary on "The DaVinci Code". I remember thinking, "what a frightful time to be an SDA, what with the tsunami, the death of the pope, and the "Revelations" mini-series and show "Medium" on NBC." They truly must think the Sunday law is coming next weekend! Anyway, I digress... While I was watching, Stone Phillips pointed out that it was Pope Gregory I who "declared" that the woman caught in adultery whom Jesus refused to condemn was Mary Magdalene. It immediately occurred to me that Ellen White said the same thing. I spent a bit of time this morning searching the EGW archives, and sure enough, here it is! "This was the beginning of a new life to this tempted, fallen soul, a life of purity and peace, devoted to the service of God. In raising this woman to a life of virtue, Jesus performed a greater act than that of healing the most grievous bodily malady; he cured the sickness of the soul which is unto death everlasting. This penitent woman became one of the firmest friends of Jesus. She repaid his forgiveness and compassion, with a self-sacrificing love and worship. Afterward, when she stood sorrow-stricken at the foot of the cross, and saw the dying agony on the face of her Lord, and heard his bitter cry, her soul was pierced afresh; for she knew that this sacrifice was on account of sin; and her responsibility as one whose deep guilt had helped to bring about this anguish of the Son of God, seemed very heavy indeed. She felt that those pangs which pierced the Saviour's frame were for her; the blood that flowed from his wounds was to blot out her record of sin; the groans which escaped from his dying lips were caused by her transgression. Her heart ached with a sorrow past all expression, and she felt that a life of self-abnegating atonement would poorly compensate for the gift of life, purchased for her at such an infinite price. In his act of pardoning, and encouraging this fallen woman to live a better life, the character of Jesus shines forth in the beauty of a perfect righteousness. Knowing not the taint of sin himself, he pities the weakness of the erring one, and reaches to her a helping hand. While the self-righteous and hypocritical Pharisees denounce, and the tumultuous crowd is ready to stone and slay, and the trembling victim waits for death--Jesus, the Friend of sinners, bids her, "Go, and sin no more." {2SP 353.1} Although not mentioned expressly by name, this obviously refers to none other than Mary Magdalene! Apparently God showed Ellen White that Pope Gregory's declaration was on base. It never ceases to amaze me how much Roman Catholic theology the Seventh-day Adventist church contains. | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 1387 Registered: 3-2004  |
Freeatlast, The SDA church does not like to hear or know that-"It never ceases to amaze me how much Roman Catholic theology the Seventh-day Adventist church contains." I learn something about the SDA church, I never knew, every day. Thank God for the Internet. Diana | ||
| Somethinfishy Registered user Username: Somethinfishy Post Number: 1 Registered: 10-2004 |
I've been lurking for a while...but had to say that I was at a Bible studdy the other day (non-sda) and brought up this whole thing, not realizing that it was an EGW thing...I completely thought it was from the Bible. The other ladies looked at me a bit strangely, but I was so sure that it was the case, that they at least said they would look into it. I am more and more amazed each day at all of the little things I grew up thinking were scriptural "fact," that are straight from EGW. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 1790 Registered: 12-2003  |
Welcome, Somethinfishy! We're glad you're here, and we look forward to hearing you story! Colleen | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 1389 Registered: 3-2004 |
Welcome Somethinfishy, I am so glad you came out of the lurking mode. When you are ready, please tell us more about yourself. Diana | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 336 Registered: 7-2004 |
A few years ago, when I had rejoined the SDA church, I remember studying Revelation with the pastor. This particular pastor had been a friend of mine when I was in academy, so we had a friendly approach to the study. At one point during our studies my pastor/friend indicated that in his opinion Mary Magdalene came the closest to fitting the description of Jesus' girlfriend of anyone identified in the gospels. My SDA pastor/friend went so far as to make the statement that when the earth is made new, he fully expects that there will be a special relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene. Yes, I know, blasphemy. I was taken aback when he made that profession to me at the time. I've since wondered what type of biblical interpretation that was indicative of. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 1799 Registered: 12-2003 |
There is a whole tradition that says Jesus and Mary had a romantic relationship. It's not a Christian tradition, obviously--it's part of a secular, critical approach to the Bible. I haven't read The DaVinci Code, but I understand that this supposed relationship is brought out in the book. Others will no doubt know more about this than I do! Colleen | ||
| Ohlonda Registered user Username: Ohlonda Post Number: 6 Registered: 3-2005 |
Wow that is something that a pastor would actually think Mary Magdalene and Jesus had a "special" relationship. Oops I forgot that shouldn't shock me! Mary looked at Jesus as her Savior, not only did Jesus save her from the mob, but he also saved her from a life of sin and brought pure joy into her life. I too understand how she worshiped Him and how she wanted to be around Him constantly. Jesus saved me too and I want to feel his presence daily! While my pastor was crying and praying out loud for forgiveness for his sins and getting re- baptized. I closed myself up to the church and allowed God to help me. He healed me I have a totally different outlook on life now. I adore Jesus I believe, as much as Mary and anyone else who truly believes that Jesus is our Lord and Savior. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 1817 Registered: 12-2003 |
Ohlonda, I believe you. I'm convinced that all of us who have come to know Jesus continue to be amazed by His love and constancy. I'm still surprised at the reality of feeling love for Him. Wow, we belong to Jesus! Colleen | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 1403 Registered: 3-2004 |
Every morning when I say my prayers, I rush into God's presence, like I rushed into my earthly Dad's presence. Then I remember where I am as I kneel at God's feet. I also remember that He is My Father because of Jesus. I am part of His family. I belong to the best family. It is awesome. Diana | ||
| Ratthedd Registered user Username: Ratthedd Post Number: 15 Registered: 2-2006 |
The tradition of Jesus and Mary's romantic involvement IS a Christian tradition albeit gnostic Christian rather than Hebrew or Greek tradition. The following comes from the Gospel of Philip (read it with the understanding that it is of gnostic tradition rather than mainstream accepted Christian tradition.) << As for the Wisdom who is called "the barren," she is the mother of the angels. And the companion of the [...] Mary Magdalene. [...] loved her more than all the disciples, and used to kiss her often on her mouth. The rest of the disciples [...]. They said to him "Why do you love her more than all of us?" The Savior answered and said to them,"Why do I not love you like her? When a blind man and one who sees are both together in darkness, they are no different from one another. When the light comes, then he who sees will see the light, and he who is blind will remain in darkness." >> There is further evidence in gnostic texts that suggests that Mary was chosen above the other disciples and that Jesus entrusted her with special teaching that he did not share directly with the others. | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1091 Registered: 7-2003  |
Ratthedd, I disagree on definitions here. Gnosticism is not by definition "Christian" because it denies the essentials of the Christian faith. In other words, Gnosticism denies some of the very things that define what Christianity is. There have always been groups that incorporated Jesus Christ into their aberrant theology and who used the term "Christian", however that does not make them Christian in any true sense of the word. Some modern day examples would be Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, and the modern day Gnostics, Christian Scientists. There are also very good solid reasons why the Gnostic texts were not included in the Cannon of scripture nor could they ever be. I would highly recommend reading Lee Strobel's Case for Christ for more on the problems with the Gnostic so-called "gospels". You will also find some helpful resources here: The Bible. Chris | ||
| Ratthedd Registered user Username: Ratthedd Post Number: 17 Registered: 2-2006 |
Chris, I understand your need to remove modern Christianty from early Gnostic traditions, but the early Christian church can be grouped into three distinct groups: The Hebrew Christians, those who had followed the laws of Moses; the Greek Christians, those who converted from paganism; and the Gnostic Christians, those who still held on to certain pagan beliefs about the unknowable, ethereal nature of god and Jesus. While the first two groups eventually reconciled their differences (mostly) the gnostics were persecuted out of existence. I won't try to argue that gnostic traditions are representative of true Christianity, but the fact remains that their traditions trace their roots to Jesus as the Christ, therefore making them christian (in the lower case sense of the word.) Thanks for the link, BTW. I had seen references to CARM in a lot of the posts and not known what that was. Erik. | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1092 Registered: 7-2003 |
Well, I think we have a disagreement on terms and definitions. The Gnostics were a cultic movement, not a Christian movement. It matters not at all that they claimed to follow Christ because the Christ they worshipped was not the Jesus of the Bible. It's also incorrect to suggest that the Church was composed of three groups. It would be more correct to say that there was apostolic teaching and then there was heresy (i.e. everything that didn't conform to the teaching of Christ and His apostles). This would include judaizers, Galatianism, Gnosticism, etc. There were many heresies in the early Church from the very start, but they were just that, heresies that never had the support of scripture and apostolic teaching. To refer to these heresies as "Christian" is a category mistake. Chris | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 3422 Registered: 12-2003 |
Chris, very well-said. As for the Hebrew and Greek Christians and their reconciled differencesóthat reconciliation occurred for one reason: Christ abolished "in His flesh" the law that divided them and created "in Himself one new man out of the two, and in this one body, reconciled both of them to God through the cross, by which He put to death their hostility." (Eph. 2:14-15) Their reconciliation was not a truce or an agreement made between them; it was the result of divine intervention and the fact that, when they accepted Jesus, they were literally indwelt by the Holy Spirit. The "one new man" is all those who are made new by being born from above and brought into oneness with God through the indwelling Holy Spirit. Now, I realize that many people would scoff at what I've just written; what rational human would believe that a person can be indwelt and changed by God Himself? In fact, however, it is true; the fact that people may not understand or may attempt to discount such a reality does not make it unreal. Those who know Jesus and have been adopted into God's family through the indwelling Holy Spirit can all attest to the reality of this phenomenon. There are two powers in the universe; good and evil. They are not equal powers; evil is perpetuated by fallen created beings. God has already disarmed them through Jesus' death on the cross (Col 2:14-15). People are either members of the kingdom of evil or of good/truth. There is no middle ground. And as Chris said, there is no such thing as Gnostic Christianity. The two are not the same. Colleen | ||
| Jeremiah Registered user Username: Jeremiah Post Number: 64 Registered: 1-2004  |
Here's a piece from Irenaeus against heresies, written about 185 AD. Irenaeus disects Gnosticism piece by piece in his 5 part work. This is a quotation about the state of Christian unity in this time period; "...we have judged it well to point out, first of all, in what respects the very fathers of this fable differ among themselves, as if they were inspired by different spirits of error. For this very fact forms an a priori proof that the truth proclaimed by the Church is immoveable, and that the theories of these men are but a tissue of falsehoods. Chapter X.-Unity of the Faith of the Church Throughout the Whole World. 1. The Church, though dispersed through our the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: [She believes] in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations132 of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and His [future] manifestation from heaven in the glory of the Father "to gather all things in one," and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole human race, in order that to Christ Jesus, our Lord, and God, and Saviour, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father, "every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess" to Him, and that He should execute just judgment towards all; that He may send "spiritual wickednesses," and the angels who transgressed and became apostates, together with the ungodly, and unrighteous, and wicked, and profane among men, into everlasting fire; but may, in the exercise of His grace, confer immortality on the righteous, and holy, and those who have kept His commandments, and have persevered in His love, some from the beginning [of their Christian course], and others from [the date of] their repentance, and may surround them with everlasting glory. 2. As I have already observed, the Church, having received this preaching and this faith, although scattered throughout the whole world, yet, as if occupying but one house, carefully preserves it. She also believes these points [of doctrine] just as if she had but one soul, and one and the same heart, and she proclaims them, and teaches them, and hands them down, with perfect harmony, as if she possessed only one mouth. For, although the languages of the world are dissimilar, yet the import of the tradition is one and the same. For the Churches which have been planted in Germany do not believe or hand down anything different, nor do those in Spain, nor those in Gaul, nor those in the East, nor those in Egypt, nor those in Libya, nor those which have been established in the central regions of the world. But as the sun, that creature of God, is one and the same throughout the whole world, so also the preaching of the truth shineth everywhere, and enlightens all men that are willing to come to a knowledge of the truth. Nor will any one of the rulers in the Churches, however highly gifted he may be in point of eloquence, teach doctrines different from these (for no one is greater than the Master); nor, on the other hand, will he who is deficient in power of expression inflict injury on the tradition. For the faith being ever one and the same, neither does one who is able at great length to discourse regarding it, make any addition to it, nor does one, who can say but little diminish it." There were Christians, and then there were Gnostics. They aren't the same! Jeremiah | ||
| Ratthedd Registered user Username: Ratthedd Post Number: 20 Registered: 2-2006 |
Chris, Jeremiah, We are obviously working from dissimilar definitions of 'christianity' (lower case). I agree that it is correct to say that there are Christians and there are Gnostics and you can clump them into separate groups. However, in the early stages of the Christian church there were groups of people who could be considered Christians because of their belief in Jesus as the Christ who also believed they had secret knowledge of great importance, thereby making them gnostics (again lower case). While no Christian today would consider their theology to be real Christianity, the fact still remains that in those days they were gnostics who were part of a growing movement called 'Christianity'. I suppose it's not completely unlike saying "There are Christians and there are Catholics" or "There are Christians and there are Protestants". Both Catholics and Protestants call themselves Christian, but neither group wants to be called by the other's name. I think we're digressing from the theme of this thread. I originally wanted only to point out that there is an old tradition linked to the early Christian church that Mary Magdalene seemed to be held in higher favor than other disciples. Erik. | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1094 Registered: 7-2003 |
Erik, I understand your position completely. I just think its wrong, by definition and by history. I would include in that statement your central tenant that a special relationship between Jesus and Mary M. is part of an early Christian tradition. It is not, its part of Gnostic heresy that was rejected by Christians. I am well aware that there are liberal/critical scholars who would want to advance such a view of the early church because of certain preconceived notions and biases. However, the majority of Christian scholarship disagrees with them. I have several Church histories on my shelf, including one of the oldest, Eusebius, and none of these scholars would agree with the view of the early church that you are advancing. You might wonder why I am so strong on this subject. The reason is that these two disparate views of the early Church are rooted in who a person believes Jesus of Nazareth is. View #1 (The Christian View): 1. Jesus is God the Son, the Immanuel, God in the flesh who lives today. 2. Jesus spoke absolute truth. 3. Jesusí words are accurately recorded in the Gospels. 4. Jesus intentionally founded the Church. 5. Jesus commissioned His apostles to build the Church based on His teachings. 6. The Holy Spirit inspired the apostles to write scripture which is the very word of God. 7. The writings of the apostles are absolute truth from God and define Christian belief. 8. The Holy Spirit regenerates and indwells all believers binding them together into one Body. 9. The Holy Spirit teaches and instructs believers illuminating the truth found in the teachings of Jesus and the writings of the apostles and conforms them to those teachings. 10. The Holy Spirit, working in believers, promotes unity in the essentials of the Christian faith although the non-essentials may be debated. View #2 (The Critical/Secular View 1. Jesus was a historical figure that tried to reform the political and religious system of his day, but got himself killed for his trouble. His body was thrown in a shallow grave and eaten by dogs. 2. Jesus was like any other teacher in that he had some good things to say and some things that should be discarded. 3. We donít really know what Jesus said and can only make guesses at his teaching from analyzing the various flawed documents we have. 4. Jesus never intended to start a new religious movement, only to reform the existing one. 5. It was Jesusí die hard followers, especially Paul, that created a new religious system by spreading the myth that Jesus was alive. This was never Jesusí intent. 6. The apostles had various agendas, some of which contradicted each other and this shows up in their writings. This led to rifts between gentile believers. 7. The writings of the apostles contradict the Hebrew Scriptures and cannot be reconciled. This disparity resulted in a rift between Hebrews and gentiles. 8. Christianity was never unified, but was always composed of various segmented groups that followed different traditions. There was no unifying force or even unified teaching so this had to be developed over much time. 9. There were a lot of competing writings and teachings. Political struggles led to men selecting writings which were male-centric and maintained their power. 10. The ìChurchî today is merely the result of who had the most power and who historically won the political battles. If conditions had been slightly different we would have a completely different ìChristianityî today. Truth is not objective and absolute; it is defined by the victor. Erik, do you see how different these two world views are? What you believe about what Christianity really is ultimately comes from what you believe about whom Jesus is and the validity of the word of God. Perhaps that was not your thought process, but it most certainly is the motivation of the ìscholarsî who promote Gnostic ìgospelsî and want to count Gnostics as part of the early Church. That view comes out of a completely different, non-biblical world view. Chris | ||
| Jorgfe Registered user Username: Jorgfe Post Number: 172 Registered: 11-2005 |
Chris -- thank you too for the link to CARM. I had wondered what it was. Gilbert Jorgensen | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1095 Registered: 7-2003 |
Your welcome Gilbert and Eric. CARM is a really nice online resource. I hope you find it helpful. Chris |
