Was the Gospel of John Changed to Suppress Mary Magdalene?
Vložit
- čas přidán 21. 07. 2019
- Mary Magdalene has a ton of conspiracy theories swirling around her. Most are pure speculation. But a recent study by a Duke University New Testament PhD student, Elizabeth Schrader, argues that the copiers of the Gospel of John may have diminished the role of Mary Magdalene.
Full interview: • Was Martha Added to th...
Support the show!:
/ religionforbreakfast
www.paypal.me/religionforbrea...
Check out my favorite religious studies books: www.amazon.com/shop/religionf...
Follow me on Twitter!: @andrewmarkhenry
Follow Elizabeth Schrader too!: @libbieschrader
Study:
Elizabeth Schrader, "Was Martha of Bethany Added to the Fourth Gospel in the Second Century?" Harvard Theological Review 110 (2017) 360-392
What is the earliest depiction of Jesus? Watch here to learn more: czcams.com/video/7DUekrCnye8/video.html
I love your channel! Keep up the great work!
Thanks for this.. Typical to change Names & People throughout history to cover up something or to decieve, etc. Interesting....
You reallly think God almighty would allow such a thing? smh
@@johnmcook1 Yes.... He " Allows" MANY MANY MANY Things to happen.... He Has to.. How else will you know Anything.. It's apart of Prophecies & HIS Plan.. He has a Plan just as The Dark Lord does.. He Tests people as well. Bad sh*t & Lies, etc MUST Happen. Part of Human Life and growth. WE have to figure out what's True...
@@CatLover7112 Mary died and now is in Heaven. She cannot return from the dead and does not answer prayers. God's prophecies say nothing about Him and Mary doing anything except she giving Birth to Him. antifederalist knows nothing about the Bible or Jesus.
I’m not saying Mary of Bethany and Mary Magdalene are the same person, I’m just saying I’ve never seen them in the same room together...
Jonathan Herring bing
This was the funniest part of the video, bar none.
Jonathan Herring I swear this was so funny 🤣
I've never seen either of them so maybe they're fictional. Maybe Martha and Jesus are made up too.
Like, Superman and Clark Kent, eh!
"We need to do something about Magdeline."
"Execute Papyrus Sixty-Six."
Grith Brot best comment
Hello there
That is so Dan Brown, or Sith Lord.... Pick your universe.
HAHAHAHAHAHA laughed way harder than I should
GGWP 🤘🏻
1st Century Palestine:
"This is my wife Mary and my daughters Mary, Mary, Mary, Mary, Mary and Joanna"
"Joanna?"
"There was a mistake on the birth certificate. But we call her Mary."
1st Century Israel you mean?
@@ememmeme8722 There wasn't any Israel in the 1st Century. There was a Judea if you want to be pedantic.
Try googling "John Smith" it's like 1/7 people LOL.
AmishRiot - very interesting. I’d never heard that.
😁😁😁
There’s certainly enough suspicious activity around Magdalene, including her own gospel. Something is fishy. She was at Jesus crucifixion, burial, and resurrection. She was obviously important
Yep 🥺😭
She anointed - 'Christened' - Jesus. In the same way that a priest anoints a king...
While the stuff discussed in this video is very real and relevant, the "her own gospel" is completely fake. Pretty much every scholar agrees ( from studying the language of it among other things ) that it was written much later on. There are hundreds of such fanfiction epistles and gospels.
@@paulspvk6049 What does studying the language can prove if the text is a translation? Other than that scholars say many wrong things all the time. Human knowledge has some limits that many scholars disregard and present opinions as facts.
@@paulspvk6049 It’s still impossible to know for certain, especially since such a massive effort was made by Church authorities (particularly the Roman Catholic church and Pope Gregory I) to erase women from scripture and even art - not just Mary Magdalene, but Mary the mother of Jesus, Mary the wife of Clopas (the maternal aunt of Jesus), Elizabeth (or possibly Mary of Bethany) the mother of John the Baptist (also related to Jesus maternally), and the women apostles who followed Jesus, such as Salome.
The Roman Catholic church was becoming the official religion of the Holy Roman Empire, and Rome was a patriarchy at that time, so the church removed the much larger role women originally played in scripture. This also included removing the Pistis Sophia from the canonical gospels, although it was considered cannon by the early church fathers.
If there were early gospels attributed to Mary Magdalene, or any of the other Mary’s or women apostles, the church authorities would have gone out of their way to eradicate them, as they did with any scripture that depicted women in an important or teaching role in religion.
Jesus’s mother Mary was also considered an apostle of light before him by some sects, since Saint Anne was written as having had Mary as a virgin birth in old age (paralleling the story of the wife of Abraham, Sarah). There was also a particular effort to erase depictions of Saint Anne after some people began to venerate her, although I don’t remember what time period that happened in.
In scripture, Saint Anne gave Jesus’s mother Mary to the temple to devote herself to God, and in return God blessed her with a second child, who Anne named Mary, also. This is the sister of Jesus’s mother and Jesus’s aunt, Mary wife of Clopas. She may also be the mother of three “brothers” of Jesus mentioned in the bible, meaning they would have actually been Jesus’s cousins. This does make sense, given that the language did not have a word for cousin, and so the word brother would have been substituted instead.
It’s also interesting that church art depicting Mary Magdalene was largely replaced by the saint of the pope, Simon Peter. The same apostle described in scripture as taking issue with Mary Magdalene for being a woman religious teacher echos a very similar sentiment in the Gospel of Mary. In it, he asks Mary to share with them (the apostles) the secret wisdom Jesus shared only with her (as his most beloved disciple). After she relays the teaching, Peter accuses her of lying, to which Mary cries and asks him why he’d believe she would lie about something Jesus had told her. The similarities are at least a very interesting coincidence.
Scribe: *changes Mary’s name to Martha*
Jesus: *comes back to life*
Jesus: WHY DID YOU SAY THAT NAME???
I love this one
isn`t this a reference to batman vs superman"s martha scene?
I knew someone would make that reference
This is great.
Thanks 👌🏽 lol
“Always make sure to dot your iotas and cross your thetas!” -Some transcriber/editor
In greek the iota is not dotted
Stresses and neumes and not cosmetic.
😆😆😆 nice.
@@Hecatonicosachoron bet you're fun at parties 😉
My Greek professor would have beat me on the head, had I dotted my iotas
🤭dont dot them no!
Ancient scribe: “How do you solve a problem like Maria?”
hahaha
Wish i could report this for being too funny 😒🙃🤣
I will be singing this to myself all night now 😂
This is one holy and apostolic reference
One of the more interesting theories that I have heard about Mary Magdalene is that she was independently wealthy and supported Jesus in his ministry.
That's likely to be very true.
That's not a theory. It's what the text actually says in Luke, people are just rediscovering it because we aren't reading over verses due to Traditions placing the focus on only certain places of the text.
It actually says that she was one of many women who supported Yeshua "out of their own resources". So she wasn't the only one. These were pretty much women who fit the Proverbs 31 mold, if you want to think about them that way.
@@blanktrigger8863 hi, that's actually very probable. A very small unimportant town in my country if a product of false catholicism (they were Muslim mostly), their chosen Saint was Mary Magdalena, and for some reason they refer to her as a h%%, they just can't explain why they chose a saint they don't like and, ofcourse, they deny they are descendents of Muslims. 😂.
@@puraLusa Christianity came before the Muslims same with Catholics Muhammeds wife was a gnostic Christian why Christian txt are in islams txt
@@nathanmolone9950 ya but catholicism has a lot of pagan rituals.
These videos of yours about early Christianity are endlessly fascinating to me. Keep up the good work!
hi
Yours are fascinating as well. Came here after watching your Gospel of Mary video. We need more interesting topic such as these to go mainstream and talked about more. All the best.
Thankfully, today's Catholic teachings about Mary Magdalene are like: "Yeah, we were wrong. Turns out she was _not_ a harlot, but basically an Apostle in her own right."
Well she was, but then she was reformed into a sort of apostle
That's certainly what I grew up thinking being raised Catholic.
@@abramzuk8807 I mean, weren't all of the apostles reformed sinners in their own right?
@@ccvcharger yeah
@@abramzuk8807 she was never a harlot.
No one:
The scribe: "Must save Martha"
Amir SA why did you say that name?!?!?
The scribe loves my cat, cause it's my cat's name
@@stvbrsn is his mother's name... 😅
I absolutely love how you showed a NIV Childrens bible as a "definitive version" of the scriptures lol
great work, i love your channel
That made me litterally lol
Hey, all the good bits of the Bible I learned from watching Veggie Tales...
Not sure if it was sarcasm or cute humor lol
The NIV the one that has many scriptures missing and words changed...lol
Also the company that owns the and prints the NIV is the same company that prints and sells the satanic bible and is partially owned by Rupert Murdoch
Imagine being named Martha. Imagine your name is a typo some old monk made 2000 years ago
*_"WHY DID YOU SAY THAT NAME?!"_*
My mother's first name is Martha, but no one EVER calls her that, she goes by her middle name. The story goes that my grandparents had already chosen "Sue Ellen" for her together, but when grandmother was still knocked out on anesthesia and the doctors came in to ask granddad what they wanted to name the baby, he answered "Martha!" Then, (presumably as a concession), "Martha... Sue!" My grandmother was so mad she NEVER said the word Martha; Mom thinks it must have been an old girlfriend or something. 😂 She didn't even recognize her own mother's voice when she called her at a new job one time where she had been too embarrassed to correct them when they started calling her by her first name. (On the single joint office line): "Hey Martha! You have a call." "MARTHA!???" "Uh, hello?" "MAAAAAR-THA???" "Yes??" "They call you MAAAARRRTHA???" Only then did she recognize who it was; she had never heard that word pass her mother's lips. 🤣
I'll have to tell Mom this story. She has dementia now, grandparents are both gone, but her eyes will light up when I tell her where Martha may have really come from. 😂 Thanks. ❤
I can't imagine this. Christian monastics wasn't a thing before Milan Edict, let alone the fact that the very first Egyptian monasteries were but dug out holes and had no scriptoria.
the typo didn't create the name. it was in common use centuries before the typo
"Paulie and his brothers had lots of sons and nephews. And almost all of them were named Peter or Paul. It was unbelievable. There must have been two dozen Peters and Pauls at the wedding. Plus, they were all married to girls named Marie. And they named all their daughters Marie." - Karen Hill, Goodfellas
The Goodfellas = The 12 Disciples?
@@Menaceblue3 The Decent Fellas
Some scholars believe that Batman added the name "Martha" to the manuscript tradition.
I'm interested in seeing the attestation of the ancient versions.
WHY DID YOU SAY THAT NAME!?!
It's his wife's name!
I'm glad I wasn't the only one to make this joke.
Funny enough, at one point early on, the Kent's firsts names where Sara and Eban instead of Martha and Jonathan.
@@falleneldor They have also gone by the names of John and Mary. That's right: Ma Kent's name was Mary until someone went in and changed it to Martha. Could it be part of an anti-Magdalene conspiracy tracing back to the early Church? Are the albino monks coming for me now?
From what I have heard, there were A whole lot of Mary's during the time of Jesus!
Miriam was a common name in Judea
I’d say there were a whole lotta Jesus’s back then also🤷♀️
The Bible wasn’t written in America
Christians enemies wrote the Holy Book
@Frank Wharton-Hughes 😂😂😂
Whole lot of Jesuses too.
Did you purposely post this on the feast day of Mary Magdalene?
Yup!
ReligionForBreakfast 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻I love your channel
Didnt even know that was a day of observance. Which tradition does that?
@@PaintedHoundie Catholics have a day for her!
@@PaintedHoundie Eastern Orthodox
Hey Andrew, can you make a video about the St Thomas Christians of India(Nasranis)? We are a very unique Christian community. Our traditional story of our origins, is that St. Thomas the Apostle came to Kerala, India and converted the locals to Christianity. But scholars view that as unlikely. However there is definite archelogical evidence for Christians in that part of the country by early 9th century, mostly through copper plates detailing the rights and priveleges that local rulers gave to Christians. Many Christian authors in the Roman Empire also wrote about Nasrani Christians from 2nd century onwards. Unlike for Western Christianity for which there are a lot of sources, our community's origins is shrouded in mystery. Western historians focus on their own history and Indian historians mostly focus on Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam, and thus there is very little research conducted on our community.
@Great Wolf
Now THAT would be interesting
Would be fascinating, but I don't think Andrew has the knowledge & resources as of current to truly do it justice.
There is Church in India at Thiruvamthcode carved by St Thomas hands built in 63 AD
@Pecu Alex As word of mouth from old Christians ancestors his old profession was building house with stones Apostle Thomas Visited Taxila modern day Pakistan 40 Ad Under king Gondapores He visited Kerala India in 52 AD When persecution happed in 63 AD total 64 families was force to leave East coast of India to west Coast where King Ara .....Ara means Kings place Hence place donated by one of the Local King.previous it use to be Jain temple now church name ARAPALLY....Pally means Church in South Indian language...Dedicated to Mother Mary ....Now it's International pilgrim site ...It's on the. net..It's having the design of Indian heritage plus that time Jewish influence....
Pls visit devalokam aramana and pazhaya seminary kottayam ull find more earlier texts written on palm leaves describing the so called privileges given to us malankara nazranis and also more about the coonan kurishu satyam
“Magdalene” indicated Mary was from the city of Magdala, in Galilee. How could one confuse Mary of Magdala with the Mary in Bethany, which was only a few miles outside of Jerusalem? If we are to assume they were the same person, then could one of these two locations be incorrect?
Good question.
Magdala did not exist during the time of Jesus
@@jsciba8211 it was actually created between the 2nd and 1st century BCE.....so it was around during the time of Jesus.
@@jsciba8211 it definitely existed before then, just wasn't a huge/famous as it would later become.
Why do you assume women were tied to their towns? Perhaps Mary was traveling with the others.
There is also a discovered text of Mary having a very deep conversation with Jesus that I’d call metaphysical rather than having the instructive tone of the New Testament. She actually sounds much more intelligent and curious than the apostles.
Actually I think it makes sense in the context of the story, that Mary Magdalene was one of the few people insistent in visiting the tomb of Jesus, leading to eventually seeing him before everyone else. She was witness of how jesus has the power to resurrect people, he resurrected her own brother. So it is understandable that she would be the most adamant in accepting that jesus was dead.
Of course also the repeating events are kind of poetic, the old author might have been doing some good old foreshadowing with the lazarous story.
I’m incredibly ignorant about these topics but I’m when seeing your videos I’m still able to easily follow your explanations and arguments. That proves you are a superb teacher. Thanks a lot for your work.
The mark of a great lecture or lesson to me is when I understand the material so well that I can then explain it to someone else. This video (and most on this channel) fit that criteria very well.
Very good video! I was talking about this very subject yesterday, as I too have seen the changes when reviewing texts.
Actually, the DaVinci Code stole the idea of Mary Magdalene being the wife of Jesus from "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" by Michael Baigent, Henry Lincoln and Robert Leigh. They beat him to the punch many years before.
jesus christ superstar was even earlier (and maybe not even the first account).
I always figuered it was jealousy. They didnt like her. So they ditched her.
yup. the gnostic gospels discuss this and it makes sense to me. of course men of that time would be opposed to women being even somewhat equal to them
So maybe Jesus was real after all? Unless the scribes were in love with a Mary and kept putting Mary when it was supposed to be Martha.
if that were true, they would have done a bad job. mary allegedly is the first person who witnessed the resurrected jesus ... so, in a way the 'first christian'. why would they have left that key moment in, while ditching some rather unimportant occasions? that doesn't make sense.
This is an awesome channel ! Great content. I love that it is presented in an objective format, I appreciate that. Keep up the good work.
Is there a way I can donate to your project ?
In Jesus's resurrection story isn't there "Mary Magdalene and the other Mary"? Could that also potentially be an answer
That's only in the Gospel of Matthew. There are four different canonical resurrection stories.
@@elizabethschrader6472 yeah but they are all almost the same. The other Marys if not mentioned are also not excluded by the context of the story
Mary, Mother of Jesus
Mary Magdalene
....and the sisters of Mary, Mother of Jesus
Mary of Clopas (aunt of Jesus)
Mary Salome (aunt of Jesus)
These are the women specifically mentioned in the Bible
@@elizabethschrader6472 All have Mary Magdelene in them. None of them are wrong. Some chose to name other women with her.
There's Something About Mary Magdeline
Yes their is..
Yes
Pray, what's the missing word between "something" and "about" ??
@@SamMejah Did you spell it wrong on purpose
2:04 I laughed out loud. My sister, thinking it must have been a funny video, comes to check it out. She finds me grinning at a very serious man talking about biblical script snd slowly walks away very confused.
So what you're saying is that your sisters Mary and Martha came into the room to see what you were watching
Today is the Feast of St. Mary Magdalene
Not coincidental ;)
Bette F he timed this perfectly
Amen
@RDE Lutherie Do you mean "hate" her?
If so, the answer is a definitive no. In fact, the vast majority of Christians venerate her as a great Saint.
@RDE Lutherie if the DaVinca Code is correct, I think Jesus was the one eating her 😉
A dear friend and colleague of mine who is a devout Muslim informed me that the word Magda in Arabic means Wisdom.
I find this intriguing. Wisdom is personified throughout the Old Testament, particularly in the Poetry and Proverbs as Feminine. Her character has intrigued me for many years as the Archetype of the Beloved Redeemed Bride of Christ... even if they weren't married per se. She is aware of her needs for redemption and unashamed of her gratitude towards him. She is my example for what contrition and service to our Lord look like in real time. Even when she was "rebuked" at the tomb, she dutifully obeys his command to deliver the news of his Resurrection to the disciples.
Thanks so much for sharing your information and insights. This is so very well done. Bravo.
I love what you've said here. I have always felt the same. And, you've expressed it beautifully.
There is something very special & very important about her & her relationship to Jesus.
P.S.
Ty for sharing the Arabic meaning of 'Magda'. Very interesting💜
T Harp
You are most welcome, angel. Thanks for such an encouragement and kind commentary.
Blessings to you and all you cherish, from my House to yours 🤗!
Ricca Day the Magda likely has very little bearing the people in judea at the time spoke Aramaic so the Magda likely has little bearing
本田盾子 Like the Bible, there is allegory, history, opinions, etc. The Quran also reflected the morals of 7th century Arabia. A lot of it is not relevant, or should be relevant, in our modern society. Also, Different schools have different emphasis.
Well .............She is Marium from the town of Magdalene. nowhere does scripture indicate that she and Jesus were anything but friends .She had 7 Demons and Jesus cast them out , Then she became a desciple .
Your question at the end is the right one. For every intention anyone else can add to an editor, I can come up with several counterposing theories. It is an exercise in futility.
Interesting video, however I think I’d probably agree with your rebuttal at the end. It doesn’t look like the name swap was anything nefarious, it just seemed like they were trying to copy the more authoritative version.
Also within the text , The replacement of Mary with Martha doesn’t actually exclude the possibility of Mary being present, perhaps since Mary Magdalene is mentioned more the scribe wanted to include Martha to demonstrate that she was a prominent figure with the earlier followers of Jesus, just a thought.
I thought it was weird the way the theta was added to make Martha. It is clearly an addition so I wonder if it was supposed to look like a footnote or something, calling the reader's--or a future copier's--attention to a questioned line?
so basically, the bible is flawed. god exist. thank you
reeglyson escabal You Obviously don’t understand what *flawed* means.
The Author who wrote Martha’s name and not Mary isn’t making a contradiction or a mistake since they were BOTH present. That’s like if I was telling a story and said “ Jack and his sister went to the mall” and you told the same story and said “ Jill and her brother went to the mall”.
That’s not a flaw loooool
@@sjappiyah4071 As I understand the information, the changing of "mari" to "marth" is not the biggest issue. That comes with the word sisters a line or two below.
My position is simply wanting to know more history, to learn more. I do not believe it detracts from faith to, if possible, fill in blank spots the church relegates to mysteries. There is confusion even within the church, in sorting out the various Maries. I am not one who wants to elevate Mary Magdalene to a superior status but I do believe there is more to learn if we can.
@@annalisette5897 Agreed. And the even bigger issue is that problems around Martha are found in dozens (if not hundreds) of manuscripts. If you want to see me working with yet another manuscript with "Mary" changed to "Martha," check out this article: today.duke.edu/2019/06/mary-or-martha-duke-scholars-research-finds-mary-magdalene-downplayed-new-testament-scribes
I actually always assumed Mary Magdalene and Mary of Bethany were the same until I went to Israel this summer, and we visited the town of Magdala. Magdala was in the northern region near the Sea of Galilee, where as Bethany is in the southern region near Jerusalem, so unless Mary and her brother Lazerus moved from Magdala in the north to Bethany in the south, then it isn't likely that they are the same person. Especially sense Mary Magdalene appeared as a wealthy supporter to Jesus' ministry (according to our guide), where as Bethany was a poorer community.
Furthermore, I had a thought recently about the psychology of Mary and Martha of Bethany as described in the text. Given the culture, they should have both been married, but the text implies that Lazarus was the one taking care of these two girls, not husbands. That is why the community would have been there trying to comfort Mary and Martha, -because they had lost the person taking care of them and providing for them in a male-dominated society. Thus, that makes me think they were both very young. I estimate Martha to have been about 12-14 years old, where as Mary probably between the ages of 6-9. This would have been why when Jesus spoke with Martha (John 11:21-27) more intellectually, -inviting her to wrestle with theological doctrine (as mature kids of that age are able to do), while also opening her up for early-teenage optimistic faith. Conversely, Jesus didn't have an intellectual conversation with Mary, but rather wept with her, because she wasn't mature enough to have a theological conversation (32-33).
Not necessarily - the word "Migdal" simply means "tower." It's just as likely that the word "Magdalene" is a title given by Jesus to Mary (i.e. "Mary the Tower"), just like he gave titles to other disciples (e.g. Simon "Peter"/"the Rock"). Moreover there were at least seven places in ancient Palestine called "Migdal something or other," some of which were in Judaea! It is by no means a guarantee that Mary came from the town in Israel that you're referring to. If you'd like to learn more on this subject, you can read Joan Taylor's excellent article: www.academia.edu/8651424/Missing_Magdala_and_the_Name_of_Mary_Magdalene?auto=download
In the Eastern tradition Mary Magdalene is called Apostle to the Apostles.
Hi, thanks, that makes so much sense.
@@puraLusa
Doesn't it? 😉
Can you imagine some scribe being yelled at by some priest to fix his scroll because he kept Making mistakes.
Nice, a weekly video! Keep goin man!
Can you do a similar piece of "the disciple whom Jesus loved"? Theories about who that disciple was - one of the 12 men (john?) Or perhaps Mary Magdalene? Or someone else? And the significance of one disciple standing out apart from the others as somehow "loved" more than or differently from the others.
The disciple whom Jesus loved was Lazar.
I thought it was Luke
@@landofw56 there was no "Lazar" among the twelve.
@@Golden-tv9iz Luke was not among any of the disciples while Jesus was alive. Luke was not even a Jew. He was a later GREEK associate of Paul (who also was not a disciple).
there are three disciples having a more prominent role, as jesus only takes these three with him several times in the gospels (incl. in gethsemane): peter, john and james.
in acts there are still two left: peter and john. many assume that james was already dead at that point (james the leader of the community in jerusalem a.k.a james the just was not james the disciple).
as the "disciple whom jesus loved" _cannot_ be peter (they appear side by side on several occasions), it's a somewhat fair assumption that it's john. (it also _cannot_ be mary magdalene, because she tells the disciple in question what she saw.)
btw: "whom jesus loved" doesn't necessarily mean, he didn't love the others or loved them less. the experience to be loved might have been something very personal for john.
it's also possible he might have been the last disciple to be alive (most scholars think john's texts are quite late, when others - like peter - were already dead). so, "whom jesus loved" could be a simple way of saying "the only guy still alive, who personally knew jesus".
Martha! Why did you say that name?
What's the reference?
@First Last Batman vs Superman. It's remembered as one of DC's most stupid scenes.
You have a great channel. Thanks for the good work :)
Fascinating, love your channel! Thank you 😊
"Have you ever heard of the tragedy of Martha Bethany and the scribe? I thought not, Martha written into the Bible by the scribe was a passage so powerful and so divine, he could use the Gospel to influence the believers to ... surpress Mary Magdalene" ~ Emperor Palpatius of The Galactic Roman Empire
The problem with New Testament scholarship is too many academics fighting over too few jobs by publishing too many papers based on too little evidence and too few new discoveries, causing too much reliance on novelty and controversy.
Thanks, I'll follow you for more informations on that subject !!
Fascinating stuff. Really enjoy your videos. Thanks.
We get a similar thing happen in the Gospel of Thomas - Thomas 114. This saying, to the unschooled in Thomas, paints Jesus as a misogynist. However, the key to this saying is in Thomas 22, which shows us that Jesus was telling Peter, in a diplomatic way, that Mary was like them & was worthy of discipleship.
What keeps me wondering is. How come no stories regarding lazarus testimony. He is back from the dead for God sake. I for one would love to hear story about it :3
I love your channel a lot, was wondering if you (or anyone else!) has recommendations for other YT educators that talk primarily about religious studies
Dr Ryan Reeves. From an American Protestant point of view. Its not up to the minute but much of this teaching has been known for decades if not centuries or millennia. czcams.com/channels/rI5U0R293u9uveijefKyAA.html Good solid atheist making stuff.
Thanks for sharing research!
your vids are so good. love the interview cut in and out. really professional production quality
Karen Brown Oh shut up Karen....your just looking for a husband😝😜
This demonstrates perfectly how deeply human religion is and not something that had fallen from the sky.
Quran ehm ehm....
Oh this channel is so good. Im currently taking the Religious Literacy course from HarvardX. I will be back and am curious if you've done any videos on Thomas Judas.. I will dig in later but its a topic ive been really into lately.
Thank you for this!!
Wouldn't a simpler explanation be that the author just realized the he had made a mistake and just tried to correct it? I have done that so many times that I can readily give you a couple of examples. Back in high school I was writing a short essay on Lord Kelvin (the physicist) and his discoveries. I was almost half done with the essay when I realized that I had spelled Kelvin as Kevin. If you saw my handwritten essay, you can clearly see my attempt to insert an "l" everywhere but I have used. I have confused the term "notional" and "nominal" in an interview on heads of states across many countries. It is certainly plausible that someone made a change intentionally, but it is also likely that someone was trying to correct an error that they think they made.
I'm just here for the "Martha! Why did you say that name?" comments.
I stumbled upon this channel and I'm so happy about it! I have always wandered what is the consensus about Jesus as historical figure. What can we state as an historical fact about him? It would be great if you could do a series about this!
Ignazio Geraci there is a consensus that Jesus was an actual person who lived. He’s mentioned by a Roman historian of his time, I forget who. A slightly less creditable source of evidence is the writings of Josephus, who was a Jew who witnessed the siege of Jerusalem and destruction of Solomon’s temple by the Roman army, starting in 62 C.E. He also wrote about the followers of Jesus (Yeshua). Josephus was a historian.
there are *zero* contemporary accounts of jesus outside the bible. apologists manufacture a ton of attempts to have a credible historian confirming jesus, but they are not contemporary and almost invariably they aren't saying much more than the fact that christians believe in jesus. josephus is by far the best source apologists have and josephus is widely believed to have been altered by later christians as well as reading like he merely takes christian claims at face value. it is true that the consensus is jesus existed, but it's circumstantial. importantly though the claims by "mythicists" that historical jesus has been disproved has gained practically no traction with real historians, so don't get excited about that stuff. the historicity of jesus is more likely than not, but nothing about him is definitely proved, including his existence. the important point is that the gospels are unreliable. paul, writing earlier, is probably reliable ... but he never met jesus, and he barely wrote anything about the precrucifixion jesus. he might not have even met anyone who met jesus ... he met peter, james & john but it's not paul who says they knew jesus, it's the gospels. maybe legend developed after paul to explain the mysterious "pillars" of the jewish christian church that paul mentions with very little detail
I read a book that discussed Mary Magdalene in the Bible as well as in Nag Hammadi texts. The author's point was to illustrate how it seems like Simon Peter and Mary Magdalene were at direct odds with each other. Between the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and John there are a few sections where Peter is corrected or even chastised by Jesus while in the Gospel of Luke these verses are pulled clean out of the chapters. The Author argued that this was evidence that the Gospel of Luke is intentionally biased in favor of Peter by its author. In the same context, Mary Magdalene as well as the role of women in general is reduced significantly in Luke. Meanwhile in the other Gospels where Peter is presented neutrally Mary has a much more prominent role.
Going into the Nag Hammadi texts you also find direct statements about this "Peter vs. Mary" drama. In the Gospel of Philip there is a verse where Mary tells Jesus that she is afraid of Peter. The Gospel of Mary itself also has a direct altercation between them when Peter tells her that she was the most beloved apostle of Jesus and surely he taught her some things that he didn't teach the rest of them openly. When she reveals what she'd been taught Peter and another apostle pretty much immediately say "That doesn't sound like something Jesus taught, and even if he did, he wouldn't've taught it to a woman!" Levi defends her by telling Peter that he was always hot-tempered and even calls him out by saying "you said yourself that she is the most beloved apostle of Jesus, so what right do you have to talk down to her like that?" The Gospel or Mary wraps up with them going their own ways.
Scribal mistakes and trying to tie alternate text differences aside, there seems to have been a clear divide between Peter and Mary. Considering Peter went on to be "The Rock of the Church" it's easy to see why there would be a complicated issue with the role of Mary Magdalene in the Bible. It's also fairly concerning as well. If the histories in the Nag Hammadi Library are taken at face value this is troublesome because if Mary really was not only an apostle but the most beloved apostle of Jesus, then she probably should've or maybe was supposed to be "The Rock of the Church" but got it wrestled away from her. How different could Christianity- and world history as whole- have been if Mary founded the Church?
why would the most beloved be the Rock of the Church? Please explain, why love in your opinion should decide wether someone gets a title that has nothing to do with love at all?
Additionally, Mary Magdalene can't be the beloved disciple because she talked to the beloved disciple in John 20:1-2: "Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene came to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the tomb. 2 So *she ran and went to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved, and said to them,* “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him.” "
Neither Mary nor Peter are the beloved disciple. Peter also translates to Rock. His original name is Simon and Jesus changed it to Cephas, Aramaeic for rock. So the term 'Rock of the church' is a reference to this name change and to the fact, that Peter was the very first disciple of Jesus, being the foundation of Jesus' following.
Edit: The Nag Hammadi texts aren't trustworthy at all btw, because they contradict the entire biblical canon. The issues you referenced between Peter and Mary actually show that they aren't credible texts, because they portray Jesus as a misogynist. In a verse from the Gospel of Tomas they used Peter to frame women as unworthy of life and they used Jesus to justify that women can't go to heaven unless they become men, which is a gnostic belief. It is derived from Gnostic cosmology. The Nag Hammadi texts are simply gnostic texts which reject the Abrahamtic tradition entirely.
There are multiple misogynist verses in the Gospel of Thomas. In another verse it says: ‘When you see one who has not been born of woman, fall upon your faces and prostrate yourselves before that one: it is that one who is your father.’ This is because they believed that being born out of women is an evil thing, that humanity has to overcome. They believed that the evil God YHWH is the demiurge and created the evil material world and put the ability of birth inside of Eve to make people suffer from wanting intercourse.He was helped by Sophia, the Holy Spirit who fell from grace because of being female, which they associate with many negative things. Sophia is later saved by receiving a masculine consort that cancels out her femininity. It's very cringe.
Wait, but if you're going to make a change to make Mary less prominent and the apostles more prominent why would you choose these stories and not the resurrection, where Mary is one of the women who is brave and goes to the tomb while the apostles cower? If you're making a conscious change to diminish Mary that seems like a weird choice.
It's a good question for this nonsense conspiracy 👍
This is such a brilliant video. So interesting, thank you so much! :)
One thing in really curious about is the fact that Lazarus is mentioned in the Bible in a way that makes it seem like he's an important figure on jesus's life but then he's barely talked about. Kind of like how it seems to suppose the reader knows about and admires John the Baptist.
Makes me feel like there's a lot of extra biblical text I'm missing out on
Very interesting, informative, and worthwhile video.
After reading many of the comments here, It never ceases to amaze me how many people think they are an authority about the Bible, God and religion whether they believe them to be true or not!
We are all limited by our own perceptions, faith and reason. It was said by Jesus God is simply spirit and truth. Let God be found true though every man is proved a liar!
This actually makes a log of sense in the context of early Christianity trying to establish a canon in contrast with Gnostics in particular. To some Gnostic sects Mary Magdalene was believed to be Jesus's lover and was potentially even elevated to the same status as Jesus, being Sophia incarnate
This is literally the best Chanel on CZcams
Very interesting. What is the antique map behind you? Thanks
450 changes in one document seems to be an extreme case of dyslexia.
I really enjoy the ease with which i learn from your videos
There’s also references in the Gnostic Gospels that imply that there was a concerted effort to diminish the role of Mary Magdalene. Her theory is very plausible considering how patriarchal society was back then.
But if it's all just about the boys, why are there any important and powerful women in the Bible at all? Are there tons of them? No. Are they far fewer than the men? Yes. But, are they still in there? Yep, they sure are.
@@nicodemous52 Who cares? The Bible is just a lazy fanfic anyway.
@@godspeedhero3671 Then why are you here at all? You seem to have investment of some kind, otherwise, you are worst than a pointless wasted.
@@nicodemous52 You pointed out the disproportion of women in the Bible to prove that women were equally represented?
@@NuncNuncNuncNunc I think you need to read my comment again, I said nothing about equal representation. That concept had nothing to do with my argument.
So, I suggest you read it again, and really consider the actual words I used, instead of the ones you wished I used that are easier to dismiss.
Dude phenomenal video!! 🙏🙏🙏
I am 54 , as a sophomore (around 15) i wrote a paper about how i thought mary Magdalene was Jesus's mate. Obviously this was a Catholic high school. My religion teacher threw it away fearing i would be kicked out. Privately she loved the idea and i got a A .
By "mate" you mean "follower/friend"? Because there is a theory saying Mary Magdalene was one of the 12 apostles of Jesus Christ
@@trikebeatstrexnodiff both as in wife and deciple.
There are theories that jesus wanted her to help teach and that she was a seerer after his death.
@@erincarr9411 never heard the psychic part. Except she saw his resurrection first. Do you remember where you heard or read it ?
You must have been a very brave girl to write such blasphemy 😅.
Great video! You can find evidence of hostility towards Mary from Church Fathers. Also glad you have a flag of Greece back there ;)
p.s Do you know where can we find the original text without the 450 changes? Has it been reconstructed online?
Beaverhousen
I could be wrong about this,(I’m no scholar) but I believe the changes are on the manuscript itself. The idea is that back in 200 AD they didn’t have white out or erasers, so if a mistake was made, they had to “change” it.
@@hannahrose2238 oh sure, i mean if modern scholars have reconstructed the text without the additions they observed so they give a purer form
Beaverhousen
I guess my point is that the text without the changes wouldn’t be more accurate. In fact, it would be less accurate since it didn’t have the corrections.
To ignore the corrections is counterproductive.
Say I was copying the declaration of Independence. If I made a mistake, that mistake is not a more accurate representation of the text. It’s just an accurate representation of my own imperfection.
Sure, if you can say with absolute certainty that they are mistakes and needed correction. The whole point of the scribe's job being to copy _without changes_ is that he doesn't know if it's a mistake of not. It could be determined later that it wasn't, as we are finding now with some of these texts.
@Serai3
“Determine later that it wasn’t” who determined that is wasn’t?
We are assuming the probability of mistakes is less than the probability of intentional “changes”. We demand proof for the mistakes and assume intentional changes.
It is actually mistakes that are more probable. We are talking about two women with similar names and close associations. Human memory and perception is greatly limited and it would not be surprising, in fact it would make perfect sense, for people to have confused these women in certain situations.
Did you suggest the NSV bible for study? I feel like you did in some video but it might take me a while. Thanks!
More videos like this would be great! 👍 very interesting
Reminds me of the Newhart skits about introducing Larry, Daryl and his other brother Daryl.
Without the text that the scribe was copying from, you have an unfounded inference. Tertullian was a famous scholar, but he was also known for being somewhat given to flights of fancy as it were, so it is difficult to take him too seriously on some issues. Without seeing the original text that papyrus 66 is derived from, it is just as likely the scribe was careless in his copying and went back to correct it on the manuscript he was already working rather than to throw it away and start over, given how expensive papyrus would have been at the time. A noted scribal discrepancy is not necessarily proof that it wasn't Martha, it is more likely proof that the scribe was human and may have gotten careless.
Very good point. In reality the only thing this is evidence for, in the objective sense, is that a scribe made a change. Whether he made that change because he was making a mistake or because he was fixing a mistake is entirely unknown.
@Andro mache the fact that you wrote "which proves 'may' was far more important..." is just prove that people can make mistakes and get careless.
@@Laotzu.Goldbug They do not pay you to make videos though
But...but...the patriarchy...
In reality, all biblical texts are unfounded, because the original has been lost to history.
I would like to see more information about how the researchers worked out those important corrections
The main problem I have with these modern theories that Christians of old tried to diminish the role of women in the Gospels is that from the very beginning Mariology was developed and Christians everywhere were having the highest of views of the Virgin Mary, the mother of Jesus. So if these early Christians in fact hated women and they wanted only men then they did a very poor job.
Just curious Andrew do you work for particular Institution?
PhD student at Boston University!
I'm not even religious and early christianity as well as various other religions in the area that sprang into existence at the time are incredibly interesting. I just wish we had more of the texts available for analysis.
I'm sure there's a lot of wisdom and stories that have been lost to time.
@@thamannaabdulkader1938 with all due respect, my religious views have changed a lot since that post, as has my identity in some regards, and any abrahamic religion is going to be an incredibly wrong fit for me.
However yes, Islam is certainly an interesting subject, especially in how it changed over time from being one of the more accepting religions in the early middle ages to it's more modern rather xenophobic incarnation.
@@thamannaabdulkader1938 It's not about race, it's about sexual orientation and gender identity, I am member of the LGBTQ+ community and so are a lot of my friends, and most interactions I had with muslims (and conservative christians for that matter) have been, while not outright hostile towards me, making it very clear that I wouldn't be accepted without repressing important parts of my identity, to the point where I wouldn't be myself anymore and potentially a threat to my own life if I did so long term.
I understand that obviously not every muslim or islamic denomination follows these beliefs but among those who live in the subsection of Europe I live in, these beliefs are quite common, espescially in the older generations, and sometimes acted upon with violence and without rhyme or reason.
GROUNDBREAKING AND GREAT TO KNOW IM RE LEARNING RELIGION RIGHT NOW! Some other religions state Mary is Js fav disciple = Gnostics.
And I had to go back over & rethink the INTENT OF THE ROMANS to make a Bible & what to use = control of populace. Great work friend! And the research gal rocks too! I’m going to watch that video next..
Here's the thing, I remember watching a documentary about the book of Yochannan it was on about the Dead Sea Scrolls they talked about this book because there was a seller who had been given a metal sheet that had lasted quite long. The Hebrew they used there and the book itself was dated to within 30 years after Yochannan's life during the Caesar
Diminished importance = wife of Jesus? That would be quite a leap.
A leap, yes, but it shouldn't be rejected. At the least, there are many poor motives for rejecting her from the list of Disciples.
They at least had an emotional or sexual relationship. As humans tend to do.
@@iciajay6891 No proof of such a thing. This is theory drug out every few years and shot down as fast as it comes out.
Icia Jay
Emotional, maybe. Sexual, not a shred of evidence.
Eisegesis is a form of blasphemy, true Christians cannot partake of.
Zerubbable Stranger I am disappointed RFB, a truly expert scholar, would say it is all not conspiracy theory just after pop culture mentions of a supposed wife of Jesus. Bad conflation in my opinion.
3:25
“Mary sent him saying, lord he whom you love is ill”
“Dude what about her sister?”
“Where?”
“Over there! Quick change it!”
“The sisters...”
@Religionforbreakfast hi, I was wondering if you could do an episode on the ANE connection between Genesis 6, the Epic of Gilgamesh, and the Book of Enoch with Dr. Michael Heiser, an expert in this field that has very interesting findings?
OK, sorry if my questions are silly, but I'm NO expert in manuscript history. Around 3:30, when you say John papyrus 66 received so many changes. does that mean the papyrus itself bears traces of corrections made by the scribe, or maybe by a second scribe coming after initial writing? or does that mean the papyrus shows variations with earlier or later versions?
9:05 "Mary Magdalene and Mary of Bethany are never seen in the same room at the same time"
So... Mary Magdalene is Batman? D:
No, Bethwoman
Yeah, pretty weak evidence of intentional minimization of Mary Magdalene, I'd say. Simplest explanation is that it was a common name.
There is also the fact that there was tons of fan-fiction about Jesus at the time. What's popular and actual very useful for wisdom/learning, may not be factual. E.g. all the quotes attributed to Winston Churchill or other famous people. It sounds like they would say it but in fact didn't.
Exactly. It wasn't just a common name, but a VERY common name.
Maybe but many of the other changes to the Gospel sho a much more deliberate effort to manipulate and change it's content
That was such a great interview but I keep asking myself what about the part in John 12 where "Martha" comes to "Mary" and says: "The teachers is calling you"... Who is talking to whom? To me that point is crucial but it wasn't addressed in the interview. Any additional comments? @ReligionForBreakfast @Elizabeth Schrader
Great observation! John 11:28 is the one and only verse where I did not find any textual instability around Martha in John 11. I believe this verse is the composition of the interpolator (as in it was written by the editor who added Martha). To me it makes sense that there would be no instability around a verse whose content never changed. But literally any other verse in John 11:1-12:2 where Martha appears, I can show you a manuscript where Mary is doing those actions instead.
Oh dear lord whose existence I doubt, watching ancient greek papysuses gives me chills especially as being greek myself!!
I would really like to see a video about Sikhi from your channel. If you haven't visited the Golden Temple in Amritsar you're missing out!
This is extremely interesting. I was raised with the understanding that Mary is Mary and Martha was the same as Mary Magdalene, but I was raised with the brand of Christianity that thinks John the apostle, John gospel author and John the revelator were the same guy.
Anybody but John , Right ?
Thank you for what you are doing. It really helps. I have start reading the 4 gospels and I a tone of questions and one of them is who is HLIAS/ ΗΛΙΑΣ?
Really interesting. Thank you.
God bless mother mary!
So let me get this straight
(please someone correct me if I’m wrong)
There are two names of two women closely associated with each other that sound quite similar. There are multiple accounts given by multiple people about these women.
...and we are scandalized that people couldn’t remember if it was Mary or Martha or maybe both of them in certain situations?
I would be more suspicious if we had impecable retellings where people pretended like the limitations of human perception and memory were nonexistent.
Oh and we have decided to use that as an argument for Mary Magdelyn being Jesus’ wife?
Basically.
Bless this comment.
I must correct you, outside of the New Testament there are 0 contemporary references to either woman.
emptyhand777
Thank you, however,
I am referring to the NT. Within the NT are multiple accounts from multiple people. Copies of these texts about these women are found thousands of miles away from each other.
Not to mention multiple people were present at the events these women are present at. Word of mouth is an important factor. Who knows how much those peoples accounts could impact.
My point is, there are soooooo many variables, it’s silly to act like they would not impact.
Hannah Rose , you are narrowing the scope. How about, “The book that is supposedly the perfectly inspired work of a perfect being has signs of being changed”
It is not a question of memory. There are no indications that these are the memories of anyone. None of the authors even claim to be eyewitnesses or tell how they came to have this information. This is how fiction is written.
I desperately need a follow up on this work
I am really enjoying your videos. Thank you. When you say that the Bible is built of fragments of text, is that quite right? Are we using fragments to validate a text whose origin is not clear but established? I find this confusing.
and your dumb School did not teach you it at religious class?
Mary Magdaline may have started out as a deciple, but she became the FIRST apostle. She was the first one that Jesus revealed himself to after he was resurrected, and He gave her the first command as a risen God. Mary was important. People have done her dirty for 2,000 years.
I've always felt like the Bible was devoid of any kind of motherly nurture outside or Mary. It's harsh, and rigid. I read it all through, front to cover, once though. After that I'd just read random books in it. Ester was always my favorite to read. Not a Christian anymore but I still hold appreciation for it's historical relevance.
As a mother comforts her child, so will I comfort you (says God)
Isaiah 66:13
It's a very masculine book.
If it is the oldest available text, how do you get that there have been so many changes? What did you compare it to?