da vinci rubbish

[chandradas]

Haribol,

What a world we are living in!!!!!!1

I am really thankfull to lord krishna to be in his spiritual sky, as I feel deeply sad for the world, especially with this di vinci code now about.

They seem to conjure up anything now, and the poor lost souls follow what they say!

Even the so called clever ppl sound like idiots, you can see right through them!

All glories to Lord Sri Krishna.

[Guest guest]

the book itself has helped create more interest in gnostic Christianity, which can only be a good thing for orthodox Christians who are lost in the teachings and dogmas of Rome.

[akshar]

I think it's helped the atholics really find out what the vatican does. I suggest another dan brown book called angels and demons

[Guest guest]

I think the Da Vinci code was a good thing. Although it is a work of fiction, it raises valid questions and will cause people to challenge the church. It fits into the image of Christ in gnostic Christianity which suggests that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were likely to have been married and Gnostic Christianity may be revived as there is more interest now than ever before.

 

What is funny it that the film's release has been posponed in India...a Hindu-majority country due to protests by Christians and Muslims, whereas it will be released simultaneously in the west which consists of majority Christians and will be seen by more Christians than any other religious community. It will be bigger than the Passion of the Christ!

[Guest guest]

 

What is funny it that the film's release has been posponed in India...a Hindu-majority country due to protests by Christians and Muslims, whereas it will be released simultaneously in the west which consists of majority Christians and will be seen by more Christians than any other religious community. It will be bigger than the Passion of the Christ!

 

please tell me no Hindus were involved in these protests. Sometimes Hindus are known to be their own worst enemies. Worrying about everyone else's sensitivities but their own.

 

Gnostic Christians would never think of sending missionaries to India, to convert villagers. Gnostic Christians respect Hindu yogic practices, and even seek to learn from eastern sages themselves. Hindus and gnostics both believe in reincarnation and the need to obtain moksha. These 2 groups should be on friendly terms. Hindus should in no way be opposed to gnostic Christians, who in truth are their friends; while holding hands and joining forces with those who believe they are eternally damned (the orthodox Christians).

[Kulapavana]

<TABLE><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top>Source: bbc.co.uk</TD></TR><TR><TD> </TD><TD vAlign=top>Published: May 15, 2000 </TD></TR><TR><TD> </TD><TD vAlign=top></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

 

<!-- -->Mary Magdalene's story is intimately linked with Jesus. She plays a starring role in one of the most powerful and important scenes in the Gospels.

 

When Jesus is crucified by the Romans, Mary Magdalene was there supporting him in his final terrifying moments and mourning his death. She also discovers the empty tomb, and she's a witness to the resurrection. She was there at the beginning of a movement that was going to transform the West. But the Mary Magdalene that lives in our memories is quite different. In art, she's often semi-naked, or an isolated hermit repenting for her sins in the wilderness: an outcast. Her primary link with Jesus is as the woman washing and anointing his feet. But we know her best as a prostitute.

 

The whole story of Mary as a prostitute, who is fallen and redeemed, is a very powerful image of redemption a signal that no matter how low one has fallen, one can be redeemed.

 

Powerful as this image may be, it is not the story of Mary Magdalene. Mary Magdalene is mentioned in each of the four gospels in the New Testament, but not once does it mention that she was a prostitute or a sinner. At some point Mary Magdalene became confused with two other women in the Bible: Mary, the sister of Martha and the unnamed sinner from Luke's gospel (7:36-50) both of whom wash Jesus' feet with their hair. In the 6th Century, Pope Gregory the Great made this assumption official by declaring in a sermon that these three characters were actually the same person: Mary Magdalene, Repentant Saint. The Catholic Church did later declare that Mary Magdalene was not the penitent sinner, but this was not until 1969. After several centuries, the reputation still lingers.

 

So who was Mary Magdalene?

Although we know something about Jewish society in ancient Palestine, 2,000 years ago, we know very little about Mary herself. The Bible provides no personal details of her age, status or family.

 

Her name, Mary Magdalene, gives us the first real clue about her. It suggests that she came from a town called Magdala. There is a place today called Magdala, 120 miles north of Jerusalem on the shores of the Sea of Galilee. We do know there was also an ancient place called Magdala from literature. The name occurs in the New Testament, and also in Jewish texts. Its full name is Magdala Tarichaea. Magdala seems to mean tower, and Tarichaea means salted fish. If the name of the town was 'Tower of Salted Fish', it's no surprise that its main business was fishing. As a woman living in Magdala, Mary may have worked in the fish markets.

 

One Jewish text which mentions Magdala, called 'Lamentations Raba', says is that Magdala is judged by God and destroyed because of its fornication. It is possible that the description of Magdala as a place of fornication is the origin of the idea that arose in western Christianity that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute.

 

A spiral of social pressures might have caused Magdala's moral decline

We know there were brothels elsewhere in the Mediterranean, and Galilee was probably no exception. It was part of the Roman Empire, which placed a heavy tax burden on families, and often women paid the heaviest price.

 

The Roman conquest, and then the Roman Imperial Rule would have made quite a dramatic impact on Galilee economically it would have brought the people into greater and greater tax burdens, and that would have put pressure on families.

 

When tax burdens were at their worst and a family could no longer pay off its debts, children were sometimes given up as slaves. Perhaps this was Mary Magdalene's fate.

 

With such a tough background, it's not hard to imagine that Mary might have been a prostitute, but this evidence is purely circumstantial. However, her name, Mary 'of Magdala', could suggest something else altogether: she was unmarried. A married woman would have carried her husband's name and Mary didn't.

 

There is nothing in the limited amount of material we have about Mary in the Gospel traditions that suggests she is married, she's never described as being a widow, and she also is not said to have any children.

 

2,000 years ago, an unmarried woman was viewed with suspicion. Perhaps this isolated Mary, but it wouldn't fully account for her negative image.

 

Could anything else in Mary's life have made her an outcast? The Gospel of Luke tells us that Jesus cast seven demons out of Mary. (Luke.8.2)

 

Jesus was known as an exorcist. In all of the gospels, one of the principle things he is doing in his campaign for a renewal of Israel is exorcism. The exorcisms and healings probably go together with the teaching and preaching that the kingdom of God is at hand.

 

At that time, people believed that the demons possessed people who had done something wrong, and deserved to be possessed, whereas good, virtuous people were protected from demon possession.

 

Whatever the cause of her possession, Mary's exorcism is the catalyst which makes her sign up with the Jesus movement. The message that Jesus is said to have preached seems to have particular appeal for people who are in the margins of society. Luke chapter 8, tells us that Mary was one of Jesus' followers and travelled with him.

 

But the Bible isn't the only source. In 1945, at Nag Hammadi in southern Egypt, two men came across a sealed ceramic jar. Inside, they discovered a hoard of ancient papyrus books. Although they never received as much public attention as the Dead Sea Scrolls, these actually turn out to be much more important for writing the history of early Christianity. They are a cache of Christian texts.

 

The Nag Hammadi texts tell us about early Christians. They were written in Coptic, the language of early Christian Egypt. As most ancient Christian texts have been lost, this discovery was exceptional.

 

The discovery includes the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Philip and the Acts of Peter. None of these texts were included in the Bible, because the content didn't conform to Christian doctrine, and they're referred to as apocryphal. They tend to concentrate on things that one doesn't read about in the Bible. For example, New Testament gospels says after the resurrection Jesus spent some time talking with the disciples, but you don't learn much about what he said. In the gospels of Nag Hammadi you can read what he said.

 

Although they're not Biblical texts, experts still believe that they give us significant insights into Christian history. In these apocryphal texts we might have genuine traditions about Jesus that for one reason or another didn't make it into the New Testament.

 

For the first time in hundreds of years there was a new source of information about Mary Magdalene. She appears very frequently as one of the prominent disciples of Jesus. In certain texts where Jesus is in discussion with his disciples, Mary Magdalene asks many informed questions. Whereas the other disciples at times seem confused, she is the one who understands.

 

One of the documents discovered at Nag Hammadi is the Gospel of Philip, in which Mary Magdalene is a key figure. It has been the cause of one of the most controversial claims ever made about her.

 

During their long burial in the desert, some of the books were attacked by ants. In this Gospel, the ants made a hole in a very crucial place. The text says:

 

And the companion of the [...] Mary Magdalene. [...] loved her more than all the disciples, and used to kiss her often on her [...]. 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."

The 'lacuna', or gap, which hides where Jesus kissed Mary has tantalised scholars for decades.

 

Were Jesus and Mary lovers?

Some scholars have interpreted the kiss in a more spiritual sense and see kissing as a symbol for an intimate reception of teaching of the word of God, of learning. The image of Jesus and Mary as engaged in mouth to mouth closeness suggests not necessarily sexuality, but the transmission of divine knowledge.

 

Mary Magdalene appears in this text also not only as the disciple he loved most but also as a symbolic figure of heavenly wisdom. These stories of Mary - as Jesus' closest companion and a symbol of heavenly wisdom - are in sharp contrast with the Mary Magdalene of popular imagination.

 

'Apocryphal' took on very negative connotations, especially in comparison to the Bible. It often means that it's not to be read, not to be taken seriously, not to be considered, not true. The contents of these books are regarded by many people as legends. So can we believe the Gospel of Philip? Was Mary really Jesus' closest companion? Well, there is other evidence for this, and some of it is even in the Bible itself.

 

The Bible says that Mary Magdalene was present at the two most important moments in the story of Jesus: the crucifixion and the resurrection. Mary Magdalene was a prominent figure at both these events.

 

 

We're told that Mary Magdalene was one of the women who kept vigil at Jesus' tomb. It was customary at this time for Jewish women to prepare bodies for burial. Corpses were considered unclean, and so it was always a woman's task to handle them.

 

When Mary goes to the tomb, Jesus' body is no longer there. The fullest account of Mary's role after discovering the empty tomb is in the Gospel of John. She is in a state of shock and runs to where the disciples are gathered to tell them the news. When she reports to the disciples she is not believed. Peter and another disciple return with her to the tomb, to see for themselves.

 

When they enter, Peter reacts to the sight of the discarded linen burial cloth with anger and dismay. But the other disciple understands what has happened and concludes that Jesus must have risen from the dead.

 

The two of them leave without a backward glance at Mary.

 

Then, something even more extraordinary happens. It is Mary Magdalene's biggest moment.

 

Mary is alone when someone asks her why she's crying. She believes it's the gardener, and says, 'they have taken my lord's body and I do not know where it is'. The figure says her name. And then she sees Jesus. She is overwhelmed and says' 'Master!' and goes forward to reach out to him, but he stops her. He says 'don't touch me'. Instead, she must go to the others and tell them that he has risen from the dead. It's an awesome moment. Jesus stands before her, yet he's beyond her reach.

 

We cannot say if Jesus really stood before her resurrected, or if Mary simply believed she had seen him. But either way, in this one moment, Mary's experience took the movement in an important new direction.

 

A new concept developed, which had nothing to with what Jesus himself was preaching, and this is the concept that Jesus didn't die - or he did but he was raised from the dead. The movement is not a failure. It is in fact a great success. The person who declares this is Mary Magdalene.

 

Jesus' resurrection was the turning point for Christianity. This was when it changed from a small movement to a whole new religion. And Mary Magdalene was a key figure in this event.

 

You might think, then, that at the very least Mary would be recognised as an apostle - one of the early missionaries who founded the religion - as she seems to meet all the criteria set out in the Bible.

 

The reason why she is not perhaps lies in another long lost apocryphal text. In a Cairo bazaar in 1896, a German scholar happened to come across a curious papyrus book. Bound in leather and written in Coptic, this was the Gospel of Mary.

 

Like the books found at Nag Hammadi, the Gospel according to Mary Magdalene is also considered an apocryphal text. The story it contains begins some time after the resurrection. The disciples have just had a vision of Jesus.

 

Jesus has encouraged his disciples to go out and preach his teachings to the world, but they are afraid to do so because he was killed for it, and they say if they killed him, they are going to kill us too. It's Mary who steps forward and says, don't be worried, he promised he would be with us to protect us. It says she turns their hearts toward the good and they begin to discuss the words of the Saviour.

 

In texts like the Gospel of Philip, Mary was presented as a symbol of wisdom. However in the Gospel of Mary, she is the one in charge, telling the disciples about Jesus' teachings.

 

At this point Peter asks Mary to tell them some things that she might have heard, but which the other disciples haven't. She says 'yes, I will tell you what has been hidden from you'. She talks about a vision she had of Jesus and a conversation that she had with him. As the Gospel tells it, Mary then relates the details of this conversation, which is to do with spiritual development and the soul's lifelong battle with evil.

 

At this point controversy arises, and Andrew steps in and says 'well, I don't know what the rest of you think, but these things seem very strange to me, and it seems that she's telling us teachings that are different from the Saviour.' Peter then chimes in and he says, 'Are we supposed to now all turn around and listen to her? Would Jesus have spoken privately with a woman rather than openly to us? Did he prefer her to us?'

 

Matthew defends Mary and quells Peter's attack on her. In the text, Peter's problem seems to be that Jesus selected Mary above the other disciples to interpret his teachings. Peter sees Mary as a rival for the leadership of the group itself.

 

Peter need not have feared. Most people think of Peter as the rock upon which the church was established. He is the main or major disciple figure, and Mary Magdalene is a kind of side figure in the cast of characters.

 

One of the absolutely fascinating things about the Gospel of Mary is it really asks us to rethink that story about Christian history: did all the disciples get it? Did they really understand and preach the truth?

 

Perhaps the Gospel of Mary was just too radical. It presents Mary as a teacher and spiritual guide to the other disciples. She's not just a disciple; she's the apostle to the apostles.

[Guest guest]

 

please tell me no Hindus were involved in these protests. Sometimes Hindus are known to be their own worst enemies. Worrying about everyone else's sensitivities but their own.

 

 

I don't know but I wouldn't be surpised if there were, some Hindus love to bow down and show their support to others, in the hope that they would be liked, even if they are hated by the group they are helping.

 

I saw a programme last night about the Da Vinci code and it's suggestions about Mary Magdalene. It was about "the divine feminie" in ancient religions and in early Christinity (gnostic). It also investigated claims of godesses in Judaism and Islam too. It seems that all ancient religions and even the early phase of the three Abrahamic religions had or came from previous traditions which has male and female principles behind the Divine. Although prophets tried to dismiss or surpress this, it still has managed to survive in a different form. It can be said that the recent sudden interest in Mary Magdalene being a divine companion of Jesus representing 'the divine feminine' is because by nature we are supposed to see God as a balance of male-female forces and Christians today are missing that, even though the Virgin mary came from Isis worship and can be seen as a mother-goddess.

 

Read more here

channel4.com/culture/microsites/D/da_vinci_decoded/sacred.html

 

After seeing this programme I can see why it is a great thing that Hindus have kept the worship of Devi in all her forms. You can really appreciate the fact that India has had this unbroken tradition of goddess worship since the ancient times. We need to keep it for another few thousand years.

[Guest guest]

 

I don't know but I wouldn't be surpised if there were, some Hindus love to bow down and show their support to others, in the hope that they would be liked, even if they are hated by the group they are helping.

 

Sounds like low self-esteem to me. Like trying to kiss up to the cool clique at school, even though they always make fun of you and will contine to.

 

 

I saw a programme last night about the Da Vinci code and it's suggestions about Mary Magdalene. It was about "the divine feminie" in ancient religions and in early Christinity (gnostic). It also investigated claims of godesses in Judaism and Islam too. It seems that all ancient religions and even the early phase of the three Abrahamic religions had or came from previous traditions which has male and female principles behind the Divine. Although prophets tried to dismiss or surpress this, it still has managed to survive in a different form. It can be said that the recent sudden interest in Mary Magdalene being a divine companion of Jesus representing 'the divine feminine' is because by nature we are supposed to see God as a balance of male-female forces and Christians today are missing that..

 

Yeah, there were some suppressed expressions of goddess worship at least in Judaism and Christianity. If I recall, King Solomon was a goddess worshipper and even built shrines for different goddesses. Several Israelites at his time were also worshipping the goddess (es); and this ended up causing a rift in the Kingdom, with the goddess worshippers being demonized in the canonized Old Testament. Patrarchial Judaism ended up winning.

 

 

even though the Virgin mary came from Isis worship and can be seen as a mother-goddess.

 

Yes, and some statues of Mary and Child are actually statues of Isis and Horus in her lap. Many Christians are totally unaware of this. But I have heard there was a secret faction within orthodoxy that continued to worship Isis in secret for centuries.

 

Gnosticism actually traces back to the Egyptian mystery religions. If you look at groups like the Freemasons and Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, they don't even hide the fact they are mixing Judeo-Christianity with Egyptian symbolism.

 

 

Read more here

channel4.com/culture/microsites/D/da_vinci_decoded/sacred.html

 

Thanks for the link. I will check it out.

 

 

After seeing this programme I can see why it is a great thing that Hindus have kept the worship of Devi in all her forms. You can really appreciate the fact that India has had this unbroken tradition of goddess worship since the ancient times. We need to keep it for another few thousand years.

 

Yes, it is a great thing. I am sure there would be even more unbroken traditions had the Roman Christians not destroyed all the European temples and traditions. But there are reconstructionists now, who have taken up to worship the old goddesses. The Neo-Pagan movement is heavily inspired by the Divine Feminine and reclaiming the Goddess to her rightful place.

[bija]

quote by guest "Yeah, there were some suppressed expressions of goddess worship at least in Judaism and Christianity. If I recall, King Solomon was a goddess worshipper and even built shrines for different goddesses. Several Israelites at his time were also worshipping the goddess (es); and this ended up causing a rift in the Kingdom, with the goddess worshippers being demonized in the canonized Old Testament. Patrarchial Judaism ended up winning."

This process of Goddess worship referred to is worship of "Asherah" in the form of some pole or tree. Modern christian commentaries on the old testament refer to Asherah as a Canaanite Goddess.

I was saw a TV program that was supposedly showing archeological evidence of this Goddess worship in ancient ruins. They said the ruins were Jewish. But there was some difference of opinion by experts with this conclusion.

The program was also exploring a theory that this Goddess worship was originally a part of Jewish practice, but at some point Jewish scribes edited the texts to portray this worship as a foreign element. And that this Asherah worship did cause the rift in the Jewish kingdom. There are many varying opinions on these conclusions, but nevertheless very interesting.

[shambu]

I thought it would be interesting to find out what the "ordinary" New Testamentical Gospels tell about Mary of Magdela. It appears that no "apocryph" text (partially eaten by ants) is needed to proof that this Mary is an important figure in the history of Christianity and the life of Christ, and that Jesus loved her very much. I couldn't find even one "negative" reference in connection with this personality, even though I only checked out the most common and welknown passages (that nevertheless appear to be quite interesting and meaningful). Especially noteworthy is the conclusion to be made, that there is a direct connection between Mary's devotional act of anointing Jesus (somewhere it says His head, somewhere His feet - I guess probably the whole body) and Judas' sudden determination to betray his Lord. I think this cannot be taken as less than more than significant, since Jesus' crucifixion or act of Self-Sacrifice has evolved to become the very symbol of the religion He represents. Please read:

 

John 12.3-8

3 Then Mary took a pound of very costly oil of spikenard, anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped His feet with her hair. And the house was filled with the fragrance of the oil.

4 But one of His disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, who would betray Him, said, 5 “Why was this fragrant oil not sold for three hundred denarii and given to the poor?” 6 This he said, not that he cared for the poor, but because he was a thief, and had the money box; and he used to take what was put in it.

7 But Jesus said, “Let her alone; she has kept this for the day of My burial. 8 For the poor you have with you always, but Me you do not have always.”

Luke 10. 38-42

38 Now it happened as they went that He entered a certain village; and a certain woman named Martha welcomed Him into her house. 39 And she had a sister called Mary, who also sat at Jesus’ feet and heard His word. 40 But Martha was distracted with much serving, and she approached Him and said, “Lord, do You not care that my sister has left me to serve alone? Therefore tell her to help me.”

41 And Jesus answered and said to her, “Martha, Martha, you are worried and troubled about many things. 42 But one thing is needed, and Mary has chosen that good part, which will not be taken away from her.”

Mark 14.3-11

3 And being in Bethany at the house of Simon the leper, as He sat at the table, a woman came having an alabaster flask of very costly oil of spikenard. Then she broke the flask and poured it on His head. 4 But there were some who were indignant among themselves, and said, “Why was this fragrant oil wasted? 5 For it might have been sold for more than three hundred denarii and given to the poor.” And they criticized her sharply.

6 But Jesus said, “Let her alone. Why do you trouble her? She has done a good work for Me. 7 For you have the poor with you always, and whenever you wish you may do them good; but Me you do not have always. 8 She has done what she could. She has come beforehand to anoint My body for burial. 9 Assuredly, I say to you, wherever this gospel is preached in the whole world, what this woman has done will also be told as a memorial to her.”

Mathew 26.6-16

6 And when Jesus was in Bethany at the house of Simon the leper, 7 a woman came to Him having an alabaster flask of very costly fragrant oil, and she poured it on His head as He sat at the table. 8 But when His disciples saw it, they were indignant, saying, “Why this waste? 9 For this fragrant oil might have been sold for much and given to the poor.”

10 But when Jesus was aware of it, He said to them, “Why do you trouble the woman? For she has done a good work for Me. 11 For you have the poor with you always, but Me you do not have always. 12 For in pouring this fragrant oil on My body, she did it for My burial. 13 Assuredly, I say to you, wherever this gospel is preached in the whole world, what this woman has done will also be told as a memorial to her.”

14 Then one of the twelve, called Judas Iscariot, went to the chief priests 15 and said, “What are you willing to give me if I deliver Him to you?” And they counted out to him thirty pieces of silver. 16 So from that time he sought opportunity to betray Him.

 

Interestingly enough, the very name CHRIST is a derivation from the Greek word CHRISTOS, which is itself a rendering of the Hebrew word Mesjieach, or Messiah, which supposedly means THE ANOINTED ONE.

[shambu]

Just let me add that I think the whole attempt to prove that Mary of Magdela was Jesus' lover or wife, that they had children together, and that this Mary was in fact his best discipel and ended up in a power-struggle with His male disciples (being discriminated by them because of being a woman) is nothing but an explosion of modern-day feminism, incorporated within the amorphous mass they call "New Age". There is nothing so annoying for a feminist as a celibate authority, who has Himself anointed by a humble woman. For them the only way to subjugate men is through the bonds of sex-life. Hahaha.