Saturday, April 18, 2009

Intimate love between Mary and Jesus


Most people reading this blog have done their own kind of research into some or all of the life of Christ, religion, pre-Christianity religions, goddesses, empowerment, Sacred Feminine.... The list goes on.

I assume everyone reading is here for a basic purpose. Understanding. Be it knowing where our spirituality springs from individually, trying to filter through history for a glimpse of what actually occurred or outright curiosity is for you and you alone. I myself have researched for years concepts Dan Brown (Angels and Demons, The Da Vinci Code) and numerous others have stirred up. Good for them! As a mother of four, a wife and "slave to the grind" I can say I am not the foremost speaker on the subject of Sacred Feminine. I have a busy life. I hold no doctorate on the subject. But I believe research; thirst for knowledge and good intuition speaks volumes. I intend to bring thoughts out in my blog here that pique my own curiosity. I hope it does the same for you.

The idea of Jesus not knowing the love of a woman is by far the most ridiculous conception (no pun intended) Christianity has spoon-fed us throughout HIStory. In every religion using the bible, we are told of the life of Christ here on Earth. His conception. His birth. His followers. His struggles. His grief. His pain. His suffering. His death. I am not going into the "whys" of Christianity's reasoning for lifting a good man to the levels of immortality. (If this is something you are not familiar with, research it… it is very interesting.)

Let's play devil's advocate: Let's say everything written in the Bible regarding Jesus' life were true. Immaculate conception to reincarnation. We are to believe he experienced a range of human emotions. Difficult emotions: pain, struggle, suffering, betrayal, deceit, failure. Wonderful emotions: kindness, faith, humility, familial love, brotherly love. But not intimate love? This is one of Christianity's biggest failures. To expect us to believe a deity put on Earth could not possibly partake in the most basic human quality to love intimately. Is it possible to feel every emotion and not experience the personal connection between man and woman? Or the longing for it? History itself depicts all young Jewish men were to be married in that era. Even The Da Vinci Code covered that.

Everyone knows Mary Magdalene. Painted as a whore. The level of equality squashed. Which unfortunately for man is a tragedy. It is most likely the most fulfilling love story in history erased. For every good man, there is a good woman behind him. (Or for some, in front of him.) It pains me to think of all the good the retelling of their lives together (Jesus and Mary) could have done if allowed to be told over the centuries, documented and revered. Healthy partnerships between man and woman are what we are designed for. The capacity to love is our best human trait. It seems the church for whatever reason they claim stole the best we have to offer by refusing to acknowledge Jesus' personal/intimate relationship with Mary Magdalene. Jesus' life was taken and used to promote another's ideals. This we cannot erase. It happened.

What we can do is question. And keep questioning. Faith is a wonderful tool. I am NOT saying people should not believe in what they choose to believe. It is not my place to say. But the next time you decide to open a Bible, read between the lines. What are your thoughts on why intimate love was left out of the emotions Jesus felt?

— Danielle Marie Powell

| | | |

Labels: , , , ,

Many syncretistic religions formed gnosticism. Gnosticism was rivaling against Christianity and gnosticism held itself better religion as Christianity was. Word gnosticism comes from Greek word gnosis, which means knowledge. Gnosticism was various effects, for instance, some Gnostics taught that divinity can be achieved through unity of the man and woman. This thought led some Gnostics to reach for divinity through sexual intercourse between the man and woman. There existed also some Gnostics, who abstained from sexual intercourse. When we know the fact that Gnostics held Christians as their enemies and that Gnostics held themselves better as Christians and that Gnostics wanted to show in every way that Gnosticism was better as Christianity, so Gnostics made so called gnostic gospels were they twisted, slandered and misrepresented the real gospels. Gnostics went so far in this misrepresent that they wrote "new gospels" by faking the real gospels. In these faked gospels Gnostics wrote that Jesus Christ was an ordinary man who has a sexual relationship with Mary Magdalene.
I don't say this to be catty or derail the conversation, but Jesus was resurrected, not reincarnated. It's difficult to take the rest of this post seriously when you're challenging something you seem not to even understand.

I'm intrigued by your argument, but double-checking the details will make it a lot stronger. There are a lot of reasons the church may have chosen to erase Jesus' relationship with Mary, such as a disgusting amount of misogyny. I'd believe it, but you don't offer much in the way of proof and managed to destroy your own argument with the resurrection/reincarnation blunder.
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?