Mary Magdelene and Her Substance

[DantesInferno]

Lately I've been devouring novels of decent literary merit as if I had just discovered reading. Currently, I'm in the middle of Anita Shreve's The Last Time They Met, a novel structured around several encounters between two former lovers and the consequences of their love for each other.

Within the first 50 pages, I came across an argument that I found extremely interesting. The proposition is raised that Mary Magdalene and Jesus were lovers. The text is as follows:

---Jesus and Mary Magdalene? "She administered to Him of her substance," the Bible says. I'd like to think that they were [lovers]. But the farthest most scholars are willing to go is to say that she let Him be who He was as a man. Seems code to me for sex.

---All we really know of her is that she was simply a woman not identified as being either a wife or a mother---interesting in itself. And, actually, she's touted now as being her own person. A woman important enough for Jesus to consider a sort of disciple. Important enough to be the first to carry the message of the Resurrection. That's the feminist interpretation, anyway.

---Intriguing to speculate.

I don't claim to be a theologian, but with a previous thread created concerning Jesus and the possibility of his harboring tendencies to sexually pleasure himself, this argument, wedged in the midst of a struggling romance was interesting. How would you interpret, "She administered to Him of her substance"? It is ludicrous to even consider a relationship of a sexual nature between Jesus and one of his most controversial disciples? Did she not demonstrate behaviors of a lover? Or was it merely devotion to her Savior?

What do you think?

[taranaki]

I would venture to suggest that the author was trying to say that there was significantly more than a purely physical encounter for Mary.To put a modern interpretation to the phrase,"She administered to Him of her substance," would,in my opinion,be best done by saying"she gave a piece of herself to him"
Not knowing things from a woman's perspective,I cannot say for certain that this does not happen for a lady every time she performs the act of intercourse,but i would have to argue that we are being told by this text that this was not a simple act of physical satisfaction,but a meeting and sharing of minds.

[ac427cpe]

don't think too hard on this... the bible has been driving people insane for over 2000 years, it is figurative in meaning to each person as they wish to understand it, that is one of the great things about every having to, or wanting to study or understand part of it

[whttrshpunk]

I'll take a stab at it, since I am one of those crazy christians =P

Substance can be defined as;
Essential nature; essence.
Gist; heart. or Material possessions; goods; wealth.

That being said, I think it could mean all of these things. She gave Him everything she had, now I don't think this indicates a sexual relationship in anyway. But I would believe that, wouldn't I?

[moondog]

A couple of books I have found absolutely fascinating, which try to deal - at least in part - with the actual historical Jesus, are The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, and The Messianic Legacy. From memory, they speculate about Jesus and Mary Magdalene's relationship in the second. They postulate that Jesus and Mary not only had a physical relationship, but had children, and that when there is mention of Magdalene bringing the holy grail to (?France???? - can't remember) this is actually a metaphor for Jesus' children. Really interesting books, and I highly recommend them, whatever your belief system, as they show Jesus as a very strong, important, and real historical figure.

[whttrshpunk]

Where does the Bible reference mary magdalene bring the holy grail to france?

[moondog]

buggered if I know - the only time I've ever looked at it was while reading the Messianic Legacy and the Holy Blood & the Holy Grail, to refer to specific bits. I'm also talking completely from memory, and a long time ago. I would still recommend those tow books though - quite thought-provoking.

[wsl1975]

I'm definetly not a theologian, but consider myself trying to be a christian. Human urges are a part of us all. We know that Jesus was
tempted by the devil of many things. All temtaions can be broken down into three catagories. Lust of the flesh, Lust of the eyes,and pride of life. Pick yours. Jesus, however, was the ultimate sacrifice for our sins.
read Leviticus. It says that the sacrifice for atonement had to be the first born male lamb, pure, without spot or blemish. My interpretation is that Jesus had to be pure, without sin, so he could become sin for us.
Otherwise, what would be the sacrifice, if he was a sinner like us.

[jon@af]

Uh... maybe you should read the AF user-guidelines and more specifically the part that talks about old threads. This thread is pretty old and if it's this old people dont usually post in them. If you think you can argue the topic, start a new thread on it. Anyways, Welcome to AF n00b.