[John Whitworth]

So it was written only 500 years after Jesus' death. Heavens!

[Julie Steiner]

I don't understand why you mention "childless couples", Raul. The idea that Jesus married Mary Magdalen and fathered a child, and that the Holy Grail was actually Mary Magdalen as the vessel for that bloodline, and that a direct descendant of Jesus and Mary Magdalen is waiting in the wings like King Arthur to return and take over when needed, has been around for a long, long time. Cf. The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail. Cf. Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code.

I find it hard to get too excited about such revelations of hitherto hidden knowledge.

For one thing, canonical Christianity has many problems, but not being weird enough already (without the aid of apocryphal documents) sure ain't one of them.

For another, I really don't see how viewing Jesus as a married man might solve the misogyny problem.

Agreed, Mary of Magdala was important to Jesus. She's mentioned several times in the Gospels, and was the first person to whom he appeared and spoke after the Resurrection. As a feminist, I love this. It seems an obvious endorsement of women's significance as more than sexual objects.

Alas, no, she's still widely regarded as a sexual object.

Within the official tradition, Mary Magdalen has been depicted as a prostitute (although there is no Biblical evidence of this).

Outside of the official tradition, she's been called Jesus' wife or lover.

Because SEX!

Women could only EVER matter to ANYONE, because SEX!

Sigh.

[Gail White]

Originally Posted by Norman Ball

[i]
The quantum cosmologists have clearly departed the realm of objectivity. They are myth-builders, hiding perhaps behind a mathematical fig leaf.

It's been well said that cosmology is just theology for people who can do math.

[Gail White]

Originally Posted by Julie Stoner

For another, I really don't see how viewing Jesus as a married man might solve the misogyny problem.

Agreed, Mary of Magdala was important to Jesus. She's mentioned several times in the Gospels, and was the first person to whom he appeared and spoke after the Resurrection. As a feminist, I love this. It seems an obvious endorsement of women's significance as more than sexual objects.

Alas, no, she's still widely regarded as a sexual object.

You're right Julie. It turns me off that the only roles male theologians can find for Mary Magdalene are those of prostitute or wife. Friend, trusted disciple, or other nonsexual roles don't seem to cross their minds.

Everyone should read Dorothy Sayers' book "Are Women Human?", with particular attention to the last page. I quote the last paragraph:

"Nobody could possibly guess from the words and deeds of Jesus that there was anything 'funny' about women's nature. But we might easily deduce it from his contemporaries, and from his prophets before him, and from his church to this day. Women are not human; nobody shall persuade us that they are human...we will not believe it, though one rose from the dead."

[Michael F]

Pardon the bump, but I’ve been traveling for several weeks in faraway lands. I’m impelled to make this clarification:

By no means did I intend my comments wrt Sokal as a value judgment on any culture as a whole. I don’t feel competent to make such a judgment.

However…

I do NOT believe that certain common elements of human experience, such as death and gravity (let us call them laws), are ‘socially constructed’. I’ll maintain that position until such time as I witness anyone, whether Buddhist or Baudrillard, by an act of thought, suspend them.