Conference lgp30::christian-perspective

    Good point...Mary Magdeline may be getting a raw deal here.
    
    If I remember correctly, there are actually 5-7 Marys in the Bible.
    
    -Jack

    Mary Magdalene was an apostle and a disciple!

Disciple, yes.

Apostle, no.

/john

    One of the 12?  No.  One who was 'sent out'?  Perhaps.
    
    Richard
    

    > Mary Magdalene was an apostle and a disciple!
     
    Scripture and verse, please???

    Were there no apostles other than the 12?  Paul implies in his letter
    to the Roman church that it was possible to have more than 12.
    
    Pharisaic legalism still abounds.
    
    Richard
    

    .6
    
    I didn't say it wasn't possible... just show me where Mary Magadelena
    is given the position of apostle in the Bible and I'll clam up.

    >Pharisaic legalism still abounds.
    
    Aleluia Aleluia!!! :-) Praise God that there are still folks who will
    stand for God's Word, His Son, Jesus Christ and a morality as God
    creates our roles as male and female!
    
    Call it legalism, but it is FREEDOM beyond your wildest imagination. 
    Freedom in Christ to do His will brings peace beyond description!

    If Jesus was in his grave, he'd be rolling over.
    
    Richard
    

    .9
    
    Jesus isn't in His grave, he's in Heaven... and I'm sure he's smiling. 
    BTW, I'm not pentacostal and that aleluia stuff felt really strange to
    type in, but hey, it was supposed to make you smile.
    
    

    Mary Magdalene was at least as much an apostle as Saul of Tarsus, it
    seems to me. Certainly she was taught by Jesus himself. And to whom did
    the risen Christ appear first? Mary Magdelene. She was "healed" by
    Jesus (Luke 8:2). She stood at his feet as he hung from the cross
    (John 19:25). 
    
    Now that I think of it she was more faithful to Christ than any of the
    twelve. Perhaps she is in a more blessed class than the Apostles...
    something between them and the Blessed Mother.

    Eric
                                                  
    PS> Was Martha's sister, Mary, a different Mary than Magdalene?

She may very well have been more blessed than the Apostles.

But she wasn't an Apostle.

/john

    She was not an apostle.  Though I do believe that she was a very
    uplifting and spiritual woman after her conversion to Christianity.
    
    Stating similarities does not deem one called to the office of any
    position.  
    
    For instance, I could state the similarities between my father and Bob
    Palmer, but that wouldn't make my father President of a corporation,
    nor would it make Bob Palmer my father.
    
    :-) 
    
    
    

re Note 926.13 by JULIET::MORALES_NA:

>     For instance, I could state the similarities between my father and Bob
>     Palmer, but that wouldn't make my father President of a corporation,
>     nor would it make Bob Palmer my father.
  
        You are right.

        Nevertheless, you haven't stated that your father *isn't*
        president of a corporation, so he could be.

        Likewise, absent a statement in the Bible that Mary Magdeline
        *wasn't* an apostle, it is impossible to state that she
        *wasn't*.

        (Unless, of course, you are coming from a doctrinal position,
        such as I assume John comes from, that states that a woman
        *cannot* hold the apostolic office.)

        Bob

    .14
    
    The Bible is not a book in which to GUESS or SUPPOSE things COULD HAVE
    or MAYBE COULD BE.  However, this is not the stance Patricia took she
    said emphatically that Mary Magdalene was an apostle... I'd like to
    know where she gets her facts.  
    
    If in fact, she is merely suppositioning her declaration, then let it
    be stated it was based on her own imaginings and not as fact.
    
    Simple,
    Nancy

re Note 926.15 by JULIET::MORALES_NA:

>     The Bible is not a book in which to GUESS or SUPPOSE things COULD HAVE
>     or MAYBE COULD BE.  However, this is not the stance Patricia took she
>     said emphatically that Mary Magdalene was an apostle... I'd like to
>     know where she gets her facts.  
  
        OK -- but if you wish to be even-handed, you should be
        equally emphatic in demanding that those who say Mary
        Magdalene *wasn't* an apostle support that statement with a
        citation or qualify it as an "imagining".

        For some reason, in this conference and others, liberals are
        called to a higher standard of support for their positions
        than are conservatives.

        Bob

    .16
    
    Absolutely be fair... :-)  I'd be willing to allow the supposition as
    long as it remains as a what if, not as a fact.
    
    I also would cite that as far as I know there is no gender related to
    the position of an apostle as there is to a Pastor, Bishop, etc.,
    however, God didn't reveal to us a woman as an apostle and therefore,
    since I believe His hand inspired the writers of the Bible, it makes it
    even less likely to be possible.
    
    Nancy

What's that quote from _The Once and Future King_?

		"Everything not mandatory is forbidden,
		 Everything not forbidden is mandatory."

Something like that.

.-)

Jim

    re 926.5
    
    Nancy,
    >Chapter and Verse
    
    I refuse to worship a book.
    
    If Paul could call himself an apostle, Mary Madgdelian certainly had
    more qualifications to call herself an Apostle than Paul.
    
    Patricia 

List those qualifications, and contrast and compare them with Paul's.

/john

    she was a witness to the resurrection, for one.
    
    she knew Jesus in the flesh for two.

    re 

    > List those qualifications, and contrast and compare them with Paul's.

    I thought I did. Please tell me what qualifications she is lacking.


    Eric

    PS. Was Mary Magdalene the sister of Martha (Luke 10:39)?

re: Note 926.22 by Eric

>    PS. Was Mary Magdalene the sister of Martha (Luke 10:39)?

I don't think so.

Jim

    Well, you can certainly suppose all you want about Mary Magdalene, but
    that doesn't make it Truth.
    
    I realize that it seems silly to you to believe the Bible to be God
    inspired and inerrant.... but since I do, I have to note from this
    viewpoint.  Therefore, Mary Magdalene was not revealed as having been
    an apostle.
    
    Just silly ol' me,
    Nancy

re Note 926.24 by JULIET::MORALES_NA:

>     I realize that it seems silly to you to believe the Bible to be God
>     inspired and inerrant.... but since I do, I have to note from this
>     viewpoint.  Therefore, Mary Magdalene was not revealed as having been
>     an apostle.
  
        You always seem to be ridiculing others, Patricia
        especially, as not regarding the Bible in their disputes with
        you.

        It is clear to me, at least, that regarding this issue
        Patricia believes that it is the Bible that gives ample
        evidence that the character of Mary Magdalene's role was not
        unlike the character of those who are named Apostle.  In the
        absence of a Biblical statement that Mary Magdalene was *not*
        an apostle, Patricia's inference is in fact Biblical.

        I know that you do not see or agree with this inference.  I'm
        not sure I do.  Patricia has not laid our all her reasoning
        behind this inference.

        However everything Patricia has said so far on this issue
        appears to be based upon her understanding of Scripture.  It
        is not based upon "imaginings" nor upon some other text.  To
        categorically call that unscriptural just because you don't
        come to the same conclusion looks to me like deception on
        your part.

        (Inerrancy is not an issue here -- there is no statement in
        the Bible that Mary Magdalene was not an Apostle, therefore
        Patricia's claim isn't that the Bible is in error in this
        regard.  However this would seem to be an example where the
        "fog of inerrancy" spreads to cover not only the text itself
        but traditional Christian doctrine.  A statement that Mary
        Magdalene was not an apostle is mere tradition, not directly
        stated in the Bible, but you seem to give it the status of
        inerrant truth anyway.)

        Bob

    I suspect Mary Magdalene is a different Mary than the Mary who was
    the sister of Martha and Lazarus.  Mary was a pretty common name
    then, I believe.
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

    Bob,
    
    I realize that I've barged into a clique of moderators here, but
    nonetheless, my issue with Patricia *had* to do with her labeling me
    homophobic...[as I [mis]understood her note].  All else is a matter of
    differing views, which I am more then willing to accept our differences
    and write about them as I see them.
    
    There was nothing condescending about note in regards to this topic, it
    was merely an exposure of said differings as it relates to our
    opposing viewpoints.
    
    

    Yeah!  If it wasn't for you clique-ish moderators!
    
    8*}
    
    Richard
    

    Richard, see 388.55... same applies here.

| <<< Note 926.27 by JULIET::MORALES_NA "Sweet Spirit's Gentle Breeze" >>>


| I realize that I've barged into a clique of moderators here, but
| nonetheless, my issue with Patricia *had* to do with her labeling me
| homophobic...[as I [mis]understood her note].  

	Really Nancy? Did you reread your .24 yet? It doesn't even touch on the
subject of you being homophobic. What gives? Did you confuse topics?

	BTW, you throw something on the table, "clique of moderators", then
when someone calls you on it you respond with antagonism? Please back the claim
you made. If you can, then you have a definite point. If you can not, then it
would appear that you, Nancy Morales, are the one who is doing the antagonism.
I mean, why else would you throw that line in if you can not back it?


Glen

    .30
    
    Glen, 
    
    Thanks for your concern.  It is noted.  
    
    Nancy

re: Note 926.27 by Nancy "Sweet Spirit's Gentle Breeze" 

>    I realize that I've barged into a clique of moderators here, 

I don't recall anyone replying in this topic with their "moderator hat" on.
References please?

Peace,

Jim

    I don't believe two people, of a (I think) 4 active moderators makes a
    clique.  And, as far as I know, moderators are not prohibited from
    expressing personal opinions.