High Stakes Page 9
Mary Magdalene always was with him and even took notes. When her gospel was found in Akhmim, Egypt, in 1896, it contained information that was very enlightening, and most of it was not in the four canonical gospels. It certainly indicated that Jesus shared with her all of his teachings and that she understood his teachings better than any of his disciples, because she was later known as the “Apostle to the Apostles.” This would be a great honor, considering the status of women at the time. Some Gnostic texts consider her to be the first disciple or apostle because she understood his teachings so well and even interpreted some of them for Peter and James. In the Gnostic Gospel of Philip, it acknowledges the fact that Jesus often kissed Mary Magdalene on the mouth and implies that she was the most beloved of all his disciples. Philip’s gospel is also one of the reasons why some scholars now think that indeed Jesus and Mary were married.
Aside from his ministry we don’t ever hear about the “social Christ.” My guide says he had a highly developed sense of humor and loved children…and often was seen playing with a type of ball and hoop in the midst of a group of excited and laughing youngsters. Francine says he loved to have what we today would call picnics, taking food and drink and going to a grove of olive trees and eating and drinking and talking about all manner of things with his disciples and friends.
He also loved visiting at not only the poorer homes, but homes of the elite for dinners. He talked with people of different races and religions, even though that part of the country was not a real melting pot. There were always merchants and caravans coming through and he loved hearing about distant lands and news from the parts of the world he had visited and studied in.
According to many artists, Christ had a very olive complexion, almost dark like many Arabs’, with luxurious shoulder-length hair that fell into soft curls. Francine says he wore a close, well-trimmed beard and mustache. He had full lips, an aquiline nose, huge dark eyes with gold flecks in them, perfect eyebrows and beautiful teeth. He stood close to six feet or a little more in height (which was unusual for that day) with a fairly lean body or frame. Magdalene had red hair (which was also unusual), brown eyes and was also olive-skinned. She stood five feet six inches, which was also taller than most women of her day. I believe his height gave him a presence and commanded respect in a world where men were lucky to make it to five six or five eight and women from four feet ten to five feet. Even if you look at some of the suits of armor in museums, they are so small that you wonder who could have worn them. I’ve also seen the beds at some of the old missions in California, and they look like beds for children.
In all my travels, the one person I found to be tall and large in armor and clothing was King Henry VIII. I understand that Mary, Queen of Scots, was five feet eleven; but people like these two were the exception and not the rule. Most people in ancient times were much smaller in stature than people today, due to either a lack of food or poor diets—although Francine says that the Merovingian and King David lines were tall and Joseph was fairly tall, being a descendant of King David. Mary, Christ’s mother, was also fairly tall for her time, so it must have been a design for notability from God, as well as her DNA.
Jesus was well built, but more on the athletic angular side rather than huge and muscular. I think the climate and all the walking lent itself to that. Francine says he wasn’t a vegetarian, even though he had been at one point in India. He ate lamb, fruits, vegetables, olives, dates and fish, which he dearly loved. Remember, he was part of the disciples’ fishing trips. His favorite meal was fish, fruit, lamb and wine. At that time, there were no alcoholic drinks to speak of except wine, which was plentiful and cheap. They drank wine because most of the water was bad; unless they went up into the mountains to drink spring water, good drinking water was fairly scarce because sewage from the towns ran into the water supplies. Although the Judaic people were very hygienic, they were not that knowledgeable about sanitation and sewage systems. The Romans were fairly knowledgeable about sanitation, but sewer systems of any size were confined to the larger cities and towns and not to rural areas such as Galilee. The pollution of water supplies gave rise to leprosy and all kinds of parasite and bacterial illnesses such as amoebic dysentery and giardiasis.
Jesus seemed to never, ever be sick, nor to have any type of physical malady ever. Magdalene was also privileged with good health and not to be ill or have any maladies. We must remember that the Hebrew communities were very much ahead of the world as far as hygiene was concerned. That’s why they survived the plagues in Europe, and many thought the reason they did was because they were in league with the devil. The Judaic people believed in cleanliness and in not eating pork—rightly so, because at that time swine carried so much disease. We know now not to even eat half-done pork because it causes trichinosis and other diseases.
As Jesus traveled and socialized, he also, as we know, healed and taught. My guide says that only major points of major sermons were recorded, but she says he talked to huge groups and multitudes at least four days or nights a week. Sometimes his sermons would last hours and sometimes he did two a day. He usually did not preach on the Sabbath, except in the occasional synagogue, and that was probably due to his Judaic upbringing and obedience to old rabbinic laws.
Three years might not seem like a long time, but with this kind of schedule Jesus literally reached thousands of people. Francine says he spoke a beautiful sermon about marriage and children and the sanctity of the female, but it was not transcribed. We can’t blame this omission on the Church, for the original scribes who had a Judaic background and archaic beliefs concerning women just chose not to write it down. I feel it’s because old norms or religious teachings die hard. We have to take into consideration that even though they were disciples, they still had been raised with Judaic law that, as we read in the Old Testament, treated women as less than nothing. Old teachings put forth that women were made to work, be quiet, give birth and wait on their husbands. So a sermon about the equality of women, I feel, was purposefully not taken down and transcribed.
The disciples of Christ in more than one instance show great jealousy toward Mary Magdalene. In the Gospel of Philip, a Gnostic gospel that is not included as canon in the Bible, it says: As for the wisdom who is called “the Barren,” she is the mother of the angels. And the companion to the Savior is Mary Magdalene. But Christ loved her more than all the disciples and used to kiss her often on her mouth. The rest of the disciples were offended by it and expressed disapproval. 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?” Now, to be fair, a portion of this gospel is missing just at the point where “on her mouth” is, and that translation of those three words is a scholarly “best guess” or assumption. Francine says it does say mouth and that the actual three words were on the mouth. Even though scholars say people exchanged kisses frequently in that day and age (Judas betraying Christ with a kiss, etc.), the jealousy part should give us pause to consider. You are only jealous of someone who is shown favoritism, as she was undoubtedly shown. Jesus confided in her, loved her, and he wanted her to carry on his church…not Peter, as the Bible says.
Jesus felt Peter was good, but in many ways a dolt. We must remember that Peter was a poor fisherman who had hardly any education. Most of us are acquainted with Christ’s supposedly saying that Peter was a rock and that he would build his church upon it (Matthew 16:18). Francine says this is erroneous and that it was a case of the humor of Jesus manifesting itself when he actually said tongue-in-cheek, “Why would I build my philosophy on you, Peter? You have no more courage or charisma than a rock.” I had always wondered (before I heard Francine’s translation) why Christ would use a rock to define Peter; especially when you realize he predicted accurately, before his crucifixion, that Peter would deny him three times before the cock would crow…which came to pass, according to the Bible.
I don’t know about you, and not to judge Peter, but I’m not sure
I’d leave my teachings to someone so disloyal and even cowardly. Of course he went on to repent and teach and was later crucified upside down, but this was years later. Again, none of us can really know what we would do out of fear…that’s not the issue. It’s an issue of giving over control to someone with strength and loyalty.
This would make sense because after Christ’s crucifixion, women held all the prominent places in early Gnostic Christianity. They were the ones who despised the so-called blessings and spiritual teachings of both the Judaic religion and the early Jewish Christians. Then later on we have Paul coming into the picture, and Peter aligns with Paul while James, the brother of Jesus, remains as the head of the Jewish Christians. Later still, as I stated before, the Roman emperor Constantine adopts “Pauline Christianity” and thus the Catholic Church was born with Peter as its first symbolic Pope.
I remember when I was at St. Theresa’s College, in Christian marriage class we were told we were always second and subservient to our husbands and that we were to have as many children as God saw fit. I won’t go into how many times I was kept after class to be reprimanded by Father Nadian, but during those talks I found out even he felt differently but under Church law had to teach the dogma. I grew to love this priest and saw the pain this dear Dominican faced in being torn by what his heart and logic told him as opposed to what he was supposed to teach. I can’t wait to see him on the Other Side, and run toward him screaming that we were right and now we are free in our thoughts.
Francine says Magdalene always walked in front and to the right of Jesus and behind them walked the disciples. This could have been another reason they felt jealous. Instead of one of them, a woman takes first place next to Jesus. Of course, it would be a natural position if she was his wife.
We don’t read much of Christ’s mother in the Bible either. She seems, except for the birth, the wedding feast at Cana and possibly a brief mention that she was at the crucifixion…to just disappear. With men writing the Bible I’m convinced they just left women out as much as possible. We see in the Old Testament Deborah, Esther, Ruth and Bathsheba, but except for a few other minor villainesses such as Jezebel, the queen of Sheba, Salome and Lot’s wife, who was turned into a pillar of salt because she looked back at the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, women are secondary players.
Francine says Magdalene was very close to Mary, as well as Mary of Bethany, Martha and Naomi, who used to travel with Jesus and his brothers and sisters. So they traveled with a fairly large core group. Mary had known Magdalene most of her life and felt like she was truly a daughter and was extremely happy to have her as a daughter-in-law. This bears up at the crucifixion when they and John (the beloved) and others (depending upon which gospel you read) stood at the cross together while the rest of the disciples went into hiding.
CHAPTER 6
The Real Passion Story of Christ
WHETHER HE WAS CURING the sick, making the lame walk or the blind see, he was constantly preaching. He had only a few run-ins with the Sanhedrin. They tried at first to ignore him, feeling as if he was just another fanatic like John the Baptist; but as his popularity grew and the synagogues began to be empty, they became more alarmed. This came from two motives. One, they were losing money, and two, they didn’t want to make the Romans angry; not only because they had their own gods, but because they wanted to separate themselves from the fact that, after all, he was a Jew and they were afraid they would be blamed for his words that went against Judaic teaching.
In all deference, let’s understand that this religion had already existed and flourished for hundreds of years and gave birth to great kings and great religious beliefs for the time. Here they sat, the lawmakers and judges of the Judaic faith, with this “new” prophet, so to speak, who threatened the fiber of their established religion. The Romans at the same time became somewhat nervous, because wherever he went huge crowds gathered and this could spell insurrection.
The Jewish people, sadly, have had to bear the stigma of crucifying Christ. But we didn’t live then, and if our establishment was threatened, how do we know what we would have done? Both the Jews and the Romans had a hand in his crucifixion—which, by the way, was the favorite Roman means of execution at that time. Later on, to the Romans, it became burning at the stake or a means of entertainment such as throwing criminals to wild animals; but at that time the Roman norm was crucifixion, just as the Jewish norm was stoning to death. Let’s also not forget Jesus had to go through this to fulfill the prophecies that would culminate in his supposed death. It was out of this martyrdom that his teachings would live on.
Let’s be logical…his teachings were vying against the long-standing religions of Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism and the all-powerful Romans as well as other religions that were minor but popular. No one knew anything of this new monotheistic religious philosophy of a gentle, loving and all-forgiving God. Most Eastern religions don’t have a personal God as such or they have many deities. The Judaic religion had one God, but He was unreachable, harsh, unforgiving and sometimes very frightening. So there appears on the stage of life a man who is trying to set the record straight, and he might well be ignored and forgotten unless his exit were dramatic. Let’s face it, the world seems to love martyrs.
Yet here is where there is a big hole in the prophecies. The “Savior” was supposed to come and free the Jews. He was to be a king with wealth and, much like Moses, was to free them from oppression and lead them in their promised land. Christ came to show them how to be free in their souls and how to correct and live their lives so they could truly live in the “promised land” of the Kingdom of God (the Other Side). Christ did neither and yet he did both…does that sound confusing?
Some of the Messianic prophecies (prophecies pertaining to the Savior, and there are reputedly over three hundred) are: The Jewish Savior was to be from the lineage of David—Christ fulfilled that. The Savior was to be born of a virgin (a misinterpreted and man-made prophecy to deflect the influence of other religions)—Christ supposedly fulfilled that. The Savior was to be heralded by a messenger of God (John the Baptist)—Jesus fulfilled that. He would perform miracles—Jesus fulfilled that. He would preach good news—Jesus fulfilled that. He would enter Jerusalem as a King riding a donkey—Christ fulfilled that. He would die a humiliating and painful death—Christ supposedly fulfilled that. His hands and feet would be pierced—Jesus fulfilled that. His executioners would cast lots for his clothing—evidently fulfilled. None of his bones would be broken in his execution—Christ fulfilled that. His side would be pierced—Jesus fulfilled that. He would die with the wicked and be buried in a rich man’s tomb—Christ supposedly fulfilled that. He would be born in Bethlehem—Jesus fulfilled that. He would come out of Egypt—Christ fulfilled that. And on and on it goes. Most of these Messianic prophecies from the Old Testament are very vague in nature and can be ascribed or not ascribed to Jesus depending upon interpretation. One of the main prophecies of the Savior was to bring world peace…Christ did not do that.
The problem with prophecies is that they are made many times by men or women for humankind, are interpreted by humankind and are always looked upon from the perspective of living life on earth. After all, most of us only consider reality to be what we can feel, hear, taste, smell and see…the premise of anything else being a part of reality is purely subjective, and therein lies the problem. God and the Afterlife are for most people a belief and not a reality, and are therefore a matter of faith. For those who are more enlightened spiritually, faith becomes knowing and also a part of their reality. The problem with most religion is that it is based on faith and not reality…thus, although a person who is religious may believe that something is true, they don’t really know if it’s true. They are put in the position of having God and an Afterlife compared to what they perceive as reality, and sadly, God and the premise of an Afterlife come in a poor second. This is because very few can hear, touch or see God or an Afterlife. If we can’t sense something with our five main
senses, it ceases to be real to us and then becomes a matter of faith—which is a poor substitute for our perceived reality.
If God would get on a loudspeaker that covered all the world and say, “I want to introduce myself, I am God”—then most likely all of us would make God part of our reality. Or if the heavens opened and all of us on Earth saw the Other Side in all its glory in a prolonged vision, then the chances are most of us might also make that a part of our reality. It is also a distinct possibility that many of us would say that hearing God or seeing the Other Side was only our imagination working overtime or a delusion. The point is that humankind perceives reality to be the life we live on Earth and that the belief in God (or gods) and an Afterlife will always be as diverse as the numerous cultures we have here on this planet.
Prophecy is nothing more than an extension of belief and faith. We certainly don’t know if something prophesied will happen until it happens, and there are many prophecies that have not happened yet and certainly many that were not fulfilled. In the case of Jesus, there are many who say he fulfilled the Messianic prophecies and many who say he didn’t. Does it really matter whether or not Christ fulfilled these Messianic prophecies? Is prophecy such an exact science that millions of Judaic people are still waiting for their savior because of it or that billions of Christian, Judaic and Islamic peoples are still waiting for the Judgment Day?
It seems that if a prophecy was made by David or Isaiah or Jeremiah, it has to be true; but many of their prophecies have not come to pass. The reason I have inserted this section on prophecy and reality is that it shows how strongly the Bible was associated with people who told the future. Then, after the Bible was put together, the Christian era banned all telling of future happenings. It’s acceptable to prophesy in the Old Testament, but not after the Church was established, for it did not fit into the Church’s perception of reality. It’s also all right to prophesy if you are a saint, but keep it under wraps and above all keep it quiet if you are not. I’ve often wondered how religions all of a sudden decided that prophets were no longer being born and that prophecy was pure hogwash, especially when it plays such a large part in the dogma of all the major religions.