The two had a romantic relationship! In fact, there is documentary proof showing that Jesus Christ was kissing Mary Magdalene in public and the disciples got jealous of her.

The evidence is contained in the Gospel of Philip, one of the Secret Gospels of Jesus Christ discovered in Nag Hammadi, Upper Egypt, in 1945, earlier than the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in the Qumran Caves... Here is the relevant passage of the Gospel of Philip according to the Nag Hammadi texts: "...the companion of 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]...

"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? When a blind man and one who sees are both together in darkness, they are no different from one another. When light comes, then he who sees will see the light, and he who is blind will remain in darkness.'

And the fact that they were romantically linked together, that Mary Magdalene was the girlfriend of Jesus, explains why Jesus first appeared to her rather than to any of the disciples after His resurrection; why Magdalene anointed Jesus' feet with a very expensive oil and He did not stop her from doing so; and why she was always present in all important events in Jesus' life, including at the Crucifixion.

One religious researcher said that it was common during that time for a single male teacher or rabbi to have a female companion. Nothing unusual or anomalous about that.

Of the three Marys who were the companions of Jesus, he showed special preference for Mary Magdalene. It seems to have been an accepted practice at that time. No one ever showed any embarrassment over it, except that some disciples got a bit jealous of her as the gospel of Philip indicates.

-- Sierra (xsel09x@aol.com), November 21, 2003

Answers

Need i even say anything??? And Sierra... Well never mind you are just ignorant...

KeV

-- Kevin Wisniewski (kez38spl@charter.net), November 21, 2003.

The so-called "Gospel of Philip" is not "documentary proof" of anything. It is a text of unknown origin which makes numerous claims known to be contrary to actual historical and scriptural accounts. The work is, at best, fiction; at worst, a deliberate attempt by the writer to disparage Jesus and His Apostles. It is one of several "gospels" which were excluded from the canon of scripture due to their spurious, and in some cases sacrilegious, content.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 21, 2003.

Sierra,

There were a number of false (fiction) letters that were written and circulated in the times of the early church by those who forged the names of Apostles and companions of the Lord. This was done by enemies of the true church to discredit as well as by gnostic groups who wanted to deceive as many as possible into believing their heresies. So they made up stories that supported their beliefs. Stories about Jesus and his disciples that are complete fiction. Those who walked with Jesus and knew him personally were able to refute these stories. But over time, the stories circulated and were kept in various archives and today, people such as yourself are picking up these fictions and believing them.

These are no more true than the Hollywood version of the story of Noah in which Noah is the one who was helping Lot and his wife to escape Sodom and Gomorrah, in reality, it was ABRAHAM who did that, not Noah. But then, it's just fiction with no real basis. So is the story you're believing, it's just a much older fiction, but it doesn't make it more true.

Dave

-- non-Catholic Christian (dlbowerman@yahoo.com), November 21, 2003.

The evidence is contained in the Gospel of Philip, one of the Secret Gospels of Jesus Christ discovered in Nag Hammadi, Upper Egypt, in 1945

funny how protestants throw out seven books of the bible because they dont like the implications, but then take the word of random papers and fictional texts like "da vinci code" over what is known in the faith...

just curious how this filth is placed higher than seven books which were a part of the bible...

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), November 22, 2003.

Mind thr Protestant Cracks. Not all Protestants, or even Most, care.

also, the "Gospel of Philip" was not even nessisarily in existance when the Bible was Cannonised. Ir was discoverd along wiht other things, like the Gospel of Thomas, and other Gnstic writings. all known copies of Philip date from at leats the Third Century. No Known text exists predating this. The scholars think it a Gnostic text, and hte Gnostics where well Known for writign their own Gospels to "Transfer the essoteric Knowledge" to others. In short, its a forgery.

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), November 22, 2003.

Zarove, the Gospel of Phillip is before 382 and 397 when the canon was fixed in the West.

By this time no heretics could live within the confines of the Roman Empire.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), November 25, 2003.

Elipdio:
Your information is false. Heretics couldn't live outside the roman Empire at all. The Empire covered all the known world. A heretical inhabitant of China or Sweden (of its day) would have been heretical to a pagan faith, not Christian. All Christianity was extant within the Empire.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 25, 2003.

Elipdio:
Your information is false. Heretics couldn't live outside the Roman Empire at all. The Empire covered all the known world. A heretical inhabitant of China or Sweden (of its day) would have been heretical to a pagan faith, not Christian. All Christianity was extant within the Empire.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 25, 2003.

The Visigoths, the vandals,....they were Arrian. They lived in and outside the Roman Empire.

In 400 they took over Spain. By 670 their King was convinced to become Catholic.

The Nestorians spread into what is now Iraq all the way to China.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), November 26, 2003.

That was for you Eugene.

Before I forget,

Happy thanksgiving to you.

A comer pavo se ha dicho.

-- Elpidio gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), November 26, 2003.

its also funyy how so many people seem to take what they learn in childhood and never stop to think, is this the truth, is this what i believe? take a moment and think, this could be true, and what if it is?

-- Anonymous (malignantmaniac@phreakbomb.zzn.com), December 30, 2003.

Why not look at it from this angle?

There comes a moment in our lives when we definitely should bring to mind what we've been taught as children; and make a conscious decision to follow the belief or abandon it.

As for instance: --Children who were instructed in Sunday school; ''Read the Bible. No other kind of knowledge is authentic; no Church or sacramental offering is called for. A concept we know as ''sola scriptura''.

This was fine when the baby was innocent. His knowledge had to be limited to what the parents believed. They believed priests were not biblical. They had no use for any religion, just Bible study. The child was reared in this faith without any further instruction. This young Christian, now in adolescence, perhaps, ought to rethink the matter. Especially if his/her love of God is fully awakened. His or her soul has a yearning for more; or an unsatisfied need for God's presence in life.

There will be much more to learn. Graces are his/hers for the asking; and the Church will bring him/her to true faith. There's no obligation to remain an unqualified Christian when Christ's Holy Church has the capacity to help you become a saint. Pray for God's grace to learn all the truth about Jesus Christ, in the Catholic Church.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), December 30, 2003.