The Passion of Mary Magdalen

[DoWhat]

I'm going to go to confession on Sunday, then sit in on Mass.
Let us all pray.

 

[Pete]

Just because you think a difference of opinion or belief is a classless, tacky, rude, blaspemous attack, doesn't make it true. Just like the bible. Just because people believe it, it doesn't make it true.

The reason I think your panties are in a bunch is because every time someone has a religious difference of opinion or discussion, you can't come to the aid of the good christian fast enough.

I never said that a difference of opinion is classless, tacky, rude, and blasphemous, I said being blasphemous and jabbing someone over their religious beliefs was classless, tacky, and rude.

If your bunched panties theory is true then yours must be wedged in pretty tight too because you don't seem to be able to pass by a discussion that involves blasphemous dialog without coming to the aide of the "religion is stupid and fake and so are the people who think it is true" side fast enough by grabbing a set of pom poms and cheering it on.

Either way;

Writing a sexually provocative book about Jesus is offensive and mocking, there is no way around it.

The DaVinci Code was one thing - that wasn't particularly shocking or salacious. It presented a different viewpoint in a non-offensive manner. But when some heathen like me goes, "Daaaaaamn" over a religious-themed book, then it's probably over the top.

You may

That's what I was tryin to say. And that I think getting all horned up over the made up sex life of Jesus is just skeezy.

Have the

I'm going to go to confession on Sunday, then sit in on Mass.
Let us all pray.

Last word.

 

[mAlice]

I never said that a difference of opinion is classless, tacky, rude, and blasphemous, I said being blasphemous and jabbing someone over their religious beliefs was classless, tacky, and rude.

If your bunched panties theory is true then yours must be wedged in pretty tight too because you don't seem to be able to pass by a discussion that involves blasphemous dialog without coming to the aide of the "religion is stupid and fake and so are the people who think it is true" side fast enough by grabbing a set of pom poms and cheering it on.

Either way;



You may



Have the



Last word.

Thank you. Have a nice evening.

 

[mAlice]

I didn't get "sexually provocative" form Geeks description. Furthermore, I have no problem knowing that anyone has a sexual relationship, whether it be to procreate, or out of an act of love. I don't understand people who have some weird fear of sex. It's what living creatures do.

The Passion of Mary Mag... 07-18-2006 07:44 PM you're stretching a bit there dear. you lost. give up

Please elaborate, and I haven't lost anything. Nor has anyone won anything.

 

[Christy]

Please elaborate, and I haven't lost anything. Nor has anyone won anything.

Tee hee, I made drama. :curtsy:

 

[Bustem' Down]

So an entire culture gets upset because someone drew comics depicting thier religious figure, and that's ok, they should just get over it already, but is someone makes up a story that involves Christ, it's wrong (and to quote Vrai, "rude") and all hell breaks loose.

 

[Toxick]

So an entire culture gets upset because someone drew comics depicting thier religious figure, and that's ok, they should just get over it already, but is someone makes up a story that involves Christ, it's wrong (and to quote Vrai, "rude") and all hell breaks loose.

1) I don't think there's been a price put on anyone's head by Christian Cult leaders.
2) What hell is breaking loose? This is a low-intensity debate on a discussion board.
3) I haven't even seen any Christians (as such) chime in. I have made it a point to not express my opinion on the concept. Other normally vocal Christians have also remained conspicuously silent.

Till now - and my opinion is:

It's no skin off my ass.

It might even be a decent story.

There's been speculation about the relationship between Mary M. and Jesus since always. Using this speculation in a book is not offensive to me, and based on what Geek has written thus far, it doesn't appear that was the author's intent either.

Furthermore, the idea of Jesus having ess-ee-ex isn't offensive to me, and the concept doesn't send me into the frothing lather that non-christians seem to expect.

 

[SamSpade]

So an entire culture gets upset because someone drew comics depicting thier religious figure, and that's ok, they should just get over it already, but is someone makes up a story that involves Christ, it's wrong (and to quote Vrai, "rude") and all hell breaks loose.

Interesting spin.

The reality is, someone draws pictures of a prophet, and there's days of rioting,killing and mayhem. They don't "get upset". They kill people.

Christians on the other hand, get painting of THEIR prophet depicted in a jar of p!ss, and *they* are supposed to just get over it.

The difference? The Christians DON'T riot, kill, commit mayhem, declare jihad. They don't like it, but basically they DO just - get over it.

The consequence? People ridicule Christians because they don't get fatwas decared against them.

Try writing this story about Mohammed from one of HIS women's point of view. See how long you live. Muslims DON'T just "get over it".

 

[SamSpade]

There's been speculation about the relationship between Mary M. and Jesus since always.

You know, honestly, this has always puzzled me. From actual Biblical accounts - and honestly, we know very little even FROM the Bible about Mary - there's not a whole lot of interaction between them. The most dramatic interaction is after Jesus' resurrection. Beyond that. there's not a lot.

But almost every Hollywood movie I've ever seen adds a little of this. Of course, almost every Hollywood movie I've seen based on ANY Bible story invariably adds SOME romance or intrigue where the Bible's largely silent - because far too many Bible stories are just - not - movie-worthy. They're kind of boring, some of them. The juiciest story of the Old Testament is probably David and Bathsheba, and there ain't much to it.

It's not uncommon for Hollywood to 'add' things based on - well, less than speculation. For example, Joseph never appears in the Gospels past the time of Jesus' childhood. Speculation is that he must have died young or was much older than Mary. But to be fair, there's not a whole lot about *MARY* beyond the birth and childhood of Jesus either. (Yes, she was at Cana, and at the cross. I do know the Bible; it's just not "a lot". Just as most of the apostles aren't there "a lot".).So why do people bring this up? Jesus was thirty when he began his ministry. So Dad wasn't around much. Maybe that was normal for a thirty-year-old in those days.

And we draw heavily on culture, tradition and things like songs. We all know about the three wise men. But the Bible never says there were three, and for all we know, there were a dozen. There were three gifts, so there probably were at least three. And they weren't kings or necessarily "wise men". They were Magi. Astrologers, basically. But we've even given them NAMES - written stories about a 4th wise man, who showed up late.

So when someone comes along and challenges it, so ingrained is the TRADITION, we balk at the fact that it never said so in the first place. That bears repeating - we're SO accustomed to our songs, culture, tradition and what we've always been told, when someone points out that none of it is based on fact but is complete and utter speculation - we don't like it. I've never figured out why people do this.

 

[mAlice]

You know, honestly, this has always puzzled me. From actual Biblical accounts - and honestly, we know very little even FROM the Bible about Mary - there's not a whole lot of interaction between them. The most dramatic interaction is after Jesus' resurrection. Beyond that. there's not a lot.

But almost every Hollywood movie I've ever seen adds a little of this. Of course, almost every Hollywood movie I've seen based on ANY Bible story invariably adds SOME romance or intrigue where the Bible's largely silent - because far too many Bible stories are just - not - movie-worthy. They're kind of boring, some of them. The juiciest story of the Old Testament is probably David and Bathsheba, and there ain't much to it.

It's not uncommon for Hollywood to 'add' things based on - well, less than speculation. For example, Joseph never appears in the Gospels past the time of Jesus' childhood. Speculation is that he must have died young or was much older than Mary. But to be fair, there's not a whole lot about *MARY* beyond the birth and childhood of Jesus either. (Yes, she was at Cana, and at the cross. I do know the Bible; it's just not "a lot". Just as most of the apostles aren't there "a lot".).So why do people bring this up? Jesus was thirty when he began his ministry. So Dad wasn't around much. Maybe that was normal for a thirty-year-old in those days.

And we draw heavily on culture, tradition and things like songs. We all know about the three wise men. But the Bible never says there were three, and for all we know, there were a dozen. There were three gifts, so there probably were at least three. And they weren't kings or necessarily "wise men". They were Magi. Astrologers, basically. But we've even given them NAMES - written stories about a 4th wise man, who showed up late.

So when someone comes along and challenges it, so ingrained is the TRADITION, we balk at the fact that it never said so in the first place. That bears repeating - we're SO accustomed to our songs, culture, tradition and what we've always been told, when someone points out that none of it is based on fact but is complete and utter speculation - we don't like it. I've never figured out why people do this.

Well said.

 

[vraiblonde]

Try writing this story about Mohammed from one of HIS women's point of view. See how long you live. Muslims DON'T just "get over it".

Thank you. I love how Christians (or even heathens like me) can merely object to how a religious symbol is portrayed, and they get likened to Islamic jihadists who are out cutting peoples' heads off.

 

[Geek]

Writing a sexually provocative book about Jesus is offensive and mocking, there is no way around it.

The DaVinci Code was one thing - that wasn't particularly shocking or salacious. It presented a different viewpoint in a non-offensive manner. But when some heathen like me goes, "Daaaaaamn" over a religious-themed book, then it's probably over the top.

It is actually abook about Mary Magadalen. Jesus is part of her story.

 

[vraiblonde]

It is actually abook about Mary Magadalen. Jesus is part of her story.

But the fact is that JESUS is the story. Mary Magdalene was a bit part in the Bible and in history.

That's like someone writing YOUR story and graphically fictionalizing your affair with Abraham Lincoln, then trying to say that the book is about you and Lincoln is only a part of it.

 

[mAlice]

But the fact is that JESUS is the story. Mary Magdalene was a bit part in the Bible and in history.

That's like someone writing YOUR story and graphically fictionalizing your affair with Abraham Lincoln, then trying to say that the book is about you and Lincoln is only a part of it.

If you see it through the eyes of an athiest, they're all fictional characters. So, I don't see it as any different than any other writer borrowing an idea from something else s/he read or saw.

 

[Christy]

If you see it through the eyes of an athiest, they're all fictional characters. So, I don't see it as any different than any other writer borrowing an idea from something else s/he read or saw.

She IS an athiest.

 

[mAlice]

She IS an athiest.

Well then, there ya' go.

 

[Kyle]

...
That's like someone writing YOUR story about your affair with Abraham Lincoln, then trying to say that the book is about you and Lincoln is only a part of it.

Funny... She doesn't look that old?

 

[DotTheEyes]

It sounds interesting. I'll search for it the next time I'm at Borders.

I am, however, surprised I haven't seen a news story yet about how it should be burned and/or banned. Guess it's not quite popular enough yet to inspire a massive, horrifying fit among hardcore Jesus lovers. Maybe Ron Howard should direct a movie adaptation.

 

[Geek]

It sounds interesting. I'll search for it the next time I'm at Borders.

I am, however, surprised I haven't seen a news story yet about how it should be burned and/or banned. Guess it's not quite popular enough yet to inspire a massive, horrifying fit among hardcore Jesus lovers. Maybe Ron Howard should direct a movie adaptation.

I would love to hear your opinion on the story Pm me when you find it