Well, Wikipedia doesn’t think so.
At least some of the ruling classes of Europe in the Late Middle Ages saw the Lord of Lords as one of them; & the kings of Europe sometimes represented themselves as gods. I see the children-of-the-Magdalene myth as part of that tendency.
Modern Anglophone Christians may be disturbed to learn that King James (he of the Authorised Version of the Bible) said,
excuse me, I was replying to BrainGlutton.
[HIJACK]Of course Baigent & Leigh’s suit against Dan Brown ultimately fell apart on the grounds that they claim their book is non-fiction while his is a novel. Had Baigent & Leigh marketed their book originally as a novel they’d have eaten Brown’s lunch, because essentially half of Da Vinci Code was a rewrite of HBHG, but there’s no law protecting novelization of historical research- it would be the same as somebody here writing a novel about John Adams that used McCullough’s bestselling biography as their leading source.
My sympathies were originally with Leigh/Baigent until this occurred. Now I think that had they been smart they’d have used the money they spent on lawyers to hire publicists to milk the book’s obvious influence on DaVinci Code for every penny they could in book sales and speaking engagements.[/HIJACK]
[HIJACK]I suppose it’s now too late to correct this almost universal misunderstanding of what it was that Mr Justice Smith actually said (a PDF file of the full judgment can be accessed here). His discussion of the legal issues involved left open the possibility that a novel using an argument from a non-fiction work could indeed, under certain circumstances, constitute a breach of copyright. He instead dismissed the case on the grounds that what Brown had used (the alleged ‘Central Themes’) didn’t really amount to a single, specific, coherent or central argument.[/HIJACK]
But Brainglutton’s question still stands. It can also be generalised. What’s the actual evidence that anyone in the Middle Ages (or indeed before the twentieth century) claimed descent from Jesus or Mary Magdalene?
Which is irrelevant as James VI and I never claimed to be descended from God, despite the fact that, like most of the Stuarts, he was inordinately proud of his ancestry and did claim to be descended from lots of other improbable people.
In response to JThunder…John chapter 10 verse 33to 36. and many occasions when Jesus was quoted as saying my Father and yours.
Monavis
But there are not “many occasions.” There is one occasion in John 20:17 that I am sure you would argue meets your standard and others would argue that you have misunderstood. However, that is the only occasion that I can recall where any phrase resembling “my Father and yours” appears in the Gospels.
Maybe, but there’s also verses like
That indicate the same sort of conclusion.
When something like Holy Blood, Holy Grail becomes controversial, isn’t it sort of putting the cart before the horse? That is, wouldn’t it be more significant if somebody could prove these people (Jesus, Mary Magdalene, et al) even existed, before arguing over whether they had kids?
I’m not being flip; maybe this is one of those areas where I just don’t understand religious people. To me it seems like arguing over whether pre-Crisis Superman could compress the Sun into a black hole; understandable as a geeky intellectual game, but not something to get upset about.
I suppose they could be twisted around to have that meaning. Being “in” a person in some sort of mystical way hardly seems to be the same statement as “my father and yours.” I was just curious where monavis thought the specific phrase had been used more than one time–particularly “frequently” or “most always.”
The difference is, no comic book fan believes his soul’s welfare depends on a good personal relationship with Superman.
Actually, there is some historic evidence that the Desposyni (“of the Lord”), acknowledged blood relatives (but not lineal descendants) of Jesus, were the principal leaders of the early Church, and maintained their identity and some measure of importance at least into the 4th Century AD. But after that they seem to have faded from view.
Actyally it would make Mary and Jesus sexual critters. Maybe they had sex a lot and liked it. Keep it simple .Dont let people visualize Mary or Jesus humping away into history.
Or even something new or unusual, something different from what one has always believed. I think it’s because American Christians (unlike European Christians) personally identify so closely with their religion. This is probably an outgrowth of the “personal relationship with Jesus” nature of American evangelism, which in turn is a result of the uniquely American concept of individual rights (not that the concept of individual rights is uniquely American, but rather the uniquely American emphasis of those rights.) When one challenges someone’s religious concepts, he is challenging their very identity; if you say Jesus wasn’t celibate, you cast doubt on everything I believe, because almost everything I believe (about sex, for instance) arises from a belief in a celibate Jesus. If you say there was no such thing as a Roman tradition of freeing a Hebrew prisoner at Passover (there wasn’t, actually) then you cast doubt on the very scriptures by which I live my life. My judgements of right and wrong, my decisions on what to eat or drink or smoke (or not smoke); on how to vote, where to send my children to school, what I say to people, what organizations I belong to – my entire life is shaped by that scripture, and you now say it is incorrect or just plain wrong – where does that leave me?!
And yes, that’s like casting aspersions on one’s parents; imagine the soap-operaesque experience of being told the man you’ve called Father all these years really isn’t your dad. It’s a stunner. It causes real fear. “Then who am I!?”
Then maybe the goal is to get people to not fear that question. That is a major fear that permeates much of our lives. Drastic changes of several kinds can cause that. I want people to understand that its normal and even desirable for our beliefs to progress and change. Not just for the sake of change itself but we shouldn’t let fear of change be the cause of stagnation.
Unfortunately, you ain’t pope.
Although, Jesus either had kids or he didn’t, and whichever it is, it ain’t gonna change or progress no matter how much we avoid stagnation.
I’d like to think you’re right.
He taught them to say “Our Father” indicating they were chikdren of God,( no mention of adoption), There are so many ways to interpet what the writers of the Bible wrote, one can take any passage and use it to one’s own advantage. The Holy Spirit must inspire all (or many) people to see things differently.
Since Jesus told the folowers that the world would end with the stars falling and the moon not giving it’s light etc. would indicate that he did not have any more knowledge of the scientific world than any other person of his time. Of course we do not know what Jesus actually said, Just what some one quoted him as saying. People either choose to believe those writers or not.
Monavis
:smack: Now being Chikdren of God would be something,wouldn’t it? Children would be something else!!!
Monavis
<shudder> thank God