# Magdalene a prostitute? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports\ **Created:** [April 1, 2005, 12:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/magdalene-a-prostitute/297217 "2005-04-01T12:25:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![juzka81](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c2a13f/32.png) [@juzka81](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/juzka81)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 12:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/magdalene-a-prostitute/297217/1 "2005-04-01T12:25:54Z")
Please dear Cecil, Why did you call Mary Magdalene a prostitute?([http://www.straightdope.com/columns/050401.html](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/050401.html)) Bible never called her that. This assumption is made by some old fools in the church who didn’t want to recognise a woman as an apostol. It is about time we started respecting her true legacy. “The Bible never explicitly says that Mary Magdalene was ever a prostitute at any point in her life. Luke does not name her in his narrative about the “penitent whore” who washes the feet of Jesus with her hair (7:36-50). Nor is she named as the woman who was caught in the act of adultery and saved from being stoned to death by Jesus (John 8:1-11). She is identified as once having been demon-possessed (Luke 8:2). However, the assumption that her sinful past consisted primarily of sexual sin is a presumption that is not usually made about the men who are identified as former sinners.” [http://members.tripod.com/~Ramon\_K\_Jusino/magdalene.html](http://members.tripod.com/~Ramon_K_Jusino/magdalene.html) ---
**Author:** ![Ed\_Zotti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/fbc32d/32.png) [@Ed\_Zotti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ed_Zotti)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/magdalene-a-prostitute/297217/2 "2005-04-01T13:28:13Z")
> [@juzka81](#): > > Why did you call Mary Magdalene a prostitute?([http://www.straightdope.com/columns/050401.html](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/050401.html)) Bible never called her that. This assumption is made by some old fools in the church who didn’t want to recognise a woman as an apostol. It is about time we started respecting her true legacy. Cecil addressed this question [here.](http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a980918.html) Mary Magdalene is popularly if probably erroneously assumed to have been a prostitute, but we were running up against the word limit in the print version of the column and omitted this nuance. Since that’s not an issue here, I’ve amended the text. ---
**Author:** ![John\_W.Kennedy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_w.kennedy/32/1031_2.png) [@John\_W.Kennedy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_W.Kennedy)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/magdalene-a-prostitute/297217/3 "2005-04-01T16:43:29Z")
> [@juzka81](#): > > Why did you call Mary Magdalene a prostitute?([http://www.straightdope.com/columns/050401.html](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/050401.html)) Bible never called her that. This assumption is made by some old fools in the church who didn’t want to recognise a woman as an apostol. It is about time we started respecting her true legacy. While you are right on the point that MM is nowhere recorded to have been a prostitute (though, [as Cecil pointed out in 1998](http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a980918.html) the identification of Mary Magdalene, Mary of Bethany, and the “woman who was a sinner” is an ancient one), Mary Magdalene is also nowhere recorded to have been an apostle. Words have meanings. ---
**Author:** ![Khadaji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Khadaji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Khadaji)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/magdalene-a-prostitute/297217/4 "2005-04-01T19:56:42Z")
> [@John W. Kennedy](#): > > While you are right on the point that MM is nowhere recorded to have been a prostitute (though, > [as Cecil pointed out in 1998](http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a980918.html) the identification of Mary Magdalene, Mary of Bethany, and the “woman who was a sinner” is an ancient one), Mary Magdalene is also nowhere recorded to have been an apostle. > > Words have meanings. Not quite true. Perhaps you mean “no where in the new testament.” However, in the gnostic gospels, particularly in the Gospel of Mary, she is indeed refered to as an apostle. Some might say that Mathew implies it. > [@](#): > > She then heard the question: “Woman, why weepest thou?” – she answered them with the words which she had said to the Apostles: “They have taken my Lord, and I do not know, where they have put Him.” Having said this, she turned around, and at that moment saw a figure standing near the grave, a man she did not immediately recognize. > > The man asked Mary: “Woman, why weepest thou? Whom dost thou seek?” She answered thinking that she was seeing the gardener and said: “Sir, if thou hast taken him, tell where thou hast put Him, and I will reclaim Him.” > > But at that very moment she recognized the Lord’s voice, a voice which was known from the day He healed her and she gave a joyful shout “Rabbi!” which means “Teacher.” Both the use of “My lord” and the use of \*Rabbi \* might imply that Jesus was her teacher and she was an apostle. I’m not sure that I agree, but it can be viewed that way. ---
**Author:** ![John\_W.Kennedy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_w.kennedy/32/1031_2.png) [@John\_W.Kennedy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_W.Kennedy)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2005, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/magdalene-a-prostitute/297217/5 "2005-04-02T14:49:33Z")
> [@Khadaji](#): > > Not quite true. Perhaps you mean “no where in the new testament.” However, in the gnostic gospels, particularly in the Gospel of Mary, she is indeed refered to as an apostle. Some might say that Mathew implies it. The Gnostic gospels, though they might contain an authentic tradition or two here and there, are almost entirely bullshit; you might as well build an argument on the _National Enquirer_ and the _Weekly World News_. > [@Khadaji](#): > > Both the use of “My lord” and the use of _Rabbi_ might imply that Jesus was her teacher and she was an apostle. Ah. So if I address Elizabeth Windsor as “Your Majesty”, that means I must be the British Ambassador? ---
**Author:** ![Khadaji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Khadaji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Khadaji)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2005, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/magdalene-a-prostitute/297217/6 "2005-04-02T15:58:16Z")
> [@John W. Kennedy](#): > > The Gnostic gospels, though they might contain an authentic tradition or two here and there, are almost entirely bullshit; you might as well build an argument on the _National Enquirer_ and the _Weekly World News_. LOL. Many would make the same argument regarding the New Testament. They are nice stories, but there is no evidence that Jesus actually existed and so they could therefore be almost entirely bullshit. > [@](#): > > Ah. So if I address Elizabeth Windsor as “Your Majesty”, that means I must be the British Ambassador? :rolleyes: Please. The argument has no merit, as it is not comparable. Jesus, if he existed at all, was recognized as a teacher. The fact that Mary calls him “her lord” and “Rabbi” could indeed imply that he was her teacher. It was you who said that words have meaning. Or not. You have chosen to ignore the sentence where I said I was not sure I agree. Mary may also have been simply using Rabbi as an honorific, rather than as an acknowledgement that he was her teacher. ---
**Author:** ![John\_W.Kennedy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_w.kennedy/32/1031_2.png) [@John\_W.Kennedy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_W.Kennedy)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2005, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/magdalene-a-prostitute/297217/7 "2005-04-02T17:00:44Z")
> [@Khadaji](#): > > LOL. Many would make the same argument regarding the New Testament. They are nice stories, but there is no evidence that Jesus actually existed and so they could therefore be almost entirely bullshit. No. First of all, there is plenty of evidence that Jesus actually existed. What you really mean is, “If we exclude all the evidence that Jesus existed, then there is no evidence that Jesus existed,” the same argument that lunatics use every day to try to prove that Shakespeare didn’t write his own plays. The Gnostic gospels are bullshit because they’re bullshit–wacky fever-dream nonsense of the same kind you can get from any dime-store “medium” or murdering homeopath. > [@Khadaji](#): > > :rolleyes: Please. The argument has no merit, as it is not comparable. Jesus, if he existed at all, was recognized as a teacher. The fact that Mary calls him “her lord” and “Rabbi” could indeed imply that he was her teacher. It was you who said that words have meaning. Yes. Words have meanings, “apostle” has a meaning, and that meaning is not “disciple”. [/QUOTE] ---
**Author:** ![bdgr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a87d85/32.png) [@bdgr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bdgr)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2005, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/magdalene-a-prostitute/297217/8 "2005-04-02T17:58:42Z")
> [@Khadaji](#): > > but there is no evidence that Jesus actually existed … The master disagrees with you there: [http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2\_275.html](http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2_275.html) ---
**Author:** ![Khadaji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Khadaji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Khadaji)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2005, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/magdalene-a-prostitute/297217/9 "2005-04-02T19:24:19Z")
> [@John W. Kennedy](#): > > Yes. Words have meanings, “apostle” has a meaning, and that meaning is not “disciple”. [Thesaurus.com would disagree with you](http://thesaurus.reference.com/search?r=2&q=disciple) > [@](#): > > \*\*Main Entry: disciple \*\* > Part of Speech: noun > Definition: believer > Synonyms: adherent, **apostle** , attendant, booster, buff, bug, catechumen, cohort, convert, devotee, enthusiast, fan, fanatic, fiend, follower, freak, groupie, henchman, hound, junkie, learner, nut, partisan, proselyte, pupil, rooter, satellite, sectary, sectator, seer, stooge, student, supporter, votary, witness, zealot [Synonym at Dictionary.com](http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=Synonym) > [@](#): > > syn·o·nym ( P ) Pronunciation Key (sn-nm) > n. > A word having the same or nearly the same meaning as another word or other words in a language. Simply saying that something is bullshit does not make it so. So far, your proofs seem to be centered around your opinion. ---
**Author:** ![John\_W.Kennedy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_w.kennedy/32/1031_2.png) [@John\_W.Kennedy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_W.Kennedy)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2005, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/magdalene-a-prostitute/297217/10 "2005-04-02T23:32:32Z")
> [@Khadaji](#): > > [Thesaurus.com would disagree with you](http://thesaurus.reference.com/search?r=2&q=disciple) I cannot believe that anyone with adult language skills would seriously advance the notion that “catechumen” (to say nothing of “freak” and “fanatic”) is equivalent to “apostle”, so I assume this is just your way of surrendering the point. (As other instances of the absurdity of your position, that same website lists “captain” for “sergeant” and “canadian bacon” for “steak”.) > [@Khadaji](#): > > Simply saying that something is bullshit does not make it so. So far, your proofs seem to be centered around your opinion. My informed opinion, together with my ability to recognize mystyck woo-woo when I see it. ---
**Author:** ![C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b2d939/32.png) [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/C_K_Dexter_Haven)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2005, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/magdalene-a-prostitute/297217/11 "2005-04-02T23:45:17Z")
WHOA!!! Name-calling and insults are not permitted in this forum. Play nice. ---
**Author:** ![Khadaji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Khadaji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Khadaji)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2005, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/magdalene-a-prostitute/297217/12 "2005-04-03T00:31:08Z")
> [@John W. Kennedy](#): > > I cannot believe that anyone with adult language skills would seriously advance the notion that “catechumen” (to say nothing of “freak” and “fanatic”) is equivalent to “apostle”, so I assume this is just your way of surrendering the point. (As other instances of the absurdity of your position, that same website lists “captain” for “sergeant” and “canadian bacon” for “steak”.)My informed opinion, together with my ability to recognize mystyck woo-woo when I see it. I have provided sites for my claims. Can you show us credentials to indicate that you have a better understanding of the language than the people from [Lexico Publishing Group, LLC](http://www.lexico.com/)? Can you provide sites for the > [@](#): > > plenty of evidence that Jesus actually existed ? Informed opinion or not, I have to take a skeptical stance until you provide some proof more than “Because I say so.” In truth, I suspect that Jesus did exist, but cannot prove it to my satisfaction. (Of course, **bdgr** makes a good point - if Cecil says it, it must be so. 😃 ) ---
**Author:** ![John\_W.Kennedy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_w.kennedy/32/1031_2.png) [@John\_W.Kennedy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_W.Kennedy)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2005, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/magdalene-a-prostitute/297217/13 "2005-04-03T13:16:26Z")
So you _are_ claiming that the terms “steak” and “Canadian bacon” are interchangeable? Well, that argument is certainly unanswerable. ---
**Author:** ![Khadaji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Khadaji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Khadaji)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2005, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/magdalene-a-prostitute/297217/14 "2005-04-03T13:37:15Z")
A review of your proofs so far seem to be: > [@](#): > > First of all, there is plenty of evidence that Jesus actually existed. But you provide none. > [@](#): > > What you really mean is, “If we exclude all the evidence that Jesus existed, then there is no evidence that Jesus existed,” No, what I really mean is, please provide the proof of which you claim there is plenty. > [@](#): > > The Gnostic gospels are bullshit because they’re bullshit Lacking somewhat in useful information that would allow us to verify the claim. > [@](#): > > My informed opinion, together with my ability to recognize mystyck woo-woo when I see it. Your informed opinion is nice, but please, show us the credentials. I do not have your expertise in “mystyck woo-woo,” so I’m not sure how to distinguish between that and the New Testament in which the authors claim that Jesus raised a man from the dead, walked on water, rose from the dead and cast out demons. Unfortunately, this thread has degenerated into me asking for sites and credentials and you ignoring these requests by telling us you have informed opinions. I see no reason to continue the discussion unless you are willing to provide any information other than your opinion. ---
**Author:** ![bdgr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a87d85/32.png) [@bdgr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bdgr)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2005, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/magdalene-a-prostitute/297217/15 "2005-04-03T15:28:55Z")
> [@Khadaji](#): > > A review of your proofs so far seem to be: > > But you provide none. > > . I provided a cite though. See above. ---
**Author:** ![Rucksinator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/898d66/32.png) [@Rucksinator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rucksinator)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2005, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/magdalene-a-prostitute/297217/16 "2005-04-03T16:19:00Z")
Cecil basically says that it’s unlikely that Jesus was completely a made-up character, which I agree with. However, we’re really looking for some of this “plenty of evidence”. ---
**Author:** ![bdgr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a87d85/32.png) [@bdgr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bdgr)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2005, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/magdalene-a-prostitute/297217/17 "2005-04-03T16:23:06Z")
> [@Rucksinator](#): > > Cecil basically says that it’s unlikely that Jesus was completely a made-up character, which I agree with. However, we’re really looking for some of this “plenty of evidence”. I think the evidence Cecil cites qualifies as “plenty”, and surely is more than “none” or “no evidence that Jesus existed”. ---
**Author:** ![Khadaji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Khadaji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Khadaji)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2005, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/magdalene-a-prostitute/297217/18 "2005-04-03T16:26:53Z")
> [@bdgr](#): > > I provided a cite though. See above. True, but if we acknowledge Cecil’s logic, then we must also acknowledge the gnostic Book of Mary, which dates from the same century as The Roman historian Tacitus > [@](#): > > She’s written a book about Mary of Magdala based on the ancient Gnostic text “The Gospel of Mary,” found in 1896 in Egypt. Translated over the last half century, the bits and pieces of papyri are badly decomposed, and thought to date from 125 C.E. From [From PBS.Org](http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/week712/feature.html) also from that site: > [@](#): > > Dr. KING: What we now know from our discovery of these new texts from Egypt is that there was a story of Mary Magdalene as a prominent disciple of Jesus and as an apostle and a leader in the church after the resurrection **John W. Kennedy** would like to dismiss these documents as “mystyck woo-woo” and has been unable or unwilling to explain to me how or why they are more or less viable than other documents from that period. If we dismiss one, why then are we not to dismiss the others? ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2005, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/magdalene-a-prostitute/297217/19 "2005-04-03T19:36:33Z")
> [@](#): > > – she answered them with the words which she had said to the Apostles: If anything, wouldn’t that indicate that Mary was not considered one of the Apostles? It doesn’t say that “…she had said to the other Apostles”. And certainly, Mary regarded Jesus as her teacher, which makes her a disciple. I’ve never heard that disputed. But regardless of how the words have come to be used, in the context of the New Testament, a clear distinction is made between “disciple” and “apostle”. A disciple is one who follows Jesus; an apostle is one of the Twelve who formed the core of his followers. All of the Twelve are listed, and Mary Magdalene isn’t on the list. One can, of course, argue that Mary _should_ have been counted as an Apostle, and that it’s only because of her gender that she wasn’t. Regardless of whether she should have been counted as an Apostle, though, she wasn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Khadaji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Khadaji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Khadaji)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2005, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/magdalene-a-prostitute/297217/20 "2005-04-03T20:56:56Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > If anything, wouldn’t that indicate that Mary was not considered one of the Apostles? It doesn’t say that “…she had said to the other Apostles”. > > And certainly, Mary regarded Jesus as her teacher, which makes her a disciple. I’ve never heard that disputed. But regardless of how the words have come to be used, in the context of the New Testament, a clear distinction is made between “disciple” and “apostle”. A disciple is one who follows Jesus; an apostle is one of the Twelve who formed the core of his followers. All of the Twelve are listed, and Mary Magdalene isn’t on the list. > > One can, of course, argue that Mary _should_ have been counted as an Apostle, and that it’s only because of her gender that she wasn’t. Regardless of whether she should have been counted as an Apostle, though, she wasn’t. Perhaps you are correct, in the context of the New Testament. All I have said is that some have argued that Matthew implies it. I also added that I’m not sure that I agree. Actually, what I said was > [@](#): > > Not quite true. Perhaps you mean “no where in the new testament.” However, in the gnostic gospels, particularly in the Gospel of Mary, she is indeed refered to as an apostle. Some might say that Mathew implies it. And the statement remains true. As my quote from PBS above shows. > [@](#): > > Dr. KING: What we now know from our discovery of these new texts from Egypt is that there was a story of Mary Magdalene as a prominent disciple of Jesus and as an apostle and a leader in the church after the resurrection And the discussion really came about from this: > [@](#): > > While you are right on the point that MM is nowhere recorded to have been a prostitute (though, > as Cecil pointed out in 1998 the identification of Mary Magdalene, Mary of Bethany, and the “woman who was a sinner” is an ancient one), **Mary Magdalene is also nowhere recorded to have been an apostle.** > Words have meanings. Bolding mine. Note that this is patently untrue, because \*somewhere \* it has been so recorded. I confess, it was the contentious “Words have meanings” that made me post. But I gave him an easy fallback > [@](#): > > Perhaps you mean “no where in the new testament.” which he chose to ignore and instead dismissed the Gnostic texts as “mystyck woo-woo.” If we can dismiss the Gnostic texts, that date from the same time period, we can dismiss them all, since none were written until AFTER the time of Jesus (at least 40 years according to Cecil.) Whether or not she was an apostle, whether or not she even existed, I dunno. But there are texts that say she was and did. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/magdalene-a-prostitute/297217.md?page=2)