Women, Wisdom & “The Word”

I began writing this on January 11th, 2012 and set it aside.  Here we are, four months later.  When I set it aside the intent was to return (shortly) and continue writing.

Today, as I re-read what I wrote, I decided not to add anything more.  There is plenty in this article already that raises questions and provides food for thought.

In a previous post (January 11, 2012)  I shared the video on Jesus & the Divine Feminine.  It was that post that caused me to sit down and write this article later the same day.

My desire was and is to share some historical facts that have come across my path through the reading of several books.  The primary book that has given rise to my purchase of several others is a book by Laurence Gardner called The Magdalene Legacy – The Jesus and Mary Conspiracy.  To-date I’ve only read 173 of the approximate 500 pages of this book, and it is more marked up, underline & highlighted than any of my plethora of versions of the Bible and/or Torah and/or Tanakh in my possession.

I smiled as I wrote those last words thinking of how when my mother and father would come to visit me in Toronto one of the first things my mother would do would be to ask to see the latest version of the Bible that I was reading.  As I gave it to mom I smiled because I knew full well that she would go through it to see what I’d written in the sidelines or highlighted so that she would then know the state of my mind, my well-being. I miss her dearly, so in a way, I think perhaps this article is a tribute to my divine mother, my human mother whose name happens to be Mary!

Where do I begin with this article?  Perhaps with my latest topics expressing concern on how we have dissed Mary Magdalene.  You see, I include me in the dissing because I accepted what the church told and taught me.

The church painted her as a harlot.  Why?  Better still, why did I believe she was exactly that, no questions asked?  I suppose the easy answer is that it was because the church told me so, and who was I, a mere child, to question that Pope.  I supposed that is acceptable to a child of 7, 8, 9 and even perhaps to someone in her teen years.  Can I blame the church once I came of the age of reason, when all I knew was what I’d been fed up to that point in time? And if I could, what good would it do; this business of blame?  I do know that from a very early age – and I think I can indeed trace it back to being as young as 7 or 8 years of age, I questioned what I was being taught – yet never spoke up or spoke aloud those questions.  I just pondered within me, never saying anything and continued one year into the next.

In order to understand why we may have accepted these teachings, I think that it is important to take a look at the books that form the Bible.

Who selected the books to be included and those to excluded and some even destroyed? Who are the people who have been included?  I’ve gone along all these years thinking they were all disciples of Yahshua, but guess what,

they were not all disciples and the writings of some of the disciples were deliberately left out with instructions to burn/destroy those writings, handed down by the church.

Again, back to the question of why?

The simple and sad conclusion that I have come to is that the church of Rome wanted to promulgate the all-male dominance of its rule based upon the teachings and reworded writings of Paul and Peter. I do recall being taught that the words spoken “Upon this rock I will build my church,” have been attributed to being meant upon “Peter” (which apparently means ‘rock’).  But that is not was intended or meant by those words.  Even I, without any knowledge of history or languages, recalled that we are told that Yahshua is the “rock” of our “salvation”; could there be 2 rocks?  I choose to stay with Yahshua as being the one.

Who were the 12 disciples?  Were Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, Paul, James, Phillip, Timothy all disciples.  There answer is some were disciples, some were not and that some who were, were not included in the writings chosen to form the Bible.  Below is a list of the books in the New Testament:

What I have garnered from reading several sources, which have also been referenced in Laurence’s book, is that

any books that gave any authority to women and in particular any books/writings that gave any authority or special mention to Mary Magdalene were deliberately left out,

and where possible, books that were included and made mention of Mary M were delibertately twisted to make her look like that picture which ultimately got painted.

Without concrete proof I still have no hesitation in saying I believe that Mary and Yahshua were espoused and there are descendants of their union -

Mary Magdala Speaking to the Apostles

to this day!

I would imagine this last statement of mine will paint me as a heretic.  Oh well.

Books of the apostles were left out and and some ordered to be destroyed.  Many have resurrected in the publication of the Nag Hammadi Scriptures, the Dead Sea Scrolls and the singular version of the Gospel of Mary Magdalene (referred to by one of Yahshua’s disciples as being the “apostle to the apostles”).  We know that Matthew and John were apostles of Yahshua, but hey, guess what, Mark and Luke were not, yet they are included (you know, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John).

Mark and Luke are presented in The Acts as being “later colleagues of St. Paul”!  On the other hand, Thomas, Philip and Peter were all listed among the original 12 apostles, and the gospels in their names were excluded and were, “sentenced to be destroyed and, throughout the Mediterranean world, people buried and otherwise secreted their copies of these works, along with the Gospel of Mary and numerous other texts which had, quite suddenly, been declared heretical“.

The New Testament as we have it today, began to take on its form in 367 AD.  The initial works began with Bishop Athanasius of Alexandria who invented the term “can0n” (approved law).  From his list certain works were approved by the Council of Hippo in 393 AD and the Council of Carthage in 397 AD.  Once the books were finalized for inclusion, there then began a number of “edits and amendments” until we have what we currently used, approved by the Council of Trento in Northern Italy (surprise, surprise) around 1547.

During my journey through different religions/churches, the bible to be used for the supposed most accurate translation with less distortion was the King James Bible.  This translation was undertaken by King James in 1604 and finalized in 1611.  One must now take into account that the KJV bible is a translation of only those books approved by the final Council of Trento – thus a translation that would include its edits and amendments.

The Church of Rome is the Apostolic Church of St. Peter, and Peter’s views are made clear in the left out Gospel of Thomas, wherein we are told that:

Peter objected strongly to Mary Magdalene’s presence in Jesus’ entourage.  The text states that, addressing the othr apostles, “Simon Peter said unto them, Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life.”

In the Gospel of Mary we get another view of Peter’s opinion towards Mary M and any involvement she had with the disciples and/or Yahshua.  Peter challenges Mary’s relationship with Yahshua saying:

“Would he really have spoken privately to a woman, and not freely to us?  Why should we change our minds and listen to her?”

In the Coptic tractate of Pistis Sophia Peter complains about Mary’s involvement and asks Yahshua to “restrain her from undermining his supremacy.” 

Many of us place the time of change of the church and today’s foundation for most religions to the time of Pope Constantine.  However, long before Constantine (circa 320 AD) when the books of the Bible were being considered for inclusion, movements already existed to be rid of women in the church.  Around 195 AD the Precepts of Ecclesiastical Discipline were put together by Quintus Tertullian, which stated:

It is not permitted for a woman to speak in church, nor is it permitted for her to baptise, nor to offer the Eucharist, nor to claim for herself a share in any masculine function, least of all in priestly office.

As I read that, I am reminded of what we find in 1 Timothy 2:11-15.  Paul is speaking and says:

Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.  But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

Hopefully, this little bit of information shared with you will cause you to ask,

“Why has the church tried so hard to usurp the wisdom of women and their rightful place as apostles of Yahshua?”

There is so much more, I’d have to re-write a book here and this is really only a blog site and meant to perhaps, and hopefully, wet your appetite to seek for yourself what is that true and acceptable Word and then to rise up, head high and share it as the light brightens from within, shedding it abroad.