Was Jesus Eaten By Dogs?

[angellous_evangellous]

They both preached the end of the world and ended on the wrong side of the government.

 

[waitasec]

No. One possible explanation of possession could be mental illness but there are other explanations as well. To put forward a theory as fact is a mistake and to claim the bible verified such a theory is close to a lie.

to be fair Trey,
they were ignorant of the workings of the mind...
people being born without the ability to empathize were evil, today we call them sociopaths...

 

[angellous_evangellous]

They both preached the end of the world and ended on the wrong side of the government.

That's an exceptionally weak defense.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

to be fair Trey,
they were ignorant of the workings of the mind...
people being born without the ability to empathize were evil, today we call them sociopaths...

Sure, and I agree that it's possible Mary was mentally ill. But we can't make claims to know for sure and we certainly can't claim the bible said so. We know that during the witch hunts of Europe and the Colonies that some of the women accused were mentally ill. We also know that some corrupt witch hunters burned any attractive woman who wouldn't sleep with them. We can't say that all witches burned or hung were automatically mentally ill and we can't just assume that Mary was either.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Sure, and I agree that it's possible Mary was mentally ill. But we can't make claims to know for sure and we certainly can't claim the bible said so. We know that during the witch hunts of Europe and the Colonies that some of the women accused were mentally ill. We also know that some corrupt witch hunters burned any attractive woman who wouldn't sleep with them. We can't say that all witches burned or hung were automatically mentally ill and we can't just assume that Mary was either.

The argument can be made that Mary's demon possession was mental illness.

Personally I think that's silly, but it can be done.

Ref: Luke 8:2 2 and also some women who had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities: Mary, called Magdalene, from whom seven demons had gone out,

 

[waitasec]

Sure, and I agree that it's possible Mary was mentally ill. But we can't make claims to know for sure and we certainly can't claim the bible said so. We know that during the witch hunts of Europe and the Colonies that some of the women accused were mentally ill. We also know that some corrupt witch hunters burned any attractive woman who wouldn't sleep with them. We can't say that all witches burned or hung were automatically mentally ill and we can't just assume that Mary was either.

i agree and i would add that it's more probable that she was ill then possessed by demons.

 

[Father Heathen]

The real question is; would this make the dogs catholic?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

i agree and i would add that it's more probable that she was ill then possessed by demons.

Do you think that it's more likely that Jesus cast out seven demons, or that he cured her of a severe mental illness?

You're picking out a small portion of the tradition (demon possession = mental illness) and (I think) recklessly rejecting the other half of it.

If Jesus didn't heal her, then it doesn't matter if she was demon possessed or mentally ill.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

The real question is; would this make the dogs catholic?

No. All dogs are Reformed. They understood that the spiritual symbol of the flesh and blood was more powerful than the actual body.

Otherwise all dogs wouldn't go to heaven.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

i agree and i would add that it's more probable that she was ill then possessed by demons.

I would also say that it is equally more probable that she upset a man who then claimed she was possessed than being actually possessed by demons. The reasons for upseting the man could be anything from showing ankles to denial of sex. Women were fair targets in the holy land.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

But the text doesn't say she was a woman of ill repute, it says she was mentally ill

I'm running on of memory here, but as Angellous is participating here I can get away with such laziness counting on his corrections (totally unfair of me, of course).

If memory serves the first time Mary Magdalene was explicitly identified as a prostitute was by a fairly early pope (Gregory?). However, I seem to recall some arguments which support that there are indications that in the gospels which (if historical) support to some extent this interpretation. One is simply how she was identified (not by relation to a male but to a place- Magdala). This may indicate not just the fact that she was unattached but had some independent wealth (something which allowed her to operate independently in a misogynistic world where women typically couldn't, and even wealthy women were connected to male supervisors).

Additionally, while the "demons" Jesus drives out are often referred to as possessing (or possessed by) pneuma akathartos, incuding the other women among whom Mary Magdalene is singled out in Luke, she herself is said to have had daimonia or demons. There seems to be a distinction. For one thing, daimonion need not have the adjective akathartos or unclean as pneuma does. Second, by NT times (and in christian literature) it is almost always associated with evil or wickedness. It's true that it does describe mental or physical illness as well, but as these were often seen as the product of immorality, one can't equate sickness and daimonion. Also, there although it is likely that many thought to be possessed were mentally ill, they could also simply be thought immoral (or physically ill). In other words, a sick person might be under the control of an unclean spirit or a demon, but so might a person who performs wicked deeds or acts immorally.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I would also say that it is equally more probable that she upset a man who then claimed she was possessed than being actually possessed by demons. The reasons for upseting the man could be anything from showing ankles to denial of sex. Women were fair targets in the holy land.

My goodness.

 

[waitasec]

Do you think that it's more likely that Jesus cast out seven demons, or that he cured her of a severe mental illness?

You're picking out a small portion of the tradition (demon possession = mental illness) and (I think) recklessly rejecting the other half of it.

If Jesus didn't heal her, then it doesn't matter if she was demon possessed or mentally ill.

in all honestly, i don't believe that ever happened. it was just a part of a narrative the gospel writers used to make a case of jesus' authority.

but in light of when these gospels were written, demon possession was probably an explanation of why people were acting 'funny'.

 

[waitasec]

I would also say that it is equally more probable that she upset a man who then claimed she was possessed than being actually possessed by demons. The reasons for upseting the man could be anything from showing ankles to denial of sex. Women were fair targets in the holy land.

well lets prove her historicity 1st

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Do you think that it's more likely that Jesus cast out seven demons, or that he cured her of a severe mental illness?

You're picking out a small portion of the tradition (demon possession = mental illness) and (I think) recklessly rejecting the other half of it.

If Jesus didn't heal her, then it doesn't matter if she was demon possessed or mentally ill.

The fact that Jesus healed Mary of demon possession leads me to think it was a false accusation rather than a case of mental illness.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

in all honestly, i don't believe that ever happened. it was just a part of a narrative the gospel writers used to make a case of jesus' authority.

That seems unlikely. Why would Luke portray mary as someone wicked/mentally ill/sick (keeping in mind that these distinctions were not always made in Jesus' time and culture), only to have not only a woman (well, she was one of them), but also a woman who had been possessed by demons be the first to Jesus' empty tomb? That would undermine the account of the empty tomb.

 

[waitasec]

That seems unlikely. Why would Luke portray mary as someone wicked/mentally ill/sick (keeping in mind that these distinctions were not always made in Jesus' time and culture), only to have not only a woman (well, she was one of them), but also a woman who had been possessed by demons be the first to Jesus' empty tomb? That would undermine the account of the empty tomb.

i'm confused...don't worry it's not the 1st time...

my argument was that the gospel writers used this character "mary" as one who would set up the notion of jesus' divinity as well as one who resurrected.

we cannot establish if this woman actually existed, we can establish jesus did though...legends are exaggerations of the real person

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

i'm confused...don't worry it's not the 1st time...

I'd be worried if it was!

my argument was that the gospel writers used this character "mary" as one who would set up the notion of jesus' divinity as well as one who resurrected.

we cannot establish if this woman actually existed, we can establish jesus did though...legends are exaggerations of the real person

The thing is we're dealing with a culture and era in which women were considered inferior and less likely to be trusted. Add to that a woman who was possessed by forces of evil, and it seems odd for Luke especially to include her as one of those who discovered the empty tomb. This would tend to provide reasons to doubt the validity of the account it seems.

As for historicity, that's always a hard one. However, given the fact that she is multiply attested and is among a select few who are named (and named repeatedly) I think it's likely she's historical.

 

[waitasec]

I'd be worried if it was!

me too.

The thing is we're dealing with a culture and era in which women were considered inferior and less likely to be trusted. Add to that a woman who was possessed by forces of evil, and it seems odd for Luke especially to include her as one of those who discovered the empty tomb. This would tend to provide reasons to doubt the validity of the account it seems.

but you see luke's audience was a greco/roman audience.
Women in Ancient Rome - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As for historicity, that's always a hard one. However, given the fact that she is multiply attested and is among a select few who are named (and named repeatedly) I think it's likely she's historical.

other than the gospel writers?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

The fact that Jesus healed Mary of demon possession leads me to think it was a false accusation rather than a case of mental illness.

A false accusation to insult Mary?

I think that when we lift stuff out of the story, we miss the point completely. It's *obviously* a story presented as a statement of fact. I don't think that it is an insult to Mary. The point of the story is to explain how Jesus's ministry was supported: by wealthy women who supported him and his disciples -- and more than that, they travelled with him.

I think that there were wealthy women who supported the church that produced this tradition, and they are honored here - not insulted. The "demons" speak to the powerful spiritual transformation that "Mary" celebrates by giving to the church.