Was Mary Magdalene the sister of Lazarus?

[Grailhunter]

In conclusion, yes, at Simon the Leper's house, the personal gesture was not humiliated so much as it was in Simon the Pharisee's house, and it was more confidential in its reverent adoration, and both took place in different locations, but still the same personal gesture in each instance. There are personal gestures which are repeated and are peculiar to a person, like the person’s style. They are unmistakable gestures. The gesture in question being made on two separate occasions, each with a different feeling or purpose behind it, doesn't rule out Mary of Bethany as having been the unnamed woman in Luke's account, because it's possible for a person to repeat a personal gesture without having the same feeling or purpose behind it each time.

Hey, how is the Weather where you are at?

 

[Grailhunter]

She also confirmed that Mary of Magdala, Mary of Bethany, and the unnamed repentant woman in Simon the Pharisee's house were the same woman,

Nothing in the scriptures to suggest this. It just does not fit in the storyline. Making things up does not work.
And I recommend that you take some serious course in Christianity.
And you never answered my question.....Why is it so important to you that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute?

 

[Sabé]

The first event took place in Simon the Pharisee’s home (Luke 7:36, 40), somewhere in Galilee. The second event took place in Simon the leper’s home in Bethany (Matt. 26:6; Mark 14:3). Two different Simons. Two different cities.

Each of the two scenes mentioning a different Simon, and the city/town of Simon the Pharisee's house in Luke's account (Lk. 7:36-50) having been located in Galilee and not Bethany, doesn't rule out Mary of Bethany as having been the unnamed woman in Luke's account, because it's possible for a person to make a personal gesture in one location, and then repeat that personal gesture(s) to another person who shares the same name, either in the same or different location(s).

The first woman is described as “a woman in the city who was a sinner” (Luke 7:37), but she is not named. The second woman is identified as Mary, the sister of Lazarus and Martha (John 12:3; 11:2). Two different women.

If you can identify by name the unnamed woman in the scene recounted by Luke (Lk. 7:36-50) as being anyone other than Mary of Bethany, then you can definitively say two different women made the same personal gesture to Jesus. Can you do this?

Hey, how is the Weather where you are at?

Why did you ask that in response to the following:

"In conclusion, yes, at Simon the Leper's house, the personal gesture was not humiliated so much as it was in Simon the Pharisee's house, and it was more confidential in its reverent adoration, and both took place in different locations, but still the same personal gesture in each instance. There are personal gestures which are repeated and are peculiar to a person, like the person’s style. They are unmistakable gestures. The gesture in question being made on two separate occasions, each with a different feeling or purpose behind it, doesn't rule out Mary of Bethany as having been the unnamed woman in Luke's account, because it's possible for a person to repeat a personal gesture without having the same feeling(s) or purpose(s) behind it each time."

Nothing in the scriptures to suggest this.

Lk. 7:11-35 places Jesus in the region of Nain in Galilee, and in Lk. 7:30, Luke mentions the Pharisees and the lawyers rejecting the counsel of God, not being baptized by him [John the Baptist] themselves. In Lk. 7:36, Luke begins his recounting of Jesus in the house of Simon the Pharisee. This is scriptural support for what Maria Valtorta—another true spokesperson of God, who received and described visions of scenes from Jesus's life on earth— said, which was that Simon the Pharisee's house was located specifically in Nain in Galilee. She also confirmed that Mary of Magdala, Mary of Bethany, and the unnamed repentant woman in Simon the Pharisee's house were the same woman, and at the time Mary came to see Jesus there, she was living in Magdala, also located in Galilee. See map attached. Later on, Mary came to live in Bethany in the house of her brother, Lazarus, whom Simon the Leper was a servant of. I highly recommend reading The Story of Mary Magdalene (extracts from The Gospel as Revealed to Me, or The Poem of the Man-God), as well as A Summa and Encyclopedia to Maria Valtorta's Extraordinary Work, especially the chapters on the proofs in support of her writings having a supernatural origin.

And you never answered my question.....Why is it so important to you that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute?

You're right, I didn't answer it, because what you asked about isn't what's important to me. What's actually important to me is finding and believing the truth. And, you didn't respond to any of the above, which is why I'm re-posting those replies.

Making things up does not work.

Providing proof found in A Summa and Encyclopedia to Maria Valtorta's Extraordinary Work, in support of Maria Valtorta having been a true spokesperson of Jesus, and her writings having a supernatural origin, is the opposite of making things up.

And I recommend that you take some serious course in Christianity.

I have already been taking a serious course in Christianity, and my teachers are the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit through their spokesperson, Maria Valtorta, and others.

 

[JohnDB]

The city/town of Simon the Pharisee's house in Luke's account (Lk. 7:36-50) having been located "somewhere in Galilee" and not Bethany doesn't rule out Mary of Bethany as having been the unnamed woman in Luke's account, because it's possible for a person to make a personal gesture in one location, and then repeat that personal gesture(s) either in the same or different location(s).



If you can identify by name the unnamed woman in the scene recounted by Luke (Lk. 7:36-50) as being anyone other than Mary of Bethany, then you can definitively say two different women made the same personal gesture to Jesus. Can you do this?



Each of the two scenes mentioning a different Simon doesn't rule out Mary of Bethany as having been the unnamed woman in Luke's account, because it's possible for a person to repeat the same personal gesture(s) around two or more different people who share the same name.



Why did you ask that in response to the following:

"In conclusion, yes, at Simon the Leper's house, the personal gesture was not humiliated so much as it was in Simon the Pharisee's house, and it was more confidential in its reverent adoration, and both took place in different locations, but still the same personal gesture in each instance. There are personal gestures which are repeated and are peculiar to a person, like the person’s style. They are unmistakable gestures. The gesture in question being made on two separate occasions, each with a different feeling or purpose behind it, doesn't rule out Mary of Bethany as having been the unnamed woman in Luke's account, because it's possible for a person to repeat a personal gesture without having the same feeling(s) or purpose(s) behind it each time."



I didn't answer it, you're right, because that's not what's important to me. What's actually important to me is finding and believing the truth. And, you didn't respond to any of the above, which is why I'm re-posting those replies.



Lk. 7:11-35 places Jesus in the region of Nain in Galilee, and in Lk. 7:30, Luke mentioned the Pharisees and the lawyers rejecting the counsel of God, not being baptized by him [John the Baptist] themselves. In Lk. 7:36, Luke begins his recounting of Jesus in the house of Simon the Pharisee. Therefore, there is scriptural support for what Maria Valtorta—another true spokesperson of God, who received and described visions of scenes from Jesus's life on earth— said, which was that Simon the Pharisee's house was located specifically in Nain in Galilee. She also confirmed that Mary of Magdala, Mary of Bethany, and the unnamed repentant woman in Simon the Pharisee's house were the same woman, and at the time Mary came to see Jesus there, she was living in Magdala, which wasn't located far from Nain. Later on, Mary came to live in Bethany with her brother, Lazarus, and Simon the Leper was a servant of his, and thus what you currently believe to have been his house was actually Lazarus's. See map attached. I highly recommend reading The Story of Mary Magdalene (extracts from The Gospel as Revealed to Me, or The Poem of the Man-God), as well as A Summa and Encyclopedia to Maria Valtorta's Extraordinary Work, especially the chapters on the proofs in support of her writings having a supernatural origin.

View attachment 69056



Providing proof found in A Summa and Encyclopedia to Maria Valtorta's Extraordinary Work, in support of Maria Valtorta having been a true spokesperson of Jesus, and her writings having a supernatural origin, is the opposite of making things up.



I have already been taking a serious course in Christianity, and my teachers are the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit through their spokesperson, Maria Valtorta, and others.

No wonder your theology has serious flaws....

 

[Sabé]

No wonder your theology has serious flaws....

And, which part(s) of my theology is seriously flawed? Don't be shy.

 

[Grailhunter]

I didn't answer it, you're right, because that's not what's important to me. What's actually important to me is finding and believing the truth. And, you didn't respond to any of the above, which is why I'm re-posting those replies.

I have told you the truth but you can believe what you want.

 

[JohnDB]

And, which part(s) of my theology is seriously flawed? Don't be shy.

Maria Valtorta....
She has been mostly abandoned....FOR GOOD REASONS. Even the Catholics dont recognize her writings as authoritative or inspired. The Protestants definitely are not.

 

[Sabé]

I have told you the truth [...]

No, you've told me "your truth", which isn't the same as "the truth".

 

[Grailhunter]

No, you've told me "your truth", which isn't the same as "the truth".

I and others have tried to get through to you and I provided an outside source. Bottom line freedom of religion. Believe what you want….no harm, no foul.

 

[Sabé]

I and others have tried to get through to you and I provided an outside source.

You and others did try to get through, but for you to assert, "I told you the truth", after you ignored (twice) my latest arguments why/how yours don't rule out Mary of Bethany as having been the unnamed repentant woman, shows that you're either delusional or obdurate.

 

[Grailhunter]

You and others did try to get through, but for you to assert, "I told you the truth", after you ignored (twice) my latest arguments why/how yours don't rule out Mary of Bethany as having been the unnamed repentant woman, shows that you're either delusional or obdurate.

There is no reason to debate it. You have nothing. You might as well believe that Christ’s mother was a prostitute. You know they were both called Mary.

This has been mulled over for centuries and it is clear that Mary Magdalene was of good character and moral and was not a prostitute.

Who taught you this trash? Catholic

 

[Sabé]

There is no reason to debate it. You have nothing.

Refer back to post #110.

Mary Magdalene was of good character and moral [...]

She was, but wholly moral in body and spirit and of good character continually from birth to death? No, which, at the very least, we're in agreement with.

 

[Sabé]

Even the Catholics dont recognize her writings as authoritative or inspired. The Protestants definitely are not.

In the February 2025 statement put out by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) regarding Maria Valtorta's writings, they said, "It should be reiterated that alleged “visions”, “revelations,” and “messages” contained in the writings of Maria Valtorta—or, in any case, attributed to them—cannot be regarded as having a supernatural origin. Rather, they should be considered simply as literary forms that the author used to narrate the life of Jesus Christ in her own way". Any honest objective investigator wouldn't and shouldn't automatically take their word for it, especially when they failed to give any indication of whether they reviewed the proof in support of her writings having a supernatural origin. My response to the DDF's decision mirrors that of those given by the Maria Valtorta's Readers' Group, as expressed in the following article: Response to the Vatican's 2025 Press Release on Maria Valtorta. See excerpt below.

Therefore, the Maria Valtorta Readers' Group:
1. Personally believes in the supernatural origin of Maria Valtorta's writings.

2. Affirms the right of other Catholics to personally believe in the supernatural origin of her writings.

3. Publicly acknowledges the DDF statement which says they do not consider it supernatural in origin, though we respectfully disagree with it, considering it an error.

While we disagree with the DDF's conclusion, we still adhere to the discipline of not presenting Valtorta's writings as if they have received approval by the Vatican as coming from a supernatural source. Where some may disagree with us is in whether we can disagree with the factual accuracy of the DDF statement. We maintain that well-informed Catholics, understanding that not all statements from the DDF are infallible, may rightfully doubt certain conclusions. If informed Catholics can present credible evidence that a statement is erroneous, they are not committing a sin by rejecting it. We do not reject the authority of the DDF, but rather we challenge the validity of the specific conclusion in this case, considering it to be an erroneous judgment.
2. There is compelling evidence that Maria Valtorta's work is far more than just a novel. This evidence spans across theological, spiritual, literary, and scientific fields, as well as the immense good it has brought to countless souls. When examined with honesty, it becomes clear that the work cannot simply be attributed to the literary imaginings of a human being, particularly considering the breadth of expertise Valtorta lacked and her severely compromised physical condition at the time of writing. For further details, please refer to the following sub-chapters in our free e-book (A Summa and Encyclopedia to Maria Valtorta’s Extraordinary Work), which provide information on scientific evidence supporting Maria Valtorta's claim of supernatural inspiration:

• Proof by Astronomy (Such as Detailed Astronomic Observations Over the Course of Hundreds of Pages in Her 1940s Visions that a Purdue University Professor of Theoretical Physics Testified Are Remarkably Consistent with Her Dating System and that She Could Not Have Predicted or Verified Without a Computer)

• Proof by Geography and Topography and Archaeology (Including Her Describing Palestine and Over 350 Geographical Locations in the Holy Land with a Level of Precision in Multiple Fields that She Could Not Possibly Have Known Without Modern Electronic Scholastic Resources or Access to an Extensive Collection of Books/Atlases in the 1940s that Eyewitnesses and Common Sense Confirm She Did Not—Nor Could Have Had—Access to and Which Itself Arguably Would Have Been Insufficient to Complete Her Work)

• Proof by its Knowledge, Depth, and Eminence in the Theological, Exegetical, Mystical, and Mariological Fields (Which Many World-Renowned Trustworthy Theologians Say Exceed Anything They Have Ever Read)

• Proof by Her Detailed, Exact, and Often Unparalleled Knowledge of the Political, Religious, Economic, Social, and Familial Situation—as Well as the Dress—of the Ancient Jewish, Samaritan, and Roman Peoples that Astound Even World-Renowned Biblical Scholars

• Proof by The Poem's Unquestionable Expertise, Deep Knowledge, and Exhaustive Information in Such a Wide Variety of Theological and Scientific Subjects, and the Fact Almost 15,000 Handwritten Pages of Such Was Written in Only 3½ Years Amidst Her Unusually Severe Physical Condition and Illnesses and Even Though She Lacked the Learning, Resources, and Books Required to Write a Work a Tenth as Profound as This

• Proof by the Extraordinary, Unprecedented Way in Which it Was Written, Compiled, & Put Together (Such as the Fact that 166 Out of the 647 Chapters Were Written Out of Order, and She has Jesus Ministering in Over 350 Named Locations and Traveling Over 4,000 Miles in Six Different Cycles Across Palestine, and Yet Jesus and All of the Other 500+ Characters are Never in a Place Inconsistent with Either the Story Line or the Timing and Distance Necessities Required for Traveling, and There is Not One Person, Place, or Thing Out of Place)

• Proof By the Writing's Extraordinary Purity, Holiness, Loftiness, and Eminence Among the Writings that Exist in the World

• Proof (or a Substantiating Factor) by Research that Shows that The Poem is Not Based on (or a Mere Expansion of) any Known Gospel Manuscript Standard, Version, or School of Critical Thought, Something Expected if a Work of This Magnitude, Detail, and Accuracy Had Been a Mere Human Effort

• Proof (or a Substantiating Factor) in How The Poem Resolves Many Problems in the Gospel Accounts Which Scholars Have Struggled with For Years (Including Apparent Contradictions Between the Different Gospel Accounts and Apparent Errors or Inconsistencies Within the Same Gospel Account), and How It Furthermore Corrects Certain Misunderstandings and Translation Errors that Have Been Perpetuated Throughout the Centuries

• Proof (or a Substantiating Factor) by the Fact Maria Valtorta's Visions of Christ's Passion Perfectly Match Detailed Findings on the Miraculous Shroud of Turin that Recent Modern Scientific Tests Have Revealed Decades After Her Writings Were Published and the Fact Her Writings Foretold Something Amazing About the Veil of Veronica Which Has Been Scientifically Proven for the First Time Decades After Her Death

• Proof (or a Substantiating Factor) by its Perfect Correspondence to the Ancient Liturgical and Patristic Tradition of the Ancient Catholic Byzantine Rite of the Church

• Proof by the Testimony of Countless Trustworthy Clerics, Authorities, Experts, Scientists, and Pious Lay Faithful and the Tremendously Good Fruits Produced in Individuals and in the Church as a Whole

 

[Aunty Jane]

Maria Valtorta, another true spokesperson of God, received and described visions of scenes from Jesus's life on earth. And, according to her account, she confirms that Mary the Magdalene, the well-known woman, who was a great, but repentant sinner, and Lazarus's and Martha's sister, Mary, were the same person.

This is what deviates from scripture.....Maria Valvorta is nothing to non-Catholics. Therefore not admissible along with Scripture as evidence.

Considering how common the name “Mary” was is Bible times, the fact is that there are 6 “Marys” mentioned in the Bible....

1. The mother of Jesus. (She is not once called “the mother of God”) Matt 1:18.

2. The sister of Martha and Lazarus. John 11:1-2.

3. Mary Magdalene. Luke 8:2.

4. The mother of James and Joses. Matt 27:56.

5. The mother ofJohn Mark. Acts 12:12.

6. A Christian in Rome who laboured in behalf of the congregation there. Rom 16:6

The two incidents that are said to correlate, (the women pouring costly oil on Jesus) do not match up, when you read directly from the Bible. (Luke 7:36-50)
The sinful woman who wet Jesus’ feet with the oil and her tears is not named. And Jesus’ words to her were “your sins are forgiven, go your way in peace”. (Luke 7:50) Luke 8 begins with Jesus and the 12 journeying from city to city and village to village preaching and that certain women were ministering to them.....Mary Magdalene was one of them.....she had been freed from demonic possession but there is no indication that she was known as a sinful woman.......she was a close friend and associate of Jesus and his apostles, and a supporter of his ministry.

 

[Sabé]

This is what deviates from scripture.....Maria Valvorta is nothing to non-Catholics. Therefore not admissible along with Scripture as evidence.

Considering how common the name “Mary” was is Bible times, the fact is that there are 6 “Marys” mentioned in the Bible....

1. The mother of Jesus. (She is not once called “the mother of God”) Matt 1:18.

2. The sister of Martha and Lazarus. John 11:1-2.

3. Mary Magdalene. Luke 8:2.

4. The mother of James and Joses. Matt 27:56.

5. The mother ofJohn Mark. Acts 12:12.

6. A Christian in Rome who laboured in behalf of the congregation there. Rom 16:6

The two incidents that are said to correlate, (the women pouring costly oil on Jesus) do not match up, when you read directly from the Bible. (Luke 7:36-50)
The sinful woman who wet Jesus’ feet with the oil and her tears is not named. And Jesus’ words to her were “your sins are forgiven, go your way in peace”. (Luke 7:50) Luke 8 begins with Jesus and the 12 journeying from city to city and village to village preaching and that certain women were ministering to them.....Mary Magdalene was one of them.....she had been freed from demonic possession but there is no indication that she was known as a sinful woman.......she was a close friend and associate of Jesus and his apostles, and a supporter of his ministry.

See posts #3, #59, and #97 in this thread, and post #3 in MARK 6:3 DID JESUS HAVE BROTHERS AND SISTERS ?.

 

[JohnDB]

See posts #3, #59, and #97 in this thread, and post #3 in MARK 6:3 DID JESUS HAVE BROTHERS AND SISTERS ?.

Nobody on this forum is going to give any regard for her writings.

 

[Sabé]

Nobody on this forum is going to give any regard for her writings.

It would be of no consequence. At the very least, they can still try to address the other aspects of my arguments.

 

[JohnDB]

It would be of no consequence. At the very least, they can still try to address the other aspects of my arguments.

So exactly how do you drink cyanide laced water without getting the cyanide?

You can't....

So no thank you. We don't have anything in common. No basis of faith to discuss anything.

 

[Aunty Jane]

See posts #3, #59, and #97 in this thread, and post #3 in MARK 6:3 DID JESUS HAVE BROTHERS AND SISTERS ?.

Been there..done that too many times......Jesus had siblings because there was no valid reason for Mary and Joseph to remain celebate after Jesus was born. They were married, and Joseph “kept her a virgin” until she bore a son. (Matt 1:25)

Her virginity was only to prove that the child born to her was not from the natural way of conception. God’s spirit was responsible for this conception because Mary and Joseph were sinners like everyone else....and the one born had to be sinless. Your church made up the “immaculate conception of Mary” to explain how Jesus was born sinless, when in actual fact he was not born from the flawed DNA of either of them.

Mary gave a sin offering for herself when they presented themselves at the Temple, after her period of purification was up. It was the offering of the poor (two turtle doves) which proves that the “wise men” were never at the stable, as they had given the child expensive gifts. They arrived on the scene much later.

There are so many flaws in your arguments because you take the words of your church instead of doing your own research. The Bible explains itself...but only if you let it.

 

[Grailhunter]

It would be of no consequence. At the very least, they can still try to address the other aspects of my arguments.

You will find that a lot of the Protestants here have a dislike\hatred for Catholics. I love most Protestants and Catholics.
The Catholic Church has a horrid history but the modern Catholic Church is better than it ever was.
With over 30,000 Protestant denominations you would think they would be a little more tolerable.