The Repentant Woman, Mary of Bethany, and Mary Magdalene: One Figure?

[Rockerduck]

I understand your position that the two women were different. But that still doesn't explain my question. In John 11:2, John identifies Mary as the woman who anointed the Lord and wiped His feet with her hair before narrating the anointing in John 12.

If John is referring only to John 12, why does he use an event that his readers have not yet been told about as Mary's identifying marker?

And why does he choose the very distinctive combination of anointing Jesus' feet and wiping them with her hair, which is otherwise found in Luke 7?

Whether the women are the same or different, John 11:2 still requires an explanation.

The Apostle John is recounting a story many years later. This is the Apostle John's writing style for detail as he writes. The Apostle John always puts a detail that shows he was present and saw these things. After all, only a witness can tell these things. To be fair, John does recount specifics and chances are, he either was not present in the Luke parable or he did not think it was important for his Gospel. The woman's name in Luke 7 is intentionally left out by Dr. Luke.

 

[Moonwood]

The Apostle John is recounting a story many years later. This is the Apostle John's writing style for detail as he writes. The Apostle John always puts a detail that shows he was present and saw these things. After all, only a witness can tell these things. To be fair, John does recount specifics and chances are, he either was not present in the Luke parable or he did not think it was important for his Gospel. The woman's name in Luke 7 is intentionally left out by Dr. Luke.

I agree that Luke never names the woman in Luke 7. But that's not unusual. The Gospel writers sometimes identify a person by name in one place and leave them unnamed in another, even when they are clearly referring to the same individual. So the fact that Luke does not name the woman in Luke 7 does not by itself prove she was not Mary.

I agree that John often includes details that suggest eyewitness testimony. But John 11:2 is serving a different function. It's not presented as an eyewitness detail. It's presented as an identifier while John is introducing Lazarus, Martha, and Mary. In that introduction, John identifies Mary as "the one who anointed the Lord and wiped His feet with her hair." Normally, when an author introduces a character, he identifies them by something the audience already knows, not by an event he has not yet narrated.

If John is referring only to the anointing in John 12, then he is introducing Mary by a future event that the reader has not yet read about.
So why use that description as her identifying marker?

And why choose the distinctive combination of anointing Jesus' feet and wiping them with her hair, a combination otherwise found in Luke 7?
John 11:2 seems to assume the description is already meaningful to the reader, which is what needs to be explained.

 

[Rockerduck]

I agree that Luke never names the woman in Luke 7. But that's not unusual. The Gospel writers sometimes identify a person by name in one place and leave them unnamed in another, even when they are clearly referring to the same individual. So the fact that Luke does not name the woman in Luke 7 does not by itself prove she was not Mary.

I agree that John often includes details that suggest eyewitness testimony. But John 11:2 is serving a different function. It's not presented as an eyewitness detail. It's presented as an identifier while John is introducing Lazarus, Martha, and Mary. In that introduction, John identifies Mary as "the one who anointed the Lord and wiped His feet with her hair." Normally, when an author introduces a character, he identifies them by something the audience already knows, not by an event he has not yet narrated.

If John is referring only to the anointing in John 12, then he is introducing Mary by a future event that the reader has not yet read about.
So why use that description as her identifying marker?

And why choose the distinctive combination of anointing Jesus' feet and wiping them with her hair, a combination otherwise found in Luke 7?
John 11:2 seems to assume the description is already meaningful to the reader, which is what needs to be explained.

I guess only Jesus can answer your question then.

 

[Moonwood]

I guess only Jesus can answer your question then.

I'm not asking because I don't know the answer. I'm asking because you don't think the answer is Luke 7.

My point is that John 11:1-2 is introducing Lazarus, Martha, and Mary. In that introduction, John identifies Mary as "the one who anointed the Lord and wiped His feet with her hair."

An identifier normally points the reader to something already known. If John is referring only to the event in John 12, then he's introducing Mary by an event he has not yet narrated.

So when I ask why John uses that description, I'm not claiming there is no answer. I'm asking what your explanation is, since you reject Luke 7 as the answer.

To me, Luke 7 naturally explains why John can identify Mary by the distinctive act of anointing Jesus' feet and wiping them with her hair. Since you think that's not the explanation, then what is?

 

[Rockerduck]

I'm not asking because I don't know the answer. I'm asking because you don't think the answer is Luke 7.

My point is that John 11:1-2 is introducing Lazarus, Martha, and Mary. In that introduction, John identifies Mary as "the one who anointed the Lord and wiped His feet with her hair."

An identifier normally points the reader to something already known. If John is referring only to the event in John 12, then he's introducing Mary by an event he has not yet narrated.

So when I ask why John uses that description, I'm not claiming there is no answer. I'm asking what your explanation is, since you reject Luke 7 as the answer.

To me, Luke 7 naturally explains why John can identify Mary by the distinctive act of anointing Jesus' feet and wiping them with her hair. Since you think that's not the explanation, then what is?

In Luke 7:37 the lady is identified as a woman sinner. This location is in the town of Nain. She opened an alabaster box of ointment, not perfume, on Jesus's feet, while crying, using her hair to wipe her tears off Jesus' feet and then used the ointment on His feet, no odor noted.

Ok now, in John 12:3, Mary is from Magdala, lives in Bethany, was never referred to as a sinner and used a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, an anointed Jesus's feet, Mary wasn't crying, an used her hair to wipe His feet. The spikenard filled the room odorously.

Matthew 26:7 and Mark 14:3 are most likely Mary of Magdala, because the same M.O. dumping perfume on the head of Jesus and both were in Bethany, where Mary and Martha lived.

John 12:3, , Matt. 26:7, and Mark 14:3 all occurred in Bethany.

Luke 7:37 occurred in Nain, so out of the 4 times Jesus was anointed only one was in Nain, by a woman identified as a sinner, was known to Simon the Pharisee in Nain, and had a different M. O. than Mary. the only commonality is the hair for wiping.
This had to be a different woman than Mary.

 

[Moonwood]

In Luke 7:37 the lady is identified as a woman sinner. This location is in the town of Nain. She opened an alabaster box of ointment, not perfume, on Jesus's feet, while crying, using her hair to wipe her tears off Jesus' feet and then used the ointment on His feet, no odor noted.

Ok now, in John 12:3, Mary is from Magdala, lives in Bethany, was never referred to as a sinner and used a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, an anointed Jesus's feet, Mary wasn't crying, an used her hair to wipe His feet. The spikenard filled the room odorously.

Matthew 26:7 and Mark 14:3 are most likely Mary of Magdala, because the same M.O. dumping perfume on the head of Jesus and both were in Bethany, where Mary and Martha lived.

John 12:3, , Matt. 26:7, and Mark 14:3 all occurred in Bethany.

Luke 7:37 occurred in Nain, so out of the 4 times Jesus was anointed only one was in Nain, by a woman identified as a sinner, was known to Simon the Pharisee in Nain, and had a different M. O. than Mary. the only commonality is the hair for wiping.
This had to be a different woman than Mary.

You're treating Matthew 26:6-13, Mark 14:3-9, and John 12:1-8 as separate anointing events, but they're actually three accounts of the same anointing in Bethany:

• "when Jesus was at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper..." (Matthew 26:6)
• "while he was at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper..." (Mark 14:3)
• "Jesus came to Bethany..." (John 12:1)

All three accounts describe:

• Bethany as the location (Matthew 26:6; Mark 14:3; John 12:1)
• costly ointment (Matthew 26:7; Mark 14:3; John 12:3)
• criticism over the "waste" (Matthew 26:7; Mark 14:4)
• the suggestion that it should have been sold and given to the poor (Matthew 26:9; Mark 14:4; John 12:5)
• Jesus defending the woman (Matthew 26:10; Mark 14:6; John 12:7)
• reference to His approaching death and burial (Matthew 26:12; Mark 14:8; John 12:7)

So there are not four anointings in the Gospels. Matthew 26, Mark 14, and John 12 are parallel accounts of the same Bethany anointing.

That leaves two Gospel anointings:

1. The anointing recorded in Luke 7.
2. The anointing in Bethany recorded in Matthew 26, Mark 14, and John 12.

And we're back to my question.

John 11:1-2 is introducing Lazarus, Martha, and Mary. In that introduction, John identifies Mary as "the one who anointed the Lord and wiped His feet with her hair."

An identifier normally points the reader to something already known. If John is referring only to the event he narrates later in John 12:1-8, then he's identifying Mary by a future event that the reader has not yet read about, namely the event where she anoints Jesus' feet and wipes them with her hair in Bethany.

So why use that description as her identifying marker?

The only other Gospel account featuring that distinctive combination of actions, a woman anointing Jesus' feet and wiping them with her hair, is Luke 7.

To me, that naturally explains why John could use it as an identifier before narrating John 12. If you reject Luke 7 as the referent, what do you think John expected his readers to recognize from that description?

 

[Rockerduck]

You're treating Matthew 26:6-13, Mark 14:3-9, and John 12:1-8 as three separate anointing events, but they're actually three accounts of the same anointing in Bethany:

• "when Jesus was at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper..." (Matthew 26:6)
• "while he was at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper..." (Mark 14:3)
• "Jesus came to Bethany..." (John 12:1)

All three accounts describe:

• Bethany as the location (Matthew 26:6; Mark 14:3; John 12:1)
• costly ointment (Matthew 26:7; Mark 14:3; John 12:3)
• criticism over the "waste" (Matthew 26:7; Mark 14:4)
• the suggestion that it should have been sold and given to the poor (Matthew 26:9; Mark 14:4; John 12:5)
• Jesus defending the woman (Matthew 26:10; Mark 14:6; John 12:7)
• reference to His approaching death and burial (Matthew 26:12; Mark 14:8; John 12:7)

So there are not four anointings in the Gospels. Matthew 26, Mark 14, and John 12 are parallel accounts of the same Bethany anointing.

That leaves two Gospel anointings:

1. The anointing recorded in Luke 7.
2. The anointing in Bethany recorded in Matthew 26, Mark 14, and John 12.

And we're back to my question.

John 11:1-2 is introducing Lazarus, Martha, and Mary. In that introduction, John identifies Mary as "the one who anointed the Lord and wiped His feet with her hair."

An identifier normally points the reader to something already known. If John is referring only to the event he narrates later in John 12:1-8, then he's identifying Mary by a future event that the reader has not yet read about, namely the event where she anoints Jesus' feet and wipes them with her hair in Bethany.

So why use that description as her identifying marker?

The only other Gospel account featuring that distinctive combination of actions, a woman anointing Jesus' feet and wiping them with her hair, is Luke 7.

To me, that naturally explains why John could use it as an identifier before narrating John 12. If you reject Luke 7 as the referent, what do you think John expected his readers to recognize from that description?

I plainly said all three were Mary in Matthew, Mark, and John. I didn't treat them as separate. :Read it again, and you are beating a dead horse. You know and see my position, and apparently, everyone sees this as two separate events. You will never convince me otherwise.

 

[Moonwood]

I plainly said all three were Mary in Matthew, Mark, and John.

I didn't say that you said otherwise.

...everyone sees this as two separate events.

Except you. According to you, Jesus was anointed on four separate occasions, not two:

"...4 times Jesus was anointed"

then you cited these verses:

1. Luke 7:36-50
2. Matthew 26:6-13
3. Mark 14:3-9
4. John 12:1-8

But Matthew 26:6-13, Mark 14:3-9, and John 12:1-8 are actually three accounts of the same anointing that occured in Bethany:

• "when Jesus was at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper..." (Matthew 26:6)
• "while he was at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper..." (Mark 14:3)
• "Jesus came to Bethany..." (John 12:1)

All three accounts describe:

• Bethany as the location (Matthew 26:6; Mark 14:3; John 12:1)
• costly ointment (Matthew 26:7; Mark 14:3; John 12:3)
• criticism over the "waste" (Matthew 26:7; Mark 14:4)
• the suggestion that it should have been sold and given to the poor (Matthew 26:9; Mark 14:4; John 12:5)
• Jesus defending the woman (Matthew 26:10; Mark 14:6; John 12:7)
• reference to His approaching death and burial (Matthew 26:12; Mark 14:8; John 12:7)

So there are not four anointings in the Gospels. Matthew 26, Mark 14, and John 12 are parallel accounts of the same Bethany anointing.

That leaves two Gospel anointings:

1. The anointing recorded in Luke 7.
2. The anointing in Bethany recorded in Matthew 26, Mark 14, and John 12.

And we're back to my question.

John 11:1-2 is introducing Lazarus, Martha, and Mary. In that introduction, John identifies Mary as "the one who anointed the Lord and wiped His feet with her hair."

An identifier normally points the reader to something already known. If John is referring only to the event he narrates later in John 12:1-8, then he's identifying Mary by a future event that the reader has not yet read about, namely the event where she anoints Jesus' feet and wipes them with her hair in Bethany.

So why use that description as her identifying marker?

The only other Gospel account featuring that distinctive combination of actions, a woman anointing Jesus' feet and wiping them with her hair, is Luke 7.

To me, that naturally explains why John could use it as an identifier before narrating John 12. If you reject Luke 7 as the referent, what do you think John expected his readers to recognize from that description?

 

[Rockerduck]

I didn't say that you said otherwise.



Except you. According to you, Jesus was anointed on four separate occasions, not two:

"...4 times Jesus was anointed"

then you cited these verses:

1. Luke 7:36-50
2. Matthew 26:6-13
3. Mark 14:3-9
4. John 12:1-8

But Matthew 26:6-13, Mark 14:3-9, and John 12:1-8 are actually three accounts of the same anointing that occured in Bethany:

• "when Jesus was at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper..." (Matthew 26:6)
• "while he was at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper..." (Mark 14:3)
• "Jesus came to Bethany..." (John 12:1)

All three accounts describe:

• Bethany as the location (Matthew 26:6; Mark 14:3; John 12:1)
• costly ointment (Matthew 26:7; Mark 14:3; John 12:3)
• criticism over the "waste" (Matthew 26:7; Mark 14:4)
• the suggestion that it should have been sold and given to the poor (Matthew 26:9; Mark 14:4; John 12:5)
• Jesus defending the woman (Matthew 26:10; Mark 14:6; John 12:7)
• reference to His approaching death and burial (Matthew 26:12; Mark 14:8; John 12:7)

So there are not four anointings in the Gospels. Matthew 26, Mark 14, and John 12 are parallel accounts of the same Bethany anointing.

That leaves two Gospel anointings:

1. The anointing recorded in Luke 7.
2. The anointing in Bethany recorded in Matthew 26, Mark 14, and John 12.

And we're back to my question.

John 11:1-2 is introducing Lazarus, Martha, and Mary. In that introduction, John identifies Mary as "the one who anointed the Lord and wiped His feet with her hair."

An identifier normally points the reader to something already known. If John is referring only to the event he narrates later in John 12:1-8, then he's identifying Mary by a future event that the reader has not yet read about, namely the event where she anoints Jesus' feet and wipes them with her hair in Bethany.

So why use that description as her identifying marker?

The only other Gospel account featuring that distinctive combination of actions, a woman anointing Jesus' feet and wiping them with her hair, is Luke 7.

To me, that naturally explains why John could use it as an identifier before narrating John 12. If you reject Luke 7 as the referent, what do you think John expected his readers to recognize from that description?

I said four are RECORDED in the Bible and only two events. Just believe what you want because you are never, ever going to change my mind.

 

[Moonwood]

I said four are RECORDED in the Bible and only two events. Just believe what you want...

You said:

"...4 times Jesus was anointed".

Four anointing events is not two anointing events. That's not believing what I want. It's your own words and basic math. So is it that you meant to say Jesus was anointed two times but misspoke by saying He was anointed four times?

 

[Rockerduck]

You said:

"...4 times Jesus was anointed".

Four anointing events is not two anointing events. That's not believing what I want. It's your own words and basic math. So is it that you meant to say Jesus was anointed two times but misspoke by saying He was anointed four times?

Yes, I meant recorded.

 

[Moonwood]

Yes, I meant recorded.

Ok.

...you are never, ever going to change my mind.

Ok, but if your position is correct, you should be able to answer the following questions.

In John 11:1-2, John is introducing Lazarus, Martha, and Mary. In that introduction, he identifies Mary as "the one who anointed the Lord and wiped His feet with her hair."
There are only two anointing accounts in the Gospels in which a woman both anoints Jesus and wipes His feet with her hair:

1. The anointing in Nain described in Luke 7:36-50, and
2. The anointing in Bethany described in John 12:1-8 (paralleled in Matthew 26:6-13 and Mark 14:3-9).

John's description, "the one who anointed the Lord and wiped His feet with her hair," applies equally well to both women.
You maintain that John is not referring to the woman in Luke 7.

But if that is the case, why does John identify Mary by a description that would also fit the woman in Luke 7? What makes that identifier uniquely suitable for Mary of Bethany?
And why would John choose that particular identifier before narrating the Bethany anointing in John 12?

If, however, Mary was the woman in both accounts, then John's wording makes immediate sense. The identifier refers to a distinctive act already associated with Mary.

 

[Rockerduck]

Ok.



Ok, but if your position is correct, you should be able to answer the following questions.

In John 11:1-2, John is introducing Lazarus, Martha, and Mary. In that introduction, he identifies Mary as "the one who anointed the Lord and wiped His feet with her hair."
There are only two anointing accounts in the Gospels in which a woman both anoints Jesus and wipes His feet with her hair:

1. The anointing in Nain described in Luke 7:36-50, and
2. The anointing in Bethany described in John 12:1-8 (paralleled in Matthew 26:6-13 and Mark 14:3-9).

John's description, "the one who anointed the Lord and wiped His feet with her hair," applies equally well to both women.
You maintain that John is not referring to the woman in Luke 7.

But if Mary was not the woman in Luke 7, then John's description does not uniquely identify Mary, because the woman in Luke 7 also anointed the Lord and wiped His feet with her hair. Since John had not yet narrated the Bethany anointing, how would his readers know that he was referring specifically to Mary of Bethany rather than the woman described in Luke 7?

And what is your explanation for how John's readers would make that distinction?

If, however, Mary was the woman in both accounts, then the identifier works naturally. John can identify Mary by a distinctive act already associated with her, and the description is no longer ambiguous.

Simply, John only wrote what was important to prove the deity of Christ in his whole Gospel. Mary was one among them who knew Jesus in the flesh. Mary's event was important to the Gospel. Dr. Luke traveled with the Apostle Paul. He met all the Apostles, including, Mary, who birthed Jesus.
Dr. Luke interviewed everyone to get a complete story and says so at the beginning of his Gospel. All the Apostles knew Mary of Magdala. So, when Dr. Luke wrote what the disciples, the Apostles, and others, like James said, and wrote the story in Simon the Pharisees house, apparently, nobody knew the woman's name. Although, they all read Luke's Gospel. All letters by Luke, and the apostles were passed around the church's in the first century. The Gospel of Luke and the Apostle letters was well known, so much so, that if it mattered what the woman's name was, it could've been added in, but it wasn't. Therefore, it didn't matter to the early church and it doesn't matter now.

 

[Moonwood]

Simply, John only wrote what was important to prove the deity of Christ in his whole Gospel. Mary was one among them who knew Jesus in the flesh. Mary's event was important to the Gospel. Dr. Luke traveled with the Apostle Paul. He met all the Apostles, including, Mary, who birthed Jesus. Dr. Luke interviewed everyone to get a complete story and says so at the beginning of his Gospel. All the Apostles knew Mary of Magdala. So, when Dr. Luke wrote what the disciples, the Apostles, and others, like James said, and wrote the story in Simon the Pharisees house, apparently, nobody knew the woman's name. Although, they all read Luke's Gospel. All letters by Luke, and the apostles were passed around the church's in the first century. The Gospel of Luke and the Apostle letters was well known, so much so, that if it mattered what the woman's name was, it could've been added in, but it wasn't. Therefore, it didn't matter to the early church and it doesn't matter now.

Whether the woman's name mattered to Luke is a separate issue.
My question isn't why Luke left her unnamed. My question is why John chose this particular identifier in John 11:2.

John identifies Mary as "the one who anointed the Lord and wiped His feet with her hair."
If Mary was not the woman in Luke 7, then there are two different women in the Gospel tradition who fit that description:

1. The woman in Luke 7.
2. Mary of Bethany in John 12.

In that case, why does John identify Mary by a description that would also fit the woman in Luke 7?

What makes "the one who anointed the Lord and wiped His feet with her hair" a uniquely appropriate identifier for Mary of Bethany?

And why would John choose that particular identifier before narrating the Bethany anointing in John 12?

Saying that Luke never named the woman does not answer those questions. How does John's identifier uniquely identify Mary if the woman in Luke 7 is someone else?