Geologist: ''Jesus was married with a child and tomb found''

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: cooperton

I just think it's weird that the most recent concrete evidence of Jesus being a real person still doesn't prove he was resurrected or that he is alive today. Isn't that the actual point?

What do you want Thomas, to dig your fingers in the wounds of his resurrected body to prove it's real? Most of the twelve apostles became martyrs due to what they saw. Despite attempts by the Jews and Romans to eradicate the good news, the truth of the resurrection still remains.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: cooperton

I just think it's weird that the most recent concrete evidence of Jesus being a real person still doesn't prove he was resurrected or that he is alive today. Isn't that the actual point?

What do you want Thomas, to dig your fingers in the wounds of his resurrected body to prove it's real? Most of the twelve apostles became martyrs due to what they saw. Despite attempts by the Jews and Romans to eradicate the good news, the truth of the resurrection still remains.

No body, no case. Havent seen him on the news lately. Havent heard any activity at all besides "visions" and "miracles". In today's world of twitter and Snapchat, if you aren't publicly promoting your brand, are you even a real hero?

It's important to know/separate - - historical Jesus and "Myth Jesus".

Many scholars think there was a real Jesus - - that the myth is/was based on.

originally posted by: glend
a reply to: Joecroft

…whether there was a child is another question entirely.

Interesting fact. France has highest concentration of Black Madonna's in Europe.

It is because Mary Magdelene was taken to France after the death of Jesus and raised children there. The French know this (or don't they)? Templar Knights so prominent as money lenders and land owners in France before they were exterminated and chased to Scotland by a jealous Pope.

a reply to: vethumanbeing

Rome had to protect their own interest (God's spokesman on Earth) so tried to destroy all traces of Mary Magdalene.

originally posted by: glend
a reply to: vethumanbeing
Rome had to protect their own interest (God's spokesman on Earth) so tried to destroy all traces of Mary Magdalene.

This was genius. The creation of the Catholic Church was everything Paul wanted it to be and MORE. Priests spoke as God interpreters. You as a *subject* of the Catholic Monarchy were not worthy/allowed to speak to God (blasphemy). Paul was a flagrant misogynist and the annihilation of all traces of any sexual behavior relating to Jesus regarding the nature of his relationship with his Mother AND the Wife would be his first agenda. Paul's final step to enforce a totally unnatural doctrine upon his leadership (priests/nuns/bishops/cardinals) to live a neutered existence in celibacy was his greatest achievement. There was this odd exception; (extraordinarily hypocritical) the human equivalent of livestock they managed to enslave within their dogma could not practice birth control.

a reply to: vethumanbeing

He wouldn't be the first male to blame his own failings, on females. But its interesting to note that essene's mostly consisted of males, waiting for the end times. With the Dead Sea Messianic Apocalypse Scroll (4Q521) having a similar tone to Luke 7:22 (raising the dead etc). So Paul may have adapted some of their beliefs into Christianity.

originally posted by: glend
a reply to: vethumanbeing

He wouldn't be the first male to blame his own failings, on females. But its interesting to note that essene's mostly consisted of males, waiting for the end times. With the Dead Sea Messianic Apocalypse Scroll (4Q521) having a similar tone to Luke 7:22 (raising the dead etc). So Paul may have adapted some of their beliefs into Christianity.

We may differ here. Jesus was an Essene. They viewed women as equals and valued them as teachers. Women did not live separately from the men but with their children lived as a collective in Qumran. The Jewish Pharisee colluded with the Roman Army to destroy this collective 70 AD? at Qumran because this cult threatened the validity of both the Pharisee and Sadducee. The Essene's were a very advanced community; not only in thinking but technologically, using power sources even we today are not privy to. There were not only 12 male disciple's within Jesus's ministry but 12 female as well. There was no extermination at Qumran as they were long gone. I imagine later in spirit became the Rosicruscion Order.

a reply to: vethumanbeing

Yes you right, many sects, different beliefs...

There is also a different order of Essenes. Though agreeing with the others about regimen and customs and legal matters, it has separated in its opinion about marriage. For they hold that those who do not marry cut off the greatest part of life, the succession, and more: if all were to think the same way, the line would very quickly die out. 161 To be sure, testing the brides in a three-year interval, once they have been purified three times as a test of their being able to bear children, they take them in this manner; but they do not continue having intercourse with those who are pregnant, demonstrating that the need for marrying is not because of pleasure, but for children. Baths [are taken] by the women wrapping clothes around themselves, just as by the men in a waist-covering. Such are the customs of this order
link

a reply to: glend
I admire them; ahead of their time..perceived as dangerous to Jewish common Law at that time (needs to be persecuted within that community)...you would think governing Pharisee of that time period would be more gracious, tolerant.

originally posted by: Annee
It's important to know/separate - - historical Jesus and "Myth Jesus".

Many scholars think there was a real Jesus - - that the myth is/was based on.

People on this forum, and in general, are not that great at distinguishing fact from fiction. Especially when it's the fiction that is tickling their ears more than the facts/truths. What they are great at when it comes to biblical, theological or spiritual subjects (on average), is demonstrating 2 Timothy 4:3,4:

For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the wholesome* [Or “healthful; beneficial.”] teaching, but according to their own desires, they will surround themselves with teachers to have their ears tickled.* [Or “to tell them what they want to hear.”] 4 They will turn away from listening to the truth and give attention to false stories.

Such as the false story that Jesus was married and other similar false stories also promoted by some of the apocryphal writings. That's why verse 2 admonishes Christians to: “Preach the word; be at it urgently in favorable times and difficult times; reprove, reprimand, exhort, with all patience and art of teaching.”

The apocryphal writings not being part of that “word” (God's word, the Bible). The Bible’s answer to the question of whether or not Jesus was married:

The Bible makes clear that Jesus was not married, even though it does not specifically comment on his marital status. * Consider the following.

1. The Bible frequently refers to Jesus’ family as well as to women who accompanied him during his ministry and who stood by when he was executed, yet it never mentions his having a wife. (Matthew 12:46, 47; Mark 3:​31, 32; 15:40; Luke 8:​2, 3, 19, 20; John 19:25) The most plausible reason why the Bible is silent on this matter is that he was never married.

2. Concerning those who remain unmarried so that they can do more in God’s service, Jesus told his disciples: “Let the one who can make room for it [singleness] make room for it.” (Matthew 19:10-​12) He set the pattern for those who choose not to marry in order to devote themselves more fully to God.​—John 13:15; 1 Corinthians 7:​32-​38.

3. Just before he died, Jesus arranged for the care of his mother. (John 19:25-​27) If Jesus had been married or had fathered children, he would have made sure that such close family members were provided for as well.

4. The Bible uses Jesus as an example for husbands, but it does not refer to the way he treated a human wife. Instead, it says: “Husbands, continue loving your wives, just as the Christ also loved the congregation and gave himself up for it.” (Ephesians 5:​25) If Jesus had actually been married while on earth, would not his perfect example as a literal husband have been used in that verse?

*: The Bible does refer to Christ as a bridegroom, but the context makes it plain that these references are symbolic.​—John 3:​28, 29; 2 Corinthians 11:2.

Does the Bible Tell Us the Whole Story About Jesus?

Could it be that Jesus did not die at Golgotha, as the Bible says he did, but survived? Is it possible that he married Mary Magdalene and fathered children by her? Or might he have been an ascetic mystic who rejected all pleasures of earthly life? Is it possible that he taught doctrines that differ from what we read in the Bible?

SUCH speculations have flourished in recent years, a resurgence that is due, in part, to popular movies and novels. Besides fanciful fiction, there have also been many books and articles that focus attention on apocryphal writings from the second and third centuries C.E. that claim to reveal facts about Jesus omitted from the Gospels. Could such claims be valid? Can we be sure that the Bible tells us the whole, truthful story about Jesus?

To answer such questions, it is helpful to consider three basic subjects. First, we need to know important information about the men who wrote the Gospel accounts and when they wrote them; second, we need to learn who established the canon of the Scriptures and how; and third, we need some background on the apocryphal writings and how they differ from canonical writings. * [The word “canon” refers to the collection of Bible books that give convincing proof of being inspired of God. There are 66 books that are generally recognized as canonical and are an integral and indispensable part of God’s Word.]
...

But again, when people go down the road of collecting information about those subjects, they tend to demonstrate 2 Timothy 4:3,4, only looking for that which tickles their ears (which I also understand to be referring to things that intrigue them, that which pleases them, interests them, besides the main meaning of that which one wants to hear; that's why it's expressed as having your ears tickled according to one's desires, and not simply as “to tell them what they want to hear”).

Therefore, these people tend not to click that article link to read the rest where more detailed information regarding those subjects mentioned at the end of the part I quoted above can be found. So I'll share a bit anyway, even though most here don't wanna hear it, and really don't want to acknowledge the accuracy/truthfulness of the following (it's not "according to their desires"; they prefer to see the Bible discredited in favor of such claims as those found in the apocryphal writings, sometimes even as they praise the Bible for its supposed spirituality or spiritual message, things they're OK with or find easy to twist and attach to their own philosophies and theosophies, cherrypicking as they go):

Some authors have claimed that the canon of the Christian Greek Scriptures was chosen centuries after the fact by a church that was an established power under the direction of the Emperor Constantine. However, the facts show otherwise.

For example, note what Professor of Church History Oskar Skarsaune states: “Which writings that were to be included in the New Testament, and which were not, was never decided upon by any church council or by any single person . . . The criteria were quite open and very sensible: Writings from the first century C.E. that were regarded as written by apostles or by their fellow workers were regarded as reliable. Other writings, letters, or ‘gospels’ that were written later were not included . . . This process was essentially completed a long time before Constantine and a long time before his church of power had been established. It was the church of martyrs, not the church of power, that gave us the New Testament.”

Ken Berding, an associate professor whose field of study is the Christian Greek Scriptures, gives this comment about how the canon emerged: “The church did not establish a canon of its choosing; it is more proper to speak of the church recognizing the books that Christians had always considered to be an authoritative Word from God.”

However, was it merely those humble first-century Christians who selected the canon? The Bible tells us that something far more important​—and powerful—​was at work.

[more on that in my next comment, where I will continue this comment]

a reply to: Annee

I have one short thing to mention concerning the word "discernment" in relation to my previous comment about distinguishing fact from fiction (or false stories/myths), then I will continue where I left off in my previous comment (between brackets is mine):

Use discernment: Discernment is “acuteness of judgment.” It is “the power or faculty of the mind by which it distinguishes one thing from another.” [such as fact from fiction, what is true from what is false] A person with discernment perceives subtleties of ideas or things and has good judgment.

Using discernment, we will be able to recognize those who are merely using “smooth talk and complimentary speech” in order to “seduce the hearts of guileless ones.” (Romans 16:18) Discernment enables you to discard irrelevant information or misleading facts and distinguish the substance of a matter.

Source: Do Not Be a Victim of Propaganda! (Awake!—2000)

According to the Bible, one of the miraculous gifts of the spirit that were given in the early decades of the Christian congregation was “discernment of inspired utterances.” (1 Corinthians 12:4, 10) So some of those Christians were given a superhuman ability to discern the difference between sayings that were truly inspired by God and those that were not. Christians today may thus be confident that the Scriptures included in the Bible were recognized as inspired (for evidence of their being inspired, see for example the demonstration of the fulfillment of 2 Timothy 4:3,4 on ATS, of course, it helps if you can distinguish/discern fact from fiction in this regards, if you are inclined to believe the same false stories/myths and fiction, this fulfillment is a lot harder to spot. Or check out this video called The BIBLE - 3 - Accurate History,Reliable Prophecy (playlist), for some additional examples).

Evidently, then, the canon was established at an early stage under the guidance of holy spirit. From the latter part of the second century C.E., some writers commented on the canonicity of the Bible books. These writers, however, did not establish the canon; they merely testified to what God had already accepted through his representatives, who were guided by his spirit.

Ancient manuscripts also provide compelling evidence to support the canon that is generally accepted today. There are more than 5,000 manuscripts of the Greek Scriptures in the original language, including some from the second and third centuries. It was these writings, not the apocryphal writings, that were regarded as authoritative during the early centuries C.E. and therefore were copied and widely distributed.

However, the internal evidence is the most important proof of canonicity. The canonical writings are in harmony with “the pattern of healthful words” that we find in the rest of the Bible. (2 Timothy 1:13) They urge readers to love, worship, and serve Jehovah, and they warn against superstition, demonism, and creature worship. They are historically accurate and contain true prophecy. And they encourage readers to love their fellow humans. The books of the Christian Greek Scriptures have such distinctive marks. Do the apocryphal writings measure up?

How Are the Apocryphal Writings Different?

The apocryphal writings are quite different from the canonical writings. These apocryphal books date from about the middle of the second century, much later than the canonical writings. They paint a picture of Jesus and Christianity that is not in harmony with the inspired Scriptures.

For example, the apocryphal Gospel of Thomas ascribes a number of strange utterances to Jesus, such as saying that he would transform Mary into a male to make it possible for her to enter into the Kingdom of heaven. The Infancy Gospel of Thomas describes young Jesus as a mean-spirited child who deliberately caused another child’s death. The apocryphal Acts of Paul and Acts of Peter emphasize complete abstinence from sexual relations and even depict the apostles as urging women to separate from their husbands. The Gospel of Judas depicts Jesus as laughing at his disciples for praying to God in connection with a meal. Such notions are at odds with what is found in the canonical books.​—Mark 14:22; 1 Corinthians 7:3-5; Galatians 3:28; Hebrews 7:26.

Many of the apocryphal writings reflect beliefs of the Gnostics, who held that the Creator, Jehovah, is not a good God. They also believed that the resurrection is not literal, that all physical matter is evil, and that Satan was the source of marriage and procreation.

A number of the apocryphal books are attributed to Bible characters but falsely so. Did some dark conspiracy exclude these books from the Bible? One expert on the apocrypha, M. R. James, said: “There is no question of any one’s having excluded them from the New Testament: they have done that for themselves.”

Bible Writers Warned About an Apostasy to Come

...

Source: see previous comment

Read the rest yourself to prove to yourself that you're not one of those described at 2 Timothy 4:3,4 as not putting up with this sort of beneficial teaching, the truths that will really set one free from the fiction and false stories/myths that are so popular on ATS and in general human society and in particular those on display in this thread now. It's only 3 more paragraphs. It will be infinitely* more useful/beneficial than reading through this entire thread, or any thread on ATS. Less time-consuming as well. Cause the myths on ATS are endless and some of them are just outragerously 'out there' (in La La Land). *: figuratively speaking (a hyperbole)

a reply to: whereislogic


Nothing proves the bible.

It's circular. "The Bible is truth - because the Bible says so".

Back to the real Jesus and Myth Jesus.

Kinda like Johnny Appleseed and John Chapman - - - only there's actual documentation of the real person and his factual life.

a reply to: vethumanbeing

Have you read any of the sayings from the Beit Hillel ("House of Hillel"). He had many similar views to Jesus. Not at all like the killer priests that exist in the NT. But Beit Hillel died when Jesus was teenager, so perhaps things went backwards, after his death.

I really don't know much about essenes at all. Except reading that they considered themselves sons of light against sons of darkness. That doesn't appeal to me as I am great believer in what the Christian Meister Eckhart preached...

‘You have to start first with yourself and leave yourself.’ rather than loose ourself in multiplicity of external realities,

a reply to: Annee

I encourage you to give it some more and deeper thought rather than quickly appealing to the standard straw man interpretation or view* of the Bible's way of reasoning and how it goes about demonstrating to be inspired by God and truthful; teaching things that don't tickle your ears and you don't want to put up with because it's not according to your desire to see the Bible discredited as such (as being inspired by God and truthful from Genesis to Revelation, what type of evidence proves it to be so and what type of reasoning allows one to come to that conclusion that requires no circular reasoning). *: a mythological view of the matter concerning circular reasoning

But if you prefer continuing your demonstration of 2 Timothy 4:3,4 and thus providing a tiny portion of additional evidence* for the claims of the Bible regarding it being inspired by the God of Truth, go right ahead (*: more if considered together with the other demonstrations of the same behaviour and attitudes towards beneficial teaching and biblical truths compared to myths'false stories designed to undermine said teaching and truths). Perhaps one day it may help someone else see that demonstration of unreasonable bias in favor of one's own desires and the myths* one wants to believe rather than the truth of the matter and reality.

*: in this case in the form of uninformed short propagandistic anti-Bible slogans like: "It's circular". ('it's based on circular reasoning') The least you could have done was give the subject some more reasonable consideration rather than trying to immediately fit it into your preferred opinion and picture you want to have of the Bible and its claims. I'm pretty sure most people have already heard that one dozens of times on these forums or elsewhere. Those who desire to agree with that straw man view, will do so with or without your comment; and to me, it remains a demonstration of 2 Timothy 4:3,4, so it convinces me of the opposite of what you seem to want to convince me of with your comment. In other words, you just wasted your breath (and time) and produced another non-beneficial comment expressing and 'arguing for'* a myth, something that is false (a false view of the matter), spiritual darkness. (*: not sure if 'arguing for' is the right terminology here cause there wasn't much of an argument there)

John 3:19

Now this is the basis for judgment: that the light has come into the world, but men have loved the darkness rather than the light, for their works were wicked.

By the way, in my previous comment I added a link to a video and playlist that goes deeper into the evidence for the Bible's reliability and the claim that it is inspired by God and that it serves as an honest manual for human life and true spirituality and enlightenment, not the counterfeit kind promoted by Satan, his demons and his human victims who have been conditioned to not put up with beneficial truthful teaching, this sort of information or evidence and try to fit everything they read into their own picture of what the Bible is or how useful it is and accompanying preferred myths about it in demonstration of 2 Timothy 4:3,4 and several other scriptures that touch on this subject.

Isaiah 5:20,21

20 Woe to those who say that good is bad and bad is good,

Those who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness,

Those who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!

21 Woe to those wise in their own eyes

And discreet in their own sight!

[the word discretion (a form of the word "discreet") is related to the earlier mentioned discernment]

a reply to: Annee

If you want to see an example of the type of teacher that 2 Timothy 4:3,4 is talking about, glend just gave 2: Meister Eckhart and Hillel. The more you read through this thread, the more examples you will come across and thus the more demonstrations of 2 Timothy 4:3,4 and what people like to soak up. An expression that takes us back to the article from which I quoted something about discernment before (between brackets is mine):

...
Using discernment, we will be able to recognize those who are merely using “smooth talk and complimentary speech” in order to “seduce the hearts of guileless ones.” (Romans 16:18) [the same types mentioned at 2 Timothy 4:3,4 as “teachers” who do their best to tickle the ears of their listeners] Discernment enables you to discard irrelevant information or misleading facts and distinguish the substance of a matter. But how can you discern when something is misleading?

Put information to the test: “Beloved ones,” said John, a first-century Christian teacher, “do not believe every inspired expression, but test the inspired expressions.” (1 John 4:1) Some people today are like sponges; they soak up whatever they come across. It is all too easy to absorb whatever is around us. [especially when it tickles your ears]

But it is far better for each individual personally to choose what he will feed his mind. It is said that we are what we eat, and this can apply to food for both the body and the mind. [so don't feed it the darkness mentioned earlier if you want to be a beacon of light, truth, goodness and honesty, enlightening others on things you feel they should know about, or be warned about, the purpose of a website exposing so-called conspiracies against truth or mankind, or conspiracies in religion as per the title of this subforum] No matter what you are reading or watching or listening to, test to see whether it has propagandistic overtones or is truthful.

Moreover, if we want to be fair-minded, we must be willing to subject our own opinions to continual testing as we take in new information. We must realize that they are, after all, opinions. Their trustworthiness depends on the validity of our facts, on the quality of our reasoning, and on the standards or values that we choose to apply.

Source: Do Not Be a Victim of Propaganda! (Awake!—2000)

Especially not antichrist, anti-Bible, anti-light and pro-darkness propaganda that follows the pattern described at Isaiah 5:20,21 (painting right as wrong and wrong as right). Wake up for real for a change (of pace; to the real threat to your mind and thinking, the real deceptions out there, the real conspiracies against the truths that matter most to your well-being, both spiritual and physical, the actual myths, not the facts perceived and painted as myths by the teachers mentioned at 2 Timothy 4:3,4 and those described at Romans 16:18 and at Titus 1:10 as “profitless talkers” and “deceivers of the mind”; those whose teachings and false, inaccurate or half-truthful claims are on constant repetition and display on ATS because they are popular and tickle many people's ears).

Do not just follow the crowd: If you realize that what everybody thinks is not necessarily correct, you can find the strength to think differently. While it may seem that all others think the same way, does this mean that you should? Popular opinion is not a reliable barometer of truth. Over the centuries all kinds of ideas have been popularly accepted, only to be proved wrong later. Yet, the inclination to go along with the crowd persists. The command given at Exodus 23:2 serves as a good principle: “You must not follow after the crowd for evil ends.”

Same source as before.

a reply to: whereislogic

People on this forum, and in general, are not that great at distinguishing fact from fiction. Especially when it's the fiction that is tickling their ears more than the facts/truths. What they are great at when it comes to biblical, theological or spiritual subjects (on average), is demonstrating 2 Timothy 4:3,4:

I appreciate that the bible doesn't specifically say Jesus was married. But I would not call the gospels a biography by any stretch of the imagination. They only cover between one to three years of Jesus life. Telling stories to evoke a certain image of Jesus. Written in Greek style, quasi history mixed with romanticism.

If we examine Luke 8, the first person mentioned by name is Mary Magdalene "out of whom went seven devils". The seven devils are the same 7 heads of the beast mentioned in revelation. The beast from the sea (water = spritiual, beast=kingdom seen as beast by our ego). So its the seven chakra that Mary Magdalene conquered. Gospel of Luke is saying Mary Magdalene was a fully enlightened being. A full counterpart to Jesus.

Latter it mentions a woman having an issue of blood for twelve years (menstruation)
Then she touched Jesus taking the virtue out of him (really!)
After which her bleeding stopped (pregnancy).
Next miracle we have Jesus raising a girl from the dead (birth).

This is one of the reasons the black Madonna is rumoured to be painted (aka inspired) by Luke the Evangelist. There are other reasons. But I don't want to take you down that rabbit hole.

a reply to: glend
I have not heard of Beit Hillel; let me run go look and get back to you!

a reply to: glend

Mother-goddess worship is still very much alive. But Luke was never involved in promoting it with the kind of things you ascribe to him. Luke's stance on paganism is clear.

Mother-goddess worship was still practiced during the days of the early Christians. The apostle Paul met up with it in Ephesus in Asia Minor. As in Athens, another goddess-worshiping city, he had borne witness to “the God that made the world,” the living Creator, who is not “like gold or silver or stone, like something sculptured by the art and contrivance of man.” This was too much for the Ephesians, most of whom worshiped the mother-goddess Artemis. Those who made a living by fashioning silver shrines of the goddess incited a riot. For about two hours, the crowd shouted: “Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!”​—Acts 17:24, 29; 19:26, 34.

The Ephesian Artemis

The Greeks also worshiped an Artemis, but the Artemis worshiped in Ephesus can only be loosely identified with her. The Greek Artemis was a virgin goddess of hunting and childbirth. The Ephesian Artemis was a fertility goddess. Her huge temple at Ephesus was considered one of the seven wonders of the world. Her statue, thought to have fallen from heaven, represented her as a personification of fertility, her chest being covered with rows of egg-shaped breasts. The peculiar shape of these breasts has given rise to various explanations, such as that they represent garlands of eggs or even bulls’ testicles. Whatever the explanation, the symbol of fertility is clear.

Interestingly, according to The New Encyclopædia Britannica, the original statue of this goddess “was made of gold, ebony, silver, and black stone.” A well-known statue of the Ephesian Artemis, dating from the second century C.E., shows her with black face, hands, and feet.

The image of Artemis was paraded through the streets. Bible scholar R. B. Rackham writes: “Within the temple [of Artemis were] stored her . . . images, shrines, and sacred utensils, of gold and silver, which on great festivals were carried to the city and back in a magnificent procession.” These festivals attracted hundreds of thousands of pilgrims from all Asia Minor. They purchased small shrines of the goddess and hailed her as great, their lady, the queen, the virgin, “one who listens to and accepts prayers.” In such surroundings, it took great courage for Paul and the early Christians to extol “the God that made the world,” rather than gods and goddesses made of “gold or silver or stone.”

From Mother-Goddess to “Mother of God”

It was to the elders of the Christian congregation of Ephesus that the apostle Paul foretold an apostasy. He warned that apostates would rise up and speak “twisted things.” (Acts 20:17, 28-30) Among the ever-lurking dangers in Ephesus was a return to mother-goddess worship. Did this actually occur?

We read in the New Catholic Encyclopedia: “As a pilgrimage center, Ephesus was considered the burial site of [the apostle] John. . . . Another tradition, witnessed by the Council of Ephesus (431), links the Blessed Virgin Mary with St. John. The basilica in which the Council was held was called the Mary Church.” Another Catholic work (Théo​—Nouvelle encyclopédie catholique) speaks of a “plausible tradition” that Mary accompanied John to Ephesus, where she spent the rest of her life. Why is this supposed connection between Ephesus and Mary important to us today?

Let The New Encyclopædia Britannica answer: “Veneration of the mother of God received its impetus when the Christian Church became the imperial church under Constantine and the pagan masses streamed into the church. . . . Their piety and religious consciousness had been formed for millennia through the cult of the ‘great mother’ goddess and the ‘divine virgin,’ a development that led all the way from the old popular religions of Babylonia and Assyria.” What better place could there be than Ephesus for the “Christianization” of mother-goddess worship?

Thus, it was in Ephesus, in 431 C.E., that the so-called third ecumenical council pronounced Mary “Theotokos,” a Greek word meaning “God-bearer,” or “Mother of God.” The New Catholic Encyclopedia states: “The use of this title by the Church was undoubtedly decisive for the growth in later centuries of Marian doctrine and devotion.”

The ruins of the “Church of the Virgin Mary,” where this council met, can still be seen today on the site of ancient Ephesus. A chapel can also be visited that, according to a tradition, was the house where Mary lived and died. Pope Paul VI visited these Marian shrines in Ephesus in 1967.

Yes, Ephesus was the focal point for the transformation of pagan mother-goddess worship, such as Paul met up with in the first century, into fervent devotion to Mary as “Mother of God.” It is principally through devotion to Mary that mother-goddess worship has survived in the lands of Christendom.

Mother-Goddess Worship Still Alive

The Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics cites Bible scholar W. M. Ramsay as reasoning that in “the 5th cent. the honour paid to the Virgin Mary at Ephesus was [a renewed] form of the old pagan Anatolian worship of the Virgin Mother.” The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology states: “The Catholic notions of the ‘mother of God’ and of the ‘queen of heaven,’ though later than the N[ew] T[estament], point to much earlier religio-historical roots in the East. . . . In the later veneration of Mary there are many traces of the heathen cult of the divine mother.”

These traces are too numerous and too detailed to be coincidental. The similarity between mother-and-child statues of the Virgin Mary and statues of pagan goddesses, such as Isis, cannot go unnoticed. The hundreds of statues and icons of the Black Madonna in Catholic churches throughout the world cannot fail to evoke the statue of Artemis. The work Théo​—Nouvelle encyclopédie catholique says of these Black Virgins: “They appear to have been a means for transferring to Mary what remained of popular devotion to Diana [Artemis] . . . or Cybele.” The Assumption Day processions of the Virgin Mary also find their prototype in the processions in honor of Cybele and Artemis.

The very titles given to Mary remind us of pagan mother-goddesses. Ishtar was hailed as the “Holy Virgin,” “my Lady,” and “the merciful mother who listens to prayer.” Isis and Astarte were called “Queen of Heaven.” Cybele was styled the “Mother of all the Blest.” All these titles, with slight variations, are applied to Mary.

Vatican II encouraged the cult of the “Blessed Virgin.” Pope John Paul II was well-known for his ardent devotion to Mary. During his extensive travels, he never missed an opportunity to visit Marian shrines, including that of the Black Madonna of Czestochowa, in Poland. He entrusted the whole world to Mary. It is, therefore, not surprising that under “Mother Goddess,” The New Encyclopædia Britannica writes: “The term also has been applied to figures as diverse as the so-called Stone Age Venuses and the Virgin Mary.”

But Roman Catholic veneration of Mary is not the only way mother-goddess worship has survived until our day. Curiously, supporters of the feminist movement have produced much literature on the worship of mother-goddesses. They believe that women have been sorely oppressed in this aggressively male-dominated world and that female-oriented worship reflects mankind’s aspirations for a less aggressive world. They appear also to believe that today the world would be a better and more peaceful place if it were more feminist-oriented.

However, worship of a mother-goddess did not bring peace in the ancient world, and it will not bring peace today. For that Christians look to the God that Paul declared to the Athenians and to the Ephesians, “the God that made the world and all the things in it.” (Acts 17:24; 19:11, 17, 20)

But what makes a God. Enlightenment is just returning to our natural state. Where altruism is the norm rather than the exception. So saying Mary is enlightened is not suggesting she is God.