Ph.D candidate research assistant: Mary Magdalene

I have an acquaintance who has applied and been accepted at a Methodist University for the Ph.D. program. He called me with the great news and the immediate challenge with which he has been tasked.

Challenge: 35 page paper on "The Theories behind the heretical claims of an intimate relationship between Mary Magdalene and Jesus Christ: The basic history of the heresy.

I've been trying to get this guy to pile in on Logos for a while and he flat out told me, "If Logos is that good for research, do you want to be my research assistant?"

For me, a future seminary student, this is an opportunity for me to see how well my library stacks up for the purposes of research, so I am very excited to get to help him with this small paper. It also gives me a spy glass on the world of thesis papers; not just reading one, but developing one. Also, if it goes well, he's going to buy a large package (somewhere between Gold and Portfolio) depending on his needs for his Ph.D. I guess you could say this is the best "demo" one could really get!

With this topic in mind what do you as users, researchers, students, pastors, ect see as the "must have" resources to do intense scholarly work on the whole Mary Magdalene, Jesus Christ, and the "French Connection" conspiracies?

Thanks for some pointers.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Rich DeRuiter

With this topic in mind what do you as users, researchers, students, pastors, ect see as the "must have" resources to do intense scholarly work on the whole Mary Magdalene, Jesus Christ, and the "French Connection" conspiracies?

What you need to deal with are the pseudepigraphal (AKA gnostic) gospels. I'm not sure which ones specifically suggest this particular relationship, as I've never had any reason to study such a topic, nor for that matter the pseudepigraphal gospels.

Logos does offer some resources in this area, though it is specialized enough that any study would likely need to be done in a library that had an extensive section dedicated to this area of research.

There is, of course, the whole DaVinci code thing, along with the debunking of it. But that would not likely be considered scholalry research by any stretch of the imagination.

Bobby Terhune

One resource you might already have is "The Gospel of Mary - Beyond a Gnostic and a Biblical Mary Magdalene".

Todd Phillips

One resource you might already have is "The Gospel of Mary - Beyond a Gnopstic and a Biblical Mary Magdalene".

Which is also included in the Gnostic and Apocryphal Studies Collection

There's also Darrel Bock's Breaking the Da Vinci Code, which I haven't read, but I would hope that it's footnoted to give leads to other sources.

NetworkGeek

Wow there's a lot. I just did a search on

"Mary Magdalene" Jesus intimate

WITHOUT matching all word forms, and I come up with 172 articles in 144 resources. Some good ones too about did they marry, Magdalene's sin, legends and apocrypha on Mary, Gnostic texts....

...you could probably refine further by excluding words like Lazarus, maybe...

In short, lots to research, pull up a chair and get a cup of coffee, and dive in!

Steve Adams

sorry gentlemen, you're all off on the start of this horrific rumor.

Mary Magdalene as a prostitute began with a sermon by a pope in the 4th or 5th century. RC Sproul had the history on this, check their site as I checked my logos already and nothing there.

nancy

Graham Criddle

Mary Magdalene as a prostitute began with a sermon by a pope in the 4th or 5th century. RC Sproul had the history on this, check their site as I checked my logos already and nothing there.

This point is picked up in the Encyclopedia of Christianity (available standalone or in Scholar's Gold base packages up)

Nowhere in the biblical witness is Mary Magdalene referred to as a sinner or a prostitute, yet her association with NT stories featuring sinful women and/or women who overtly display their devotion to Jesus has led to her depiction in art, literature, and film as a penitent prostitute.

A composite sketch of Mary Magdalene, including pieces of each of these NT stories and the distinct women featured in them, is dramatically drawn in a sermon preached by Pope → Gregory the Great (590–604), dating from the late sixth century. In his sermon Gregory identifies Mary Magdalene with Mary of Bethany, as well as the female sinner of Luke 7 and the Mary (of Galilee?) who listens intently to Jesus while he teaches. This composite gained popularity, and Mary Magdalene became not only a model of pious devotion to Jesus and a herald of the resurrection but also a contemplative, listening at the feet of Jesus, and a symbol of true repentance (→ Penitence), the sinner who has been forgiven much and thus loves much. For centuries, the → Roman Catholic Church recognized elements of Gregory’s conflation in its configuration of feast days. Not until the 1969 reform of its liturgical calendar were different feast days appointed in the West for Mary of Bethany and Mary Magdalene.

Erwin Fahlbusch and Geoffrey William Bromiley, vol. 3, The Encyclopedia of Christianity, 447 (Grand Rapids, Mich.; Leiden, Netherlands: Wm. B. Eerdmans; Brill, 1999-2003).

Graham

Todd Phillips

This point is picked up in the Encyclopedia of Christianity (available standalone or in Scholar's Gold base packages up)

That is a good article. It also goes on to discuss Mary Magdalene in the Gnostic literature:

In several of the documents included in the Nag Hammadi library, Mary Magdalene plays a major role among the disciples. The writings that mention Mary date from the second to the fourth centuries and are written from a Gnostic point of view. Elements of the canonical witness are present in their portrait of Mary, including her being a disciple of Jesus in Galilee and a witness to the resurrection.

These documents, however, further develop Mary into a disciple who is particularly loved and honored by Jesus. She is both a companion to Jesus and a conversation partner, so treasured that the male disciples, particularly Peter, become jealous. In Pistis Sophia, a Gnostic document found prior to the discovery of the Nag Hammadi library, Mary is the chief dialogue partner of Jesus, asking 39 of 64 questions. Competition between Peter and Mary surfaces in the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Mary (Magdalene) and Pistis Sophia. The Gospel of Philip (63, 34–37) includes the observation that “the Savior loved her more than all the disciples.”

Fahlbusch, E., & Bromiley, G. W. (1999-2003). Vol. 3: The encyclopedia of Christianity (447). Grand Rapids, Mich.; Leiden, Netherlands: Wm. B. Eerdmans; Brill.

Mark Barnes

I searched my entire library for "Mary Magdalene" NEAR (intimate, sexual, relationship, kiss). The following hits were most useful:

AYBD will direct you to Gospel of Thomas 114, and Gospel of Philip 63-64. These are the key Gnostic writings. If you don't have GoP, there's a brief transcript in BAR.
Jesus in the Nag Hammadi Writings has more on GoP and Mary.

The Cited by Tool on The Gospel of Thomas 114 will pick up several more references (or just do a search). You can do something similar for GoP.

Mark Barnes

Sorry, should have added that the Nag Hammadi library is essential as a primary source. Jesus in the Nag Hammadi Writings ought to be useful, though I've not read it, as ought the various resources on the Gospel of Thomas.

Jeremy

I searched my entire library for "Mary Magdalene" NEAR (intimate, sexual, relationship, kiss).

The odd thing is that everyone assumes that the word "kiss" is in the manuscript. That word is missing because there is a break or crack in the manuscript, but most people assume that is the word the author would have used (they are probably correct). In "The DaVinci Code" Tom Hanks interrupts Ian McClellan just as he is about to say "kiss" in his quotation of "The Gospel of Thomas." How fitting!

MJ. Smith

Mary Magdalene as a prostitute began with a sermon by a pope in the 4th or 5th century. RC Sproul had the history on this, check their site as I checked my logos already and nothing there.

or more recent research would say "The Mary Magdalen of medieval legend was a composite figure who had her
origins in the Biblical passages about three different women - not just
the woman explicitly called Mary Magdalen in the Gospels, but also Mary
of Bethany, sister of Martha and Lazarus, and the unnamed female sinner
who washed Christ's feet with her tears. Biblical exegetes in the Latin
West tended to equate the three from the time of Gregory the Great on,
but the various New Testament passages about these women were first
woven into a single narrative vita in a tenth-century sermon attributed to Odo of Cluny."

This is more likely because the composite is Latin West ... if it were from Gregory, it would most likely be more common in the East. Any way you look at it, it is a gradual folk development over time not a single initiating event.

Rosie Perera

The same goes in seminary as in other academic studies. An encyclopedia or dictionary, even one that is as in-depth as ABD, would generally not be an acceptable source to quote. Such articles are summarizing research that someone else has done.

What is the difference between hiring a "research assistant" like Wilson or quoting AYBD? Submitting from either source would be prohibited by most plagiarism clauses.

Quoting from AYBD is not plagiarism if you footnote your source with proper citation. It's just that AYBD isn't considered an original source to quote from, so it is lazy to quote from it instead of going to the original sources that it provides for you. It's not unethical, just isn't considered very good scholarship. However it's fine to use AYBD to lead you to good sources. That's not plagiarism either.

Using a research assistant in the way Wilson is suggesting isn't very different from using AYBD in that latter way, as a launching pad for your own research. Professors do it all the time. I'm not sure whether it is considered unethical for PhD candidates to do it, but I'm guessing it's not. There would be no way to prove you'd done it anyway. People share bibliographies all the time. The bibliography in the back of a book is public knowledge, so if you read a good book in your field and then add most of the books that are in its bibliography to your own growing list of resources you want to follow up on, there's nothing wrong with that.

Matthew C Jones

Using a research assistant in the way Wilson is suggesting isn't very different from using AYBD in that latter way, as a launching pad for your own research. Professors do it all the time. I'm not sure whether it is considered unethical for PhD candidates to do it, but I'm guessing it's not.

I am aware that many professors do this (after they have attained their graduate degrees.) In the same way, lawyers use legal aides to research case law to build their presentation. Back in the 1990's I applied to a law school. The process included a packet of legal briefs that I was assigned to research and suggest strategies for filing appeals. It also strictly forbade the assistance of anyone in the formation of those appeals. The work was to be exclusively mine. Citing references was required, enlisting help to find those references was banned. The process did serve one function well. After seeing what really goes into good lawyering, I decided I did not enjoy it. Too much nose-in-the-books and not enough "Perry Mason" moments.

There would be no way to prove you'd done it anyway.

Unless you post it in a public forum. [:|]

It's just that AYBD isn't considered an original source to quote from, so it is lazy to quote from it instead of going to the original sources that it provides for you. It's not unethical, just isn't considered very good scholarship. However it's fine to use AYBD to lead you to good sources. That's not plagiarism either.

In regards to banning encyclopedic sources, I'd like to see what the history professor drew on for her Napoleonic thesis. (I've got micro fische of Napoleon's daily secret service reports, in case she is interested. [:-*] ) I find AYBD and Encyclopaedia Britannica to be highly reputable and the best starting point for finding source materials.

Wilson Hines

Using a research assistant in the way Wilson is suggesting isn't very different from using AYBD in that latter way, as a launching pad for your own research. Professors do it all the time. I'm not sure whether it is considered unethical for PhD candidates to do it, but I'm guessing it's not.

I am aware that many professors do this (after they have attained their graduate degrees.) In the same way, lawyers use legal aides to research case law to build their presentation. Back in the 1990's I applied to a law school. The process included a packet of legal briefs that I was assigned to research and suggest strategies for filing appeals. It also strictly forbade the assistance of anyone in the formation of those appeals. The work was to be exclusively mine. Citing references was required, enlisting help to find those references was banned. The process did serve one function well. After seeing what really goes into good lawyering, I decided I did not enjoy it. Too much nose-in-the-books and not enough "Perry Mason" moments.

There would be no way to prove you'd done it anyway.

Unless you post it in a public forum.

It's just that AYBD isn't considered an original source to quote from, so it is lazy to quote from it instead of going to the original sources that it provides for you. It's not unethical, just isn't considered very good scholarship. However it's fine to use AYBD to lead you to good sources. That's not plagiarism either.
In regards to banning encyclopedic sources, I'd like to see what the history professor drew on for her Napoleonic thesis. (I've got micro fische of Napoleon's daily secret service reports, in case she is interested. ) I find AYBD and Encyclopaedia Britannica to be highly reputable and the best starting point for finding source materials.

Matthew, you're way over playing this whole gig, man. AND you're gett'n me down.

Matthew C Jones

over playing this whole gig, man. AND you're gett'n me down.

OK. You're probably right. I will cease & desist.

Cheer up. I think you are an excellent candidate for a PhD and a ThD. You personally have the gumption to chase this one down with the greatest of enthusiasm. You are a role model for the rest of us and your friend is blessed to have you in his counsel.

Carry on Wilson. And God bless you.

postscript: I really DO have Napoleon's documents. When Ambassador's College (in Texas) closed I bought many file cabinets of microfilm & fische from the auction of their library holdings. I've got theological journals from the 1800's -- all public domain & waiting to be scanned into Logos! Anybody want to loan me a film scanner?