Mary the Magdalene, the Repentant Woman, and Mary of Bethany.

[Magdala]

Yes you can! For Mary Magdeline was called from Magdala at the same time Mary was called from Bethany.

The woman in Bethany named "Mary" who anointed Jesus with ointment using her hair isn't called anything but "Mary" by the apostle John. She's called "Mary of Bethany" by readers because Bethany is where she's located in the scene, and it's assumed that she lived there at the time. Can you rule out that Mary the Magdalene went from living in Magdala to Bethany? Can you also rule out that Mary the Magdalene was also called "Mary"?

 

[Ronald Nolette]

The woman in Bethany named "Mary" who anointed Jesus with ointment using her hair isn't called anything but "Mary" by the apostle John. She's called "Mary of Bethany" by readers because Bethany is where she's located in the scene, and it's assumed that she lived there at the time. Can you rule out that Mary the Magdalene went from living in Magdala to Bethany? Can you also rule out that Mary the Magdalene was also called "Mary"?

Can you prove she moved to Bethany? One cannot prove a negative- So I cannot prove Mary Magdala did not live in Bethany. But she followed Jesus so she lived nowhere.

And assumptions are dangerous to make absolute declarations on.

 

[amigo de christo]

A False prophet giving false information.
Nothig new.

under the sun . many decievers abound and they can wear wool . Too many now preach and believe
in another gospel , AND friend , IT AINT NO GOSPEL at all , its a false love inclusive broad path to peridition .

 

[Magdala]

Can you prove she moved to Bethany?

Yes, because I can provide proof that Maria Valtorta was a true spokesperson of Jesus, and He showed her scenes from His life on earth, and from them, I learned that Mary of Magdala came to live in Bethany again with her brother Lazarus and sister Martha after her conversion, and that's where she resided when she wasn't traveling with Jesus.

One cannot prove a negative- So I cannot prove Mary Magdala did not live in Bethany.

Actually, proving a negative isn't inherently impossible, but it is more challenging than proving a positive, and can be achieved through various logical and empirical methods. Since you say that you can't prove Mary of Magdala didn't come to live in Bethany, you can't reasonably say that she and Mary of Bethany weren't the same woman.

But she followed Jesus so she lived nowhere.

And assumptions are dangerous to make absolute declarations on.

You say "Assumptions are dangerous to make absolute declarations on" right after making an assumption that Mary Magdalene lived nowhere after becoming a disciple of Jesus...

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Yes, because I can provide proof that Maria Valtorta was a true spokesperson of Jesus, and He showed her scenes from His life on earth, and from them, I learned that Mary of Magdala came to live in Bethany again with her brother Lazarus and sister Martha after her conversion, and that's where she resided when she wasn't traveling with Jesus.

Well then show the empirical proof!

Actually, proving a negative isn't inherently impossible, but it is more challenging than proving a positive, and can be achieved through various logical and empirical methods. Since you say that you can't prove Mary of Magdala didn't come to live in Bethany, you can't reasonably say that she and Mary of Bethany weren't the same woman.

Well as we have no record of Lazarus sister moving to Magdala, nor being a prostitute nor having demons- you are just proposing hypotheticals that cannot be empirically proven.

You say "Assumptions are dangerous to make absolute declarations on" right after making an assumption that Mary Magdalene lived nowhere after becoming a disciple of Jesus...

The Bible has her living with her brother Lazarus in Bethany. Mary Magdeline was a follower of Jesus and travelled with him as well as other women.

 

[Magdala]

Well then show the empirical proof!

See the chapters on proofs in A Summa and Encyclopedia to Maria Valtorta's Extraordinary Work that are in support of Maria Valtorta's writings have a supernatural origin. Some of those writings are descriptions of visions she received from Jesus of scenes from His life on earth, many of which include Mary of Magdala, whom she saw came to live in Bethany again with her brother Lazarus and sister Martha after her conversion from a life of prostitution, and that's where she mainly resided when she wasn't traveling with Jesus.

So I cannot prove Mary Magdala did not live in Bethany.

Since you say that you can't prove Mary of Magdala didn't come to live in Bethany, you can't reasonably say that she and Mary of Bethany weren't the same woman.

But she followed Jesus so she lived nowhere.

And assumptions are dangerous to make absolute declarations on.

Is your assumption that Mary of Magdala "lived nowhere" because she followed Jesus not invalidated by your own statement "Assumptions are dangerous to make absolute declarations on"?

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Since you say that you can't prove Mary of Magdala didn't come to live in Bethany, you can't reasonably say that she and Mary of Bethany weren't the same woman.

Neither can you nor Maria.

Is your assumption that Mary of Magdala "lived nowhere" because she followed Jesus not invalidated by your own statement "Assumptions are dangerous to make absolute declarations on"?

Well as she followed Jesus since her conversion, she would not have left to go back to live with Martha and Lazarus- she would have been following HIm.

 

[Magdala]

Neither can you nor Maria.

You're right to agree that you can't reasonably say Mary of Magdala and Mary of Bethany weren't the same woman. You're wrong to say that I can't either, because I can. Again, see the chapters on proofs in A Summa and Encyclopedia to Maria Valtorta's Extraordinary Work that are in support of Maria Valtorta's writings have a supernatural origin. Some of those writings are descriptions of visions she received from Jesus of scenes from His life on earth, many of which include Mary of Magdala, whom she saw came to live in Bethany again with her brother Lazarus and sister Martha after her conversion from a life of prostitution, and that's where she mainly resided when she wasn't traveling with Jesus.

Well as she followed Jesus since her conversion, she would not have left to go back to live with Martha and Lazarus- she would have been following HIm.

That's an assumption invaliated by your own statement "Assumptions are dangerous to make absolute declarations on".

 

[Ronald Nolette]

You're right to agree that you can't reasonably say Mary of Magdala and Mary of Bethany weren't the same woman. You're wrong to say that I can't either, because I can. Again, see the chapters on proofs in A Summa and Encyclopedia to Maria Valtorta's Extraordinary that are in support of Maria Valtorta's writings have a supernatural origin. Some of those writings are descriptions of visions she received from Jesus of scenes from His life on earth, many of which include Mary of Magdala, whom she saw came to live in Bethany again with her brother Lazarus and sister Martha after her conversion from a life of prostitution, and that's where she mainly resided when she wasn't traveling with Jesus.

Sorry but the Bible says facts must be established by 2-3 witnesses. Just because this Maria says so, doesn't make it so.

That's an assumption invaliated by your own statement "Assumptions are dangerous to make absolute declarations on".

And you are assuming these supposed visions are true! There is no verifiable evidence to support your theory, but much circumstantial evidence that proves Lazarus sister Mary is not Mary from Magdala.

 

[Magdala]

Sorry but the Bible says facts must be established by 2-3 witnesses.

Firstly, that pertains to accusations of wrongdoing or legal matters. Secondly, you said in another thread that the proofs in A Summa and Encyclopedia to Maria Valtorta's Extraordinary Work support that Maria Valtorta's writings have a supernatural origin.

And you are assuming these supposed visions are true! There is no verifiable evidence to support your theory,

The proofs in A Summa and Encyclopedia to Maria Valtorta's Extraordinary support that Maria Valtorta's writings have a supernatural origin. Some of those writings are descriptions of visions she received from Jesus of scenes from His life on earth, many of which include Mary of Magdala, whom she saw came to live in Bethany again with her brother Lazarus and sister Martha after her conversion from a life of prostitution, and that's where she mainly resided when she wasn't traveling with Jesus.

Well as she followed Jesus since her conversion, she would not have left to go back to live with Martha and Lazarus- she would have been following HIm.

That's an assumption invaliated by your own statement "Assumptions are dangerous to make absolute declarations on".

much circumstantial evidence that proves Lazarus sister Mary is not Mary from Magdala.

Everything you have presented thus far has been refuted.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Firstly, that pertains to accusations of wrongdoing or legal matters. Secondly, you said in another thread that the proofs in A Summa and Encyclopedia to Maria Valtorta's Extraordinary Work support that Maria Valtorta's writings have a supernatural origin.

Demonic is supernatural as well. And we need support for Marias supposed visions.

The proofs in A Summa and Encyclopedia to Maria Valtorta's Extraordinary support that Maria Valtorta's writings have a supernatural origin. Some of those writings are descriptions of visions she received from Jesus of scenes from His life on earth, many of which include Mary of Magdala, whom she saw came to live in Bethany again with her brother Lazarus and sister Martha after her conversion from a life of prostitution, and that's where she mainly resided when she wasn't traveling with Jesus.

And this Summa means nothing without verification.

That's an assumption invaliated by your own statement "Assumptions are dangerous to make absolute declarations on".

And all of Marias "visions" remain mere assumptions. But I will saythis If she believes Mary was conceived without sin, was kept from sin by some special grace, remained a virgin, was bodily assumed in to heaven, is co-Mediatrix, co-redemptrix in a sense and the Queen of Heaven, no matter how much truth there may or may not be- she is receiving false visions.

 

[Magdala]

And we need support for Marias supposed visions.

And this Summa means nothing without verification.

[...] she is receiving false visions.

The verified proofs are in A Summa and Encyclopedia to Maria Valtorta's Extraordinary Work which days ago you reviewed, and you concluded, at the very least, that Maria Valtorta's writings have a supernatural origin. Your only reason for saying those writings are Satan's work and not God's is because the writings consist of certain things you already presently don't believe, would rather not believe, and which you refuse to admit you could be wrong about disbelieving in. It's not prudent and is prideful to automatically reject things out of prejudice and bias.

 

[Behold]

Your only reason for saying those writings are Satan's work and not God's is because the writings consist of certain things you already presently don't believe, would rather not believe,

This Idol of yours, has not become one to Ronald, and that is why he has no issue with realizing the Satanic origin of her "spirituality" & "writings".
You are spellbound by this deceiver and this is why you feel the inner obsession/compulsion to try to sell her to the members of this forum. @Magdala

 

[Magdala]

This Idol of yours, has not become one to Ronald, and that is why he has no issue with realizing the Satanic origin of her "spirituality" & "writings".
You are spellbound by this deceiver and this is why you feel the inner obsession/compulsion to try to sell her to the members of this forum. @Magdala

She's not an idol of mine, so please stop misrepresenting me and misusing that word. Ronald reviewed the proofs and concluded, at the very least, that Maria Valtorta's writings have a supernatural origin. He just believes that they are Satan's work based on prejudice and bias, but I trust that the Holy Spirit will keep helping him come to see it's all God's Work, as He already got him this far in helping him recognize the writings have a supernatural origin. So, I pray for continual protection around Ronald from Satan who will try to dissuade him.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

The verified proofs are in A Summa and Encyclopedia to Maria Valtorta's Extraordinary Work which days ago you reviewed, and you concluded, at the very least, that Maria Valtorta's writings have a supernatural origin.

Your only reason for saying those writings are Satan's work and not God's is because the writings consist of certain things you already presently don't believe, would rather not believe, and which you refuse to admit you could be wrong about disbelieving in. It's not prudent and is prideful to automatically reject things out of prejudice and bias.

Wrong. I grew up a very good little catholic boy. Even went to seminary. It was when I became a believer and started reading Gods INspired Word that I learned that so much of Roman Catholicism is supernatural, but a supernatural that is not of heaven.

 

[Magdala]

Wrong.

But I'm not wrong, because you don't want to believe certain things you read in Maria Valtorta's writings, and you refuse to admit that you could be wrong in disbelieving them. At the very least, you recognize that Maria Valtorta's writings have a supernatural origin, and I praise God for that.

 

[Behold]

But I'm not wrong, because you don't want to believe certain things you read in Maria Valtorta's writings

Ronald is not going to make an Idol out of yours.

 

[Magdala]

Ronald is not going to make an Idol out of yours.

Are you going to start using the word "idol" correctly? As for Ronald, at the very least, he recognizes that Maria Valtorta's writings have a supernatural origin, and I praise God for that.

 

[Behold]

Are you going to start using the word "idol" correctly?

So far.

 

[Magdala]

So far.

I didn't ask if you've been using the word "idol" correctly, but rather I asked if you're going to start, because you haven't been.