Thread by @dianabutlerbass

Re-membering Mary. Quite literally. The Bible may have a naming discrepancy, and a Duke researcher plans to correct it dukechronicle.com/article/2019/0…

I absolutely love the academic understatement of "naming discrepancy." The headline should probably be: "Duke researcher upends the Gospel of John and demands rewrite."

And honestly -- this changes EVERYTHING about John 11 and 12. And it also might mean that John (the older gospel) and Luke (the final one) are in some conflict. That John had only Mary; Luke added the Martha/Mary duo; then John got changed to reflect Luke....?

That Luke's narrative functionally colonized John's? And thereby slapped down the early tradition of disciples and a community following a Way of Mary? (Which many suspected had been the case.)

OK. Now I'm madder about this than impeachment.

This is genuine evidence (not idle speculation) of a significant early Christian conflict with impacts over two millennia. And the evidence was always there.

Of course, John and Luke may have been written at nearly the same time. That would mean there were two contending, very powerful narratives about Mary in early Christianity -- and Luke's eventually wins while John has to be "adjusted" to reflect that.

In memory of her. One day, we will know HER. May that day come quickly, and may the whole of Christianity be revolutionized when she is finally, fully remembered.

This story also from July: "The scribes may have wanted to avoid giving Mary Magdalene the confession of faith that follows the story of Lazarus. That confession — 'I believe that you are the Messiah, the Son of God, who is to come into the world.'" religionnews.com/2019/07/19/scr…

And as a public service reminder: Christian history has occasionally turned on a new translation of the biblical text or a textual discovery.