Rating: 
Summary: Precarious speculation, Read SB 1 or God instead.
Review: Once again the research done to connect Mary and Jesus is done out of blind background history. The entire scope of research here is nothing more than possibilities based on acceptable tradition at the time of Christ. From the research done here there are absolutely no direct solid connections to Mary and Jesus, it is all specualtion at best and dismal. I recommend a good read concerning the Grail, SB 1 or God by Maddox
Rating: 
Summary: Draws on Holy Blood, Holy Grail
Review:
This is a very good book. The author draws heavily on Holy Blood, Holy Grail for her factual data in addition to her own research, but she makes her point more clearly and The Woman With The Alabaster Jar is much more readable. Holy Blood, Holy Grail contains more dense verbiage, and the authors develop their facts and surmises slowly and their themes very carefully, item by item. It gets tedious at times. Not so with Margaret Starbird. She comes right out with it.
The thrust of both books is that Yeshua bar Yosef (better known by his Greek name, Jesus) was married to Miriam of Bethany (better known as Mary Magdalene) and sired a daughter by her. After his crucifizion, Mary moved to Egypt where her child, Sarah, was born, and then to Provence on the Mediterranean coast of France. The Catholic church tried to stamp out and eradicate the idea that Mary and Jesus were married and had a child because it threatened their orthodox views, and murdered 15,000 people in the Provence area in their effort, who believed the fact that Mary and Jesus had started a bloodline which survives yet. In the Inquisition, many thousands more were killed for the same reason: their "heresy," in the eyes of the church. The theory is that the organizations known as the Knights Templar and the Priory of Sion protected the secret genealogy of the holy bloodline, and the proofs of the sang raal (holy blood, which became known as the Holy Grail). Starbird and the three authors of Holy Blood, Holy Gail make a plausible case--even a convincing one. These hypotheses were the background for the recent best-seller, The Da Vinci Code, by Dan Brown, who also drew heavily on Holy Blood, Holy Grail for his fictional mystery. The research is very thorough, although there is clearly much persuasive speculation involved. I do not recommend this book for orthodox Christians who are convinced that the Bible, as they know it, is the inspired word of God and not to be questioned. This is a book better suited to people with a background in religious history, who are familiar with the Council of Nicaea and its activities, and the part played by Constantine and Theodocius in suppressing the so-called "heretical" gospels and other writings that were denied entry in the canon of scripture, and the editing, deletions and additions made to those that were included. It is not clear that the truth of the matter is portrayed in these books, but it is quite clear that there is much evidence to support their plausibility. On balance, this is a more likely story than the virgin birth or resurrection of the dead, as portrayed in the orthodox version of the Bible. Joseph (Joe) Pierre
author of The Road to Damascus: Our Journey Through Eternity
and other books
Rating: 
Summary: A Very Silly Book
Review: This is just another of those very silly "IF books" from the fantasy tradition that can be traced back to books like "Chariots of the Gods", "The Bermuda Triangle", etc.
The "IF" method of turning fiction into alleged fact is based on the fallacious version of the three step logical argument know as a "syllogism" pioneered by the Greek philosopher, Aristotle. A correctly constructed a syllogism might look like this: All men are mortal
All mortals die
Therefore all men die An incorrectly constructed syllogism would look more like this: All men die
All grass dies
Therefore all men are grass In a correctly presented syllogism the logic goes: - If something (A) is universally true for a group of people/things (B)
- And if something else (C) is true for any group where A is universally true
- Then C will be true for all the individual people/things who/which make up group B The incorrect syllogism, or "distorted syllogism ploy" goes like this: - If something (A) is universally true for a group of people/things (B)
- And if (A) is universally true for another group of people/things (C)
- Then every individual in group (B) must also be a member of group (C). "IF books" usually take the restructuring process one step further using the formula: 1. IF A is true
2. And if B is true
3. Then C must be true
4. Therefore D is true. In "IF books", the statements in Steps 1 and 2 are almost always true. The "sleight of hand" comes as we move on to Step 3 in the process, which is nothing more than an unsupported extrapolation from Steps 1 and 2. And since the veracity of the statement in Step 4 depends on Step 3, there is actually no reason to suppose that either of the last two statements is true, even though it LOOKS as though they were arrived at by the use of logic. For example, Ms Starbird cites Jesus' instruction to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection, in John's gospel, when Jesus tells Mary not to touch Him. According to Ms Starbird, what Jesus really meant was "do not cling to me."
On the basis of this unsupported reasoning she then goes on to claim that this proves they were married. In other words, by means of the distorted syllogism ploy: 1. If John's gospel says that there was a meeting in the cemetary between Jesus and Mary (true)
2. And if it says that Jesus commanded Mary not to try to "touch" him (true)
3. Then Jesus "must" really have meant "don't cling to me" (pure speculation)
4. Therefore Jesus and Mary "must" have been married (more speculation). The tenuous basis for this line of argument is that the original Greek phrase has three meanings: "To touch", "To hold on", "To embrace". Ms Starbird presumably supposes that the correct translation of the phrase in this passage is "embrace" - but on what basis? There are four different Greek phrases meaning "touch" which are used in the New Testament - and three of them are used only once.
This most common phrase is used 36 times, including passages such as: "touched the hem of his garment"
"If I may just touch his clothes"
"he came and touched the coffin" and
"he touched his ear and healed him." Does it really make sense to translate these passages as: "clung to the hem of his garment"?
"If I may just cling to his clothes"?
"he came and clung to the coffin"? or
"he clung to his ear and healed him."? As a matter of fact, out of these 36 passages, these is only ONE example of the phrase being used in a way that clearly refers to the intimate way a husband and wife would touch each other.
Looks like pretty flimsy "evidence" to me. As to the claim that Ms Starbird is a "pre-eminent theologian", when an American TV show ran an item on Ms Starbird's claims and "The Da Vinci Code" (which deals with the same theme), Professor Darrell Bock, who teaches New Testament studies at Dallas Theological Seminary, totally rebuffed the idea that Jesus and Mary were married, saying that Mary Magdalene's move to touch Jesus was nothing more sensational than "her single act of devotion, given to him without concern about what people are thinking about what she's doing." The show's presenter admitted that the majority of biblical scholars consulted for the program agreed with Professor Bock's assessment. So, if you're not to worried about the use of illogical "logic", and you prefer to have your Bible stories sexed up and sensationalised, this may well be the book for you. If, on the other hand, you prefer at least a modicum of intellectual rigor, you'll likely find a whole host of books far more worthy of your attention.
Rating: 
Summary: Goddess, priestess or very sensitive historical woman?
Review: I appreciate Margaret Starbird's book on Mary Magdalene. It is one of the many recent attempts to return her centre-stage in Christian tradition. However, there is little literal or surface evidence to show Yeshua married Mary. The indirect evidence put forward in her book goes the right way: Yeshua married Mary. Although confessing churches loathe to accept this point, there is a growing consensus today that Yeshua was more intimate with Mary than they had ever suspected.
The alabaster jar with its perfume and the service rendered by Mary to Yeshua in Bethany before his 'death' seem not so much mystical, esoteric or ritual marriage practices of the Roman goddess cult, but actual practices of the Essenes and Qumran ascetics, and early Christian communities led by Yeshua and others. The latter separated themselves from the ascetic priestly and royal sect and created their own 'Christian'communities of lay and Diaspora Jews and 'gentile' proselytes. In their common heritage the alabaster jar needs to be returned within the Song of Songs tradition and its marriage ritual associated with perfume ceremony held by the bride for the bridegroom. Miriam would have held it for her 'Lord' with the perfume in the alabaster jar.
Mary, in my view, needs to be related to the first Miriam, the sister of Moses and Aaron. Re-enacting this Miriam we have so many Miriams around Yeshua, which could go to ascertain the fact that Miriam is a title, and less a personal name. Probably Miriams made up a female monastic and ascetic group within Essene and Qumran community, later went over to the Chrisitian party. In both communities they re-enact the exodus drama in 'these last days' re-playing the female role of the original Miriam, the prototype.
From this historical point of view of Jewish and Christian life in the first century AD, the mystical and grail story to which Starbird links Mary Magdalene could be an interesting later Christian tradition built around Mary Magdalene, but it will not do sufficient justice to the historical 'Miriam.' She was, it looks to me, a fine, sensitive woman; very much attached to her 'Lord.' But the upheaval and stormy life of the Jews under Romans could have led to strained relationship between them. This might be reflected in repudiating Mary in the second century and casting out her 'Gospel' together with other 'Gospels' from the canon of the New Testament. The 'Gospels' have now been recovered and published; the Dead Sea Scrolls too have been recovered and published. Together they open the closed New Testament canon and submit it to new historical scrutiny.
Rating:
Summary: Fantasy
Review: One of the reviews refers to Starbird as a "preeminant theologian and New Testament scholar." On what planet? I promise you not a single Theologian or New Testament scholar of any merit even knows who this woman is. Not because some evil church empire is suppressing the knowledge; rather, her work is fantasy. If you just read the Da Vinci Code and think this is some kind of scholarly backing and you've never read any real scholarship in the field then I sympathize with you for being duped. Read something like N.T. Wright's "Jesus and the Victory of God" to get an idea what real engagement with the New Testament and early church literature is like.
Rating:
Summary: the Woman with the Alabaster Jar: Mary Magdalen and the Hol
Review: I think it is an excellent presentation in lamen's terms of the early christians and ancient cultures and rituals. It explains many things that have been misunderstood and erroneasly taught up through time. I personally found it easy to read and captivating!
Rating:
Summary: I really wanted to like this book
Review: First, let me say I very rarely write a negative review of anything unless I feel it's subject matter is not what it is purported to be. I'd just gotten done with "The Da Vinci Code" and this book seemed so highly recommended in reviews here on its factual, historical content. Or maybe I misunderstood. Because halfway through I had to stop reading it. I thought it was going to be about Mary Magdalen-from her birth to her death, including her time with Jesus. Maybe eventually it ends up being about her, but it's not written that way in the half I read. It was more of a Holy Grail history lesson. While the subject is her relationship to the Grail, I did not buy this book for a Holy Grail history lesson, there's a ton of information on that subject already. I bought it for the biographical information about Mary Magdalen. The author repeats herself quite often, and constantly refers to Bible passages. If you aren't Christian, or haven't opened a Bible in a long time, these constant referrals get quite frustrating and exclusionary because you have no idea what is being referrenced. I have no other recommendations for information on Mary Magdelan. And I'm not saying people could not enjoy this book. All I am saying it was disappointing and not what I expected in a biographical story.
Rating:
Summary: Hogwash!
Review: Don't get taken in by this nonsense, Folks! These claims that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, are taken from the Gnostic Gospels, which are purely heretical and totally without validity! As a Catholic, I was outraged to see in one of the reviews of this book, that a "supposed" Catholic priest has claimed that these false allegations are true. I say, supposed, because I cannot believe that a REAL priest would condone such blasphemies! This alleged priest says that Mary Magdalene was the First Lady of the Christian Community and the Model of the Church. Get real! Those titles apply to our Blessed Mother, Mary, the mother of Jesus, not Mary Magdalene! So much for his knowledge! The Holy Grail, Mary Magdalene! How much drivel does the author of this ridiculous book expect us to swallow? The Holy Grail was the chalice used by Jesus at the Last Supper. Period! This book and others of its kind belong in the TRASH!
Rating:
Summary: Honoring the feminine by loving Mary.
Review: With the 'Da Vinci Code' so very popular there has been a corresponding increase in the sales of Starbird's book. It seems to be the 'hot' thing currently as this theory is gaining attention and press. Starbird's book is certainly scholarly from the standpoint of referencing her sources via both quotations and footnotes. However, I believe she falls short of putting forth a convincing case regarding Mary Magdalen being Jesus' lost bride. May I suggest why? Upon first hearing of this book I had assumed Starbird had primarily utilized 3rd and 4th century Gnostic writings as her sources. However, she heads the other direction and focuses primarily on medieval tradition, art, and legends. The book appears to be chalk full of 'facts and history', but on closer evaluation these 'facts' are often based on suspicious 'symbols' and speculation. For instance, Starbird suggests some scholars believe there may have been a pagan influence regarding the Song of Solomon and therefore its certain that Jesus believed this pagan myth as well. This idea is speculative and contains little supporting evidence. We cannot know for certain what Jesus believed apart from his words recorded by eyewitnesses. Starbird's theories may make for fascinating reading, but they unfortunately make for second-rate scholarship. She even delves into the 'meaning of the Tarot' and thereby steps outside of Christian sources. She's using occultist teachings to re-interpret the very center of Christianity. Both cannot be true. Either the claims of Christ are true, or the claims of the occult are true - but not both. Starbird attempts to show that the anointing of a bridegroom/king was a sacred ceremony reserved for the bride. This seems plausible and even probable. However, with much of Christ's life (from birth to death) being the fulfillment of OT prophecies it would seem reasonable to see Mary Magdalen's anointing as having primarily spiritual significance. That is, she sees herself as the spiritual bride and a member of the church which the NT repeatedly says is the bride of Christ. That is, Magdalen is a model of the church that Christ loves so much and gave his life for in order to cleanse her from sin. (as another reviewer pointed out) Certainly based on the original texts we do know that Jesus had a very deep relationship with Mary Magdalene. She was involved in the anointing of Jesus at the tomb and wept for her Savior. Other accounts show how Jesus broke from tradition and developed deep relationships with woman. He was not ashamed to show real concern, compassion, and friendship toward women as we see not only in his dealings with Magdalene, but also the woman at the well, the woman caught in adultery, the woman who reached out and touched his robe, etc. He honored the 'feminine' by showing love for women individuals - and still does. If this was Starbird's conclusion I would have rated the book much higher.
Rating: 
Summary: Reads like a textbook
Review: I wouldn't be surprised if this book was used as a text for a college class. It reads like one. That's not to say that the book isn't interesting. Starbird's research is presented in a very scholarly and interesting way. It just took me awhile to get through it. I bought this book to fill in the blanks of my own knowledge concerning Mary Magdalen. After reading THE DA VINCI CODE, I had to know more. If you, too, have just read THE DA VINCI CODE, I would suggest starting with HOLY BLOOD, HOLY GRAIL. Starbird wrote THE WOMAN WITH THE ALABASTER JAR after reading HOLY BLOOD, HOLY GRAIL herself. Don't get me wrong. Starbird's book is extremely interesting and contains a lot of evidence for Mary Magdalen being Christ's lost bride. I just wish I had read HOLY BLOOD, HOLY GRAIL first.
| 
