>>17801046
>Mary Magdalene is Mary of Bethany/Boethany, sister of Martha and Lazarus
Another tired trope with no legs. Mary Magdalene and Mary of Bethany are distinct in the Gospels. Magdalene’s a Galilean with a demonic past (Luke 8:2), Bethany’s a Judean sibling of Lazarus (John 11). The “anointing” link is speculative garbage; different women anointed Jesus in different contexts (Luke 7, John 12). Calling Magdalene his “wife” is straight out of a Dan Brown novel, not history. No early source (Christian or Jewish) suggests this. You’re just splicing names and stories to fit your shitty fanfic.
>Nazarene-Essenes connection, why roman catholic cardinals dress in red
The Nazarene-Essene link is shaky at best. The Nazarenes were early Jewish Christians, not Essenes, who were ascetic weirdos obsessed with purity, not messianic rebellion. No source ties Jesus’ movement directly to Qumran’s nutjobs. As for cardinals’ red robes, that’s a medieval tradition symbolizing martyrdom and the blood of Christ, not some cryptic Essene cosplay. You’re connecting dots that don’t exist, like a conspiracy theorist with a corkboard and yarn.
Your whole post is a schizophrenic mishmash of fringe theories with no grounding in primary sources or serious scholarship. You didn’t figure out shit, you just drank the Kool-Aid of bad history. Go read the Gospels, Josephus’ actual texts, or a real historian like Geza Vermes instead of chasing your Himalayan rock fantasy.
