THE JESUS LIE . EDITIO MAIOR . 7

CHAPTER 8 : DATING THE LIE

Now we had better ask ourselves : since when are matthew 15:39 and mark 8:10 attested to ? They are the only 2 passages in the entire new testament mentioning magdala and all its variants above. When do these 2 passages first appear for us, in written documents ? What is the earliest evidence for the existence of those 2 passages ?

We can answer by perusing the standard scientific edition of the new testament, nestle/aland ´s novum testamentum graece et latine, deutsche bibelgesellschaft, 5.druck 2005 : this book features a list of the greek manuscripts they used - not all of them, but presumably the most ancient and important ones. So let´s have a look at the dating of the manuscripts carrying matthew 15:39 and mark 8:10. Not all manuscripts do: many are fragmentary. Hence the need to know.

We might conceivably assume that the line 15:39, or at least its word magdala etc., was interpolated into matthew in order to enhance tourism to the holy land . This is the opinion of professor joan taylor of king´s college , london, who does not believe in the existence of magdala in jesus´time and wrote about the issue extensively.

There are many papyri with matthew´s gospels, some of which as old as the III or even II century, but NONE OF THEM CARRIES THE MAGDALA PASSAGE . NO PAPYRUS AT ALL, THAT IS TO SAY NONE OF THE MOST ANCIENT MANUSCRIPTS CARRYING THE GOSPELS, HAS MARK 8:10 AND ITS DALMANOUTHA ETC. STUFF .

WHICH ONLY GOES TO STRENGTHEN MY THESIS : NO GOSPEL PAPYRI AT ALL, THAT IS TO SAY NONE OF THE MOST ANCIENT GOSPEL MANUSCRIPTS CARRY THE MAGDALA PASSAGES IN EITHER MATTHEW OR MARK .

Now let us consider the codices, that is to say, the non-papyracean manuscripts, those made of parchment and bound in book form : the first codex carrying both passages is dated to the IV century, that is between the years 300 and 399 - again a very late date, reinforcing our suspicion that magdala was absent from the first drafts of matthew and mark in the II and III centuries. This particular codex bears 2 hands : a first hand and a corrector´s edits : now the first hand reads MAGADAN. The editor´s hand above the first reads MAGHEDAN. Neither hand wrote magdala. That means, in the IV century, as matthew´s editors started to add this silly fabricated city to the manuscripts, they still did not write magdala because magdala had never existed at all - they cooked up magadan/maghedan because it sounded a bit like the other hebrew toponyms, attested to in the old testament, we saw above and which were more familiar to their readers´ears than an unheard-of magdala !! Toponyms such as meghiddo.

Now the funniest thing about this codex we are considering here (London, Brit. Libr.,Add.43275),

is that when it comes to mark 8:10, the parallel passage to matthew above, instead of consistently reading MAGHEDAN or MAGADAN as it had done in matthew, it reads DALMANOUTHA !

So much for the synoptic gospels . O wondrous harmony of the word of god ...

I think that these 4th-century forgers, in revising the texts of matthew and mark, whose first drafts date from the II century, added different fake city names to the roster because matthew is a more jewish gospel addressing primarily jews who would have been more familiar with the old testament and thus would easily buy into a maghedan/magadan because to their ears it called to memory meghiddo etc.

Whereas mark addresses gentiles mainly, westerners to whom magadan would have meant nothing, and wouldn´t have stuck : therefore "mark" and its subsequent editors, or rather the latter in the 4th century, thought up dalmanoutha, playing on the original meaning of magdalene above, because to western ears such a toponym would be acceptable on the basis of similarity with DALMATIA : all the forgers had to do was invert mag-dal from magdalene into dal-ma.

The same goes for dalmounai : it was fabricated on the basis of western ear familiarity with DELMINIUM, today´s Tomislavgrad in Bosnia. That is to say, lobotomized western gentile ears would buy a non-existent dalmounai at face value, because it sounded like their known delminium and delminium was a town so dalmounai sure was one too right ?

Now the first manuscript occurrence for the fake city of magdala in this very form, its popular form, is in codex C, Paris,Bibl. Nat., Gr.9 : at matthew 15:39, it reads MAGDALAN - not quite magdala, but almost. This particular codex C is dated to the V century, that is between 400 and

499 . Again a very late addition, one would incline to think. All other codices bearing magdala as such, date from way later, no earlier than the VI century ! Just when the pilgrimage to magdala as the city of mary magdalene became common.

Joan taylor is right : magdala did not exist in jesus´ times - I century ce.

Nobody mentions magdala, no inscription or literary text or shard of pottery, nothing at all before the IV century ! When it is still magadan/maghedan in matthew and dalmanoutha in mark. Magdalan only pops up in the V century. And settles down as magdala in most manuscripts only starting in the VI century. It is an interpolation, a fraudulent addition, a forged city name.

SUMMING IT ALL UP THUS FAR :

MAGDALENE IN MARY MAGDALENE DOES NOT MEAN FROM MAGDALA AT ALL BECAUSE THE CITY OF MAGDALA NEVER EXISTED AT ALL AS SUCH IN THE I CENTURY CE. THE NEW TESTAMENT ITSELF NEVER MAKES THE CONNECTION MAGDALENE


THE WORD MAGDALA AS SUCH FOR A CITY IS UNKNOWN BEFORE THE V CENTURY, WHEN IT IS FIRST WITNESSED TO AS MAGDALAN, AND DOES NOT STABILIZE INTO MAGDALA BEFORE THE VI CENTURY, WHEN PILGRIMAGE STARTED TO A SITE ON LAKE TIBERIAS FRAUDULENTLY SOLD TO THE PILGRIMS FOR MAGDALA THE BIRTHPLACE OF MARY MAGDALENE.

THE NAME MAGDALENE INSTEAD MEANS WATER-DRAWER FROM THE WELL; AND WAS THE SOBRIQUET OF THE MOTHER OF JESUS; JAMES; JUDAS; SIMEON AND JOHN THE BAPTIST,AND WIFE OF HANAN THE HIDDEN: THIS WAS THE FAMILY AT THE CENTER OF EARLY CHRISTIANITY IN THE FIRST CENTURY CE : A FAMILY OF FANATIC JEWISH ZIONISTS, HELL-BENT ON PREPARING AND WAGING WAR AGAINST ROME FOR THE LIBERATION OF ISRAEL, TO BE ACHIEVED WITH A LITTLE HELP FROM A SON OF MAN OR MESSIAH FROM THE SKY AND THE HEAVENLY HOST.

IT WAS A FAMILY OF RAINMAKERS; DAILY BATHERS AND FOUNTAINS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS THAT IS SPIRITUAL MULLAHS AT QUMRAN ON THE DEAD SEA, WHERE THE REAL EARLY CHRISTIANS, THE NAZORAEANS OR KEEPERS OF THE TORAH, RAN ONE OF THEIR TRAINING CENTERS AND GUERRILLA CAMPS : THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS COMMUNITY.