Two Separate Anointing Incidents In The Gospels?

[kamenraider]

I was listening to Pastors Prespective (a live call-in question and answer show on Calvary Chapel's KWVE radio station) the other day, and Pastor Chuck and the other guy agreed that there were actually two separate incidents of women anointing Jesus in the gospels. They called attention to the chronology of events to support this, but I don't remember the specifics of what they said. Recently I've read the idea in a few different places that these anointing incidents pertained to a royal form of marriage. One of these books was about the historical background of the DaVinci Code novel, and another one was The Woman With The Alabaster Jar by Margaret Starbird. Anyway, I know that LDS members already believe (whether they know it or not) that these incidents relate to the second anointing and therefore would relate to marriage as well, but I'm not sure if Evangelicals understand anything like this. Do they realize that to say that there was more than one anointing incident implies that Jesus was a polygamist?

[katherine the great]

I was listening to Pastors Prespective (a live call-in question and answer show on Calvary Chapel's KWVE radio station) the other day, and Pastor Chuck and the other guy agreed that there were actually two separate incidents of women anointing Jesus in the gospels. They called attention to the chronology of events to support this, but I don't remember the specifics of what they said. Recently I've read the idea in a few different places that these anointing incidents pertained to a royal form of marriage. One of these books was about the historical background of the DaVinci Code novel, and another one was The Woman With The Alabaster Jar by Margaret Starbird. Anyway, I know that LDS members already believe (whether they know it or not) that these incidents relate to the second anointing and therefore would relate to marriage as well, but I'm not sure if Evangelicals understand anything like this. Do they realize that to say that there was more than one anointing incident implies that Jesus was a polygamist?

Jesus doesn't say anything that I know of that relates the annointing to marriage. I know that in one case, he specifically says that the annointing is related to his death.

[Notquitewetyet]

Jesus doesn't say anything that I know of that relates the annointing to marriage. I know that in one case, he specifically says that the annointing is related to his death.

Like Kamenraider said "Second Anointing" and "marriage" and "death." If he or I say anymore, this thread will be closed faster than you can say, well, I don't know, something clever

[jadams_4242]

I was listening to Pastors Prespective (a live call-in question and answer show on Calvary Chapel's KWVE radio station) the other day, and Pastor Chuck and the other guy agreed that there were actually two separate incidents of women anointing Jesus in the gospels. They called attention to the chronology of events to support this, but I don't remember the specifics of what they said. Recently I've read the idea in a few different places that these anointing incidents pertained to a royal form of marriage. One of these books was about the historical background of the DaVinci Code novel, and another one was The Woman With The Alabaster Jar by Margaret Starbird. Anyway, I know that LDS members already believe (whether they know it or not) that these incidents relate to the second anointing and therefore would relate to marriage as well, but I'm not sure if Evangelicals understand anything like this. Do they realize that to say that there was more than one anointing incident implies that Jesus was a polygamist?

Yea I keep trying to convince my wife, but she aint goin for it one bit! {just kiddin; i would never}.

[kamenraider]

I Heber C. Kimball recieved the washing of my feet. and was anointed by my wife Vilate fore my burial. that is my feet head Stomach. Evan as Mary did Jesus. that she mite have a claim on him in the Reserrection.

--Heber C. Kimball Journal, April 1, 1844

[katherine the great]

Like Kamenraider said "Second Anointing" and "marriage" and "death." If he or I say anymore, this thread will be closed faster than you can say, well, I don't know, something clever

Like I said, Jesus does not relate these annointings to marriage. Do you believe that there is only one possible purpose for annointing?

[Notquitewetyet]

Like I said, Jesus does not relate these annointings to marriage. Do you believe that there is only one possible purpose for annointing?

No. However, I've heard these annointings related to the higher ordinances. Someone in the ward told me that Brigham Young said such once, although I don't know where one would find it. However, since Jesus does relate it to his death, and it is only with his twelve apostles and his most loyal followers, I do think it was a bit "sacred" and not a washing & anointing, since genders don't mix in that ordinance. But like I said, anything more from me and this thread will be closed.Kamenraider, that is a very interesting last quote, however, it might be going a little into forbidden waters.

[kamenraider]

[Heber C. Kimball] came to our room [and] said he did not feel

well. spoke of an ordinance which he had previously taught and said

that only one of his wives had attended to it. he then spoke of our

Savior and his wives but more particularly of Mary [and her]

faithfulness to her Lord Said Mary felt to say that she intended to

devote her time to him for he had told her that his time was short

and he must soon leave them Now she says I design to attend to his

words and teaching Let Martha and the rest say what they would.

The Savior then told Martha to let Mary alone for she had chosen

the better part which should never be taken from her Now said He

follow me and you shall see my father This she did even to the tomb

and was the first to see him resurrected from the grave.

--Mary Ellen A. Kimball Journal, February 18, 1857

On December 15, 1845 we [David Fullmer and her] received our

endowments and on the 19th of January, 1846, in the Temple of the

Lord at Nauvoo we received our second anointings and ordination and

the next day, the 20th of January we attended to the last

anointings, that of the feet.

--Experiences in the Life of Rhoda Ann Fullmer, January 19 & 20, 1846

At the temple at Nauvoo she received her washings and

anointings even to become a queen and a priestess, after which time

she attended to one other ordinance which was to wash the feet of

her husband and anoint him to be her king and priest and Savior,

that she might have claim on him at the resurrection.

--Record of Lewis Dunbar Sr. and Nancy Ann Wilson, July 20, 1851

[kamenraider]

I'm interested to see what non-LDS Christian posters here think about this too. So far none have responded.

[BCSpace]

Speaking of the washing of feet, have any of you considered the ordinance of the washing of feet with regards to the school of the prophets?

Consider D&C 88:139-141 and then compare with John 13:1-12. He who hath an ear to hear let him hear........

[kamenraider]

Like I said, Jesus does not relate these annointings to marriage. Do you believe that there is only one possible purpose for annointing?

Jesus doesn't relate these anointings to marriage? Are you suggesting that Jesus did not understand them as relating to the second anointing the way LDS leaders did and still do?

[katherine the great]

Jesus doesn't relate these anointings to marriage? Are you suggesting that Jesus did not understand them as relating to the second anointing the way LDS leaders did and still do?

I am suggesting that you are making a wild leap in logic and are either not understanding the customs of Jesus' time or else you didn't really read the scriptures. Are you suggesting that Jesus married the prostitute of Nain? I am suggesting that she was truly penitent and performed a service to Jesus and that he forgave her many sins. Did Jesus marry every male servant who washed and anointed his feet? (a common custom among wealthy Jews.) People were anointed for various reasons: illness and death as well as ceremonial and simply cleanliness rituals. Jesus taught his disciples that in order to be great, one had to become a humble servant.

Speaking of the washing of feet, have any of you considered the ordinance of the washing of feet with regards to the school of the prophets?

No doubt that means that the apostles are now married to one another...

[kamenraider]

I am suggesting that you are making a wild leap in logic and are either not understanding the customs of Jesus' time or else you didn't really read the scriptures. Are you suggesting that Jesus married the prostitute of Nain? I am suggesting that she was truly penitent and performed a service to Jesus and that he forgave her many sins. Did Jesus marry every male servant who washed and anointed his feet? (a common custom among wealthy Jews.) People were anointed for various reasons: illness and death as well as ceremonial and simply cleanliness rituals. Jesus taught his disciples that in order to be great, one had to become a humble servant.No doubt that means that the apostles are now married to one another...

Why would Jesus connect this with his burial if it were a common occurance? Why would costly spikenard, worth close to a year's wages, be used if this was so ordinary? Sounds like a BIG deal to me. Also, why would Jesus have told Peter regarding washing his feet "If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me" and "He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit"?

I've found, since starting this thread, Christians posting their views elsewhere online that there were actually three anointings by women described in the gospels; one at the beginning of Jesus' ministry, one 6 days before His death and burial, and yet another one 2 days before His death and burial.

Any non-LDS people out there want to reply now? Let's hear what you have to say about this!

p.s. Here's a quote from Margaret Starbird about the one by Mary early on:

"Her anointing of the Messiah was the exclusive prerogative of the priestess/bride in the ancient rite of the sacred marriage indigenous to the Near East..."

--Margaret Starbird, Magdalene's Lost Legacy: Symbolic Numbers and the Sacred Union in Christianity, Inner Traditions / Bear & Company, 2003, pg. 131.

[erichard]

...Any non-LDS people out there want to reply now? Let's hear what you have to say about this!

...

Hi Kamenraider,

Here is her site: http://www.margaretstarbird.net/

I will check it out.

Richard

[BCSpace]

Speaking of the washing of feet, have any of you considered the ordinance of the washing of feet with regards to the school of the prophets?

No doubt that means that the apostles are now married to one another...

Well, no. I was actually thinking of something else having to do with our own esoteric rites.

[saemo]

I'm interested to see what non-LDS Christian posters here think about this too. So far none have responded.

I disagree with everything said (more like, what the hell?) I do agree with Katherine the Great.

To the washing of feet, it was a very profound act. It was an allusion to baptism and also a precursor to what Jesus was about to do.

Culturally, to wash another's feet was a very low thing to do, something only servants and slaves would do. Certainly not something your Lord and Master would do for you. This is why Peter objected. But in typical Peter fashion, once Jesus explained what his objection meant, he exclaimed wash all of me!

So Jesus humbles Himself for us, and we should humble ourselves before Him. It was really, quite an incredible exchange.

To the catholic rites of today, every Holy Thursday, the feet of a 12 people are washed by each bishop.

[katherine the great]

Why would Jesus connect this with his burial if it were a common occurance? Why would costly spikenard, worth close to a year's wages, be used if this was so ordinary? Sounds like a BIG deal to me. Also, why would Jesus have told Peter regarding washing his feet "If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me" and "He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit"?

I've found, since starting this thread, Christians posting their views elsewhere online that there were actually three anointings by women described in the gospels; one at the beginning of Jesus' ministry, one 6 days before His death and burial, and yet another one 2 days before His death and burial.

Any non-LDS people out there want to reply now? Let's hear what you have to say about this!

p.s. Here's a quote from Margaret Starbird about the one by Mary early on:

Please explain this comment of yours to me in a way that makes sense:

"Do they realize that to say that there was more than one anointing incident implies that Jesus was a polygamist? "

IMO, this is a ridiculous statement.

[kamenraider]

Please explain this comment of yours to me in a way that makes sense:

"Do they realize that to say that there was more than one anointing incident implies that Jesus was a polygamist? "

IMO, this is a ridiculous statement.

I meant that it implies that (or should) to LDS people.

Don't you think it to be an odd coincidence that multiple women would decide to spend $$$ on spikenard ointment and anoint him, and that those passages in the gospels have a special significance to those who understand the highest temple ordinances?

[kamenraider]

I disagree with everything said (more like, what the hell?) I do agree with Katherine the Great.

To the washing of feet, it was a very profound act. It was an allusion to baptism and also a precursor to what Jesus was about to do.

Culturally, to wash another's feet was a very low thing to do, something only servants and slaves would do. Certainly not something your Lord and Master would do for you. This is why Peter objected. But in typical Peter fashion, once Jesus explained what his objection meant, he exclaimed wash all of me!

So Jesus humbles Himself for us, and we should humble ourselves before Him. It was really, quite an incredible exchange.

To the catholic rites of today, every Holy Thursday, the feet of a 12 people are washed by each bishop.

As I said in my reply to katherine the great, don't you think it's kind of odd that more than one woman might spend the equivalent of a years wages in order to do something that was common and low?

Do you believe that having ones feet washed can make a person "clean every whit" (John 13:10) ?

[aspire]

I meant that it implies that (or should) to LDS people.

Don't you think it to be an odd coincidence that multiple women would decide to spend $$$ on spikenard ointment and anoint him, and that those passages in the gospels have a special significance to those who understand the highest temple ordinances?

This might be the same incident just described differently in each gospel. Maybe it's not multiple women just one Mary Magdalene, and the diffrent women comes from the multiple authors and their view of her. If I remember right I think Starbird even suggests it in one of her books.

[katherine the great]

As I said in my reply to katherine the great, don't you think it's kind of odd that more than one woman might spend the equivalent of a years wages in order to do something that was common and low?

Not as odd as someone interpreting these scriptures as Jesus being a polygamist.

[saemo]

As I said in my reply to katherine the great, don't you think it's kind of odd that more than one woman might spend the equivalent of a years wages in order to do something that was common and low?

Women at that time had no money to spend on anything. Mary Magdalene understood very well who Jesus is, which was not her spouse, but her GOD.

Do you believe that having ones feet washed can make a person "clean every whit" (John 13:10) ?

It is in a baptismal context.

See also:

1 Corinthians 6

11 That is what some of you used to be; but now you have had yourselves washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

Titus 3

5 not because of any righteous deeds we had done but because of his mercy, he saved us through the bath of rebirth and renewal by the holy Spirit,

19 Therefore, brothers, since through the blood of Jesus we have confidence of entrance into the sanctuary 20 by the new and living way he opened for us through the veil, that is, his flesh, 21 and since we have "a great priest over the house of God," 22 let us approach with a sincere heart and in absolute trust, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed in pure water.

And, as I said, a precursor for what Jesus was about to do:

Hebrews 9

13 For if the blood of goats and bulls and the sprinkling of a heifer's ashes can sanctify those who are defiled so that their flesh is cleansed, 14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from dead works to worship the living God. 15 For this reason he is mediator of a new covenant: since a death has taken place for deliverance from transgressions under the first covenant, those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance.

Verse 13 is in reference to Numbers 19

9 Finally, a man who is clean shall gather up the ashes of the heifer and deposit them in a clean place outside the camp. There they are to be kept for preparing lustral water for the Israelite community. The heifer is a sin offering.

All of Numbers 19 is an instruction for ritual washings. Verse 20:

Any unclean man who fails to have himself purified shall be cut off from the community, because he defiles the sanctuary of the LORD. As long as the lustral water has not been splashed over him, he remains unclean.

In light of what is actually be said and done, what Jesus is teaching quite clearly to a group of people who clearly understood Jewish law, is that HE is the new covenant. And those who wish to be cleansed are done so by baptism and the blood of His Sacrifice.

[kamenraider]

Not as odd as someone interpreting these scriptures as Jesus being a polygamist.

Yeah, I guess that would be completely out of the question, wouldn't it?

Bishop Abraham Hunsaker of Honeyville, UT had this experience in Illinois, cca. 1843:

When the law of celestial marriage was first whispered to him,

he opposed it, exclaiming, "It is of the devil," but God knew his

heart and in open day a messenger from heaven with three

women clothed in white raiment stood before him several feet

from the ground and addressed him thus, "You never can receive a

full and complete salvation in my kingdom unless your garments

are pure and white, and you have three counselors like me." Thus

he was convinced that the principle was right and he subsequently

married five wives and he became the father of fifty children.

-- Latter-Day Saint Biographical Encyclopedia by Andrew Jenson,

Salt Lake City, Utah: Andrew Jenson Memorial Foundation 1936, Vol. 3, pg. 415.

[CMZ]

Not as odd as someone interpreting these scriptures as Jesus being a polygamist.

Uh...

[Notquitewetyet]

Not as odd as someone interpreting these scriptures as Jesus being a polygamist.

Jesus Christ practiced plural marriage. Heck, there's even Church artwork at my ward and that I saw at an LDS bookstore in Palmyra that secretly teaches this for those who have eyes to see:

The_Bridegroom.bmp