0
   

Could Christ Have Been A Woman?

 
 
Sun 1 Aug, 2021 05:28 am
I found this sketch website the other day...
https://www.kingofsalem.com/christ-is-a-woman.html
And while it does heavily alter text, it does make three interesting points:
1. They mention that a female lamb must be sacrificed. (Leviticus 4:32)
2. They mention 30 pieces of silver, and reference it back to Leviticus 27, where they value a man at 50 pieces of silver (and we see this number float around the Bible), but Jesus is betrayed for only 30 pieces.
3. The Jews did have a female form for God (look up Chokhmah), but they heavily suppressed the idea. I mean very heavily. The Jews basically decided to be sexist, and cut off the idea that women have any heirship to God. So they point out in the article the idea that we are children of God is not actually blasphemy. Most of the Jews did accept this idea that we are children of God. This was not enough of blasphemy to get him killed. But suppose someone (male of female) claimed to be equal to God? That is to say, wife of God? Would that get you killed? Yes. Even among Christians, you'd be labeled as a crazy feminist atbest, and a blasphemer at worst. If you were around particularly hot-tempered folks, this would get you killed. Particularly in a society that saw women as second-class. The mere fact that you are a woman preaching is already an issue (see the church's own stance on women preaching), but that you also claim to to be the Wife of God? As a side note, it is worth looking at Proverbs 8, where it mentions Lady Wisdom (Wisdom is Chokhmah in Hebrew). They mention Wisdom is made bt God (but if this word should say "begotten" then we have a match). Also of interest is to compare about Proverbs 8:22-23 to John 1, and how both are described as having been with God since the beginning and have similar text.

What do you think? An interesting theory? Or "burn the heretic"?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Question • Score: 0 • Views: 2,101 • Replies: 95
Topic Closed

 
View best answer, chosen by bulmabriefs144
The Anointed
 
  -2  
Sun 1 Aug, 2021 06:04 pm
@bulmabriefs144,
I see you are not a Catholic, who believe that Mary is the bride of God the Father and mother to God the Son, Queen of heaven and co-redeemer of mankind.
bulmabriefs144
 
  -3  
Sun 1 Aug, 2021 08:42 pm
@The Anointed,
This is correct.

I see Catholicism's list of flaws as not compatible with Christianity.
1. The wine does not "turn into" Christ's blood. It is a symbol. What this describes is magical thinking and priest worship.
2. The Pope supplanting Jesus as the Father of the church.
3. A human woman supplanting the actual Bride of God.
4. The buying of indulgences in the past.
5. Omitting wine from the communion in some Catholic churches. The scripture directly suggests that at no point did any of Jesus's followers only eat bread for communion.
6. Papal infallibility. This opens the door for Pope's to push unbiblical teachings.
7. Basically, the idea that you can earn grace or forgiveness, which invalidates the reason for Jesus's death. Including the idea of confession to priests. No amount of Hail Maries will undo a sin. You might be able to repent of a sin through apologizing to the actual person, or trying to make things right. Or you might simply be forgiven without any strings. But the "medical prescription" approach to sin is nothing but empty action.

As is Islam turning Trinity into Father, Son, and Mother and condemning them as polytheism (among other things I could mention).

The Bride of God is one of three things:
1. Humans as a collective (some passages mention humans being married to God)
2. Jesus or Chokhmah (see my points above)
3. Both (humans, or at least Christians, are called the "Body of Christ")

NOT Mary. Mary was a one-night stand for God's purposes to be fulfilled. Mary married Joseph. And when we ask Catholics, they seem to think she was a perpetual virgin.

https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/when-were-joseph-and-mary-married

This article wrongly claims that Mary was never engaged to Joseph, and instead mentions a vow of virginity.

Either you are making things up, or relying on Latin to cover the fact that the Bible says nothing of the sort.

Quote:
18This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about: His mother Mary was pledged in marriage to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit. 19Because Joseph her husband was a righteous man and was unwilling to disgrace her publicly, he resolved to divorce her quietly.


Conclusion? This was NOT a marriage to God. Mary got knocked up, except for her consent to fulfill prophecy. Joseph thought so too, which is why he wanted to leave her quietly. But the next passage says he gets warned otherwise in a dream.

As for the "vow of perpetual virginity"? No.

https://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-siblings.html

Quote:
Jesus’ brothers are mentioned in several Bible verses. Matthew 12:46, Luke 8:19, and Mark 3:31 say that Jesus’ mother and brothers came to see Him. The Bible tells us that Jesus had four brothers: James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas (Matthew 13:55). The Bible also tells us that Jesus had sisters, but they are not named or numbered (Matthew 13:56). In John 7:1-10, His brothers go on to the festival while Jesus stays behind. In Acts 1:14, His brothers and mother are described as praying with the disciples. Galatians 1:19 mentions that James was Jesus’ brother. The most natural conclusion of these passages is to interpret that Jesus had actual blood half-siblings.

Some Roman Catholics claim that these “brothers” were actually Jesus’ cousins. However, in each instance, the specific Greek word for “brother” is used. While the word can refer to other relatives, its normal and literal meaning is a physical brother. There was a Greek word for “cousin,” and it was not used. Further, if they were Jesus’ cousins, why would they so often be described as being with Mary, Jesus’ mother? There is nothing in the context of His mother and brothers coming to see Him that even hints that they were anyone other than His literal, blood-related, half-brothers.


Quote:
There is no biblical reason to believe that these siblings are anything other than the actual children of Joseph and Mary. Those who oppose the idea that Jesus had half-brothers and half-sisters do so, not from a reading of Scripture, but from a preconceived concept of the perpetual virginity of Mary, which is itself clearly unbiblical: “But he (Joseph) had no union with her (Mary) until she gave birth to a son. And he gave Him the name Jesus” (Matthew 1:25). Jesus had half-siblings, half-brothers and half-sisters, who were the children of Joseph and Mary. That is the clear and unambiguous teaching of God’s Word.


Basically, Catholics are making up lies for this farce of perpetual marriage to God.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/7a/73/3d/7a733d6f26224e51d7f407cd01701a08.jpg

Only the other parts of the Trinity are equal to God. Therefore, if God the Father has a wife or son, they must be part of the Trinity.
The Anointed
 
  -1  
Sun 1 Aug, 2021 09:31 pm
@bulmabriefs144,
I see you are not a Catholic as I am not a Catholic. I see that you do not believe her false teaching as I do not believe her false teachings.

Now tell me, who was Mary pregnant to, when she was engaged to Joseph the son of Jacob, a descendant of Solomon through the cursed line of Jenoiachin, and how many children did she bear to that Joseph, after Jesus was born and their union was finally consummated?

And did Mary bear any more sons to Joseph the biological father of Jesus, who was the son of Heli=Alexander Helios, who was also the father to Mary but by a different mother than his son Joseph, who is a descendant of Nathan the half brother to Solomon, and how many male children did she bear to that Joseph?
bulmabriefs144
 
  -2  
Mon 2 Aug, 2021 07:24 am
@The Anointed,
I get the feeling you are scamming me somehow. Your last post seemed to heavily imply that you were a Catholic.

The article above quoted Jesus as having an unknown name and number of sisters, and four brothers.

Yes, that guy. This is the reason why the virgin birth myth exists. Because a legit birth from Joseph would be immediate disqualification as King of the Jews.

To answer the question anyway, Jesus's father was either:
(a) A man, similar to how Jacob wrestled a nan but who gave him a blessing.
(b) No one (Anakin Skywalker birth)
(c) Jesus is a demigod

In the former case, Mary got knocked up by a mysterious stranger who had exactly the right genes to be King of Jews, but we have no other family line, besides Joseph and Mary, so I'm gonna raise an eyebrow at this. Also, the Gospel already tells us that it is her line that matters. So we'd have to assume an opposite sex twin of hers approached her that that night. It's also not accurate to what the text says, which is "the Holy Spirit came into her," and she became pregnant .

So how does the second one work? Well there is a model of virgin birth in animals. It's called parthenogenesis. I believe God has mastery of the natueal world, so this is doable. But it never happens in humans, only with certain lizards or whatever. The thing is a parthenogenesis baby is a clone of her mother. Pretty much always female or an XX male (basically a biological woman with some outward signs of being male). When you look at murals of Mary look at how much like Jesus she looks. Basically identical but for a beard. Even in Catholic churches. It's almost as though they are trying to hide something....

The last one is rejected by the church. Jesus is all God and all Man, they say. Meaning all genes and physical matter came from Mary, while the soul/spirit stuff came from God. So we are left with the same deal, a clone of Mary. Which leads to a very important question. Aside from the original Mary with Jesus, and the Mary standing next to Jesus on the cross, how can we be sure all those other ones actually are Mary? Suppose female Jesus artwork existed, but those involved didn't want to explain why "Mary" has a crown so they made up some stories? After all, having an unpopular theology can get you killed.
BillRM
 
  1  
Mon 2 Aug, 2021 08:33 am
Christ can be anything you can dream up/
Mame
 
  2  
Mon 2 Aug, 2021 09:04 am
@BillRM,
Exactly. Why do people feel the need to believe in a God? The bible is just translated scrolls written by MEN. Not all the found scrolls were included. Why not?
maxdancona
 
  -4  
Mon 2 Aug, 2021 09:38 am
@Mame,
Mame wrote:

Exactly. Why do people feel the need to believe in a God? The bible is just translated scrolls written by MEN. Not all the found scrolls were included. Why not?


Well damn!

Physics was developed by MEN. As was Democracy (from the Magna Carta to the US Constitution) classical music, medicine, electricity and computers. All of these foundations of Western Civilization were almost completely devoloped by men.

If you are going to reject everything developed by men, you will give up Evolotion, Electricity, cars, literature and the internet.
edgarblythe
 
  3  
Mon 2 Aug, 2021 10:04 am
@maxdancona,
I think she meant as opposed to gods, rather than making a gender issue out of it.
maxdancona
 
  -4  
Mon 2 Aug, 2021 10:15 am
@edgarblythe,
Maybe you are correct. Mame can correct me if they choose. Given the topic of this thread is gender, it is a little ambiguous.

My point stands either way, it doesnt make sense to reject something just because it was written by men.
BillRM
 
  1  
Mon 2 Aug, 2021 04:10 pm
@maxdancona,
Why would a one of it kind all powerful god need to have a sex of any kind to begin with?

Next given women are the grates keepers to the next generation so why would not a god be more female then male?

Quote:
This poem I love by Kipling

When the Himalayan peasant meets the
he-bear in his pride,
He shouts to scare the monster,
who will often turn aside.
But the she-bear thus accosted rends
the peasant tooth and nail.
For the female of the species is more
deadly than the male.
When Nag the basking cobra hears the
careless foot of man,
He will sometimes wriggle sideways and
avoid it if he can.
But his mate makes no such motion where
she camps beside the trail.
For the female of the species is more
deadly than the male.
When the early Jesuit fathers preached
to Hurons and Choctaws,
They prayed to be delivered from the
vengeance of the squaws.
'Twas the women, not the warriors,
turned those stark enthusiasts pale.
For the female of the species is more
deadly than the male.
Man's timid heart is bursting with the
things he must not say,
For the Woman that God gave him
isn't his to give away;
But when hunter meets with husbands,
each confirms the other's tale -
The female of the species is more
deadly than the male.
Man, a bear in most relations -
worm and savage otherwise, -
Man propounds negotiations,
Man accepts the compromise.
Very rarely will he squarely push the logic of a fact
To its ultimate conclusion in unmitigated act.
Fear, or foolishness, impels him,
ere he lay the wicked low,
To concede some form of trial even
to his fiercest foe.
Mirth obscene diverts his anger -
Doubt and Pity oft perplex
Him in dealing with an issue -
to the scandal of The Sex!
But the Woman that God gave him,
every fibre of her frame
Proves her launched for one sole issue,
armed and engined for the same,
And to serve that single issue,
lest the generations fail,
The female of the species must be
deadlier than the male.
She who faces Death by torture
for each life beneath her breast
May not deal in doubt or pity -
must not swerve for fact or jest.
These be purely male diversions -
not in these her honour dwells.
She the Other Law we live by,
is that Law and nothing else.
She can bring no more to living than
the powers that make her great
As the Mother of the Infant and the
Mistress of the Mate.
And when Babe and Man are lacking and
she strides unclaimed to claim
Her right as femme (and baron),
her equipment is the same.
She is wedded to convictions -
in default of grosser ties;
Her contentions are her children,
Heaven help him who denies! -
He will meet no suave discussion,
but the instant, white-hot, wild,
Wakened female of the species warring
as for spouse and child.
Unprovoked and awful charges -
even so the she-bear fights,
Speech that drips, corrodes, and poisons -
even so the cobra bites,
Scientific vivisection of one nerve till it is raw
And the victim writhes in anguish -
like the Jesuit with the squaw!
So it comes that Man, the coward,
when he gathers to confer
With his fellow-braves in council,
dare not leave a place for her
Where, at war with Life and Conscience,
he uplifts his erring hands
To some God of Abstract Justice -
which no woman understands.
And Man knows it! Knows, moreover,
that the Woman that God gave him
Must command but may not govern -
shall enthral but not enslave him.
And She knows, because She warns him,
and Her instincts never fail,
That the Female of Her Species is more
deadly than the Male.

maxdancona
 
  0  
Mon 2 Aug, 2021 04:56 pm
In the gospel, Jesus was visited by Kings, accepted by religious scholars and followed by diaciples. These all suggest that he was born and raised a boy.

More importantly he referred to himself in a very masculine way... He way as is the "son of Man". Even if Jesus had a vagina, we should still respect the fact that he used masculine pronouns.
BillRM
 
  2  
Mon 2 Aug, 2021 08:38 pm
@maxdancona,
Quote:
He way as is the "son of Man". Even if Jesus had a vagina, we should still respect the fact that he used masculine pronouns.


Once more what purpose would sex organs of any kind have for 1/3 of the all powerful god hood?

A god that had been around before the big bang strangely is carrying around sex organs.
maxdancona
 
  0  
Mon 2 Aug, 2021 09:20 pm
@BillRM,
A penis has the power to create life, they say it all started with a Big Bang.

You have heard of the Bang Bang, right?
roger
 
  2  
Mon 2 Aug, 2021 09:22 pm
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:

You have heard of the Bang Bang, right?
Okay, that was beyond funny!

Still, I have wondered why God, a unique being, would have gender.
The Anointed
 
  -1  
Mon 2 Aug, 2021 10:29 pm
@bulmabriefs144,
B B 144 wrote ..... I get the feeling you are scamming me somehow. Your last post seemed to heavily imply that you were a Catholic.

The Anointed Responds ….. And what makes you think that the following heavenly implies that I am a Catholic? “I see you are not a Catholic, who believe that Mary is the bride of God the Father and mother to God the Son, Queen of heaven and co-redeemer of mankind.

B B 144 wrote ....The article above quoted Jesus as having an unknown name and number of sisters, and four brothers.

The Anointed Responds ….. In the post above I asked the question; “Tell me, who was Mary pregnant to, when she was engaged to Joseph the son of Jacob, a descendant of Solomon through the cursed line of Jenoiachin, and how many children did she bear to that Joseph, after Jesus was born and their union was finally consummated?

See Luke 2: 5; which reveals that Mary was only the fiancée of Joseph the son of Jacob when they travelled down to Bethlehem of Judaea, and it was only after the birth of Jesus and they had returned to Nazareth that Joseph the son of Jacob, with Mary and the child, returned to their home in Nazareth, that their union was consummated and Joseph, the half-brother to Jesus was born.

Joseph the son of Jacob, is a descendant of Solomon through the cursed line of Jenoiachin, of who it is said in Jeremiah 22: 30; “This man is condemned to lose his children, to be a man who will never succeed. He will have no descendants who will rule in Judah as David's successors. I, the Lord, have spoken”.

As the King of the Jew had to come through the line of Solomon, it would appear that any son of Joseph the son of Jacob, could never inherit the throne of David.

Luke 3: 23; Reveals that Jesus was the biological son of Joseph the son of Heli, who was a descendant of Nathan who was a half-brother to Solomon. Luke 3:23; (KJV) And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli. The (AS WAS SUPPOSED) in brackets, was a later interpolation by those who would have you believe the false teaching of the so-called virgin birth.

In the different translations of the KJV into Arabic, Afrikaan, Zulu, etc and even some of the more modern English translations, such as the Good News Catholic Study Edition Bible, the words (As was supposed) have been retained, but the brackets are removed, thus by, making those words appear to be the declaration of Luke, while the serious biblical student know that they were not written by Luke, but were a later interpolation and a corruption of the Holy Scriptures, by those so-called Christians, who refuse to accept that Jesus was not a God who became a man, but a man, born of human parents, who was later CHOSEN by the Lord our saviour ‘The Son of Man,’ as his heir and successor, and who was given divine glory, as revealed in Acts 3: 13; where it is said that the God of our ancestors, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, has given divine glory to his servant Jesus etc.

The Scripture twisting theologians of the Roman church of Emperor Constantine, also changed Luke 3: 21-22; From, “You are my son, this day I have begotten thee”, to “You are my own dear son in who I am well pleased.”

Luke 3:22; Now reads; “Thou art my beloved son in whom I am pleased,” which was not the original variant, but was changed by those who want you to believe that Jesus was not born of the flesh by a physical biological father, and (In place of “Thou art my .”beloved son in who I am well pleased.”) The following authorities of the second, third, and fourth centuries read, “This day I have begotten thee,” vouched for by Codex D, and the most ancient copies of the old latin (a, b. c. ff.I), by Justin Martyr (AD 140), Clemens Alex, (AD. 190), Methodius (AD. 290), among the Greeks. And among the Latins, Lactaitius (AD 300), Hilary (AD) Juvencus (AD. 330), Faustus (AD. 400) and Augustine. All these oldest manuscripts were changed completely. They now read, “This is my son in whom I am well pleased.” Whereas the original variant was, “Thou art my Son, This day I have begotten thee.

It was on the day of his baptism, that the spirit of the Lord descended upon the man Jesus in the form of a dove as the heavenly voice was heard to say; “You are my Son, ‘THIS DAY’ I have begotten thee. Or as said in Hebrews 5: 5; “You are my son, TODAY I have become your Father.”

Jesus the son of Mary and her half-brother Joseph who were both sired by Heli=Alexander Helios III, by different mothers, was born "SON OF GOD" not by blood, nor by the will of the flesh nor by the will of man, but by the spirit of the Lord which descended upon him in the form of a dove as the heavenly voice was heard to say, "You are my Son, 'THIS DAY' I have begotten thee."

To be continued.
maxdancona
 
  -2  
Tue 3 Aug, 2021 01:28 pm
@roger,
roger wrote:

maxdancona wrote:

You have heard of the Bang Bang, right?
Okay, that was beyond funny!

Still, I have wondered why God, a unique being, would have gender.


Masculinity is associated with power, creative force, and authority in most (if not all) cultures. These are traits you would associate with a creator God, particularly for monotheist societies (polytheists have moremfreedom to explore different aspects of divinity).

I think the Catholic religion has a great figure in Mary. A masculine all powerful God with a feminine intercessor. It works to address both sides of the human experience.
The Anointed
 
  -2  
Tue 3 Aug, 2021 06:24 pm
@BillRM,
Women are the grates keepers to the next generation???

What makes you think that?

The maximum number of eggs that a woman will ever have is the number she has when she's a 20-week-old fetus. She'll have about 7 million of them then, 600,000 when she's born, and about 400,000 at puberty. Once a woman hits puberty and menstruation begins, her ovaries release one of those eggs every 28 or so days.

Those eggs are dormant and lifeless, once they are released they float along the fallopian tube until those lifeless eggs are flushed out by the monthly blood flow, unless of course they are fertilised by one of the living swimming 40 million to 1.2 billion sperm cells that can be released in a single ejaculation.

God is an androgynous being, who said; "And now let 'US' make man in 'OUR' image," And God made man in his own likeness, male man and female man made he them.

0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  -1  
Wed 4 Aug, 2021 06:04 am
@maxdancona,
I am actually surpised to find that both the Roman Catholic church, and fundamentalist American Christian groups say God is beyond gender. I would have that conservative Christian groups would think of God the father as a male.

I still believe that God has a penis.
The Anointed
 
  -2  
Wed 4 Aug, 2021 06:43 am
@maxdancona,
You believe that God has a penis do you? You appear to have an obsession with male genitalia, is there something you wish to tell us?
 

Related Topics

Is The Bible Just a Good Book? - Question by anthony1312002
What Is Wrong With Christmas Customs? - Discussion by anthony1312002
Do Christian lives matter? - Discussion by gungasnake
Satan (a discussion) - Question by Smileyrius
"Thy kingdom come". What's that about? - Question by neologist
Where are all the churches in the mist of this? - Discussion by reasoning logic
No God in Christianity - Question by Cyracuz
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Could Christ Have Been A Woman?
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.12 seconds on 09/20/2021 at 09:19:24