Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Was Jesus a woman?

jesus woman jerusalem alternative history archaeology

  • Please log in to reply
44 replies to this topic

#16    Purifier

Purifier

    Δ

  • Member
  • 2,829 posts
  • Joined:12 Feb 2010
  • Gender:Male

  • We don't need to conquer the world, we need to conquer our individual selves first. Then the world will be at peace.

Posted 12 June 2013 - 08:28 AM

View PostThe Nameless One, on 11 June 2013 - 03:00 PM, said:

Oh come on now damn it! Jesus was no friggin girl, he wasn't even a man. Everyone knows that Jesus the Christ was indeed sexless! (born without genitalia)

Fixed that for you.

PAWNING RESIDENT TROLLS

#17    Capt. P. Lilandra

Capt. P. Lilandra

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 31 posts
  • Joined:29 May 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:UK currently

Posted 12 June 2013 - 08:47 AM

I don’t see why this is so hard to believe really I mean think about it Jesus lived (if you are religious and believe) in a time that women were little more than a commodity and the records were written by men so it follows logic that if such a person was around performing “miracles” that it would be spun in history as it being a man it has happened before.


#18    laver

laver

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,367 posts
  • Joined:02 Jan 2013

Posted 12 June 2013 - 09:40 AM

View PostWiseWoman, on 12 June 2013 - 03:49 AM, said:

Why stop?  This is a good question..was he a she or a he?  No one know's for sure, but who is anyone to dismiss it?  Still up for debate. :)

The first part of your question ( a bit of April Tomfoolery?) on the gender of Jesus is probably best answered by a glance at bible stories where he/she is clearly depicted as a he but with a special affinity to women and Samaritans. This comes together at the incident of the Samaritan women at the well in John 4 : 1-42 which is a very important account of his delibrate breaking of strong taboos in chatting to this lady and asking her for a drink from her cup. This all happened at Shechem ( called Sychar in the text) which is an ancient holy sanctuary from thousands of years before the time of Jesus and next to the holy mountain of the Samaritans which Jesus refers to in the passage so he is clearly drawing attention to this ancient sacred location and its links to the feminine. His disciples were shocked by his actions which would not have been the case if he was a she?

The second part of your topic on the gender of 'god' is related to the above incident because the ancient sacred sites of the Holy Land were dedicated to Gods and Goddesses, deities of both genders, which of course was overturned by the incoming belief in one male deity. Jesus by his actions and close companionship with Mary of Magdala, Mary Magdalene, was apparently making his position clear at this ancient sanctuary. The Jerusalem hierarchy were strong supporters of the 'one male deity' position and in John 8: 48-49 say to Jesus
'Are we not right in saying that you are a Samaritan and that you are possessed ?'
Jesus replies that he is not possessed but does not respond to the charge of being a Samaritan.

The sacred mountain of the Samaritans,where they believed the main Temple should be, was Mount Gerizim not Jerusalem, and is the one refered to by Jesus in the text and you may note that Jesus says that the mountain and Jerusalem would not in the end be of future importance as places of worship...'we worship what we know', he says.


#19    Capt. P. Lilandra

Capt. P. Lilandra

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 31 posts
  • Joined:29 May 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:UK currently

Posted 12 June 2013 - 10:25 AM

View Postlaver, on 12 June 2013 - 09:40 AM, said:

The first part of your question ( a bit of April Tomfoolery?) on the gender of Jesus is probably best answered by a glance at bible stories where he/she is clearly depicted as a he but with a special affinity to women and Samaritans. This comes together at the incident of the Samaritan women at the well in John 4 : 1-42 which is a very important account of his delibrate breaking of strong taboos in chatting to this lady and asking her for a drink from her cup. This all happened at Shechem ( called Sychar in the text) which is an ancient holy sanctuary from thousands of years before the time of Jesus and next to the holy mountain of the Samaritans which Jesus refers to in the passage so he is clearly drawing attention to this ancient sacred location and its links to the feminine. His disciples were shocked by his actions which would not have been the case if he was a she?

The second part of your topic on the gender of 'god' is related to the above incident because the ancient sacred sites of the Holy Land were dedicated to Gods and Goddesses, deities of both genders, which of course was overturned by the incoming belief in one male deity. Jesus by his actions and close companionship with Mary of Magdala, Mary Magdalene, was apparently making his position clear at this ancient sanctuary. The Jerusalem hierarchy were strong supporters of the 'one male deity' position and in John 8: 48-49 say to Jesus
'Are we not right in saying that you are a Samaritan and that you are possessed ?'
Jesus replies that he is not possessed but does not respond to the charge of being a Samaritan.

The sacred mountain of the Samaritans,where they believed the main Temple should be, was Mount Gerizim not Jerusalem, and is the one refered to by Jesus in the text and you may note that Jesus says that the mountain and Jerusalem would not in the end be of future importance as places of worship...'we worship what we know', he says.

You have good references but you like many have missed one thing, that the bible was written by men and as a record of historical events is taken in faith of the truth obviously this is not an issue but is does give a point of view given by man in a time that women were little more than a commodity and being such the accounts could have been easily written as a man, that said I am by no means saying that the bible is a falsified  group of stories but I am saying that you must accept that there is a large room for interpretation as wide as anything a person can think of.


#20    laver

laver

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,367 posts
  • Joined:02 Jan 2013

Posted 12 June 2013 - 01:49 PM

View PostCapt. P. Lilandra, on 12 June 2013 - 10:25 AM, said:

You have good references but you like many have missed one thing, that the bible was written by men and as a record of historical events is taken in faith of the truth obviously this is not an issue but is does give a point of view given by man in a time that women were little more than a commodity and being such the accounts could have been easily written as a man, that said I am by no means saying that the bible is a falsified  group of stories but I am saying that you must accept that there is a large room for interpretation as wide as anything a person can think of.

I quite accept that the bible being written by men must have had a big impact on the way stories in it will have been recorded, from oral traditions, with a strong male bias and it seems to me that, for example, the role of Mary of Magdala has been treated in this way from other texts that have come to light. This was clearly encouraged by the church over many years who wanted the 'official' Jesus to meet their criteria and perpetuate a notion of male superiority.
The story of 'the Samaritan women at the Well', depending on how much we can rely on it, is very interesting for several reasons but particularly that Jesus apparently had no qualms about breaking the taboos about Samaritans, talking to a women and asking for a drink from her cup. She was also apparently 5 times married and at the time of the meeting 'living in sin' with a man who was not her husband. None of this seemed to bother Jesus at all who stayed for days at this Samaritan location.

It makes one wonder not so much whether Jesus was a woman but whether the 'Good Samaritan' of another famous biblical story was in fact a woman, a woman of compassion. The attitude of Jesus to Samaritans is highly interesting as he was apparently a southern Jew and the Samaritans should have been treated as the 'enemy'.


#21    justcalmebubba

justcalmebubba

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 229 posts
  • Joined:16 Feb 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:frankston texas

  • there are many things that bump along in the nite but there are sum of us that bump back

Posted 12 June 2013 - 04:05 PM

hummm..god a male or female?  well if god took a mans rib and made a female and we'r made in his image...wouldnt  god be both sexs thatd make  him  whats the word i'm thinking of here.?


#22    bee

bee

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,714 posts
  • Joined:24 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:England

Posted 12 June 2013 - 05:02 PM

.


Perhaps Leonardo da Vinci was trying to tell something with his painting The Last Supper....

Where the figure to the right of 'Jesus' (his right).......

Is a female figure...with the left hand of Peter? slicing at her throat......and holding a knife in a concealed fashion in his other hand.

The reproductions of the painting don't show the left hand in so much of a slicing way....but the original looks more slicing....to me.

And we all know what that gesture means.....knife slicing the throat.

A symbol of the killing off of the female Jesus? Perhaps?

Or that Mary Magdalene was the actual 'Jesus' of the bible stories..

The others are in some kind of uproar....gesturing all over the place


The painting can be examined in this link..


http://www.jaydax.co.../lastsupper.htm



.


#23    laver

laver

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,367 posts
  • Joined:02 Jan 2013

Posted 13 June 2013 - 12:14 AM

View Postbee, on 12 June 2013 - 05:02 PM, said:

.


Perhaps Leonardo da Vinci was trying to tell something with his painting The Last Supper....

Where the figure to the right of 'Jesus' (his right).......

Is a female figure...with the left hand of Peter? slicing at her throat......and holding a knife in a concealed fashion in his other hand.

The reproductions of the painting don't show the left hand in so much of a slicing way....but the original looks more slicing....to me.

And we all know what that gesture means.....knife slicing the throat.

A symbol of the killing off of the female Jesus? Perhaps?

Or that Mary Magdalene was the actual 'Jesus' of the bible stories..

The others are in some kind of uproar....gesturing all over the place


The painting can be examined in this link..


http://www.jaydax.co.../lastsupper.htm



.


From the Gnostic texts the role of Mary Magdalene as companion and confidant of Jesus was a problem to some of the disciples notably Peter.

Leonardo may well have been aware of this element of the biblical stories when painting the Last Supper hence the knife at the throat of Mary.

But looking at the picture you post... who put the doorway below the centre of the painting after it was completed and removing the detail below Jesus and Mary?

Was there a bit of 'footsie footsie' going on under the table which was considered so overt it had to be removed by the 'church' ?

The position of the figures of Jesus and 'Mary' would suggest that something was going on under the table ?


#24    bee

bee

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,714 posts
  • Joined:24 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:England

Posted 13 June 2013 - 11:32 AM

View Postlaver, on 13 June 2013 - 12:14 AM, said:

From the Gnostic texts the role of Mary Magdalene as companion and confidant of Jesus was a problem to some of the disciples notably Peter.

Leonardo may well have been aware of this element of the biblical stories when painting the Last Supper hence the knife at the throat of Mary.

But looking at the picture you post... who put the doorway below the centre of the painting after it was completed and removing the detail below Jesus and Mary?

Was there a bit of 'footsie footsie' going on under the table which was considered so overt it had to be removed by the 'church' ?

The position of the figures of Jesus and 'Mary' would suggest that something was going on under the table ?

:o

Lol..... it's a conspiracy....

but of course we don't know what that bit under the table showed.

Re. Peter...... according to the bible and interpretations.....


http://www.online-bi...ostle-peter.htm


Quote

Andrew introduced his brother Simon to Jesus. The name Peter, meaning 'rock', was selected by Jesus to indicate the he would be the rock-like foundation on which the Church would be built.



and Da Vinci did his famous painting....Virgin of the Rocks....with more enigmatic pointing and hand gestures.


http://en.wikipedia....e,_c._1480).jpg


Perhaps this was another hint?.......that someone called Mary should have been the 'rock-like foundation' on which the Church would be built.

:huh:


.


#25    laver

laver

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,367 posts
  • Joined:02 Jan 2013

Posted 13 June 2013 - 12:46 PM

View Postbee, on 13 June 2013 - 11:32 AM, said:

:o

Lol..... it's a conspiracy....

but of course we don't know what that bit under the table showed.

Re. Peter...... according to the bible and interpretations.....


http://www.online-bi...ostle-peter.htm





and Da Vinci did his famous painting....Virgin of the Rocks....with more enigmatic pointing and hand gestures.


http://en.wikipedia....e,_c._1480).jpg


Perhaps this was another hint?.......that someone called Mary should have been the 'rock-like foundation' on which the Church would be built.

:huh:


.

The bit about the possible sub-table activity is just an observation as I noted some time ago that this doorway was put in I think about 100 years after Leonardo did the painting and it is a curious thing to do to the work of a master artist, is it not ?

It only seemed important when various authors interpreted the figure next to Jesus as Mary Magdalene which only recieved wide publicity with the Dan Brown book about the artist and the later film of the book.

The feet of Jesus and 'Mary' must have been in very close proximity... and it just makes one wonder ?

The Gnostic gospels clearly indicate animosity between Peter and Mary who was obviously the close companion and confidant of Jesus, she was also his messenger and leader of the disciples who directed them to Galilee for a final meeting with Christ. The anti - Mary, anti - women Peter must have been a strong influence on how the early church viewed the role of women which seems to be very different to real attitude of Jesus.


#26    Whisperer

Whisperer

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 736 posts
  • Joined:26 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Aotearoa

  • "Never challenge the Universe for it will respond"

Posted 15 September 2013 - 05:25 AM

...then again, could it all be one big fraud?
Not that is my point of view but, could it?

Another passage I recall when Judas was betraying Jesus, that he needed to kiss him to show which one was Jesus as Jesus was a known shapeshifter or something like that.

Adds up a bit more now...thought they meant Werewolf sort of thing or ....Reptoid...   :)

I be Ra...The river of life, the ebb and flow of summer tides...
Make not an image of me, nor offer unto me the limitations of form...
For I be Soul....and I will not be limited...

#27    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 23,803 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

  • Hey, I'm not wrong. I'm just not completely right.

Posted 15 September 2013 - 06:13 AM

View PostCapt. P. Lilandra, on 12 June 2013 - 10:25 AM, said:

You have good references but you like many have missed one thing, that the bible was written by men and as a record of historical events is taken in faith of the truth obviously this is not an issue but is does give a point of view given by man in a time that women were little more than a commodity and being such the accounts could have been easily written as a man, that said I am by no means saying that the bible is a falsified  group of stories but I am saying that you must accept that there is a large room for interpretation as wide as anything a person can think of.
This could be true. But, then it could be that Jesus was a made up creation with the same arguement. Or, that Jesus was Japanese, or a Zulu, or an Proto-Aztec, or from Easter Island, or a grey alien, or a very advanced bigfoot.

What we have is 2000 years of oral and written history that all says He. Vast parts of the Bible would have to be re-written. How could a female child be King of the Jews? How could a female child be taught in the synagog? How could a female child travel with a company of men and not be accused and stoned? How could such a woman have people accept Her Knowledge and Authority as Jesus showed? Would John the Baptist have even baptized a woman?

Remember this was not 2010 New York, but 0 AD Israel in one of the most Patriarchal cultures to ever exist.

Answer these questions or your just putting forward a story, and not an arguement.

http://www.religious...rg/ofe_bibl.htm

Edited by DieChecker, 15 September 2013 - 06:21 AM.

Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker

#28    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 23,803 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

  • Hey, I'm not wrong. I'm just not completely right.

Posted 15 September 2013 - 06:18 AM

View Postbee, on 12 June 2013 - 05:02 PM, said:

Perhaps Leonardo da Vinci was trying to tell something with his painting The Last Supper....

Where the figure to the right of 'Jesus' (his right).......

Is a female figure...with the left hand of Peter? slicing at her throat......and holding a knife in a concealed fashion in his other hand.
And yet, Leonardo's Jesus has a Beard?

It is more likely that Leonardo was trying to portray someone who would be indentified today as Gay. I'm not saying Peter was gay, but that perhaps Leonardo was painting him that way 1500 years later.

Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker

#29    jaylemurph

jaylemurph

    "If we would know, then we would be more wisdomed."

  • Member
  • 9,549 posts
  • Joined:02 Nov 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle, WA

  • "You can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make him think." Dorothy Parker

Posted 15 September 2013 - 06:21 AM

View Postlaver, on 13 June 2013 - 12:46 PM, said:

The bit about the possible sub-table activity is just an observation as I noted some time ago that this doorway was put in I think about 100 years after Leonardo did the painting and it is a curious thing to do to the work of a master artist, is it not ?

No, actually it was closer to 150 years, and more to the point, it was badly damaged and past the point where some people were calling it a ruin. But in either year, he as hardly the genius Leonardo we all think about. It wouldn't've been that strange to cover it up.

Quote

It only seemed important when various authors interpreted the figure next to Jesus as Mary Magdalene which only recieved wide publicity with the Dan Brown book about the artist and the later film of the book.

Well, no. Actually it was popularized in a ****ty, ill-researched book (that used evidence admitted as faked not long after) written by an ex-Doctor Who script-writer called The Holy Blood, The Holy Grail, twenty years or so before Brown's little abomination. And by various authors, I think you mean "the idiot Dan Brown and the suckers who wrote the book he based his 'novel' on.

Quote

The feet of Jesus and 'Mary' must have been in very close proximity... and it just makes one wonder ?

As no one living has seen that to confirm it, it does make one wonder. In fact, in the copy made by Leonardo's student Giampetrino, which was used as the the recent(ish) renovation of the work, their feet are nowhere near each other. (http://en.wikipedia....per-ca-1520.jpg)

Quote

The Gnostic gospels clearly indicate animosity between Peter and Mary who was obviously the close companion and confidant of Jesus,

Really? Then why don't you quote it so we can jusge for ourselves? :innocent:

Quote

she was also his messenger

His messenger? According to what?

Quote

and leader of the disciples who directed them to Galilee for a final meeting with Christ.

This must be in your conviently uncited Aprocrypha.

Quote

The anti - Mary, anti - women Peter must have been a strong influence on how the early church viewed the role of women which seems to be very different to real attitude of Jesus.

...are you sure you don't mean St. Paul? It's just... that's a lot to say about someone who gets sort of minimalist treatment in orthodox scripture. Almost like someone was creating material based on things people generally weren't that familiar with and thinking they could get away with anything.

--Jaylemurph

"... amongst the most obstinate of our opinions may be classed those which derive from discussions in which we affect to search for the truth, while in reality we are only fortifying prejudice."     -- James Fenimore Cooper, The Pathfinder

Posted Image

Deeply venial

#30    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 23,803 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

  • Hey, I'm not wrong. I'm just not completely right.

Posted 15 September 2013 - 06:25 AM

View Postjaylemurph, on 15 September 2013 - 06:21 AM, said:

Really? Then why don't you quote it so we can jusge for ourselves? :innocent:



His messenger? According to what?



This must be in your conviently uncited Aprocrypha.


--Jaylemurph
He's talking about the Gospel of Mary. I've gone a round with him on this before. He's full of interpretation and word spin even when taking quotes from the Gospel of Mary.

Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker





Also tagged with jesus, woman, jerusalem, alternative history, archaeology

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users