Poll: Intersex Jesus?

[HonestJoe]

An academic has raised the possibility of Jesus Christ having had an intersex condition, of having inside lady parts:

Your link is behind a paywall and I can't possibly imagine what reason anyone would have to even speculate on the question or on what basis they could ever support the idea, given the lack of reliable information about Jesus. Why not speculate that he was allergic to peanuts, red-green colour-blind or didn't like the smell of wet grass?

 

[Eddi]

Such an individual would probably have been perceived as something of an abomination.

Only if anyone noticed it

would it make sense for God to choose a form that would have been far less acceptable to the ancient Hebrews than a female form? A form that would immediately have elicited their revulsion?

I don't think they'd necessarily notice, and that such a person could pass as being exclusively male

Jesus was certainly treated as exclusively male by his contemporaries, as far as we can tell, but they could have been mistaken

n my opinion exceedingly unlikely historical hypotheses

I suppose it is, but I maintain that it is a possibility

 

[Fool]

An academic has raised the possibility of Jesus Christ having had an intersex condition, of having inside lady parts:

Jesus may have been a hermaphrodite, claims academic

I made a post about this in December 2018 but I’m asking again, this time with a poll

When I did this, back in 2018, someone basically said that there’s as much chance of him having been a chimpanzee than an intersex person, which is silly if we acknowledge the fact that 1.7% births can be classed as intersex – which doesn’t include those with an intersex condition who look “normal” on the outside…

But was Jesus Christ intersex?

If we believe him to be a mere historical figure, I think the answer is “why not?”

But if we believe him to be a part of the Godhead, divine as well as human, then it would make perfect sense. What if God wanted to join humanity as a woman but all the societies were deeply patriarchal and misogynistic? Who would ignore and persecute an intelligent and articulate woman? Well, then he’d send the next best thing!

But of course, there is no way of ever knowing…

And of course, at the end of the day I don’t think it matters, not at all

Pic related:

View attachment 40089

he was more likely what we identify as homosexual as Irenaeus alluded to in "The Refutations of All Heresies" because of the naasseni association. he would have manifested both masculine/feminine qualities and not necessarily been hermaproditic but masculine in body and feminine in Spirit.


For (the Naassene) says, there is the hermaphrodite man. According to this account of theirs, the intercourse of woman with man is demonstrated, in conformity with such teaching, to be an exceedingly wicked and filthy (practice).27 For, says (the Naassene), Attis has been emasculated, that is, he has passed over from the earthly parts of the nether world to the everlasting substance above, where, he says, there is neither female or male,28 but a new creature,29 a new man, which is hermaphrodite. As to where, however, they use the expression "above," I shall show when I come to the proper place (for treating this subject).


further more


Judaism and homosexuality: A brief history

 

[Samael_Khan]

I believe that some things in the bible are culturally and historically specific and that other parts are universal

I believe God gave us the gift of reason, to help us tell what's universal and what's culturally and historically specific. I think this is a pretty mainstream view...

If Jesus was intersex (and I'm only arguing that it is possible) then I'd love to see how the authors of those letters you've quoted would react, as I don't think they'd have known

OK. I understand your viewpoint. I would think that God would have also given us our minds to help us solve problems and evolve socially. I don't think he gave us minds so that we couldn't use it to live independently.

I don't even know if the idea of someone being intersex even came into the mind of the Jews at the time as I don't see any reference to it in the Bible. I think they would be shocked because I don't think that they would think of the possibility of the Messiah being such in the first place.

 

[Augustus]

Your link is behind a paywall and I can't possibly imagine what reason anyone would have to even speculate on the question or on what basis they could ever support the idea, given the lack of reliable information about Jesus. Why not speculate that he was allergic to peanuts, red-green colour-blind or didn't like the smell of wet grass?

Some 'scholar' basically said "there is no way to prove he wasn't intersex therefore maybe he was intersex".

It is the most fiendishly erudite thesis I've ever seen, and a formidable contribution to the advancement of human intellect

 

[Katzpur]

How is it nonsensical?

Well, for starters, there is virtually zero evidence to support the notion. Zero! Honestly, sometimes I think that the only reason some people even both to post on RF is to see how worked up they can get everybody else. Topics like this serve no useful purpose. They're trolling, pure and simple.

 

[Katzpur]

There is no gender in heaven that is true. Not even intersex

How does anybody know this?

 

[columbus]

I voted the second.
"No, He certainly wasn't."

By "certainly" what I mean is simple. Had Jesus been born intersex He probably would have been offed, killed, immediately by the primitive community he was born into. It isn't utterly impossible for Jesus to have survived a few days. But it was far more likely that His parents would have left such freak out to die, or buried it alive, than raised Jesus and taken Him to the Temple. Which the Gospels clearly described.

Frankly, He couldn't even have been cis-female and the rest of the Legend of Christ be anything like true.
Tom

 

[Spirit of Light]

How does anybody know this?

For me i understood it when reading the teaching in Falun Gong, if other teachings does not say this, i do not know.

 

[crossfire]

He was male, according to scripture and the customary practices of the Jews at that time:

Luke 2:21-24

The Circumcision and Presentation of Jesus
21 When the eight days were completed for His circumcision, He was named Jesus—the name given by the angel before He was conceived. 22 And when the days of their purification according to the law of Moses were finished, they brought Him up to Jerusalem to present Him to the Lord 23 (just as it is written in the law of the Lord: Every firstborn male will be dedicated to the Lord 24 and to offer a sacrifice (according to what is stated in the law of the Lord: a pair of turtledoves or two young pigeons).​

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Some 'scholar' basically said "there is no way to prove he wasn't intersex therefore maybe he was intersex".

It is the most fiendishly erudite thesis I've ever seen, and a formidable contribution to the advancement of human intellect

It's the Ancient Aliens form of logic.

 

[1213]

An academic has raised the possibility of Jesus Christ having had an intersex condition,...

I have no reason to believe so.

 

[columbus]

I have no reason to believe so.

We don't often have reason to agree. So, I'll take this opportunity to agree with you wholeheartedly.

I see no reason to think that Jesus was anything other than male. He was a dude.

And probably celibate.
This wasn't the norm. But Jesus wasn't normal. Despite Dan Brown's blockbuster novel, it's profoundly unlikely that Jesus was just another guy.
Tom

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

The only debate to be had about his sex is concerning the virgin birth.

For a female to give birth spontaneously, the outcome must be female as only X chromosomes are available. However as Jesus successfully under went circumcision we know he was male.

It can clearly argued that either his was not a virgin birth, or that some how Mary was in fact fertilised in another way. However the Bible leaves us guessing as to how this could have actually been achieved.

I have known two Anglican priests who have said that is not "necessary" to believe in the virgin birth.
And I do not believe in magic.

 

[taykair]

How does anybody know this?

The Bible hints that those who will be resurrected from the dead will be genderless, or at least certainly be unable to procreate.

For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven. -- Matthew 22:30

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

There is no gender in heaven that is true. Not even intersex

How does anybody know this?

Travel brochures?

 

[Katzpur]

The Bible hints that those who will be resurrected from the dead will be genderless, or at least certainly be unable to procreate.

For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven. -- Matthew 22:30

Last I knew, marriage was not a prerequisite for procreation, and quite a number of married people never procreate. And concerning angels, could you please provide some biblical evidence that the angels are genderless? I'm wondering if Christians who believe in the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ think that He was somehow resurrected missing some of His male parts. Really?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Because it's a possibility, and if it were true it would radically change Christianity and how many people view God

When looking at historical figures...not just religious ones but ALL historical figures if you go back far enough...most things are 'possible'.

 

[taykair]

Last I knew, marriage was not a prerequisite for procreation, and quite a number of married people never procreate. And concerning angels, could you please provide some biblical evidence that the angels are genderless? I'm wondering if Christians who believe in the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ think that He was somehow resurrected missing some of His male parts. Really?

I'm sorry, but I can't provide you with the evidence you seek concerning the gender (or lack thereof) either of angels or of the resurrected Jesus. I only quoted the verse because it is the one that is usually cited by those who do believe in a "gender-neutral" Heaven.

And you're right, of course, about the whole marriage/procreation thing -- although it still seems rather odd, all those single angels...

...wait a minute! Some of those angels weren't always single, and they were definitely male:

That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. -- Genesis 6:24)

 

[blü 2]

An academic has raised the possibility of Jesus Christ having had an intersex condition, of having inside lady parts:

The answer depends on which of the five principal Jesuses of the NT you're talking about.

1. The gnostic-flavored Jesus of Paul pre-existed in heaven with God, created the material universe, and was born of a Jewish woman of the line of David. The question of who fathered Paul's Jesus is never discussed; it may have been the woman's Jewish husband, since there's no suggestion otherwise. I see no need to wonder about hermaphroditism there.

2. The next Jesus we meet is that of Mark. Mark's Jesus is an ordinary Jew with ordinary parentage, not of the line of David, who did not become the son of God until God adopted him when he was baptized by JtB, in the manner God had earlier adopted David as his son in Psalm 2:7 (and see Acts 13:33). No problem there either.

3 - 4. Then we meet the Jesuses of Matthew and of Luke. Neither pre-existed in heaven. In Matthew, Mary is implied to have been a virgin at the time of conception. In Luke she's expressly a virgin.

Here there are two possibilities. The obvious one is that since Mary conceived (in both cases) as the result of an act of the Holy Ghost, that act was divine insemination, meaning that Jesus had, at the very least, God's Y-chromosome, or, a Y-chromosome devised by God for the purpose. Again, no problem there.

The second possibility is that Jesus was conceived solely by operations within the genetics of his mother ─ true parthenogenesis. But in that case he would have been genetically female, not a 'he' at all, unless we further suppose a faulty process leading to an appearance of hermaphroditism. (An article on mammalian parthenogenesis, relevant to humans, is >here<.)

(However, Luke's Jesus (4:23) says ""Doubtless you will quote me the proverb, 'Physician, heal thyself'". This can be read as implying that Jesus had some visible defect or deformity; and if you take that view, then you could argue that the deformity was hermaphroditism. That isn't my view, but it's as close as I can get to an argument for it.)

5. That leaves the gnostic-flavored Jesus of John, who like Paul's Jesus pre-existed in heaven with God, made the material universe, and 'was made flesh' and was of the line of David, which strongly suggests he was born of Jewish parents. So, like Paul's Jesus, John's Jesus apparently raises no question of hermaphroditism.


Of course, if we leave out the supernatural elements, and we assume there was indeed an historical Jesus and that he's to some relevant extent the Jesus on which the five versions above are based, then I see no need to assume anything hermaphroditic about him at all. He would have been born of Jewish parents and the odds of hermaphroditism being involved would be as small as they are in real life.