Would we view the Crusifixion any differently if the Savior was a woman? Let's through a hypothetical savior out there and see what happens..
Christina ( as good as any other name ) was the one that went to the people and preached the will of God, Christina was the one that was almost whipped to death, and was later crusified. Would a mental image of a woman being put through this any different than a man in the same?
Remember, hypothetical question....
2006-10-15
06:31:43
·
17 answers
·
asked by
Odindmar
5
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
Okay, yes. I understand that back then, a woman preaching the gospel is ubserd. But the question of more towards, if our savior was a woman, how would it affect our church today? Purely hypothetical.
2006-10-15
06:51:46 ·
update #1
"Love spreads her arms, waits there for the nails
I forgive you, boy, I will prevail"
"Let me put you in the picture, let me show you what I mean
The messiah is my sister, aint no king man, she's my queen"
(Well, i put more faith in the Stone Roses than the bible so in my world you're really on to something)
Good question. The history would've been something really different, and maybe also women's position trough out history and in the world today. However, the sad part is that it's a man's word, and indeed back than. If there was a Christina, maybe the Christianity never would have set off. Or maybe there was a Christina: "what an inappropriate thing! let's say it was a boy instead!" All the wise men cried and rewrote the history books as if it was a man instead. "there there, no harm done".
2006-10-15 11:32:52
·
answer #1
·
answered by johanna m 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Fascinating question and I think the answer is that there would either be no Christians or the world would be completely unrecognizable. Why? Because western society is built on Christianity as a foundation (mostly the Catholic Church from the early days) and the church would have not had the effect it had on Europe if it focused only on a woman. In fact, the Church was agressively patriachal then and even the protestants keep that going today.
However, I think that aggression is what provided the church with its success in converting Europe and the Americas. I think that if a woman was the messiah, most of us would be Muslim today as the Muslim aggression would have no counter during the time of the crusades.
Its a sad, but the treatment of the sexes was simply not equal enough to allow such a change.
2006-10-15 15:26:06
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I don't know, good question. Since we ALL have sinned and are in need of a Savior then I guess whoever God provided would be ok. The Bible says that God is not a man, but that He is Spirit. So basically Jesus is the body of God. Since God is not a man he could come down into the body of a woman as well, but He did choose a man which was Jesus. That is why Jesus is 100% God and 100% man.
2006-10-15 06:37:20
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
There were some women who spoke about Jesus back then.
Also, since God states in the Bible that He created us "in His own Image", that would include females.
When I think of an image of God, I see everyone included in His Image that are all of the different colors of skin and both sexes.
I don't see God as just being male.
2006-10-15 07:10:56
·
answer #4
·
answered by Big Bear 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
no I don't believ so, and because of the way life was back then and how they thought of women they treated and did to woman much worse than what was done to Jesus. So to me it would have the same effect on me if it was man or woman, but of course the bible says Jesus was male. I know you said hypothetical, I just had to throw that in, Interesting question though.
2006-10-15 06:34:34
·
answer #5
·
answered by Barbara C 6
·
3⤊
0⤋
there's a ingredient referred to as "certainty" and that i've got chanced on that the only solid source of suited certainty is the Bible. maximum Protestant ministers do no longer instruct the completed Bible, in simple terms the climate that greater healthy their very own private ideals. The Catholic Church has issues incorrect with it notwithstanding that is actual teachings are greater Bible based than maximum if no longer all Protestant church homes. it quite is typically had to show out Ministers and church homes that instruct severe blunders yet various the time it quite is sufficient to declare the reality and enable the shoe greater healthy whoever wears it. i do no longer ought to criticize Atheists basically talk the reality and what Atheists have self assurance and instruct would be shown to be blunders; and the reality of God and the reality of the Bible would be seen to be certainty.
2016-10-19 10:46:41
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
i believe it had to be a man because women have not always been respected. basically this is a mans world with a male God and a male savior. but people are quick to forget we are all made in GODS image
2006-10-15 06:37:43
·
answer #7
·
answered by Peace 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
I would still follow her but I suspect that many men would not today and none would have then. Back in that time if a woman went around independant of her famiily she would have been considered a whore or a harlot. It was not seemly.
2006-10-15 06:34:25
·
answer #8
·
answered by Debra M. Wishing Peace To All 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
I think cristina would have female apostles and female people who will continue the church. This means that every mass their is a chick standing in front of you. This also means that Christianity would really have a lot of followers...
2006-10-15 06:37:01
·
answer #9
·
answered by Screwdriver 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
Women weren't crucified they were stoned so the symbolism would be different for one thing. Christians would worship a lump of rock instead of a cross.
2006-10-15 06:34:44
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋