This post comes up every so often, and every time either I, or someone else, reminds people that one of the Bible’s biggest stories is that of Jesus washing Mary Magdalene’s feet. Mary Magdalene was a “street walker” at the time, which is old times speak for hooker, thus making him a feet guy
Maybe it was like a Tarentino thing. You work with this guy for years and feet keep coming up so one day you ask him and he’s like “yeah ok, I’ve got a foot thing but it’s a personal thing” and you leave it at that but then you remember at the start of your career doing foot photos with him and you’re too embarrassed to ask but you always wonder…
No, washing feet was a common thing - they wore sandals or walked barefoot most of the time, it was a common hygiene practice. It was just a task for “submissive”-classed people - the wife would wash the husband’s feet, and so on.
Jesus was subverting social norms in multiple ways.
Agreed he had an obsession with washing peoples feet. As I see it, as an evolved and enlightened human he was probably a pan sexual with a feet washing fetish
In short, feet might mean genitalia.
I really have no opinion on it, but it makes a lot of sense. The purpose of even describing the submissive act of washing feet aligns well with the old Greek teacher and pupil relationships to present Jesus as a stand up guy who will go down on anybody, men or women, regardless of their status. He took your sins and such.
The message is the same anyway, so I suppose it has been whitewashed a bit throughout the years.
The reason why I want to believe it is that it would also explain why he was so popular that contemporary writers would bother writing anything about him.
You gotta be careful though, because the Bible basically called every woman that is featured in it a whore. A lot of this is actually more modern translation stuff, clerics of the dark ages loved adding whore to ever female description
There’s nothing that points to Mary Magdalene being a prostitute. She’s conflated with another character who was, but they aren’t directly connected in the text.
This post comes up every so often, and every time either I, or someone else, reminds people that one of the Bible’s biggest stories is that of Jesus washing Mary Magdalene’s feet. Mary Magdalene was a “street walker” at the time, which is old times speak for hooker, thus making him a feet guy
He washed all the disciples feet ;)
Maybe it was like a Tarentino thing. You work with this guy for years and feet keep coming up so one day you ask him and he’s like “yeah ok, I’ve got a foot thing but it’s a personal thing” and you leave it at that but then you remember at the start of your career doing foot photos with him and you’re too embarrassed to ask but you always wonder…
No, washing feet was a common thing - they wore sandals or walked barefoot most of the time, it was a common hygiene practice. It was just a task for “submissive”-classed people - the wife would wash the husband’s feet, and so on.
Jesus was subverting social norms in multiple ways.
So what you’re saying is… Jesus was a bottom.
Service sub
Jesus seemed like a great dude. Shame that none of his followers pay attention to the lessons he taught.
I know I just thought it was funny
Agreed he had an obsession with washing peoples feet. As I see it, as an evolved and enlightened human he was probably a pan sexual with a feet washing fetish
There are claims that the translation of the bible is wrong on this though.
https://bycommonconsent.com/2006/01/24/weird-ot-euphemisms-uncovering-the-feet/#:~:text=A good example of this,part of a euphemistic expression.)
In short, feet might mean genitalia. I really have no opinion on it, but it makes a lot of sense. The purpose of even describing the submissive act of washing feet aligns well with the old Greek teacher and pupil relationships to present Jesus as a stand up guy who will go down on anybody, men or women, regardless of their status. He took your sins and such.
The message is the same anyway, so I suppose it has been whitewashed a bit throughout the years.
The reason why I want to believe it is that it would also explain why he was so popular that contemporary writers would bother writing anything about him.
Dan McClellan has a good breakdown of why that is extremely unlikely.
This sounds heretic as fuck so I’m gonna roll with it
You gotta be careful though, because the Bible basically called every woman that is featured in it a whore. A lot of this is actually more modern translation stuff, clerics of the dark ages loved adding whore to ever female description
clerics when they see a woman:
Holy shit they were based in 500 AD?
There’s nothing that points to Mary Magdalene being a prostitute. She’s conflated with another character who was, but they aren’t directly connected in the text.