100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Was Jesus Gay? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Even if Jesus was gay, what would that change about his over all message? People need to let go of their homophobia long enough to realize that gay is not a bad thing. It is only one form of love. My concern would be that the text said it was a "boy" and that would make him a pediphile, now that I would agree would make him a bad guy. Jesus' overall message is of peace, love and light  regardless of sexual orientation
People need to get over the gay thing, who cares, they are just people like anyone else My point exactly  
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dude, you need some serious help. I suggest you seek help at a church.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Secret Gospel is a forgery, that is accepted as fact by all but the most liberal of scholars. So now we attack the source ... cool That is not the point of the debate. Although I have no issue with this, if what you say is true, then thats fine. Im not arguing its validity. So, its almost a pre-dated Da Vinci code then. But Was Jesus Gay? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But, ok, lets say he is straight ... prove it to me Quote me chapter and verse where it definitively proves he is straight Wow, that's stupid. Par for course around here, but still really really stupid. and now we have the religious intolerance ... cant provide proof when requested so obviously IM STUPID |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dude, you need some serious help. I suggest you seek help at a church. Wanna come to church with me, D I'll take you if you want. lying in bed on a Sunday morning screaming "oh god!" doesn't make it church 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dude, you need some serious help. I suggest you seek help at a church. Wanna come to church with me, D I'll take you if you want. lying in bed on a Sunday morning screaming "oh god!" doesn't make it church
No, but the 3 flights of steps to my boudoir would be a "Stairway to Heaven" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Secret Gospel is a forgery, that is accepted as fact by all but the most liberal of scholars. So now we attack the source ... cool That is not the point of the debate. Although I have no issue with this, if what you say is true, then thats fine. Im not arguing its validity. So, its almost a pre-dated Da Vinci code then. But Was Jesus Gay? You actually have the balls to complain that someone attacked a forgery? 
That's awesome man. You rock. "How dare you question an obvious forgery!"
That is not the point of the debate. It's not? Seems like it's the heart of the debate. Your evidence that Jesus is gay is an obvious forgery, that seems kinda relavant. No, Jesus wasn't gay. He wasn't capital G gay either. Jesus is never mentioned having sexual relations with anyone or being promised to anyone. There is no evidence to support your position, so you demand that we supply evidence to support ours? How about the gospels? None of them mention a girlfriend or wife. Jesus commanded his mother into the care of John, but he didn't care about the woman he was plooking? Come on man, get a grip!
I'm tired of you, enjoy your evening. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dude, you need some serious help. I suggest you seek help at a church. Wanna come to church with me, D I'll take you if you want. lying in bed on a Sunday morning screaming "oh god!" doesn't make it church
No, but the 3 flights of steps to my boudoir would be a "Stairway to Heaven" right on 15 seconds of glory 
you're not stupid, btw, i doubt proof will or can be provided for this thread. this is mostly based on speculation and theory but i am pretty sure i and other Christian people would doubt this, i don't deny the possibility, just the bible as we know it today portrays Jesus in a asexual way |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In John a term is used that means 'is in love with' with the implication of sexual intimacy.
5 times it is used to define Jesus' relationship with John. One time it is with reference to Jesus' relationship with Lazarus. And it is also used to describe his relationship with Martha and with her sister Mary. So, would it sit better if he was bi sexual then? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Secret Gospel is a forgery, that is accepted as fact by all but the most liberal of scholars. So now we attack the source ... cool That is not the point of the debate. Although I have no issue with this, if what you say is true, then thats fine. Im not arguing its validity. So, its almost a pre-dated Da Vinci code then. But Was Jesus Gay? Jesus was but a man so naturally he was sexual. Human beings are sexual. I am sure that any and all of the sexual references in the texts were altered to make him as pure as possible for the original intention of the text and his stature as the son of god. That does not make it truth, it makes it par for course with a man made religion that was designed by men to acheive a goal, control. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Belushi
on
Thu 05/22/08 04:52 PM
|
|
The Secret Gospel is a forgery, that is an accepted fact by all but the most liberal of scholars. I forgot this bit ... sorry ... I missed my "questioning the source" line In 1980, Thomas Talley, a Professor from the General Theological Seminary in New York City visited the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate Library in Jerusalem. While there, a priest, Archimandrite Melito, stated that he had taken Clement's letter (or perhaps the Voss 1646 book with the letter intact) from Hagios Sabbas to the Jerusalem library.
The librarian, Archimandrite Kallistos Dourvas, confirmed this, but said that it was being repaired and was not available for inspection. So, proof that it did exist was provided by an Archmandrite ... and Spider, I wasnt complaining, I was ready for this line of questioning. As you are tired of me, then I take it I wont be on your Pagan Holiday card list anymore? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In John a term is used that means 'is in love with' with the implication of sexual intimacy. 5 times it is used to define Jesus' relationship with John. One time it is with reference to Jesus' relationship with Lazarus. And it is also used to describe his relationship with Martha and with her sister Mary. So, would it sit better if he was bi sexual then? Religions are what made sex "dirty" in the first place. Sex was and is a natural thing for us to do. Man made religions are the ones who put this into a bad light. It would make sense that they were having sex back then. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
right on 15 seconds of glory
Hmmm ... Hallelujah! you're not stupid, btw, i doubt proof will or can be provided for this thread. this is mostly based on speculation and theory but i am pretty sure i and other Christian people would doubt this, i don't deny the possibility, just the bible as we know it today portrays Jesus in a asexual way The New Testament is an anthology of stories - man made ones at that. Some of them can be debated and some like this have to be denied or the fabric of society will crumble around our ears. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Even if Jesus was gay, what would that change about his over all message? People need to let go of their homophobia long enough to realize that gay is not a bad thing. It is only one form of love. My concern would be that the text said it was a "boy" and that would make him a pediphile, now that I would agree would make him a bad guy. Well Dragoness if he was gay and people have been going on and on about the Bible saying homosexuality is an abomination ,don't you think that would be a hoot?i mean think about it..
Well and considering the original of these texts was used by king James and then most of them destroyed after he took what he wanted and discarded the rest, we will never know for sure but I still stand on the premise how does it change his word? It doesn't but it sure would give a lot of people egg facials. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It doesn't but it sure would give a lot of people egg facials. ... and how do you like your eggs in the morning? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Secret Gospel is a forgery, that is an accepted fact by all but the most liberal of scholars. I forgot this bit ... sorry ... I missed my "questioning the source" line In 1980, Thomas Talley, a Professor from the General Theological Seminary in New York City visited the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate Library in Jerusalem. While there, a priest, Archimandrite Melito, stated that he had taken Clement's letter (or perhaps the Voss 1646 book with the letter intact) from Hagios Sabbas to the Jerusalem library.
The librarian, Archimandrite Kallistos Dourvas, confirmed this, but said that it was being repaired and was not available for inspection. So, proof that it did exist was provided by an Archmandrite Yes...a librarian who cut the pages out of an old book and then lost them. Makes perfect sense to me. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Even if Jesus was gay, what would that change about his over all message? People need to let go of their homophobia long enough to realize that gay is not a bad thing. It is only one form of love. My concern would be that the text said it was a "boy" and that would make him a pediphile, now that I would agree would make him a bad guy. Well Dragoness if he was gay and people have been going on and on about the Bible saying homosexuality is an abomination ,don't you think that would be a hoot?i mean think about it..
Well and considering the original of these texts was used by king James and then most of them destroyed after he took what he wanted and discarded the rest, we will never know for sure but I still stand on the premise how does it change his word? It doesn't but it sure would give a lot of people egg facials. And that is the sad part to me, why can't they let go of the homophobia and accept the differences of people. Who a person has sex with, unless it is a child, is of no importance to anyone else in the whole world except the person or people the person is having sex with. Why do the religious feel they have the right to judge others based on their sex life anyway???  
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Belushi
on
Thu 05/22/08 05:07 PM
|
|
The Secret Gospel is a forgery, that is an accepted fact by all but the most liberal of scholars. I forgot this bit ... sorry ... I missed my "questioning the source" line In 1980, Thomas Talley, a Professor from the General Theological Seminary in New York City visited the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate Library in Jerusalem. While there, a priest, Archimandrite Melito, stated that he had taken Clement's letter (or perhaps the Voss 1646 book with the letter intact) from Hagios Sabbas to the Jerusalem library.
The librarian, Archimandrite Kallistos Dourvas, confirmed this, but said that it was being repaired and was not available for inspection. So, proof that it did exist was provided by an Archmandrite Yes...a librarian who cut the pages out of an old book and then lost them. Makes perfect sense to me. Quite similar to your "worshipping" a non-entity makes perfect sense to me, I guess. But I provided you with three different people who have seen this ... You still fail to provide me with the proof I request. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quite similar to your "worshipping" a non-entity makes perfect sense to me, I guess. Oh my...my night is ruin! You have hurt my feelings! I really care what a jaded, biased atheist thinks. Oh dear...oh dear...
A Librarian probably wouldn't cut pages out of a book and a librarian definitly wouldn't cut out pages from a book and then lose the pages. Maybe it's your arguments that are gay, because they certainly suck. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe it's your arguments that are gay, because they certainly suck.
What a very Christian view you sport there .. Here is more evidence of the document existing ... During the 1990s, Kallistos told Professor Nikolaos Olympiou, a Professor of Old Testament at the University of Athens, that he, Kallistos, had removed the letter of Clement from the book shortly after he received the book into the Patriarchate library. Kallistos later gave color photographs of the letter to Olympiou. Professor Olympiou speculated that the missing Clement letter was concealed by someone at the library for religious reasons. NO! A conspiracy? The Church? Never! There is visual evidence that the photographs of Clement's letter were once in the Voss edition. A small circular discoloration appears on the last page of the book. A matching discoloration is found on the first page of the letter. Still waiting for yours by the way ... |
|
|
|
|
