Was Jesus Gay?

[Zhade]

Poll question: Was Jesus Gay?

There seems to be some possibility to the idea, what do the biblical and historical scholars here think?

Sure would make the fundies scream if it were true, eh?

[HEyHEY]

1. There's only one answer Zhade...

How the FUCK should I know!?

;-)

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Zhade]

3. Hey, I'm bisexual and I'm pretty scruffy.

NT!

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Zhade]

10. You know, that's not that funny.

Actually, it's kind of insulting.

I know you don't mean to be, but it is. We're just in-between, and can go either way. Gender's not an issue. It's not about wanting it all (though I know I've heard THAT one a million times).

But again, I know you weren't trying to be insulting, so don't feel too horrible about it. I'll live. :)

[Chipper Chat]

4. My opinion - he was omnisexual.

But if you want to get a rise out of any fundie - just suggest that He was gay. They go berserk!

[tuvor]

9. I'm sure the same'll happen if you tell a Muslim the same about Mohammed.

[Zhade]

12. What does that infer?

I'm not sure I understand the term "omnisexual", but I'm always interested in learning. Can you expand on that a bit?

[Chipper Chat]

30. Well, I was hoping no one would ask....

I meant He was probably "all-knowing, all-feeling, capable of universal feeling, all-caring (sexual and non-sexual), etc:
Maybe a better word would be "pan-sexual."
Of course He was "all-loving" and would never discriminate against anyone who would explore sexuality - contrary to those red-faced fundie preachers (hell & damnation) who rant & rave against anything but the missionary position with your spouse and only once a month for the purpose of procreation.

[Deja Q]

99. Omnisexual? Well, that can be taken in a lot of ways!

Pun semi-intended.

Man on man lovin'.

Man on woman lovin'.

Man on toaster lovin'.

Man on cantaloupe lovin'.

:evilgrin:

[renaissanceguy]

152. The fundies won't even acknowledge his ethnicity.

Next time a fundie tells you we should nuke the whole Middle East (they say it PLENTY)....ask them if they would bomb Jesus since he lived there?


-----------------------------------------------
JESUS W. BUSH has arrived! Outspoken and hilarious political merchandise at www.cafepress.com/liberalissues

[tuvor]

6. Other: Who cares?

[AngryWhiteLiberal]

7. Looks like a Goddamned pinko liberal hippy to me...

The real son of gOD would have had a shit-kicker crew cut, denim work shirt, and a Ford SUV.

JB

[orpupilofnature57]

13. nah you had it first blush, liberal hippie, first thing i liked about him,

second thing was telling people to pity Cesar,what a concept,cool.

[orpupilofnature57]

8. Not that he was asexual,there is no mention of his sexual,political

Or for that matter religious desire, in fact he ridiculed the pomp of religion.

[okasha]

11. Just my personal opinion

He was Mr. Mary Magdalene. But a number of Christian mystics, eg. St. Aelred, referred to the relationship between Jesus and the Beloved Disciple as a "spiritual marriage," so who knows?

Okasha

[orpupilofnature57]

17. Christian mystic?

[WillyT]

14. Well... One Of His Best Buds Was A Hooker !!!

I've always admired Jesus for that. But Gay??? I have no idea.

Not that there's any thing wrong with that. :evilgrin:

:shrug:

[autorank]

26. Hey, she's no hooker, she's my virgin.

:grr:

[WillyT]

27. Hey Man... I Don't Have Anything Against Virgins !!!

:evilgrin:

[autorank]

31. And I don't have anything against hookers. We're cool.

[cally]

37. Are you referring to Mary Magdalene?

She was not a hooker. Instead, the church fathers in about 300 created the myth to villify her because they were uncomfortable with her teachings and relationship to Jesus. They didn't like a woman having that power.

I think she was a disciple and possibly his wife. BTW, many women funded Jesus' travels.

[Zhade]

45. AHA! PROOF!

Jesus must have been gay, because some of his best supporters were women!

(It's a joke, people.)

[WillyT]

51. Oh Great... Another Favorite Myth Of Mine, Knocked Down !!!

Next you're gonna tell me there ain't no Santa Claus!

:hi::evilgrin::hi:

[cally]

61. Pssst...there is not a Santa Claus

:hi: Willy. I hope all is well.

[superconnected]

115. if you looked at your history

you'd find he's an actual historical figure.

Wether or not he is the Messiah is the question.

[WillyT]

128. Santa Claus... The Messiah ??? - I Had No Idea !!!

:shrug:

[phylny]

149. Cally, can you cite a reference for this info?

I find it very interesting, and have never heard it before. I'm not challenging you, I'm actually intrigued.

Thanks!

[Razorback_Democrat]

47. Actually Mary Magdeline as "hooker" was a planted story by an early pope

there is no biblical evidence that Mary Magdaline was an ex-prostitute, in fact, she was probably a woman of means and a devoted follower as she supported his ministry materially as well as emotionally and spiritually.

[K-W]

64. There is good reason to believe she was an apostle.

Who was edited out of christian theology.

[WillyT]

104. Well... At Least She Was\Is A Woman Of Mystery !!!

I like that.

:shrug:

[Zhade]

15. Hmmm. I just realized a flaw with this poll.

Those who despise Christianity (I don't, just some of its followers) might just vote "Yes" to piss off Christian DUers.

SO! Please, if you vote, offer a reason for your vote. I'm interested in scholarship, not an easy Christian-bashing poll (which was honestly NEVER my intention).

[Jesus H. Christ]

16. That's OK.

It's counteracted by people who vote "No" just because they despise homosexuals.

[Zhade]

21. Touche! Thanks, Dr. J!

(Wait, was he a doctor...?)

[Lone Pawn]

70. I have a feeling the homophobes

are likely covert freepers, and as such would vote "yes" so as to make DU look like a bunch of heathen philistines mocking their God, link to this thread, and use it to 'prove' Liberals Hate God, because there is obviously no greater insult to say the only sinless man was gay.

[Zhade]

165. Sadly, it seems some of the people who think "gay" is an insult...

...are long-term DUers.

[orpupilofnature57]

Rather be hated by demo's, than excepted by shrubers,

[orpupilofnature57]

Rather be hated by demo's, than excepted by shrubers,

[orpupilofnature57]

19. Rather be hated by demo's, than excepted by shrubers,

[orpupilofnature57]

Rather be hated by demo's, than excepted by shrubers,

[orpupilofnature57]

20. Rather be hated by demo's, than excepted by shrubers,

[JerseygirlCT]

18. Not to sound too snarky, but does it really matter?

Would anything he taught have been different?

I think not.

[Zhade]

22. Only in one tangible way.

They could never claim homosexuality to be a sin (as they wrongly do based on misinterpreting the OLD Testament) if Jesus were bi or gay.

Of course, they might white-wash that, had he been gay (perhaps they already did).

[JerseygirlCT]

100. Well, that's just it, isn't it?

the same guys who've written, translated, and edited the bible would surely have taken any bit of that out, because it didn't fit with their preconceived notions. Much like women are relegated to secondary or even tertiary status... and like that's been used even to this day to keep women down.

I think if one looks at the real message, there is no possible way to continue prejudice and hatred for gays or women or anyone, really. But that's so much harder to do!

[ProdigalJunkMail]

23. how could ANYONE here answer at all?

I understand the point of theorizing over this...but, come on, people are saying he WAS or WAS NOT gay based on what? The fact that he loved one of his disciples? I think there is a good bit more to suggest that he and Mary M. were married (or at least involved)...why post a question that cannot be answered by anyone, anywhere? This is worse than a CNN poll question of the day...or IS it the CNN poll question of the day?

theProdigal

[orpupilofnature57]

28. there is not one iota of a reference to Jesus and sex ,not one

Or that he loved Mary m any differently than Judas Iscariot.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

29. i agree...at least in the texts we have regular access to

but I am simply pointing out the futility of asking such an asinine question...there is no way to back up an answer either way. Mary M is the only woman widely mentioned in the Gospels and therefor had a special place amongst Jesus' followers...and you'll find less to support that he was gay.

theProdigal

[AliciaKeyedUp]

85. Why worry about facts

This is all about opinion and trying to piss off Christians.

[Telly Savalas]

98. And what better way to advance the progressive agenda...

than to piss off liberal Christians.

[Behind the Aegis]

109. Seems today, everything piss some Christians off!

Does this piss you off because of the "gay" question? Or is it that implies Jesus was a sexual being?

[ProdigalJunkMail]

111. some would consider it flame bait

because it asks a question that cannot be answered...ever. There is nothing in any writings that have been found that indicate that Jesus was gay...so why even ask unless you are trying to inflame? A good question to ask, IMHO, would be, "Would your beliefs be changed if it turned out that Jesus was gay?" The logic of people trying to answer whether or not he was gay kind of blows my mind...since it cannot be proven in either direction...

theProdigal

[Behind the Aegis]

112. Nice reply!

I just wonder if there would be such "outrage" if the question was "Was Jesus married and a father?" One can't "prove" that either. I can see how it could be seen as flamebait...but to me, it is just an interesting question! BTW, I like reading your posts! :)

[ProdigalJunkMail]

144. the ONLY reason I see flames

is because of the logic of the question. It is indeed interesting to posit that he might have been gay and what would be the repurcussions of that. I have many times considered that he MIGHT have been married and could have fathered children...but the children thing seems like a stretch to me...if he had fathered children I think there would have been something written about them and it would have been discovered by now...it's just too big to NOT be in SOMETHING, somewhere.

Ok...back to sleep...the rain has slowed enough that it doesn't sound like a flood any longer...

theProdigal

[AliciaKeyedUp]

118. I don't want Christ used to make a political point

That is wildly untrue.

The same goes when neocons use him, but I don't post there to tell them so.

[Behind the Aegis]

140. Out of curiousity....

How does asking if Jesus was gay make a political point? And, how does anyone know if it is true or not? Would it make a difference if it were discovered he was gay?

[Kathy in Cambridge]

141. I think in this case

*ahem* you know he answer to that!

[Behind the Aegis]

143. Alas....we meet again! :)

Some how, I think you may be correct.

[AliciaKeyedUp]

150. It was intended to promote gay marriage (a political point)

Though I support gay marriage, I oppose using Christ to do it.

If Christ were gay, yes it would in effect promote homosexuality. Since hundreds of millions of people aspire to live Christ-like lives, that would suddenly be a part. And there is no evidence, none that it is true.

[Behind the Aegis]

158. Jumping to conclusions

How does this thread promote gay marriage? If Jesus was gay it would no more promote 'gayness' than his being straight promotes heterosexuality! While there is no evidence he was gay, there is also no evidence he was not gay. Would it really matter?

[AliciaKeyedUp]

187. Of course it would matter if Jesus had been gay

Christians try to emulate Christ as much as possible.

I love your comment, there is no evidence he was not gay. You could say that about everyone. It's complete BS.

This is left doing what people bitch about the right doing -- trying to use Christ for political purposes.

[Behind the Aegis]

189. If that is true...

...then why are so many Christians married? According to most Christians, Jesus never married. Seems that many do not emulate that aspect of his life. So it is kind of disingenuous to say they would try being gay because Jesus was. The ONLY thing that would come from that (his being gay) would possibly be more understanding of gay people...but that may not even be true because you see how some Christians treat Jews and dark-skinned folks!

As for This is left doing what people bitch about the right doing -- trying to use Christ for political purposes, I am glad that Christians on the Left have finally started using Jesus! The difference? The left uses his works and his message for society's betterment....the right...use (misuse, which is blasphemy) his name to corrupt and deny others' basic rights and human dignity!

So to all you Lefty Christians...show off Jesus for the liberal he was!!!

[AliciaKeyedUp]

190. I don't want anyone to USE Christ

That's offensive to me. To do good works is great. To use him for political gain is wrong.

Christ didn't marry, but that was not his mission here on earth. However, had he been actively gay, that would certainly have had an impact on the view of marriage and heterosexuality.

[Zhade]

191. Please define "actively gay".

One does not have to be sexually active to BE gay. One can be celibate for life, and this does not change the fact they were born gay.

As far as Christ not marrying, there's some evidence he may have. See elsewhere on this thread.

[Zhade]

164. So a queer guy like me asking this is equivalent to a neocon?

How exactly can you even assume I'm "making a political point"? Got any evidence besides your inflamed sense of self-righteousness?

[AliciaKeyedUp]

188. It's trying to promote gay marriage

It's not part of some faith-based discussion of the almighty.

Neither side should try to coopt Christ to score political points.

[Zhade]

192. Please illustrate where I pushed equal rights for gays here.

I fully support equal rights for all, including gay marriage, but you're not going to find one bit of evidence outside the projection in your own mind that I was promoting such.

I was speaking of Jesus, period. Feel free to misinterpret that however you like, but expect me to say you're totally wrong in your assumptions.

[Enraged_Ape]

90. In one of the books of the Apocrypha...

(and I'm sorry, but I can't remember which one), one of Jesus's disciples complains about how much time Jesus spends with Mary Magdalene and how he kisses her on the mouth. Another apostle explains that Jesus loves her in a different way from the rest of them, but not necessarily more.

I'm pretty convinced that Jesus and Mary were shacked up, and it doesn't bother me a bit.

[orpupilofnature57]

105. Book's of what,about who apocrypha... ?????

[Solon]

180. One of the Gnostic texts, called the Book of Mary(Magdelene)...

that was precisely the complaint too...of course the whole fall of Satan out of heaven was from another apocryphal text, the Book of Tobit(I think) of the Old Testament.

[RUDUing2]

197. The Bible only contains a small portion of the books written about Jesus

and the disciples, etc.

The Council of Hippo decided what books were included based on the message they wanted to present this was confirmed by the Council of Nicaea..any that deviated from the *approved* message were not included (often called "The lost books of the Bible). However most of the books/writings were not destroyed (the Vatican Library has most of them)...one exception was the The Gospel of St. Peter which was almost entirely destroyed (wonder just what it contained?)..

for more info on this: http://gbgm-umc.org/umw/bible/canonselect.html
http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhl.html
http://webpages.marshall.edu/~wiley6/gnos.html
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/144/story_14483_1.html
http://altreligion.about.com/od/gnosticscriptures1/

(while these books are sometimes referred to as apocryphal that term is also used by protestants in reference to the deuterocanicals of the OT that are included in the Catholic version but not in the Proty one)..

[MrSlayer]

24. No.

But it would be funny.

[autorank]

25. Nah, nothing to it!

It's f'ing Xmas folks, a little respect. Although thinking Jeebus is gay isn't a sign of disrespect. This thread confuses me. Who cares?

[Nikia]

32. I think that the official position is that he was celibate

Some people have used scripture along with background information from the era to suggest that he may have been married. As far as his relationship to his disciples, we can impose our culture on his culture. For example, there was a stronger Platonic friendship culture then than there is in modern America. In not all cultures does a relationship have to be sexual in order for it to be close and even closest emotionally.

[Zhade]

40. Of course, you don't have to have sex to BE gay.

NT!

[genieroze]

33. I said no, but I could be wrong.

I always thought of Jesus to be above that. Basically non sexual.

[donheld]

36. I would think if he was "tempted in all points like we are"

he would have to had to have some kind of sexual feelings.

[Undercover Owl]

146. I agree

Jesus was exempt from sexual desire.

[lgardengate]

34. The scripture presents only the impression that Jesus was

celebate.There is not one hint of anything but close friendship (a teacher/student relationship really)between Jesus and Mary M. and John and the other deciples.
What the scriptures DO teach is that he was a preacher/teacher who traveled with his students.They called him "Master" and "rabbi",and he spoke about loving God,each other,and turning away from sin,And he healed people.

[Zhade]

41. Ah, but what scriptures? Many originals were tossed.

NT!

[lgardengate]

68. Your speaking of the Gnostic bible

I didn't consider that in my answer because although the books are interesting (i've read them) they do not fit with the accepted scriptures.That was why they were left out.There was a sect of "believers" that mixed legalism,mysticism,and greek philosophy.As far back as the book of Clolossians the early church leaders were fighting what later became known as gnosticism.It tought that salvation could only be obtained through"speical knowledge".
Later the Gnostic "bible" was written. Interesting but not really scripture IMO.

[infusionman]

35. Five Things about a Jewish Father

There were Five things a Jewish father had to do for his son:

Circumcise him.

Redeem him.

Teach him the Torah.

Teach him a trade.

Find him a wife.

In the matter of Jesus, the first four we know were accomplished. It is Biblical. It's Possible Jesus could have taken a wife, especially if he followed Torah. It's also possible and more likely Jesus did not take a wife especially since Joseph, Jesus'earthly Father probably died before Jesus reached adulthood. The Bible is silent about the death of Joseph and also the possibility Jesus had a wife.

In my opinion therefore, those matters are irrelevant to what Jesus was about.

This notion about Jesus being Gay is offensive and not true, as the Torah says being gay is an abomination, and Jesus followed the Torah.

Incidentally: When Jesus was born, the TORAH became FLESH.

[Zhade]

43. It was always my informed understanding that Jesus REPLACED the OT.

In other words, his way was the way to follow, not the old Leviticus laws (such as not cutting your hair, and slavery was A-Okay).

And, as you well know, Jesus never condemned homosexuality, or indeed ever mentioned it to my knowledge.

[lgardengate]

69. Jesus said he did Not come to obolish the law or the prophets

but to fullfil them.And yes,Jesus Did follow Torah.If you read the new testement it is clear that he did.He also whore the prayer shall of the Jewish male etc.

[infusionman]

132. Jesus did not come into the world to change the Law (Torah)

He came to fulfill it.

[MattBaggins]

50. Why is it offensive?

[Zhade]

58. Because fags are bad? (I'm queer. I can say it.)

</sarcasm>

[Bluebear]

76. God do I hate "fag" and "queer".

[Undercover Owl]

133. I thought gays use those terms themselves....

Don't gays regularly refer to themselves as queer?

[sui generis]

195. correct -

it takes away the power of those words to hurt. Also by and large, it's always very apparent when somebody is using it in a hateful way, which really makes them look like they're from the shallow end of the gene pool. It's an informal form of speech among friends and trusteds.

[RUDUing2]

97. because it is using homosexuality as an insult and as a way to

try and denigate somebody. It is both an insult to christians and an insult to homosexuals.

[infusionman]

102. That's entirely right

[Boosterman]

113. that I will buy. n/t

[noiretextatique]

121. seems like you're projecting

where is the "insult" in the original post?

[infusionman]

131. I did not say it was an insult...

I said the statement was offensive.

I'm not ever going to try to stop someone from voicing their opinion.
When someone says Was Jesus gay?, my very nature calls me to respond.

Jesus and what he was about goes beyond any temporal issue we could ever imagine. And no I am not a fundamentalist Christian trying to convert anyone either.

I am just a man who follows Jesus.

The very universe declares his majesty. How could anyone on earth compete with that

[Zhade]

183. I still fail to see how the question "Was Jesus Gay?" is an insult.

Unless you see something wrong with being born homosexual, how could that POSSIBLY be offensive?

[Zhade]

161. Considering I'M QUEER, you're just plain WRONG.

But, thanks for kicking the thread.

[Liberal_Dog]

38. I'll Hop Into The Way-Back Machine And...

find out once for all.

I'll be back in a few days. :)

[devilgrrl]

39. Other: He was a 'Quirky Alone'

He liked chicks but couldn't deal with the whole relationship/marriage gig.

[AlienGirl]

42. Secret Gospel of Mark

"They came to Bethany. There was one woman there whose brother had died. She came and prostrated herself before Jesus and spoke to him. "Son of David, pity me!" But the disciples rebuked her. Jesus was angry and went with her into the garden where the tomb was. Immediately a great cry was heard from the tomb. And going up to it, Jesus rolled the stone away from the door of the tomb, and immediately went in where the young man was. Stretching out his hand, he lifted him up, taking hold his hand. And the youth, looking intently at him, loved him and started begging him to let him remain with him. And going out of the tomb, they went into the house of the youth, for he was rich. And after six days Jesus gave him an order and, at evening, the young man came to him wearing nothing but a linen cloth. And he stayed with him for the night, because Jesus taught him the mystery of the Kingdom of God. And then when he left he went back to the other side of the Jordan."

:shrug:

I don't care, because I don't believe Jesus was divine. Plus, the concepts of "gay" and "straight" may not have been the same as they are now--many Greeks, for example, had both same-sex lovers and opposite-sex marriages.

Tucker

[Zhade]

46. I wondered when someone would bring this one up.

I myself am not totally convinced (heck, I don't even know if Jesus ever really existed).

[regnaD kciN]

77. The SGoM is a highly-dubious document...

...since it was "discovered" in the mid-20th Century, and the only version of it ever found was not an ancient document, but something that had been hand-copied into a book published in the 17th Century. Its authenticity is highly-questionable, to put it mildly, and even a Jewish scholar such as Jacob Neusner, who would have no reason to have a built-in bias toward orthodox Christianity, has described it as "the forgery of the century" by the scholar who "discovered" it. (Others have theorized that it is a forgery, but by the 17th Century copyist rather than the scholar in question.) Even if the text itself is genuine in the sense of being from earlier than the 1600s, there no reason to believe that it is what it is claimed to be, namely a letter by Clement of Alexandria with fragments of a suppressed "genuine" gospel included within it.

[Razorback_Democrat]

44. Is this just a flame poll?

I find this topic really off the wall.

[Zhade]

48. Honestly? No.

Just seems timely with all the anti-GLBT/pro-Christian fascism activities going on in America today (I'm referring, of course, to only SOME prominent Christians).

[TroubleMan]

49. Who cares?It's his message of peace, love and forgiveness that's important

What Jesus's color, sexual orientation, ect is immaterial.

Most Christians have a hard enough time following his teachings without getting bogged down in minutia.

[Zhade]

59. Please make your signature happen. PLEASE!

That would be a dream team!

[Raster]

52. If the apostles had been gay...

10. The Last Supper would have been a brunch.

9. The Beatitudes would start, "Fabulous are they ..."

8. The Triumphal Entry screams for a drag number.

7. The water at the wedding feast of Canna would not have been changed to wine but to extra dry Bombay Sapphire martini straight up and dirty.

6. The temple would not have been cleansed of money changers, just redecorated.

5. Mary's hair would have been flawless.

4. The Gospels would be Matthew, Mark, Steve and Bruce.

3. Priests would have affairs with altar boys...w..wait....never mind.

2. Jesus would never wear white after Labor Day.

1. The Sermon on the Mount would have been a musical.

[disconnected]

54. not that it matters...

Now would it really be any of our business if he was I wonder.
This reminded me of a passage where Jesus was asked if a woman would be married to her first or second husband in heaven...he answered saying that at that time people will neither marry nor be given in marriage.

Also, it states in the Bible that Male and female are the same in God...
Gay, not gay, straight, not straight...I've never seen anyone who could say they were completely straight in all truth.
It's possible, but I'm sure the religious leaders of the time could have had him crucified much sooner than they did if he was...and I'm sure they'd have made a big deal of that one.

[Undercover Owl]

134. I LOVE IT! ....n/t

[rocktop15]

53. This is the dumbest most left thing I have ever seen posted here.

Yea let's get moderates to read the site with subjects titled "Was Jesus Gay?" Pure stupidity.

[Raster]

55. not a christian, don't give a shit and REALLY don't care if the so-called

"moderates" like DU or not. The issue is freedom, the continuation of the republic and the curtailment of Imperial Amerikan theocratic fascism. I for one will never go the "repuke lite" route. And furthermore, according to the latest Gallup pole, the "morals and values" bullshit that was shoved down our throats was just that, bullshit. Far more people in this country care about Iraq, the economy and the environment than the morals and values drivel.

[Duncan Grant]

75. OMG!

I think I'm in love! Raster, you made my day! ;) :hi:

[Raster]

101. thank you, ditto!

[Zhade]

60. "Left" thing? No, honey, this is a QUEER thing. Try reading next time.

Thanks for kicking the thread, though!

[Redleg]

63. I don't see it as a "left thing," I see it as a "dumb thing."

[Zhade]

65. Well, at least that's an honest opinion of it.

I'm sorry some feel that way, but expressing your opinion kicks the thread, so thanks anyway! :)

[Razorback_Democrat]

92. My opinion exactly

it is a flame thread, anti Christian, designed to ignite anger among Christians in my opinion.

ya got me Zhade, I'm pissed

and I have nothing against gays, I just don't understand the relevance of a poll about this.

Flame bait is all it is!

[Behind the Aegis]

138. Question

I asked this of someone else, would you have been offended if the question was something like..."Was Jesus married and had children?" What if the question had been posed as "Was Jesus a sexual being?" Would those questions be just as offensive or considered flamebait?

[Razorback_Democrat]

153. I'm offended at the attempt to create a flame thread about this

the only people I've ever heard say Jesus was gay were gay themselves.

I have nothing against gays.

I don't know if Jesus was gay, straight, had children, was married, or whatever, it doesn't matter to me really.

the flaming comes in the sarcasm towards Christians, many who are your liberal brethren fighting the good fight against the evil empire too.

so why create a thread that allows people to bash Christians and lump them all together, when to me, the thing that the far right has claimed as Christianity, the fundamentalist dominionist doctrine, is so far removed from the teachings of Jesus as to be a whole other religion.

I'm offended at the bashing and flaming

I think the question was intended to be a trigger for this

Why not ask this on a freeper board? there it would be a real flame challenge.

Instead, it seems to show that there are people in DU who a) lump all Christians together and b) show their hatred towards them in posting about them.

[Behind the Aegis]

159. Was Jesus Black?

Would that be offensive? Seems to me people project onto to Jesus what they see in themselves, should they follow his teachings. I haven't really seen any Christian bashing here. I have on other threads, but seems most of the comments here are pretty innocuous. I have seen more homophobia here than anti-Christian sentiment.

Why would one ask this one a freeper board? We know that they are homophobes and it would only inspire hatefulness toward gays. On this forum, I expect that people would be a little more intelligent (as intelligence is often what separates us from them). But, it seems ANYTHING posted about Christians that doesn't match their beliefs here is automatically labeled as anti-Christian. I think that is silly.

I don't hate Christians, but I really don't understand why this is such a "flamebait" question. Now, if the poster had said "Was Jesus a murder?" I could see that as unproductive and flamebait. Minority groups are expected to "suck it up" when we are overlooked, why can't Christians do the same on some issues?

[GOPBasher]

155. rocktop, I agree.

[tedzbear]

56. Damn right he was gay!

And a complete doll too.

:bounce:

[not systems]

57. Totally!

[Redleg]

62. Does it matter?

Did you do this to stir up some shit in here?

[Zhade]

66. "Did you do this to stir up some shit in here?"

Nah. I don't think asking a question is stirring up anything. I welcome discussion of controversial subjects, as long as it's reasoned, calm discussion.

Honestly, no harm intended. :hi:

[Redleg]

67. Believe it or not, it's those kinds of statements that push people away

from the Democratic party. I'm not saying you don't have a right to say those things but I do suggest those statements come with a cost.

[Razorback_Democrat]

93. Yes they do

I will defend his right to say it

I wish he wouldn't though
it does come with a cost

[Jesus H. Christ]

126. If the question "was Jesus gay" pushes people away...

that's a good thing.

Only a homophobic bigot would be offended by the question.

[Undercover Owl]

145. It did appear to be flame-igniting, at first glance.

I'm not religious, and I don't sit around wondering about Jesus's sexual orientation... I assumed that God had removed sexual cravings from Jesus, just so that he would be non-offensive to everyone around the globe, in a fatherly light.

I would prefer Jesus to be satiated with God's love, to the point of not needing a sexual outlet.

[Razorback_Democrat]

154. Oh, but you are wrong

A person of faith is offended by persons who knowingly seek to bash their faith.

I have nothing against gays, and I don't start gay bashing threads.

But this "question" easily turned into people's opportunities to bash something that they lump together, Christianity. I happen to belong to a Church that just recently made an openly gay man an ordained bishop. That has created a lot of chaos in the Episcopal community as a whole, threatening to split it. But so far it hasn't.

I resent the Christian bashing on this thread and think the question was nothing more than bait for that purpose.

[Zhade]

184. Again, how is asking if Jesus was gay "bashing"?

I don't see homosexuality as a sin, crime, or insult, and unless you're homophobic, I doubt you do either - so how is it bashing to ask the question?

:shrug:

[Razorback_Democrat]

94. This thread has become a Christian bashing thread

not a poll with honest intentions of finding out people's opinions

this drives people away from the Democratic party

Why ask the question?

flame throwing

[Behind the Aegis]

160. Where?

I just don't see any bashing. Which post is bashing? I think the moderators have removed a few questionable ones (I didn't see those before they were deleted).

[Zhade]

162. Those were a half-attempt to make fun of BISEXUALS, in fact.

I didn't even think the posts deserved deleting - the guy just made a dumb joke about bisexuals "wanting it all", and I said it wasn't funny, but that I knew he didn't mean to be insulting.

Interestingly, I was able to deal with it like an adult, yet some people here are so easily offended that they jumped to the conclusion that I'm "bashing Christians" - which, of course, I'm not.

I really think your "Was Jesus Black?" example, and the rest of your posts here, spell out the situation with this thread pretty well. I didn't think asking a question of scholars (which was my intent, as the OP states) would make so many jump to the attack.

I'm very impressed with those followers of Christ on this thread who didn't automatically see the worst in me for posting the thread and didn't judge me. That, to my understanding, is what Christ really taught. Kudos to those guys and gals!

[Behind the Aegis]

172. I like threads like this

I like controversial issues, because I like to see what other people think and how they arrived there. However, I also know that some people lack reading comprehension and others...well, they are just ornery! I also think some people just like playing the victim. I am glad you posted the question!

[Lilith Velkor]

71. He was not simply divine, darling

He was fabulous!

[bobweaver]

72. No he wasn't, because the throw pillows didn't match the curtains. Sorry.

[bobweaver]

73. Were Joseph and Mary straight? If the conception was "immaculate"?

[manhattanite]

74. Jesus never existed.

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/

[Swamp Rat]

82. Horse pucky! He DOES exist!

He's my cousin and a Harley mechanic that lives in Phoenix.

[AliciaKeyedUp]

124. Of course he did

nt

[FM Arouet666]

130. Really no proof

Except for the bible, you have no other support for the assertion that Jesus really existed. Titus Livius, Plutarch of Chaironeia, P. Cornelius Tacitus, Thucydides, all ancient historians at various times after Jesus, fail to mention Jesus, except for a few vague references. No remains, no artifacts supporting his presence, save for the shroud of Turin and the recent ossuary box of James, both fakes.

Belief in the message of Jesus requires a belief in his existence. Without further proof, those without your belief, tend to view his existence with skepticism.

[imenja]

78. remember Mary Magdalene?

[Must_B_Free]

79. no, but he was fabulous

[indigobusiness]

80. hehee

Abfab.

[RBHam]

81. He was married to Mary "Magdalene" from the Benjamite tribe...

It was a dynastic marriage...

Yeheshua ben Youseff, as heir to the rightful throne of Judea and descended from the bloodline of King David (a usurper), he needed a Benjamite wife for the legitimacy it brought.

He was ritually married to Mary at age 30, at whch time he earned the religious right to become a Rabbi (he trained with the Essenes fro 18 years) and at which time he earned the title "king of the Jews"...

He martyred himself in the vain hope his crucuifixion at the hands of the Romans would spark a nationalist revolt...

I could go on...

Read Robert Eisenmann and Barbara Thierry's work...

[Swamp Rat]

83. Sure, why not?

He mostly hung out with guys who "adored him." He was extraordinarily sensitive toward women and children. I'm sure he was black too... Delicious! ;)

... thinking of hot nights in the desert with a bunch of guys. :D

[roguevalley]

84. he's buried in layers of politics, editing and wishful thinking. I don't

see how he could be a teacher if he wasn't married, especially with children. He had to be married. A rabbi not married? A teacher, a prophet not married? An observant Jew not married in the first century?

Not likely. Was he gay? It wouldn't have mattered regarding his obligations toward getting married. Married first, whatever else was incidental. You had to fulfill the law and you had to make an heir.

Personally, I believe he married Mary. I believe she was edited out because of the mysognist men who kicked the women diciples and teachers and bishops out when the religion went political and became the state viewpoint. Women taught, they kept the group fed and gave money and they were among the first converts.

Jesus was a real man with a real heart and soul. He loved people, loved to laugh and talk and he was human. He would have followed his religion even as he did other things as well that formed something new. I don't see how it could have been anything different. As for the gay thing, I would imagine no one will ever know but being married seems reasonable.

[orpupilofnature57]

86. HOW OLD ARE YOU? SOUNDS LIKE YOU WERE THERE.

[roguevalley]

103. I'm a few centuries short but I read a lot and my area of

expertise is ancient history. Nice caps by the way.

[Swamp Rat]

91. OK, but he was definately black.

I recently saw him in a Brazilian movie where he explains that it is a popular misconception that he is white.

[orpupilofnature57]

106. wishful conclusions? thanks for the neat compliment,did i make my

POINT, student,expert?

[xchrom]

87. yes, and i think john was his lover.

as iread about his relationship with john -- it reminds me of lovers.
and that is who jesus turns the care of his mother over to when he was crucified -- like a son in law?

[AliciaKeyedUp]

88. Jesus loved everyone

Just not the way you claim.

[RetroLounge]

89. How can a Man-Made myth be gay OR straight?

:wtf:

RL

[Razorback_Democrat]

95. All "myths" are man made

a myth is not a falsehood though

look it up

a myth can be an embellishment, or formula for telling a story about a real person!

Jesus is real

get real

[superconnected]

110. Jesus is a historical figure

The tales surrounding him however are questionable.

[Jesus H. Christ]

120. Actually, no, he isn't.

There's no real evidence he existed.

[Az]

122. The struggle to find the historical Jesus

has never been resolved. The best evidence for his actual existance is not even first hand. And it is higly questionable in nature. The argument is not made public very often as there is little to no new evidence concerning the matter thus it is left as a moot issue. And the clergy are certainly not going to raise the issue to there congregation that the thing they are supposed to have absolute faith in may not have even existed.

[superconnected]

127. oh really

Was the apostle paul also a myth or did the Emperor Nero behead him?

[RUDUing2]

96. he was an observant religious jew from a respected and wealthy family

which included temple priest. He was most likely married and possibly a father. I truly doubt that he was gay...but it does seem to be a popular claim made by people who want to denigate and poke fun at christians...wonder why anyone would want to show such a depth of ignorance and prejudice as to use homosexuality in that manner...but hey to each their own...

[Zhade]

163. Since I'm queer, why would I "denigrate" Jesus by asking if he was gay?

I don't think there's a thing wrong with being born gay, nor with living that way.

Interesting that a few have jumped to the conclusion that a bisexual like myself (as revealed in some of the first few posts) would "insult" Jesus by asking if he was gay.

[RUDUing2]

173. because it is a favorite tactic used to try and lessen Jesus and to divert

attention away from what he was. If you didn't mean it in that manner then apologies..but in the norm this line of questioning is used in a completely different manner.

[Zhade]

177. Again, how is asking if Jesus was gay "lessening" him?

What's wrong with being gay?

[RUDUing2]

179. not a thing...I thought you were using this as a way of promoting

McNally's Corpus Christi view of Christ...

[Zhade]

182. Ah! We're good then, friend.

:toast:

[La Lioness Priyanka]

107. does it bloody matter?

[superconnected]

108. I always though Jesus was friendly with the ladies

and it was Paul who was gay.

[Zhade]

166. Is that why Paul seems so homophobic?

A lot of his followers (Paulians) are.

[Boosterman]

114. I voted no

But heres the best part about Jesus IMHO. He doesnt care what you think of his sexuality. If you need for him to be straight to appeal to you hes probably OK with that. If you think hes gay hes probably OK with that. I think you will be judged based on how you live your life. JMO

[superconnected]

117. I think the same way.

[Zhade]

168. Really good post, thanks for the thoughts.

NT!

[Bluebear]

116. Who wrote this poll, CNN?

yesterday as our troops died, they asked if people take pain killers daily in their online "poll".

[Az]

119. Some sources suggesting he was gay

From the bible. Specifically from John.

John 13:23 Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.

John 19:26 When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son!

John 20:2 Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the LORD out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him.

John 21:7 Therefore that disciple whom Jesus loved saith unto Peter, It is the Lord. Now when Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he girt his fisher's coat unto him, (for he was naked,) and did cast himself into the sea.

John 21:20 Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee?


There is also a disputed work called the Hidden Gospels of Thomas that say that Jesus lay with Lazurus after he brought him back from the dead.

[Johonny]

123. non-sexual

Jesus is depicted in the bible as non-sexual. And I imagine this was on purpose. You can believe he was gay, or he was married to Mary if you wish. But there is round about 0 evidence for either.

[Az]

125. Hehe, evidence he says

Too many threads on the historocity of Jesus already. hehe evidence hehe :D

[superconnected]

129. actually you're supposed to come up with evidence he didn't exist

The letters of paul and the books of the new testament are the evidence he did.

oh an the book of Thomas and other writings...

Did his apostles not exist either in your world, or do the writings they left behind count, or the churches paul founded, and the letters they have from him.

Gee how did Christianity get started if Paul and the other apostals didn't start all those churches. Who did?

[Az]

135. Another time another place

This argument has been going on for over 2000 years now. We are not going to add anything to it with our own point of views. Suffice to say that there is a good chance someone named Jesus existed but there is no conclusive evidence of it. Beyond that neither of us or the miriad of scholars that have addressed this issue can advance without more evidence.

[Zhade]

169. Not that I want to go there, but a reminder: can't prove a negative.

It's up to those who profess he did exist to prove it, not those who don't to disprove (which is an impossibility).

[Placebo]

136. I don't understand why you're asking this question?

I mean, there's no way of knowing either way, but given that more people are heterosexual than homosexual the odds are that he was indeed straight, at least in human form.

[jellybelly]

137. maybe...

Was Jesus a gay, black man?
If Jesus were a Roman I would most certainly say 'of course', but he was a religious jew. How many jews during that time were known for homosexuality?

[Behind the Aegis]

139. Huh?!

You would say he was gay if he had been Roman? But because he was a religious Jew you have asserted he couldn't be? Is that a correct summation of your point? If so, let me ask you this...how many religious homosexuals have you heard about in history? Seems to me that gays have been written out of history and we will never really know who was or wasn't. Just because one is religious doesn't exempt him or her from being gay.

[Undercover Owl]

147. you are weird.

weird, and, you are trying to get kicked off the DU.

[Obviousman]

142. will this piss the fundies off

lol
William Donohue

[bklyncowgirl]

148. I don't know and you don't know either.

Jesus lived over 2000 years ago. The only information we have on his life come from the Gospels, accounts written years after his death. The Gospels are silent on the subject of his sex life.

He apparently enjoyed warm relationships with several of his disciples, both male and female. Whether any of these relationships were anything other than platonic is a subject that the gospels don't go into. Given the strong emotions he aroused, however, I would think that if he were engaging in homosexual relations with any of his followers that his enemies would have used that as a weapon against him. As far as I know, establishment Jews in the 1st century AD were not exactly tolerant toward homosexuality. Please correct me if I'm wrong but I believe that Pharisee's complaints about Jesus immorality came from the fact that he had women travelling with him.

Should we take those accounts of his close friendship with Lazarus and John to indicate that Jesus was gay? Without anything other than a fascination with way things are expressed in the gospel coupled with my own lack of understanding of the cultural context, I'm not ready to go to the point of saying he was celibate, gay, bisexual, straight or whatever. If I had to guess, I'd say celibate but the simple fact is that we don't know.

But hey, the sex life of Jesus Christ is a fascinating subject. Witness the popularity of the "Da Vinci Code".

[infusionman]

151. Jesus led a sinless life.

Otherwise, how could he redeem us from sin by dying on the cross?

The bible says when Jesus was on the cross he took on all the sins of us in the past and in the future to redeem us. To offer us a chance at everlasting life.

The bible in fact says: " He who knew no sin BECAME sin."

If Jesus were gay or was involved in a sexual relationship either homosexual or heterosexual outside of marriage, it would be a sin.

[Zhade]

185. If Jesus were gay, it would have been a sin?

But since Jesus was supposedly perfection made flesh, wouldn't that mean, had he been gay, that homosexuality is NOT a sin?

[Zhade]

170. Would it then be fair to say his followers likewise do not know?

NT!

[Stuckinthebush]

156. This thread is fascinating

Read the number of posts where people are offended or upset that it would even be mentioned that Jesus might have been gay.

Reverse this discussion and ask, "Was Jesus married?" and you would get far fewer negative posts.

Even some progressives have deep seated homophobia that wells up from time to time.

[Tafiti]

167. You're absolutely right.

I was thinking the exact same thing. When it comes to religious matters, people's true feelings really start to seep out, don't they? They may be able to stay PC, or throw in worthless qualifier statements. But even then it's easy to see how they really feel. Sad. You'd think more liberal Christians would be liberal enough to interpret the Bible for themselves, rather than swallowing dogmatic nonsense whole.

[Zhade]

171. It sure is. Kinda surprising, too.

I mean, fundies I understand - they hate anyone not exactly like themselves.

The homophobia from a few DUers really made me shake my head, though - assuming being gay is an "insult" aimed at Jesus. I must be really "self-hating" to hurl such an "insult"!

:eyes:

[RUDUing2]

175. I figured your question was based on McNally's play/book

Corpus Christi..and that it was meant as another of the myriad of bashing post that seem to be so prevalent on DU right now. I had no idea what you sexual orientation is...

If it was meant as a serious question I apologize.

There is no evidence to support the theory that Jesus was gay, and based on when and where he lived, the Pharisees and Sadducees would certainly have used that against him if he had been. So the silence of the Gospels regarding his sexuality and marriage IMO points towards him being both heterosexual and married...

[Zhade]

176. No, I've never heard of McNally's work.

No worries on the apology - I'm only interested in bashing Paulian conservative fundies who don't follow Jesus, not good liberal Christians who don't judge others.

[RUDUing2]

178. Corpus Christi depicts a Jesus and his disciples as being

drunken promiscuous homosexuals and deviants...which is bad enough, but it is also poorly written and relies on the shock value to sustain it...

[Zhade]

181. Hmmm...sounds just as negative toward gays as toward Jesus.

If that's the premise, methinks I'll not seek it out.

[RUDUing2]

174. sorry this should be in reply to zhade.

[catbert836]

157. Why the f*ck does it matter?

Seriously.

[princehal]

186. Perhaps....

a better question is; if it were proven, beyond doubt, that there was a Jesus, and he was gay -- and everything else claimed in the scripture of the current church did, in fact, happen --

would you still call yourself Christian? Would it change anything in his word?

[Zhade]

193. That's a good extrapolation of the original question. I like it!

I think it's clear a couple of "Dems" on this thread would be happy to pound the nails in if they found out Jesus had been gay.

Sad, really. I didn't expect the homophobia to come bubbling up like that, but it makes me glad that I posted this after all. It lets me know exactly where some stand on equal rights for GLBT people.

[Is It Fascism Yet]

194. other, jesus was non existent fictious legendary character sans sexuality

[sui generis]

196. a provocative question

but who cares? Moreover if they care, then why? I certainly don't think that Jesus was a role model for marriage or parenthood by his own actions, but then I don't think that was the point.

The sad part Zhade is that if you know someone who's gay, we tend to think "gay" first thing, and then their name or other relevant information next.

Can you imagine how funny the world would be if everyone wandered around thinking: that's Brad Pitt. He's straight. And an actor.

So when you ask that question about Jesus it just twists some peoples' tits.

[Mabeline]

198. I believe Jesus was an Eunich

and the physical desires of life meant nothing to Him.