'Could Jesus have been gay?'

[Safe-Keeper]

I just watched this gem of a movie from the AmazingAtheist. Basically, it's an argument he employs against the 'God has a reason to commit genocide'-excuse from the fundies justifying the Great Flood, the sacking of Jericho, and so on. He advises that you employ it, quote, when you're arguing with a fundamentalist and you want him to leave you the [...] alone'.

First, he asks why God kills when one of the commandments is 'thou shalt not kill'. He most often gets a reply like 'oh, He has his reasons', or 'He's above the rules since He made them'. AmazingAtheist then states that OK, then Jesus could've been homosexual, right? I mean, He's above standards of the Bible and can sin, right? I mean, if he can violate the Bible by killing, he can violate it by being gay, can he not?

Then of course the answer is that 'he has reasons for killing, but not for catching teh ghey!', at which point you ask what those reasons might be. The fundie of course won't be able to come up with any good answers, just like with homosexuality. Or he'll say something like that we aren't to question God's ways, in which case you ask him why that wouldn't apply to homosexuality: If God has His reasons for massacring whole cities, surely He could have His reasons for being gay?

I personally found the movie hilarious. I can't wait to try this one out. It's also sort of creepy, as it strongly implies that to fundies, homosexuality is more wrong than genocide ('I'm fine with Papa Yahweh slaughtering all of Jericho, but teh buttsekhs, no, that's too vile, He'd never have done indulged in teh ghey!').

 

[Miss Anthrope]

Somewhere Randfan employed the thou shalt not kill/murder argument on someone, who seemed to fight it tooth and nail to the bitter end. I wonder if that thread is still going........hmmmm.........

 

[Darth Rotor]

It's also sort of creepy, as it strongly implies that to fundies, homosexuality is more wrong than genocide ('I'm fine with Papa Yahweh slaughtering all of Jericho, but teh buttsekhs, no, that's too vile, He'd never have done indulged in teh ghey!').

I see, and if Jesus had hemroids, what then, with your theory here? Preparation H is a relatively recent advance in ass soothing tech.

DR

 

[Loss Leader]

I was once very nearly beaten in Macon, Georgia for suggesting that Jesus might as well have been black. If what Jesus said was right, I argued, it would have been right no matter who said it. So, Jesus could have been black and his message would still be equally as valid, went my argument.

The three local men to whom I was speaking were not especially thrilled with this reasoning.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

Very unclever, LL. It does not follow that just because G-D could slaughter cities, He could incarnate as a Black! Even HE must have a freaking limit to his vileness!

 

[Puppycow]

What part of 'thou' don't you understand?

If I was a fundie, I would give the St. Augustine response:
Before God made the Heavens and the Earth, he made Hell for people who ask impertinant questions!

And in case that wasn't enough to put the fear of God in you, he made the Inquisition!

 

[Loss Leader]

And in case that wasn't enough to put the fear of God in you, he made the Inquisition!

And nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.

 

[articulett]

I know it's off topic but I don't think I should start a thread on this... It's just the "gay" topic had me curious. The GOP senator who was arrested for soliciting an undercover officer in a airport restroom makes me wonder all sorts of things. What does the hand under the door mean? Where would one learn these signals? If everything is agreed upon, what happens next and where? Is this generally a tit for tat orgasm exchange or a monetary exchange? Are people who engage in this behavior more likely to be apparently heterosexual men too afraid to go to a gay bar or a similar place?

Anybody?

 

[quixotecoyote]

I know it's off topic but I don't think I should start a thread on this... It's just the "gay" topic had me curious. The GOP senator who was arrested for soliciting an undercover officer in a airport restroom makes me wonder all sorts of things. What does the hand under the door mean? Where would one learn these signals? If everything is agreed upon, what happens next and where? Is this generally a tit for tat orgasm exchange or a monetary exchange? Are people who engage in this behavior more likely to be apparently heterosexual men too afraid to go to a gay bar or a similar place?

Anybody?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=91579

 

[timhau]

Well, the answer to the question in the thread title is simple. Has Jesus been seen tapping his foot in the Minneapolis/St. Paul airport mensroom? If not, he must be gay, because that's what straight guys do. Just ask Larry.

 

[blobru]

There is a very controversial theory among a few biblical scholars that Jesus was gay based on a censored excerpt from a primary Gospel of Mark:

But the youth, looking upon him, loved him and began to beseech him that he might be with him. And going out of the tomb they came into the house of the youth, for he was rich. And after six days Jesus told him what to do and in the evening the youth comes to him, wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, [naked man with naked man,] for Jesus taught him the mystery of the kingdom of God. And thence, arising, he returned to the other side of the Jordan.

It's taken from a 17th century transcription of a 2nd century letter from Clement of Alexandria condemning the passage as noncanonical, and "naked man with naked man" as forgery. The controversy is very few scholars have seen the letter (just photos, it's now locked away in a library in Israel); some question its authenticity and the bias of the scholar who 'discovered' it (it fit his own previously published theory); and there are no other references to it in any other historical source (though many gnostic gospels were likewise uncorroborated before Nag Hammadi). Anyway, an intriguing portrait of Jesus exploring his love of his fellow man, but take it with a snowball of salt.

 

[Hokulele]

That reminds me of the one bible verse I have never understood in context. As Jesus is being led off to be tried and eventually crucified, we have this. Mark 14:51-52.

And there followed him a certain young man, having a linen cloth cast about [his] naked [body]; and the young men laid hold on him: And he left the linen cloth, and fled from them naked.

Um, what?

Oh, and why is he always asking Satan to get behind him, hm?

 

[Puppycow]

There is a very controversial theory among a few biblical scholars that Jesus was gay based on a censored excerpt from a primary Gospel of Mark:


It's taken from a 17th century transcription of a 2nd century letter from Clement of Alexandria condemning the passage as noncanonical, and "naked man with naked man" as forgery. The controversy is very few scholars have seen the letter (just photos, it's now locked away in a library in Israel); some question its authenticity and the bias of the scholar who 'discovered' it (it fit his own previously published theory); and there are no other references to it in any other historical source (though many gnostic gospels were likewise uncorroborated before Nag Hammadi). Anyway, an intriguing portrait of Jesus exploring his love of his fellow man, but take it with a snowball of salt.

There was an Australian bloke who claimed to have determined that Jesus was gay by examining his astrological chart.
This was a few years ago. I believe this was his doctoral thesis for a public taxpayer-supported university.

 

[blobru]

That reminds me of the one bible verse I have never understood in context. As Jesus is being led off to be tried and eventually crucified, we have this. Mark 14:51-52.

And there followed him a certain young man, having a linen cloth cast about [his] naked [body]; and the young men laid hold on him: And he left the linen cloth, and fled from them naked.

The guy who found Clement's letter, Morton Smith, and the few scholars who support its authenticity, like J. D. Crossan, think that's the same boy from 'Secret' Mark; of course it could also be a case of retro-fitting, Smith knowing about naked-linen-boy and including the same phrase in his forgery. Would be lovely if it were corroborated one day; I can't imagine a bigger blow to xtian fund'ism, other than Christ coming back dressed like one of the Village People; but for now one doc ain't much to go on.

Oh, and why is he always asking Satan to get behind him, hm?

Or was that shorthand for: "Get thee behind [to] me, Satan!" ???
I think JC would have shown Ol' Scratch around Sodom and Gomorrah before he was done.

 

[boloboffin]

One possible weakness to the argument: a fundie would say that Jesus, while on Earth, would have been held to the standards of men, so no man-on-man for the Son of Man. Still, it really should make some people think about what's living in their mind.

 

[Dutchman]

Well, the answer to the question in the thread title is simple. Has Jesus been seen tapping his foot in the Minneapolis/St. Paul airport mensroom? If not, he must be gay, because that's what straight guys do. Just ask Larry.

So, before there was a Minneapolis/St. Paul airport men's room to tap one's foot in, all men were gay?

 

[Foster Zygote]

I was once very nearly beaten in Macon, Georgia for suggesting that Jesus might as well have been black. If what Jesus said was right, I argued, it would have been right no matter who said it. So, Jesus could have been black and his message would still be equally as valid, went my argument.

The three local men to whom I was speaking were not especially thrilled with this reasoning.

I've actually heard some fundies claim that Jesus was white with short hair, clean shaved, and wore trousers.

I like this reconstruction of a typical 1st century Palestinian Jew of about Jesus' age.

 

[Foster Zygote]

And nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.

NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition! Our chief weapon is surprise...surprise and fear...fear and surprise.... Our two weapons are fear and surprise...and ruthless efficiency.... Our three weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope.... Our four...no... Amongst our weapons.... Amongst our weaponry...are such elements as fear, surprise.... I'll come in again.

 

[AgeGap]

I once read that Jesus would need to be married in order to call himself a teacher or rabbi. It was in "Holy Blood, Holy Grail", my favourate scholerly text.

 

[ksbluesfan]

Well, he was fond of showtunes.