Was Jesus A Homophobe? (Should We Care?)

[Orac]

According to Simon Sebag Montefiore's book Jerusalem The Biography (an excellent book well worth reading) , at the time of Jesus homosexuality, or greek love, was conventional and not regarded as effeminate: Caesar, Anthony, Titus and Trajan were all what we would call bisexual. However, in a reversal of morality today, Romans believed it was acceptable to have sex with boys but not with adults. This could go someway to explaining why there was some homophobia in Judea at the time due to its popularity with their oppressors.

[brit1984]

Based on the paintings of Jesus in the uffizi it would appear he was a ladyboy... discuss

[endure]

Sounds better than Gherkin.

Given the choice I'd much prefer a cucumber to a gherkin

[Jingthing]

Based on the paintings of Jesus in the uffizi it would appear he was a ladyboy... discuss

He didn't have long hair. That was a fashion thing that came later in the depiction of the arty Jesus.

[LeCharivari]

1 Corinthians 11:14

[yogi100]

I must say that I thought it was a pretty stupid thread. There isn't much evidence of Jesus' sexuality, but what there is (his relationship with John) suggests sympathy at least.

He spent all his time with his disciples who were all men, such a lifestyle is more than just a bit suspect!

[isanbirder]

I must say that I thought it was a pretty stupid thread. There isn't much evidence of Jesus' sexuality, but what there is (his relationship with John) suggests sympathy at least.

He spent all his time with his disciples who were all men, such a lifestyle is more than just a bit suspect!

First, this statement is just not true. Second, in the Middle East two thousand years ago, it would hardly have been possible for women to go wandering round the countryside with a band of men!

You may criticise as you like, but please put it in context!

[Payboy]

The sandals were a dead giveaway though.

[Ijustwannateach]

Orac:

Greek homosexuality (and to whatever extent it had an influence on Roman homosexuality) is certainly a differently constructed kettle of fish than most of our modern versions, at least as far as the sources we have available (which may or may not be truly representative of actual Greek homosexuals of the time- those sources were written by a rarified group of men of leisure). But you are right to point out that if that model was what truly was considered mainstream homosexuality, then Jesus and his disciples may not have looked the part.

There is also a considerably strong academic argument that the homosexual practices to which Mosaic Law refers were actually condemned ritual practices for other gods, which were forbidden along the same lines as idol worship- but personally speaking I think the homophobic strain is there, too.

[Ijustwannateach]

All in all, though, if we look at what Jesus actually said and did:

He condemned hypocrisy (the moneychangers at the temple, etc.)

He condemned unproductivity (the parable of the talents among others)

He forgave sexual 'crimes' (the adulterous woman)

It's hard to see a homophobe in these trends, and it's too bad modern Christians can't emulate them.

[isanbirder]

Off topic, IJWT? That last sentence hardly connected with the rest!

But, as I just posted on another thread, If you can't fault the message, fault the messenger.

[Ijustwannateach]

Take a look at the topic, IB, and you'll see it's perfectly topical.

The topic is (in case you hadn't noticed): Was Jesus a Homophobe?

I point out trends in his behaviour which, for me, argue that he wasn't all that concerned with sexual 'crimes', but he was with hypocrisy, and so on that basis I deduce: not a homophobe.

I hope this clears things up for you?

[isanbirder]

"Off topic, IJWT?"

That was just poking fun at you, IJWT! But yes, I agree with you.

[NoshowJones]

Some people posting on this forum should get a life.

Never thought I had to see such a stupid thread in a forum.

Don't let the door bang your arse on the way out...

Don't be so negative. Cornichon88 (probably born in 1988, calling himself cucumber) has probably just discovered that homosexuality is something that has to do with him. Otherwise he wouldn't even care to post here.

He has made the first step and is connecting with gay people. Let's welcome him, so he can see that it is OK, he does not need to be afraid.

Tombkk. The word is Homosexual, not Gay. Anyone using the word Gay instead of Homosexal in front of me will always be corrected, though in a decent manner.

[Ijustwannateach]

^Welcome to the GAY SUBFORUM (you may not have noticed the forum title somehow).

While I am aware of the tiresome and getting-rather-old-fashioned-and-quaint etymological issue certain people have with the use of the word 'gay' in this context, I'm afraid if you have difficulties of any kind with the use of the word 'gay' in referring to variations of same-sex human sexuality, you don't belong here. Or you will always be corrected, possibly in a decent manner, quite likely by having your posts deleted and/or removal of your postings rights, by ME (among others). Normally your post would already have been deleted, but this is an issue that hasn't come up recently and this example may help to avoid it in the future.

[eagleflyinghigh]

Based on the paintings of Jesus in the uffizi it would appear he was a ladyboy... discuss

Jesus was probably not, but the painters perhaps liked to see him like that. Ideally we should not make an image of our messiah, but of course it can help our lives doing so. Jesus can certainly not be put in a category - he is universal.

Strange username that - cucumber. Is there a bit of wishful thinking going on?

It is only wishful thinking in the (wrong) English translation. Cornichon is a really small thing and in English would be a pickle....... A cucumber (concombre in French) is more interesting of course.

It is amusing reading the (not so) straight trolls in this forum.

[doggie888888]

Was Jesus a homophobe? Clearly not; love thy neighbour, judge not lest ye be judged and all that. If he were a homophobe, then he'd be a hypocrite at the very least.

Should we care? Yes, because many people who profess to be followers of Jesus are clearly letting the big man down by inciting hate and discrimination against gays. And some of these phony "christians" want to be political leaders. Jesus help us!

Just my opinion, that's all.

[transam]

At least we all know where we stand, or bend or.................................

Why not go visit the women's forum now and spout some misogyny over there?

Shit, sorry, is this the homosexual forum. I read a lot and really don't look at the forum titles. Sorry guy's gal's and others.

[endure]

At least we all know where we stand, or bend or.................................

Why not go visit the women's forum now and spout some misogyny over there?

Shit, sorry, is this the homosexual forum. I read a lot and really don't look at the forum titles. Sorry guy's gal's and others.

No this is the gay forum - the homosexual forum is a 10 penny ride on the Tardis.

[theblether]

I was reading an interesting article last night about the teachings of Christ, as far as I can see he made no comment about homosexuality, so Jingthing will have to bring forward a biblical quote from Jesus to support his argument or accept that Jesus was not a homophobe.

The problem with the bible is that the vast majority of it was second and third generation accounts from eye witnesses, just about the only thing that can be take literally in the New Testament are the actual words attributed to Jesus as they were recanted and recounted daily from the moment he spoke them. All the rest of the New Testament is an exercise in framing the context.

I will be writing a book this year about the influence of man on religious teaching, and the need for man to pollute the original teachings of the Messiah and the Prophet Muhammed among others with their interpretation. What then happens is this interpretation is taken as the teachings and that is not correct,in fact it is the act of a heretic to interfere with the pure word.

I am not religious, I am interested in social history, and in this case I can see some amazing corruptions of both Christianity and Islam, as well as the Jewish faith fragmenting into competing camps. Nothing good will come of this, and the previous post referring to Henry 8th was correct in some regard, but fundamentally flawed in another. That is for another thread on another day and that aspect of religious history is fascinating.

However, on topic, Jingthing show me a quote in which Jesus said anything homophobic?

[Jingthing]

I was reading an interesting article last night about the teachings of Christ, as far as I can see he made no comment about homosexuality, so Jingthing will have to bring forward a biblical quote from Jesus to support his argument or accept that Jesus was not a homophobe.

OMG! Read the OP, dear. I never said he said anything homophobic.

[theblether]

I was reading an interesting article last night about the teachings of Christ, as far as I can see he made no comment about homosexuality, so Jingthing will have to bring forward a biblical quote from Jesus to support his argument or accept that Jesus was not a homophobe.

OMG! Read the OP, dear. I never said he said anything homophobic.

Yes I know that Jingthing, so why did you put up such a stupid topic title? Was it just to get a reaction?

[Jingthing]

I was reading an interesting article last night about the teachings of Christ, as far as I can see he made no comment about homosexuality, so Jingthing will have to bring forward a biblical quote from Jesus to support his argument or accept that Jesus was not a homophobe.

OMG! Read the OP, dear. I never said he said anything homophobic.

Yes I know that Jingthing, so why did you put up such a stupid topic title? Was it just to get a reaction?

You seemed to like it enough to read and post in the thread. Again, there is NOTHING in the title which asserts that I think Jesus was a homophobe. So you "know" yet you post as if you didn't know. Boring. Face it, dude, you're trolling. Edited April 17, 2012 by Jingthing

[Xangsamhua]

I was reading an interesting article last night about the teachings of Christ, as far as I can see he made no comment about homosexuality, so Jingthing will have to bring forward a biblical quote from Jesus to support his argument or accept that Jesus was not a homophobe.

The problem with the bible is that the vast majority of it was second and third generation accounts from eye witnesses, just about the only thing that can be take literally in the New Testament are the actual words attributed to Jesus as they were recanted and recounted daily from the moment he spoke them. All the rest of the New Testament is an exercise in framing the context.

I will be writing a book this year about the influence of man on religious teaching, and the need for man to pollute the original teachings of the Messiah and the Prophet Muhammed among others with their interpretation. What then happens is this interpretation is taken as the teachings and that is not correct,in fact it is the act of a heretic to interfere with the pure word.

I am not religious, I am interested in social history, and in this case I can see some amazing corruptions of both Christianity and Islam, as well as the Jewish faith fragmenting into competing camps. Nothing good will come of this, and the previous post referring to Henry 8th was correct in some regard, but fundamentally flawed in another. That is for another thread on another day and that aspect of religious history is fascinating.

However, on topic, Jingthing show me a quote in which Jesus said anything homophobic?

If you haven't already, theblether, I recommend you read Earl Doherty's "Jesus, Neither God nor Man" and Robert Price's "The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man". If you find these writers persuasive you'll need to think of Jesus not as an historical influence on the rise of Christianity, but as a fictional one - a literary construct to personify a body of teaching that had been doing the rounds of the "Q" community in early to mid-first century Palestine and Syria. Creating a person to embody a broad raft of ethical teachings gives life to those teachings, so that's what Mark did. Matthew and Luke largely drew on Mark. John was off on a Greek philosophical trip of his own.

So there's no point hypothesizing what Jesus may have thought about gays or homosexuality, as we don't have any strong evidence that he existed at all. (It's not possible in this thread to go into the "evidence" from Josephus, Tacitus, etc.) And if there was in fact someone on whom the gospel stories were based, it's fair to say we really don't know much, if anything, reliable about him. Having said all that, there's no indication that the Jesus of the gospels was homophobic. Paul, however, was, for whatever reason, and one can argue quite well that "high christology" Christianity (emphasizing Jesus' divinity), was founded by Paul, not Peter, not James, and definitely not Jesus. The Western Catholic and Eastern Orthodox traditions are high christology (as are High Church Anglicans).

[theblether]

I was reading an interesting article last night about the teachings of Christ, as far as I can see he made no comment about homosexuality, so Jingthing will have to bring forward a biblical quote from Jesus to support his argument or accept that Jesus was not a homophobe.

OMG! Read the OP, dear. I never said he said anything homophobic.

Yes I know that Jingthing, so why did you put up such a stupid topic title? Was it just to get a reaction?

You seemed to like it enough to read the thread. Again, there is NOTHING in the title which asserts that I think Jesus was a homophobe. So you "know" yet you post as if you didn't know. Boring. Face it, dude, you're trolling.

Very good Jingthing, turn your fire on me. As far as I can see you can offer no justification for your topic title, you are by far and away the most prolific and experienced member on Thaivisa, you knew exactly what you were doing when you put that topic title up, and that is below your standards.

Just like the rest of us here you are not immune to criticism, it would be better that you put your hand up to deliberate obfuscation in the topic title rather than accuse me of being a troll, which I am most certainly not.

So I suggest you explain your reasoning for the topic title, or maybe just put your hands up to making a mistake.

[Jingthing]

My reason was to write a catchy headline. I used to do that kind of thing professionally. I did well enough to retire early in Thailand but not well enough to retire early in Australia. I will make no apologies here about my headline, and especially not to the likes of you. Be clear, I apologize and adjust my opinion on the board quite often enough ... when there is a good reason. Please bugger off this personal harassment, OK? I realize attention seeking posters like you though are often tempted to snipe at highly visible posters like me for dubious motivations. You're in a long line. BORING.

Next ...

Edited April 17, 2012 by Jingthing

[transam]

My reason was to write a catchy headline. I used to do that kind of thing professionally. I did well enough to retire early in Thailand but not well enough to retire early in Australia. I will make no apologies here about my headline, and especially not to the likes of you. Be clear, I apologize on the board quite often enough ... when there is a good reason. Please bugger off this personal harassment, OK?

Next ...

There is no next on this subject.

[theblether]

I was reading an interesting article last night about the teachings of Christ, as far as I can see he made no comment about homosexuality, so Jingthing will have to bring forward a biblical quote from Jesus to support his argument or accept that Jesus was not a homophobe.

The problem with the bible is that the vast majority of it was second and third generation accounts from eye witnesses, just about the only thing that can be take literally in the New Testament are the actual words attributed to Jesus as they were recanted and recounted daily from the moment he spoke them. All the rest of the New Testament is an exercise in framing the context.

I will be writing a book this year about the influence of man on religious teaching, and the need for man to pollute the original teachings of the Messiah and the Prophet Muhammed among others with their interpretation. What then happens is this interpretation is taken as the teachings and that is not correct,in fact it is the act of a heretic to interfere with the pure word.

I am not religious, I am interested in social history, and in this case I can see some amazing corruptions of both Christianity and Islam, as well as the Jewish faith fragmenting into competing camps. Nothing good will come of this, and the previous post referring to Henry 8th was correct in some regard, but fundamentally flawed in another. That is for another thread on another day and that aspect of religious history is fascinating.

However, on topic, Jingthing show me a quote in which Jesus said anything homophobic?

If you haven't already, theblether, I recommend you read Earl Doherty's "Jesus, Neither God nor Man" and Robert Price's "The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man". If you find these writers persuasive you'll need to think of Jesus not as an historical influence on the rise of Christianity, but as a fictional one - a literary construct to personify a body of teaching that had been doing the rounds of the "Q" community in early to mid-first century Palestine and Syria. Creating a person to embody a broad raft of ethical teachings gives life to those teachings, so that's what Mark did. Matthew and Luke largely drew on Mark. John was off on a Greek philosophical trip of his own.

So there's no point hypothesizing what Jesus may have thought about gays or homosexuality, as we don't have any strong evidence that he existed at all. (It's not possible in this thread to go into the "evidence" from Josephus, Tacitus, etc.) And if there was in fact someone on whom the gospel stories were based, it's fair to say we really don't know much, if anything, reliable about him. Having said all that, there's no indication that the Jesus of the gospels was homophobic. Paul, however, was, for whatever reason, and one can argue quite well that "high christology" Christianity (emphasizing Jesus' divinity), was founded by Paul, not Peter, not James, and definitely not Jesus. The Western Catholic and Eastern Orthodox traditions are high christology (as are High Church Anglicans).

Yes I am fully aware of this theory, ( theories ), I think I alluded to the input of man into the bible when I said that the new testament was an exercise in framing the word of Jesus. I have been reading ancient history recently and I also know that the entire Christian construct was an evolvement, while nigh a copycat, of earlier belief systems. I have posted elsewhere today on Thaivisa about the influence of Lao Tzu, Confucius and Socrates in the development of the "State of Man", along side Buddha.

I have also stated that I am not religious, I am interested in the social history of man and the development of belief systems. In as far as I can tell the chances are that Christ lived, he was of a time when there were plenty of Roman historians and politicians etc who were right on the button as to their understanding of contemporary affairs, and as far as I am led to believe the Jewish faith acknowledges the life of Christ but not his role as Messiah, the Samaritans have an oral history that goes back 167 generations and they acknowledge the life of Christ, the Prophet Muhammed acknowledged the life of Christ, but hey.......we are going way off topic.

I have never seen anything to suggest words attributed to Jesus Christ are in any way homophobic, so even if he was an amalgam and not a real man, that would still stand as true.

edited for clarity

Edited April 17, 2012 by theblether

[theblether]

My reason was to write a catchy headline. I used to do that kind of thing professionally. I did well enough to retire early in Thailand but not well enough to retire early in Australia. I will make no apologies here about my headline, and especially not to the likes of you. Be clear, I apologize on the board quite often enough ... when there is a good reason. Please bugger off this personal harassment, OK? I realize posters like though are often tempting to snipe at highly visible posters like me for dubious motivations. You're in a long line. BORING.

Next ...

Tut tut.......nothing personal here Jingthing, I hold you in very high regard, very high. You have let yourself down today, maybe you are suffering from a siege mentality. You need to chill out.

[Jingthing]

My reason was to write a catchy headline. I used to do that kind of thing professionally. I did well enough to retire early in Thailand but not well enough to retire early in Australia. I will make no apologies here about my headline, and especially not to the likes of you. Be clear, I apologize on the board quite often enough ... when there is a good reason. Please bugger off this personal harassment, OK? I realize posters like though are often tempting to snipe at highly visible posters like me for dubious motivations. You're in a long line. BORING.

Next ...

Tut tut.......nothing personal here Jingthing, I hold you in very high regard, very high. You have let yourself down today, maybe you are suffering from a siege mentality. You need to chill out.

The regard isn't mutual based on your behavior on this thread.