jump to last post 1-17 of 17 discussions (99 posts)

Was Jesus Heterosexual or Homosexual?

  1. 0
    Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago

    http://s1.hubimg.com/u/5850788_f248.jpg
    After coming across an article, I am now familiar with the agurment that is for Jesus being a homosexual. So, I'm curious to what the Bible says about his sexuality?

    1. LookingForWalden profile image61
      LookingForWaldenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      El oh el.
      This is gonna be fun.

    2. MelissaBarrett profile image60
      MelissaBarrettposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      A serious answer is I don't believe the issue of Jesus's sexuality was ever directly addressed in the Bible.

      1. LookingForWalden profile image61
        LookingForWaldenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Serious answers have no place on this thread.

    3. 0
      Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      It's a fair question. I can't find anything that the bible says about Jesus and his sexuality.

      1. Cagsil profile image61
        Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        To be honest, the bible is an incomplete book. There have been many books that weren't put into the bible. So, it's anybody's guess at this point.

        Personally, I would say that Jesus was most likely bi-sexual but with tendencies toward more female than male. Only because there are some indications that Jesus supposedly took a wife(unconfirmed by some and confirmed by some).

        On a side note- I don't care. lol

        1. couturepopcafe profile image60
          couturepopcafeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          And that would be the first thing they'd eliminate.  OMG could you just see the faces of the cardinals panicking over the fact that their dirty little secret trysts with boys might be let out?  Talk about a cover up.

          Oh, and Jesus was neither homo, bi, hetero or anti sexual.  He was virginal.

          1. 0
            Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Probably look the same as the present day cardinals, whenever their church was caught covering up the raping of children in order to protect the image of the church.

      2. stclairjack profile image78
        stclairjackposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        i cant find any where in the bible that adresses weather or not he liked asparagus iether.

        agree w/ cags,.... dont care

        1. 0
          Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          But the church doesn't have a war on asparagus either. The church doesn't condemn asparagus to hell. Right?

          1. stclairjack profile image78
            stclairjackposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            when refering to THE church,... to which church do you mean?

            1. 0
              Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Why? Is there a church that condemns asparagus?

              I think it's easy to understand the context in which I'm using 'church'.  Any church that Jesus would approve of! wink

              1. stclairjack profile image78
                stclairjackposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                but that my friend is a trick question,.... can any one tell you or i wich church jesus aproves of?...... no.

                it would be easier to ask which church aproves of jesus,... nd even hat question is loaded,.... which version of jesus do the aprove of,....

                in the end,.... all christian churches claim to hold the keys to the kingdom based on a vision of jesus that they aprove of,....

                not the other way around.

                1. 0
                  Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Semantics....................................................................................................................................................
                  Your initial question was loaded, and your answer was semantic based!

                  "but that my friend is a trick question,.... can any one tell you or i wich church jesus aproves of?...... no"

                  ^^^ yea that's the problem with man made religion, they think they know the unknowable. Your are right, no person can say what church the big J would approve of wink

                  1. stclairjack profile image78
                    stclairjackposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    "man made religion",.... yea,... thats the point.

                    man makes religion to explain what man cannot explain.

                    i must assume from what i read of you that you claim not to be in the buisness of choosing a faith,... in fact, you appear to be hell bent on destroying all or most of them,.... that said,...

                    were one engaged in trying to choose a belief system or faith, it would serve that person well to research the available 1000's of options, and then assess what your personal needs and limits are in the way of IQ and social needs,...

                    choosing a faith or belief system is more complicated than buying a car,... but not quite as overwelming as buying a home.... know what you want, and shop till you find it.

                    the fundies will blast me for making that comparison,... but,... theyre fundies,... so i dont care.

    4. 0
      Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      It is ironic that an established religion denounces such homosexual practices, when in itself, one can’t denounce fully the dispute that Jesus, the founder of the faith, is himself a man of mysterious, holding an unknown sexuality, for which all we know could be of homosexual tendencies.

    5. pennyofheaven profile image81
      pennyofheavenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I watched this hippy type movie once. He was a nympho in that one!

    6. brotheryochanan profile image61
      brotheryochananposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      the secret gospel of mark has already been proven to be a hoax.

      other n that the persuasive evidence of the NT and the mandates of God of the OT dictate... no to homosexuality
      He did not even practice heterosexuality
      In fact he did not practice sexuality
      He looked upon both male and female as people in need of redemption.
      There was no leeway for a homosexual son of god in this society at this time.

    7. 0
      Brenda Durhamposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      What does the Bible say?
      It says Jesus was tempted in all ways known to man.
      It also says He resisted temptation and remained entirely sinless.
      The perfect example for anyone to follow when they're tempted to say they don't have a choice between right and wrong.

      1. LookingForWalden profile image61
        LookingForWaldenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        This only applies if having sex and being gay are wrong

      2. brotheryochanan profile image61
        brotheryochananposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        nice
        and jesus mind set was to be all about the fathers work.
        and his lifestyle of traveling constantly did not allow for diaper changing time at the home he never had.

  2. MelissaBarrett profile image60
    MelissaBarrettposted 5 years ago

    Wow.  I was just sitting here wondering what I was going to do for the rest of the night...  Thanks!

    *Grabs Popcorn, Coffee and Smokes*

    Front row seats!  Close enough to get splashed!

    1. 0
      Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      lol smile let the games begin!

  3. 0
    Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago

    “According to the US Biblical scholar, Morton Smith, of Columbia University, a fragment of manuscript he found at the Mar Saba monastery near Jerusalem in 1958, showed that the full text of St. Mark chapter 10 (between verses 34 and 35 in the standard version of the Bible) includes the passage:” -

    And the youth, looking upon him (Jesus), loved him and beseeched that he might 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 instructed him and, at evening, the youth came to him wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the Kingdom of God

    1. Cagsil profile image61
      Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      lol lol lol lol lol

    2. janesix profile image61
      janesixposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      That's only circumstancial evidence...

      1. 0
        Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        I know, I'm just trying to get views from all possible angles.
        wink

        1. couturepopcafe profile image60
          couturepopcafeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          You dirty minded boy. (Or girl) (Or ...)

  4. MelissaBarrett profile image60
    MelissaBarrettposted 5 years ago

    My guess is that if he was openly gay or bi-sexual he would have never gained any status at all.  Son of God or not.  This was 20 centuries ago in Judea. Judea wasn't Ancient Greece or Rome.  That spear in his side would have came a hell of a lot sooner. Gay would have undermined any hopes of being taken as a divine being.

    1. LookingForWalden profile image61
      LookingForWaldenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Interesting, so you think he spread the mystery of the kingdom inside of a closet?

      1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
        MelissaBarrettposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        No, I don't think he was gay.  It would have been AWESOME if he were at least bi, then we wouldn't be having all this struggle with gay rights... unfortunately it is quite unlikely, both statistically and given the political climate of the area.

        1. wilderness profile image94
          wildernessposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          I thought Rome was quite loose in that regard?

          Of course, Jesus didn't seem to get along with the Roman empire too well...

          1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
            MelissaBarrettposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            The elite of Rome have a history of some freedom there, but in this regard, the Romans would have been the last of his worries.  The Jews would have killed him.

            1. 0
              Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              There's evidence that Paul was also gay.

              1. LookingForWalden profile image61
                LookingForWaldenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Well  it takes two to tango.

                What fun is being gay if your the only one?

                1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
                  MelissaBarrettposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Oh my, so many conversations on the forum that could get me banned tonight.

                2. 0
                  Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  haha

              2. brotheryochanan profile image61
                brotheryochananposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                There is no evidence that paul was gay
                     reveal your sources please
                Trust that i will check them out

            2. wilderness profile image94
              wildernessposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              They did anyway.  Weren't they the driving force behind the final decision?  Perhaps that's the hidden reason behind the crucifixion.

              1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
                MelissaBarrettposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                If I remember right (and this is dredging the bottom of my knowledge vaults) the Jews of the time didn't have the actual power to try a case or order an execution.  I believe that the Pharisees(sp?)had quite a bit of behind the scenes clout but the actual legal system belonged to the Romans. 

                As far as a hidden reason for the crucifixion, possibly I guess.  Although the pharisees were pretty loud about every other accusation, I can't see a reason why they would hide a reason that would turn almost every Jew at the time against Christ.

                Then again, their is much that has been edited from the Bible.

                1. LookingForWalden profile image61
                  LookingForWaldenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Not to mention the hundred year gap before it was written.

                2. brotheryochanan profile image61
                  brotheryochananposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  oddly it was christs riding upon the donkey that turned people away.
                  The jews pictured a victorious Messiah, freeing them of the roman rule, and that he would come in the clouds with vengence.
                  Not ride into jerusalem on a donkey. This was the servant christ, who must suffer much.

                  Two prophecies about Jesus:
                      Jesus because of their rejection of him as Messiah rode the donkey. The people all around at that event were really happy to see this but then when news got out that this is was the lowly of the two prophecies, they became disheartened and bitter.

            3. Friendlyword profile image61
              Friendlywordposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              I gotta go to work so I can't read through this whole forum.  But, here is a funny question I hear alot.
              WHY DID JESUS HAVE ALL THOSE DECIPLES AND ONE DECIPLET?

              HUMM...
              Sounds alot like my dating history.

  5. Randy Godwin profile image93
    Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago

    We don't even know if he had to use the bathroom or not, much less his sexual preferences.  Holy cr*p!! lol

    1. couturepopcafe profile image60
      couturepopcafeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      There's a 10% chance he had to use the toilet.

  6. LookingForWalden profile image61
    LookingForWaldenposted 5 years ago

    Statistically speaking, from empirical biological evidence of the mammal world, there is a 10% chance he was gay.
    That is before you factor the passages from the bible in.

    There has been roughly the same percentage of gay people throughout mankind.

    It is very possible he could have experimented with the mystery of the kingdom.

    Kingdom curious if you will.

    1. 0
      Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Maybe bi-curious?

      1. LookingForWalden profile image61
        LookingForWaldenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Ok ok it was a poor attempt on humor.

        1. 0
          Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          It sounded legit, you should have spiked it with 18esh percent.

    2. brotheryochanan profile image61
      brotheryochananposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      well the human mind is what differentiates us from the animal kingdom.
      human minds are able to discipline themselves and bring their bodies in subjection to their thoughts.
      Jesus would have no problem with guiding his actions according to the righteousness of God.

  7. Jerami profile image77
    Jeramiposted 5 years ago

    Having a sexual relationship outside of marriage is breaking one of the 10 commandments.
       These ten are quite simple to understand.
      Jesus would not have been accepted as a teacher or priest if it were known that he was guilty of fornication.

       I would say ... NO ... for those reasons previously stated in this thread.
      I see no reason to believe that he could not have been married had he chosen to do so.

    1. LookingForWalden profile image61
      LookingForWaldenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      What commandment was that?

      I know you say they are simple to understand yet I do not see that one.

      Is that in the unabridged version of the bible?

      1. Jerami profile image77
        Jeramiposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        # 7   My bible says Adultry  ....  this too has changed sinse my youth.

           I don't make a habit of re reading the 10 commandments.
           I'm sure I've read a much older version of the bible which listed fornication also.

           The KJV has not always been the commonly accepted translation.

        1. LookingForWalden profile image61
          LookingForWaldenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          It's really funny because you made it a point of how easy and simple they are to understand.

          You must see the irony of this.

          Im pretty sure it never said that in the ten commandments.

          Probably elsewhere.

          1. 0
            Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            +1

    2. A Troubled Man profile image59
      A Troubled Manposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Interesting, that is cited as the primary reason for the high rate of divorces amongst Christians. smile

      1. Jerami profile image77
        Jeramiposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        That is correct.  In this century anyway.

          People, in general, are too quick to jump into marriage these days, "Because" they know how easy it is to get a divorce, as they are entering into it.

          Maybe ?  this was a good reason for parents to pick a spouse for their teenage daughters, way back in the OLD days; when the life expectancy was what 25 or 30, and girls usually got married at such an early age.
          What is the average age now that people marry (first time), 25 or 30 ??? I don't know?   

          "IF" when we get married, we were as committed to each other as we say that we are, divorce wouldn't be as rampant as it is??
           Marriage isn't what it used to be ... entering into it.

        1. A Troubled Man profile image59
          A Troubled Manposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Don't you mean how easy it is for Christians to defy their God's word about marriage and get divorced regardless of that faith? lol

          1. Dave Mathews profile image61
            Dave Mathewsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Troubled Man: Jerami never made mention of Christians in his comment. Why do you insist upon taking things out of context just to suit your purpose and turn what he said against Chiristians?

            It is amazing how one who doesn't even believe in God feels it necessary to attack that which they don't even believe in. If God doesn't exist, why try to attack what you perceive as a myth?

            1. A Troubled Man profile image59
              A Troubled Manposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              I was talking about the high rate of divorce amongst Christians and how easy it is for them to defy Gods word. Have you been divorced, Dave?



              You're starting to sound just like Chris...

              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHmvkRoEowc

              Your elementary question has been asked out of frustration here several times by other fundies as if the question had some sort of validity. It doesn't.

              Dave, we both know your God probably doesn't exist but the Christian religion does exist and that is what is being attacked. It is being attacked due to the irreparable damage it has inflicted upon mankind for a very long time and continues to do, which we can see in many of your posts and the posts of other believers.

    3. DoubleScorpion profile image85
      DoubleScorpionposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Ten Commandments....Only place that actually says the words Ten Commandments is found in Exodus 34:28. And the ten commandments listed in that chapter say nothing about adultery. Adultery is listed in Exodus 5:18 and is just part of the Laws. Exodus 5:1 Moses summoned all Israel and said: Hear, O Israel, the decrees and laws I declare in your hearing today.


      Edit: Thanks to Virgil, Exodus 5:18 and 5:1 should be Deuteronomy not Exodus.

      1. 0
        Virgil Newsomeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Just for clarification purposes.  I have no desire to get into this discussion.

        Exo 20:14  Thou shalt not commit adultery.

        EDIT:
          King James Translation.

        1. DoubleScorpion profile image85
          DoubleScorpionposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          You are right. Exodus 20:14 and I meant to write Deuteronomy 5:18 and Deuteronomy 5:1.

          Thanks for the correction. smile

  8. goldentoad profile image60
    goldentoadposted 5 years ago

    I heard he was a tri-sexual entity.

    1. pennyofheaven profile image81
      pennyofheavenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Hehe that's a good one!!

  9. Dave Mathews profile image61
    Dave Mathewsposted 5 years ago

    Your original question is nothing more than garbage being spewed out by someone who would rather try to denegrade and degrade God and Jesus rather than to seek the truth.

    1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
      MelissaBarrettposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I guess that depends on how you see homosexuality.  If you see it as negative then then I guess you would view it as degrading.  I don't happen to see being gay as a negative and if Christ was gay it wouldn't have changed anything about my faith.

    2. 0
      Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      @Dave- Do you think it's "garbage" or do you know? Did you personally make any erotic passes at Jesus only to be shunned away? Did he tell you that he wasn't gay. Did he tell you he was straight or maybe just a little bi-curious?

  10. Disappearinghead profile image89
    Disappearingheadposted 5 years ago

    At the same monastery where the lost fragment was found allegedly showing Jesus spending a night with a boy, another fragment showed up. In this one He fell off the tower of the local synagogue and landed in the back of a spaceship piloted by two aliens whose heads consisted of a single eye. He was taken into orbit where a mighty battle was raging. Their ship was shot down and they crash landed outside Jerusalem. Jesus climbed out unharmed whee he met a hermit who commented on his lucky escape.

    For crying out loud people !! roll

    1. 0
      Emile Rposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Aw man. Space ships and intergalactic battles. Why did they leave that out? That would have made an excellent book in the NT. smile

    2. 0
      Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      It's ironic that the joke you made isn't to far fetch from Jesus and all of his stories. Be careful, I wouldn't want a gullible Christian to come by and have his or her world turned upside down. lol

      Anyways there's more evidence for the existence of extraterrestrials than for Jesus. And mathematically speaking also.

  11. Doc Snow profile image96
    Doc Snowposted 5 years ago

    I want to respond, "Yes!"

    But that's probably just *too* short, so let me expand:

    "Yes!  He was heterosexual or homosexual."

  12. Druid Dude profile image60
    Druid Dudeposted 5 years ago

    Besides the twelve disciples, Jesus also had an "inner circle". The evidence is in the bible. The inner circle was composed of women, and is the principle reason why there are 24 judges on judgement day, not twelve. Jesus was compassionate to men and women. This doesn't require bi-sexuality or homosexuality. He loved...period. Peter, the one named as his cheif disciple said of Jesus: "He was a man of whom God approved." Therefore he slept, ate, urinated. His composition was the same as ours. The first church decided that to believe otherwise was blasphemy. His divinity and humanity are not contestable. He laughed, shed tears and was afraid. He was tempted, and we also can be tempted. There was nothing about him which was any different than us, for we are human and a product of divine nature. The spaceships and intergalactic battles were in the O.T. Jesus came to us, the P.O.W.'s. Thank you, and GOOD DAY!

    1. LookingForWalden profile image61
      LookingForWaldenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      So then, if he was like us there was a 10% chance he was gay.

      But for the way you described his love for male and female I'm thinking probable bi.

    2. Jerami profile image77
      Jeramiposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Yep  that just about sums it up.

      1. 0
        Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Ole fruity pants Jesus!

        1. Jerami profile image77
          Jeramiposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          When I reply with what I think, I'm just expressing (sharing) my thoughts as everyone has a right to do.

             Don't want to argue or "DEBATE" with anyone.

             Think what you will.

      2. couturepopcafe profile image60
        couturepopcafeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        In the interest of fair debate, the 10% chance does not imply absolutism.  If he was in fact without sin in the eyes of the believers, he would not succumb to his sexual inclination regardless of where it lay.  Christianity does not comdemn homosexuality in and of itself but the practice of it.

    3. couturepopcafe profile image60
      couturepopcafeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Druid - I've never heard any able to explain the 24 judges before.  How do you back this?  Seriously curious.

  13. olodarkwriter profile image60
    olodarkwriterposted 5 years ago

    Just a comment - you are all to be pitied.

  14. arekwhite profile image60
    arekwhiteposted 5 years ago

    dude he was the real man and he is still watches us but we can't see him he is so brighten like thousand of together, he made this all universe and how u can say about his sexuality he is the godfather of all the humans..

    1. Cagsil profile image61
      Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      roll

    2. 0
      Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      arekwhite- I'm curious if you will be able to receive this comment. I ask because while looking into your profile, it stated you had been banned from hubpages. I guess Jesus has a plan of us all, and his plan doesn't involve you blogging wink

      1. couturepopcafe profile image60
        couturepopcafeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Lighten up people.  Anyone who can attempt the English language as a second language is ok in my book regardless of his religious bent.  Some native English speakers do a worse job.

        1. 0
          Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          I wasn't poking fun at his "English". Just the fact he's banned from hubpages.

          1. couturepopcafe profile image60
            couturepopcafeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Ok.  My apologies.

            1. 0
              Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              wink

  15. secularist10 profile image90
    secularist10posted 5 years ago

    Before modern times, there was a bit less rigidity in concepts of sexuality. As marriage was usually an economic and legal agreement between families, "love" was often more the domain of close friends. In these heavily gender-segregated cultures, people probably felt more passion and excitement for their closest friends of the same gender than for their spouse who was chosen years earlier by their parents.

    We see this phenomenon in Victorian England and many conservative Muslim societies today, for example.

    The Old Testament makes reference to homosexual sex acts without actually saying much on "being gay" or "being straight" as an orientation per se.

    Jesus said precious little on sex acts, it is the modern Evangelicals who are so obsessed with them.

    1. livelonger profile image88
      livelongerposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Convenient distraction from all the things that Jesus talked about at length, that they'd rather ignore.

  16. hilda21 profile image60
    hilda21posted 5 years ago

    why dont you read the bible for yourself and see. Its not that hard to read

    1. 0
      Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I read a lot! I have read most of the bible, but maybe there's something that is interpreted as his sexuality preference that I myself didn't pick up. I also plan on starting on the Koran after Christmas! Cross you fingers that I don't go Muslim by summer. lol sad The reason I state this is because it's ironic , if in fact you're personally a god fearing person, someone who is so sure about their religion,  tells me to read the bible, when in doubt, I have an intellectual foundation of all the major religions, giving me more credit on the issue of 'God'.

      My point is, if you claim Christianity, how do you know their isn't something in the other holy books that wouldn't warrant changing your views? That's  like saying ranch is the best dressing and having only tasted ranch. 

      Don't worry, I'll wait for a response wink

  17. Druid Dude profile image60
    Druid Dudeposted 5 years ago

    Being that God is male and female, man was created male and female, as was Adam, then Jesus being man and God was both male and female. As are you. You had a mom, and a dad. The question is frivolous and frought with total misunderstanding of the nature of Jesus, Adam, man and God. Judge not.

    1. 0
      Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Is he? Was he? How do you know all of this? The bible is all about interpretations right? That's why we don't have slaves ect....... So why would your interpretation be better than mine?

      1. stclairjack profile image78
        stclairjackposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        to say that the bible is all about interpretation is not totaly untrue,..... to say that he bible is often miss interpreted,... or interpreted with alterior motives,... re-interpreted to justify a current position,... thats probably the more honest answer,....

        remember that justified slavery was justified by quoting the old testament.

      2. brotheryochanan profile image61
        brotheryochananposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Interpretations.
        Are you saying yours is right? Because any time anyone has an interpretation that is different than yours you cry foul... "that's only your interpretation" and therefore you must try to honestly consider all interpretations because yours may not be correct, But if you have an agenda or discrimination or a bias that you do not want to discover someones elses interpretation to be correct then that is a sorry position indeed.

        When an interpretation comes your way you should look to the source of that interpretation. If it comes from a christian chances are it is better than yours and it doesn't have to be a rock solid, miracle working christian either because if you haven't noticed no christian purport anything about Jesus sexual nature because in christianity 101 Jesus sexuality is of the given stance and therefore interpreted correctly that he was not as you imagine.

        Good luck resolving other interpretations

        1. LookingForWalden profile image61
          LookingForWaldenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Isn't this all you do?

          Like all day, everyday?

        2. 0
          Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          @brother-

          Is this directed at me? lmao?!?!?!  (The fasten your seat-belt light is on smile)

          A) (Your first question) Is that a rhetorical question? Obviously I have never claimed I had a better interpretation. Are you saying hers is better than mine? Who are you to judge whose "interpretation" is better? If there was any fact in the bible, Christianity wouldn't have a trillion different sects.

            "That in itself is evidence that religion (particularly Christianity), as we know it, holds no merit. If you have to redefine the "word of God," we are faced with a serious logical fallacy. You can change one's conception of scripture all you want, but it does not change the fundamental fact that religious doctrine, in its original form, is incompatible with the modern world. This is serious evidence that religion has mortal origins" -Sam Harris

          B) "When an interpretation comes your way you should look to the source of that interpretation." OKAY!!!!! Well lets take a further look in to that.  Instead of looking at the source, (I presume you mean the person who is making the interpretation) but what about where the interpretation is coming from. A 2k year old book who makes the same historical claims as any other holly book, who as just as much credibility. Have you read any other holly books? How do you know there isn't another "interpretation", in regards to religion in a general broad sense, that wouldn't strong hold you into leaving your current boyfriend Christ?

          C) Since we are on the subject of interpretation, I have a few questions to ask you. How does one get around some of these "interpretations"? I mean they are words right? They have meanings right? If one acted literally to these passages, how would they be misinterpreting the word of god? If I was a God fearing person, I would trust Jesus, and the people who wrote the books to the bible, right? Didn't you tell me in a previous comment that it was tradition for society back then to accurately depict the teaching of Jesus?

          *"I permit no woman to teach or have authority over men; she is to keep silent." Timothy 2:11

          *"He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord."(Deuteronomy 23:1)

          *If in spite of this you still do not listen to me but continue to be hostile toward me, 28 then in my anger I will be hostile toward you, and I myself will punish you for your sins seven times over. 29 You will eat the flesh of your sons and the flesh of your daughters."(Leviticus 26:27-30)

          *"And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into h**l, into the fire that never shall be quenched." (Mark 9:43)

          *"A b*****d shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord." (Deuteronomy 23:2) (the b*****d is bastard)

          Side Note- Straw man, or semantic based argument will not be accepted wink

          1. 0
            Cranfordjsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            .

 
working