Did jesus have a penis?
Did jesus ever get stiff or was he divinely impotent?
Did jesus have balls with semen in them?
Did semen ever come from his balls out of his penis from say wet dreams?
If not, then how did the semen ever get replaced, semen has a short shelf life, if jesuses semen was never ejeculated then it would ROT IN HIS BALLS. 30 year old semen would be very rotten.
For wet dreams to occur them jesus would have had to have a dream, either about women, men or animals, what did jesus dream about?
From the logical pathway above we see that Jesus MUST have been a sexual being if he existed, whether he acted on that sexuality by masturbating or having sex is another Q.
However he must surely have at least had wet dreams, and dreamt about other beings having sex with him. Whether human women men or animals. So when he was awake he must surely have remembered these dreams, and also then looked upon fellow humen sexually.
If he was heretrosexual, then he would have looked sexually upon women, like the prostitute who bathed his feet with oil n hair.
Jesus said he was Son of Man or Son of Adam; so naturally he was not a woman; and his mother took him as a son not a girl.
Jesus must have married and have had children and proginey. Bible is an incomplete book, it only cover 3 years of his life; they missed a lot.
There is some material to that effect.
Talk about pinning the tail on the donkey.
You are seriously disturbed to even come up with this.
do you not know that the father came into this world to shed his blood ,for who soever believeth in him should not perish but have life everlasting for this purpose he came was born thru a virgin woman in the form of Jesus 100% human 100% god the perfect lamb for the slaughter knowing all human emotion,being tempted 40 daze of the devil in all manor of temptation resisting all ,in the beginning was the word,and the word was with god and the word was god.understand these truths all things were made of his will and without him was not anything made that was made in him was life, and the life was the light of men.the realm of god who can know,can the creation question the wisdom of the creator,foolish disobedent children ,where were you when the foundation of the world was layed.amen ,shalom
the reason i think is that to admit that jesus had sex would ruin the sin thing about having sex before your married. if he never had sex then he has no right condemming those who enjoy sex. christians love to use "sin" as a way of making anything they disagree with wrong.
Like couturepopcafe said, The Bible tells us that Jesus was tempted in all areas, as we all are. But He resisted all temptations.
Jesus had a purpose here on earth far greater than your outlandish imaginings. It's called offering to save your soul, if you can entertain the notion of something that gracious and awesome!
It is strange that the Christian set purpose for Jesus; in stead of Jesus himself describing it in his own words; perhaps Christian think they are wiser than their Jesus-god.
It's actually easy to understand why this happens. There is aboslutly no way to prove it one way or the other and nothing makes a christian more convinced that their opinion is fact. If you can't prove it, it must be as we say.
I wonder why it's taken so long to address the utter ignorance of male physiology expressed in the original post. Also the ignorance of just how choice affects sexual behavior. Men don't have to act like bonobos, looking with lust upon whoever takes their fancy, in order to be sexual human beings. In fact, Jesus spoke rather strongly against even looking upon anyone with lust in their hearts, saying it was tantamount to actual adultery.
Lol this is so gonna piss off the fundlementalists. Anyway I thought Jesus was married to Mary magdeline and they had a kid named Sarah. Now I don't know how accurate the da vinci code is but it makes more sense than anything I've read in the bible.. Just saying.....
lost in translation
but have a great night!
First you must have a demented mind to ask such questions. There is no documented proof in the Bible that Jesus ever married. Also sex outside of marriage would go against His religious beliefs.
Jesus was rare human being born out of no sexual intercourse. So those who are not born out of intercourse have no sexual drive and hence resort to opposing any type of sex - straight, homosexual.
he he he.
But my point is, he had an alpha "perfect" mans body.
Men are sexual, he couldnt have been a true man unless he was sexual.
Jesus was not impotent; the Christians are a weird people; the believe he was Omnipotent yet they don't mention of his being potent even.
Really Paarsurrey? Christians are weird people? One might could say the same thing about believing in a man who claimed to have been visited by an invisible angel that only he could see!
Do you really have to put christians down? I think you are not peaceful at all!
Would it really make any difference in his message if he was a sexual human being? As long as he followed the fathers instructions as to proper behavior?
It is said that he came to the earth to resist temptation.
And to give himself as a perfect sacrifice.
Would that include setting a perfect example for husbands to follow?
I think that it was customary for a priest, before he became a priest ... to be married. As it was also the custom to wait until the age of 30 before becoming a priest.
I personally have no problem believing that he might have had children. In fact his message might be enhanced by it ? I don't know.
The children would have to have been hidden from the "Beast" that is later prophesied in Rev.
That would be the only problem that I see.
Who knows ??
This thread is directed at christians who do have a problem with a sexualized jesus.
There are many problems with sexualized jesus producing children if you wished to discuss that, eg jesus is either an angel or god, what happened last time angels took on bodys and had sex with women?
The nephilim come to mind?
Pleeaaz the pure stupidity of your fingernail apologetics is simply mindboggling.
Jesus was not customary at all. He was really against tradition. Tradition makes Word of God invalid, He said.
Custom is tradition and he was not traditional at all. He opposed tradition.
It would be also uncustomary to get married and leave at age 33.
Jesus was free of genetic (DNA) marker of Adamic sin. There was no similar partner for Him. Besides it was not His mission to get married and have family.
Absoultely correct! I agree!!! He came to to Earth for one reason... not to marry or reproduce! He came to save the world from sin!
and here we are today, sinning all the time. if jesus was real and god was real then this "saving us from sin " makes no sense. i no , free will. well if we have free will then why would we need to be saved?
I think that being saved is referring to being saved from the punishment that we would otherwise have coming to us.
"Kinda" like being being an heir to the Howard Hughes fortune.
BUT because we don't know it, OR refuse to accept the fact; we don't claim it. our house is foreclosed on, and we are living under a bridge and hungry and cold.
But out debt has been paid.
But we don't see it that way cause the Day of Accounting doesn't come until we leave this world and are moving into the next.
This is not literal, but "KINDA LIKE"
I agree so much with you libby. And I am so thankful
Why do Christians insist that Jesus was not a sexual being
This thread is directed at christians who do have a problem with a sexualized jesus.
- - - -
I didn't read that in the OP. ALL Christians can not be put in the same "Box"
- - - - - =================================================
Antecessor wrote ... Pleeaaz the pure stupidity of your fingernail apologetics is simply mindboggling.
- - - -
You were sounding quite reasonable until that last comment.
A wise man once said ... "stupid is as stupid does"
I gotta go for a while anyway... Have a nice day !
Well you see most christians would actually say, Brenda Durham for example, that you Jerami are not a true christian because of what you believe about jesus having sex, thats what my thread is about ok.
I would also say you do not believe in god and jesus according to how they are presented in the bible, but that you give your own understanding and your own interpretation to the bible, which the bible say specifically not to do, lots of fingernail christians like yourself, who are halfway reasonable, do exactly the same.
The truth is, only fundamentalist christians who believe homosexuality is bad and the earth is flat, TRUELY follow the bible.
Just checked back in while eating breakfast.
The only reference to "NOT Interpreting" that I am aware of is in reference to PROPHESY of scripture.
These are said to be messages that come from God himself.
I also do not recall the bible stating whether Jesus was or was not married.
Too many people read things into scripture that are not actually stated.
If the definition of being a Christian is to believe everything that a religious leader tells us to believe!!
Then I don't want to be one!
But if reading scripture unabated by the reasoning of another person. And believing those things that are said to be spoken by God and Jesus ... if this is being a Christian ? I do sign up for that.
10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
I think that he knew that when anyone chose to follow him, this was going to cause strife between them and those that do not.
The sword is a symbol of the word of God. The two edged sword
He came to reveal sin (wrong doing) which cut asunder to the marrow.
There would be no peace when they saw their sin
I think the Christians should leave the symbol "Cross" which may only denote that the "innocents should be killed", or " the fathers should kill their sons" ; sword will be a better sign, perhaps and show the true face of Christian history; Jesus had nothing to do with that though.
This they hide; it will disturb their preaching spree. Instead the prefer " the other cheek" verse for preaching for the rest sword part the have " Just War Canon". Please don't go too deep. Are you supposed to go that deep?
Now that you mention it !! You are right !!
But then Forest Repeated it... Maybe he quoted his mom? lol Maybe his mom was the wise man ??
It says "He was tempted in every manner"
It is indicated in Hebrew that he married Mary Magdalene.
Since ancient times, Hebrew men sought a wife, and at a very early age.
Deborah, you do not know Jesus. It would be better know Him.
In all fairness, one must assume this logically: Jesus was sent/born as man to experience man's ordeals and therefore must have had desires of the flesh. But he could not and did not act upon them because then he would have sinned. End of story. I'm just sayin'.
But desires of the flesh are not automatically wrong. It's only when it's used as an expression denoting desires not of God that it means wrong desires. Eating, sex, drinking, exercise, work... all those are desires of the flesh but they're not sinful. The Bible says not to be a whore but it never condemns sex itself as sinful.
I liked the movie from long ago called "The Last Temptation of Christ" because it assumed that being married, having children, living a normal life was Jesus's temptation - and why wouldn't it be? I've sometimes wondered about what he did about sexual desire but I don't actually see why it would matter. It's no sin to marry. (Or to do what guys do...he would have just been considered unclean for the specified period of time. He was always touching unclean people and becoming ritually unclean anyway, how would that be different?)
I'm certainly no Bible scholar but I think Jesus' temptation was when Satan tried to seduce him into using His power to possess the land and the riches and everything else, to use His power for His own personal gain.
I believe the only way one was 'allowed' to have sex was after marriage, not before. So if He didn't marry, he could not know a woman. Marriage itself wasn't the sin.
I think the reason He did not marry was because it supposedly did not serve the reason He came. There was to be no physical heir. He came to fulfill a certain agenda and marriage was not part of it. I guess someone will come on with chapter and verse.
Because it would be like imagining your parents having sex.
And that just plain yucky!
Why do Christians insist that Jesus was not a sexual being?
Having any knowledge of the political climate of the first century; can you imagine what would have happened to any off spring of the Messiah, if he had had any?
His followers would have kept that fact a secret.
And the Church that the Roman Empire built would not have allowed his heirs to come forward.
Maybe he did and maybe he didn't. One thing for sure..., no one wanted it to be known if he did.
But myself ? .. He may have gotten married but I am fairly confident that he didn't have any children.
He would have known that the end of time for the Hebrew Nation was to soon come.
He would have known that the Hebrew people were going to be scattered throughout the rest of the world; not being allowed within any city in Israel for over 1650 years.
I don't think that he would have allowed his children to have to go through that ordeal.
Jesus never married! It says Jesus never sinned! If he never married and did not sin then he could not have had sex! The scriptures and all the other writings there is no evidence whatsoever to think this!
Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit in the desert, where for forty days he was tempted by the devil. He ate nothing during those days, and at the end of them he was hungry. The devil said to him, "If you are the Son of God, tell this stone to become bread."
Jesus answered, "It is written: ‘Man does not live on bread alone.’ "
The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. And he said to him, "I will give you all their authority and splendor, for it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to. So if you worship me, it will all be yours."
Jesus answered, "It is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God and serve him only.’ "
The devil led him to Jerusalem and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. "If you are the Son of God," he said, "throw yourself down from here. For it is written: " ‘He will command his angels concerning you to guard you carefully; they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.’ "
Jesus answered, "It says: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’ "
When the devil had finished all this tempting, he left him until an opportune time.
Many argue there are signs in the bible that point to him being married. But I have studied it in great detail and found nowhere saying he was married, nor have I found anyting leading one to believe he could have been married! Mary Magdeline had 7 demons in here and Jesus cast them out. She persued Jesus and is consistently with them all. Whe was devoted to him because he healed her! I think people confuse an old tradition with the Jews with him being married to her.... Jews kissed other Jews on the lips just as we shake hands. I believe this is part of the misconception!
There is simply no hard evidence that Jesus Christ was married to Mary Magdalene or any other woman. The vast majority of scholars, whether they are liberal or conservative, agree that Jesus Christ was not married.
"For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world" (1 John 2:16).
Since Jesus came from the father, he could not have the lusts of the flesh... lusts of the flesh is from this world! Read the scriputre above!
"For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin" (Hebrews 4:15).
Jesus came to this world but was not of this world! He was tempted but could not sin! Those who believe that Jesus could not have sinned do so based upon His nature as God. Since God cannot be tempted to sin, and Jesus was God, then Jesus could not have sinned. This is known as the impeccability of Christ.
He was tempted by satan and God allowed this to prove sin can be overcome! It was impossible for him to have sinned because God cannot sin!
James 1:13-15—Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone. But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.
Again... God/Jesus cannot be tempted by sin! It is he who has his own desires who gets enticed... if you do not have desires you cannot be tempted. Satan tempted Jesus but Jesus was not tempted to act upon them! He could not have sinned and God cannot be tempted!
Again, Christ faced no such struggle because His one and only desire was to do the will of the Father. He could not be led to stray even when He was at the point of death. Matthew 27:34, Mark 15:23—Then they gave Him wine mingled with myrrh to drink, but He did not take it. He would not so much as take anything to dull the pain of the torture He was enduring.
While Satan may have tested Jesus, to see if He would sin, and while Satan tried every way he could to lead Jesus to sin, there was no way that Jesus would have ever even considered sinning against the Father—because He did not have our sinful nature. We, however, are tested by our own fleshly lusts and desires that bring forth nothing but death.
Whenever the bible speaks of Jeus' natural relatives it speaks of his father, his siblings and his mother... but never does it speak of a wife! To believe that Jesus had a wife yet
most reliable accounts of Jesus' life failed to mention one of the most salient aspects of that life. How unlikely!
If Jesus and Mary had been married, then we should expect that he would have entrusted her into the care of the Beloved Disciple at the cross, just as he did with his mother. The absence of this action strongly suggests that Jesus and Mary were not married.
I believe Jesus was unique!! And, I'm sure everyone can agree with that? We know that Jesus was fully God and fully human when he walked among men! It is true this is hard to comprehend and he surely could have very well married and remained sin free...however, in what I've read and studied (including the bible) and writings after the bible I do not see any evidence to support this theory! There is not enough evidence to assume in any way that Jesus was married to anyone, much less Mary Magdeline! I can speculate why he would not marry... I
imagine that Jesus realized his unique calling was incompatible with marriage and family life. I believe Jesus knew his calling and it was his life! He was sent for a reason... and I believe he did not marry because of the demands of his calling for his Father!
And I hardly think that if Jesus fathered children they wouldn't be mentioned, these would be grandchildren of God... think about that... I think it was not Jesus calling to be married. He was sent for a purpose!
If it were a court of law and one would have to prove that Jesus was married by the scriptures and all other writings of that time... the evidence would be null!
I don't think that he was either.
I also think that if he had gotten married it would not have changed the message that he taught.
But "IF" he had? There wouldn't be any evidence to be found.
I don't think that he married or there would have been children.
And that would not fit within the purpose of his coming.
And as I said above... He would have known the hardships that were soon to come into the world. He would not have subjected offspring to such conditions.
@libby101a how come sex becomes sin?..if it does...biggest sinner would be god who introduced sex as way to produce offsprings..god could have given different options but god gave sex...so sex cannot be sin..
Sex doesn't become sin. We humans make it into sin when we do it out of marriage.
I think sex is good when done within God's commandments!
But Jesus had a purpose. He wasn't sent here to have heirs and reproduce as we were. He was sent to save the world from sin.
Humans purpose was to reproduce and multiply. Jesus purpose was to come into this world and save us from our sin.
Jesus was a male; his mother new and from her the others.
He had parts special for a male.
Jesus had a mouth; he used it for eating, drinking and talking. Jesus had a nose to breath; he had hands to pick things; feet to walk about.
He had male parts; for what use?
He did marry and had children; he was potent and not impotent.
with respect - let's hear the evidence to back your argument, paarsurrey. speculation is not part of good debate form.
There are people in Kashmir; northern part of Pakistan who say they are from the progeny of Jesus. When Jesus came to India after the event of Crucifixion in which he survived miraculously as he had prophesied; Mary Magdalene also accompanied him; and being in the line of David he could marry and have more wives; that was very natural for him; why deny him his natural faculties.
Paarsurrey. I've met people who claim to be kin to the Easter bunny too!
There is nothing in the bible or any other writings to indicate Jesus was married or had heirs. You are just trying to back your claim that Jesus was nothing more than a prophet and this serves your purpose well. Well, nobody is buying into your prophet Muhammad's babblings... he clearly had his motives to do what he did! But that is another story all in it's own right!
JESUS blood is before Apple.[ The Holy birth]
Our blood is after Apple - We can feel and know sex at what age pl tell me [may be at the age of 10 or .... ]
The before Apple Blood may take more than 30 years after Birth to get & feel sex.
This one is a no brainer.
Jesus did not have sexual relations even though a lot of women desired the man who could heal and was a prominent person and completely interesting to talk to.
Jesus came to do the fathers will. Jesus had a mission and that mission was
1) to preach the gospel of christ
2) to die as a willing sacrifice on the cross
Spiritual common sense dictates that Jesus did both preach the gospel and die on the cross. Seeing as jesus was a man of duty and serious about what God wanted, born of a virgin, (imagine hearing that story if you were not already aware of God in you).
There is a difference between living, according to the desires (food, entertainment, shelter, etc) or the lusts (sexual anxiety, greed, selfishness, etc) of the flesh (body and its mechanisms)
1 John 2:16 "For all that is in the world, the lust
of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride
of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world"
Jesus was in all ways tempted as we are. Jesus was tempted by all the lusts and desires that we experience because he lived in a fleshly body. Jesus overcame everything perfectly. There was no sin in jesus and jesus did not marry to prevent the sin of fornication, he overcame the lusts of the flesh.
How did he do that
The same way christians today overcome their ungodly impulses.
Galatians 5:16 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit,
and you shall NOT fulfill the lusts of the flesh.
You have heard many christians say that God resides in them, indeed many with a false belief claim the same thing. So, here comes one of my favorite sayings, it is only God in us that stops us from sinning.
And of course jesus was the God of the bible (yahweh) in flesh, come down to show us how to do all things. This is why God was born of a woman, to experience flesh. And this is why jesus was hung on the cross, to be the last blood sacrifice of that system (a lamb substitute without blemish) to prepare the way for a great host of people to also do as Jesus had done. No greater love has any God shown in that He should sacrifice his only son that a world might be saved.
Absoultely. I believe many want to make Jesus like us. But Jesus was unique. He was God in the flesh. He was tempted but he did not give in to those temptations because it is impossible for God to sin!
if he wasn't able to have the lusts of the flesh, he wasn't really a man, so how could he really know the temptations of humans.
How far does one go before you consider it sin ie these "lusts of the flesh".
eg if he had a dream desiring a woman, is that sin?
Or was he never equipped with semen etc?
You would have to know the Jewish way of Life. Marriage was created for man. He made woman and man for each other. Hebrews seek marriage very young. They are very devoted to their family.
Being married helps them keep from having sex outside of marriage.
Yahshua. So what if he was married. Does that make him any less than who he is? What’s the big deal and why has the church put so much effort into stressing his singleness? The church and its hidden motives need to be looked at, seriously. The church, the original beginnings that turned into the Roman Catholic religion that was instrumental in changing things to suit its own hidden agenda; things like the original appointed holy days as determined by YHVH, according to the books we call the bible or torah or Tanakh.
I'm pretty sure no one is disputing the corruption of the old Catholic church. It's not the church putting so much effort into his singleness. It just is what it is.
I don't think it's impossible... however I believe Jesus was much more than our fleshly brains can imagine! He was sent for one reason! He was God in the flesh and therefore I believe he did nor marry for his purpose was greater than that!
I believe it doesn't matter. One could say he was or he wasn't but either way the scripture does not prove he did or he didn't! I believe by the life of Jesus recorded in the bible that he did not marry. He was not your usual man... his purpose was a higher calling!
I don't agree with your. Jesus never claimed he was a god in flesh; it was later added by the Church.
He was flesh and bones; a son of man.
yes paar, jesus was born of a woman and do not forget this important little bit of information... GOD was the father.
You don't get a holy spirit conceived zygote and not have the dna or the traits of the father.. what are the traits of God... Spirit!
Jesus lived by the spirit and did not fulfill the desires of the flesh.
Given DNA and zygotes are physical body things, I don't see how a spirit is supposed to possess these
And if he was conceived of spirit, why does he have a geanelogy (that varies widely in names and number of generations) if no sperm used?
I don't agree with you. Father,mother and the off-spring have to be from the same specie. God was not father of Jesus; Mary did not marry with Christian-god; the marriage did not get solemnizes and there are no witnesses to it; was it an illegal act?
It is also not scientifically possible.
It is only a mythical part of the so called Christianity; it has got nothing to do with Jesus and/or Mary; they never believed in it.
Yahshua was a Jew.
For him to be single, would be to consider him out of balance and incomplete.
Things left out of scripture means people know only half truths.
Christianity and the Catholic church all came from the Pauline doctrine (except the Narazenes)
Male and female, created equally the same by the same Creator; created as two physically, yet one for they are the same, each with his or her own strength. The female is by very nature and as spoken of in the Bible/Torah, wisdom. She would rule wisely and not with intimidating fear to control people, but to allow people to live and be as intended by the Creator of all that is.
It is more likely that Yahshua would not been married than not.
The bible speaks for itself. Jesus never married and he never sinned.
The christian-god should not have been any gender; just neutral.
Paarsurrey I would not expect you to understand! He came to Earth as a man... human... not something people could not relate to!
Paarsurrey believe what you want to... it's your right!
Yes he was not god; just a man who marries and has children. If he could not marry; then he should have been of a neutral gender.
What need he had to be a male?
Paarsurrey did you not see the word "peace"????
He was not just a man. He came to Earth with a purpose! He came as a man for a reason. If you do not understand the smallest concepts of the Bible, which I see from other posts that you don't, then how on earth could you understand why Jesus was a man?
You can argue against the Bible all you want... but the fact is the Qu'ran was all hearsay.... people memorized events and they weren't recorced for many, many years after Muhammad was dead and gone!
Think about a few facts will you??
1. You seem determined to undermine Jesus as God's son and the Bible's truths, yet your own Qu'ran is merely hearsay.
2. You put a lot of faith in a man who pushed war, took booty (openly admitted to theft), had more wives than allowed by what the Qu'ran says, and took his step son's wife (which was a direct result from divorce which was brought forth because of Muhammad wanting the woman sexually), and many other immoral issues with this man.
3. God always calls his prophets himself... yet with Muhammad we find (by Muhammad's word) that an angel came to him and called him for God. If this is true then why coudn't Muhammad do miracles as the rest of the prophets could that were called by the one true God?
There are many, many more I could write but I wont. I don't feel like typing it all! But I think you should really look at the life of Muhammad to understand why people don't agree with you. He was not a prophet of God... he wasn't even a moral man! He was a warmonger and thief who led many wars just for the booty. He allowed his men to rape women from villages they took over through war.
If anyone should be looking at their religion and questioning it.. it should be you Paarsurrey!
Now peace and stop trying to say Jesus was just a man! In the end, when you stand before God... and he asks you why you did not accept his son... you can argue with him as he tells you "depart from me, for I never knew you because only through my son can you enter the gates of heaven".
So good luck with your life Paarsurrey and stop persecuting christians... but you realize the Bible foretold people would!
by jewish Law the male 'inherits' all that the father has when he (jesus) dies... not the female.
The males are listened to
The males are in places of authority
It makes complete sense that jesus could not have been a female or a transgender.
When we die we inherit all that God has for us.
Colossians 3:24 Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ.
Well I just say I don't know a lot regarding jesus life etc but you have discussed very interesting topic. I must say this is quite informative.
Don't ever join spiritual discussions, but....
I love the way God confirms things for us in the scriptures. I have never found a concept that is singular and mentioned only once. When the Lord conveys a point, He makes that point at least twice in the Bible -- and sometimes more.
I feel it's important to point out that Jesus or Yeshua is not the only young unmarried Hebrew person in the New Testament. Mary, Martha (2 sisters) and Lazarus (their brother) were surely single (Luke 10, John 11). The scriptures state that it was "Martha's home" that Jesus was welcomed to.
As unmarried women, Mary and Martha relied on Lazarus for income and protection. I'm sure their parents were already dead. Martha is depicted as a devoted homemaker in charge of the household. Lazarus probably lived with his two sisters. If he were married, his wife would have entreated Jesus the way Martha did when she said, "Lord, if you had been here, our brother would not have died."
The resurrection of Lazarus was an absolutely pivotal moment in the gospel accounts, and it was a single man that Jesus raised from the dead. Is there a better hint that single people were considered worthy, if not traditional?
Would these three unmarried Jews be considered odd in society? Most likely VERY odd. But they weren't ostracized. Did one or all of them marry sometime later? Yes, I have no doubt. But at the time of this account, they were all single.
But Jesus never married. God's plan for the Messiah was for a more exalted purpose -- the salvation of souls.
I agree completely! Thanks for bringing this up! It makes a good point!
From the Old Testament, Jeremiah (another Jew) was commanded by the Lord to be single his entire life. He's the other example I can remember.
It has nothing to do with what Jeremiah "desired". In point of fact, this meant that Jeremiah lived with unfulfilled desires.
For all we know, he could have been in love with a special girl, but had his plans changed dramatically.
I will never put down anyone in this thread who does not understand celibacy as examined from many diverse points of view. My own personal history has given me the ability to "get it." It's OK to question and doubt, as far as I am concerned.
Its amazing how our minds work . . .
We believe in a human God, with flesh and blood, died for our sins over 2000 years ago to save man, performed great miracles and we argue a point of whether he was man or not . . . I'm a logical person and can't find logic in discussing what we think happened 2000 years ago when all we have is a book half filled with information that could easily have been twisted, changed and edited over time . . .
In conclusion I think we should all wake up and smell the present and see the world for what it is - full of sin, ruled by evil, democracy and everything the bible says we shouldn't do - what was the point of jesus in the first place . . .
If Jesus actually existed, I'm sure he was no different from anyone else. I'm sure he and Mary Magnalin wined, dined, and sixty-ni.... I meant "had some fun".
I believe that Jesus was indeed human in every way but sin. So, I would imagine that he was tempted sexually - possibly in His dreams, as you mentioned, and certainly in His waking hours. As an unmarried man (according to canonical scriptures), he would not have acted on His sexual desires. I believe He sublimated the energy in other ways that were as constructive as sex can be for those in marriage.
I know you said you had directed the OP to those who did not believe that Jesus was a sexual being. My reply is primarily directed toward those folks as well.
I think for us to yammer on about Jesus' humanity, yet deny His sexuality is asinine. Fully God and Fully Man - Fully Man seems to indicate to me that He would have experienced, with great awareness, His own sexuality, but would have chosen not to act on it in what would have been considered a sinful manner.
My personal opinion as to whether Jesus was ever married? Given the importance that he placed on the sanctity of marriage in the canonical scriptures, and given the importance that the Christian Church places on it as well, if Jesus had been married, there would have been no desire on anyone's part to keep it hidden. So, I think, if there's no mention of it in scripture, then he remained a single, celibate man until his death. -- Just a thought.
VERY interesting question.
The thing is nobody knows much/or anything about him. Anything written about him didn't appear 30 years after he supposely died by biographers who never met him.
I wasn't speaking from a position of authority, Paul. That's why I started the post with the words, "I believe..." What we know about Jesus, we know from Scripture. That's the Jesus I have examined, in light of, first, Jewish tradition, and, later, Church history.
You appear to have missed Paul's point entirely. If you "believe and imagine" those things about Jesus, then so did the biographers who never met him that wrote the Scripture, hence you believe what others believed and imagined.
Yes, thank you for pointing out my foolishness. It's much appreciated, as usual.
It is not foolishness to follow your heart.
However, It is foolishness to put your heart upon the foolishness of others.
I did...because I've come to recognize that if I say it first, it usually keeps you quiet. Apparently, it didn't work this time.
Where have I called you "foolish"? And, how is your believing and imagining of Jesus any different from those who wrote about him but never met him, nor had anything whatsoever to establish their writings?
In all fairness, you did not call me foolish. And, what difference does it make if my belief or imaginings about Jesus are different or identical to that of those who wrote the scriptures if I very clearly state it as a belief, rather than as a fact that you must believe in? It certainly doesn't take anything away from your lack of belief or your surety that you're more rooted in reality than I.
I was answering the OP - no more, no less. In fact, I was pointing out to the sweeping generalization made in the OP that not all Christians do, in fact, believe that Jesus was not a sexual being.
More than anything, I was being a smarta$$, and I apologize.
Thank you, I appreciate the acknowledgment.
Clearly, it does make a difference as to who is rooted in reality. You must believe it to be fact or else you wouldn't be a Christian. Are you honestly stating that all of your beliefs are just imagined beliefs and have no bearing on reality at all, that they are no more valid or credible than any given fairy tale or myth? Seriously?
Absolutely, I wouldn't have it any other way.
I do believe it to be fact. But it is something I cannot prove and therefore I do not attempt to sell it to anyone else as such. I do not demand the same belief (or lack of belief) as mine from others. I simply express what I believe and move on about my business. If I don't feel that I can contribute anything to a conversation, I keep my mouth shut. I know that I'm a rare bird, but you will never find me trying to convert you, trying to convince you, or anything else. I will state my beliefs if one asks (which the OP did) and respond to any direct questions that might come my way.
The fundy Christians don't like it, and you guys on the other side of the fence don't generally either. Thankfully, I'm old enough to not want to be "in" with either crowd. I'm perfectly comfortable here in the middle.
Then, you make my point.
That is exactly what a discussion forum is all about. However, the fact that believers believe what they do is due to indoctrination, which is a cycle of child abuse that needs to be resolved as it destroys the capacity for the mind to develop properly. And, that can be seen here in spades with the presenting of those beliefs.
That's fine, but it does nothing to solve the problem of childhood religious indoctrination, but instead only promotes it further.
And here is where we see that you believe something that you can't prove as fact. There are those believers who never heard a word about God as children. I suppose that my saying that will cause a great deal of conflict, and so, I will head back into my shell like the good little "indoctrinated" turtle you believe me to be.
Really? Are you sure about that? There are a great deal of books, articles and papers regarding the indoctrination and inculcation of religious beliefs. In fact, it has been shown that parents simply cannot avoid indoctrinating their children when they impart their religious beliefs.
So what? The vast majority of all people on the planet have been indoctrinated into their parents religion. Do Muslim parents raise Christian or Jewish kids? Do Christian parents raise their children under Islam?
Are you honestly saying your parents were not Christians? Are you saying your parents did not raise you with their beliefs?
Yes. I am honestly saying that my parents did not raise me with their beliefs.
I also am in agreement with you that extremist religious indoctrination is an evil that should be done away with. But, I also say that extremist unbelief is dangerous as well. Anytime someone violently pushes their views onto another person (regardless of what those views may be) chaos will result for the individual who is being put upon.
Fair enough, although I don't believe it because almost every single believer here has stated the exact same thing.
So, let's get this straight.
A magical super being one day decided to create the universe and the earth in six days, then went on to create a baby inside of a women without conception, which grew to manhood and was crucified only later to rise from the dead because he was also a magical super being. All this from a book written by a group of individuals centuries ago.
And, you believe that is and conforms perfectly to our reality and everything we know and understand about the world around us, despite the fact the universe shows no signs whatsoever as being created by a magical super being and also exhibits the the natural laws that actually prohibit the existence of that very same magical super being.
Have I got that right?
I'm not a bible thumping fundy or radical creationist. I don't believe that the earth was created in six days.
I believe in the virgin birth, the crucifixion, and the resurrection.
I do not believe that it conforms to the reality that I know, but I am not embarrassed or ashamed to say so. I am only familiar with the reality I know, but there may be much beyond it. I simply cannot be comfortable saying that I know all there is to know about everything. Period.
Then, you are contradicting yourself and are cherry picking the bible for what YOU want to believe as opposed to what your religion and your god wants you to believe.
I understand that. However, there is a great deal of knowledge and understanding in regards to what we do know about the world around us, every bit of it is experimentally verified. Becoming more familiar with those concepts will help you to understand the world around you and help understand that the beliefs of virgin births and resurrections are just fantasy and myth.
Unless of course, you want to believe in fantasy and myth. That's a different story altogether which involves indoctrination.
Perhaps I'm okay with fantasy and myth. And, cherry picking has always been one of my favorite activities. As to indoctrination, I'll let you fly with that one, because I honestly just don't feel like fighting it. What it boils down to is that I believe there are portions of the bible that are allegorical, portions that are literal, and portions that are coded due to the circumstances of the day. Crazy, I know, but whatcha gonna do? Honestly, though, I'm worn out for today. Perhaps we can make another appointment for discussion. I will say that I've enjoyed our discourse today like I never have before. Not sure what that's about.
There is only indoctrination, not various levels or magnitudes. One simply accepts doctrine without any question or critical thought, that's indoctrination.
I am not sure why it matters how often or not that Jesus got boners, or how often, or when he came... but um, the only answer to this question is yes. If Jesus existed and if he was a human male (Son of God stuff aside) of course he was a sexual being.
Well, if your goal was to ask a question that nobody has ever asked before, I think you accomplished your goal. But, is this really a question we need to ask? As...in who cares?
Some priests never marry, and claim that they never have any kind of sex, not even masturbation. But, you know that's a big lie. So, why would anyone question Jesus? What's the point?
This is also the first time I have heard someone say that the Church claiming any religious figure was a sexual anything. They even claim that Mary gave birth to Jesus without having sex with anyone. But there certainly was a lot of "begots" going on.
The biggest one of all is Adam and eve...and apparently Adam was here first, then Eve, then two sons, then Adam died, yet there are suddenly all these other people. Meaning that we are all children of incest, which the church will deny...claiming the whole beasts in the field BS. They just can't admit that the story of Adam and Eve and the bible is too full of holes to be possible. Which is why they still try to pick apart the bible every day for hundreds of years to justify it.
And the debate will go forever.
No Problem,If you do not believe that earth is created in six days,but you must believe that there is someone who is created it.
Just a comment. A day is based on the rotation of the earth. It seems to me that in order for the timing, wouldn't the earth have to be created on the first day in order for whomever came up with this to claim it was done in six days? That and the whole Earth is only 4,000 years old nonsense, when various bones of people and possible villages have been found that were older than that? Just sayin.
I think the early church probably erased all information that might have shed some light on who he was other than his role as savior. Probably to avoid arguments like this thread. If he was going to be held up as the son of God, he had to have a godlike life. Above possible reproach. In every way.
I think there are enough passages in the gospels nuanced to imply an intimate relationship with Mary. Coupled with the gnostic gospels, and the vilification of Mary early in the church's history; it's difficult not to wonder.
Why it would matter, is beyond me; but it obviously upsets the religious to consider the possibility.
The opposite of heavenly attributes of perfection is bodily function.
by glassvisage 2 years ago
How has being a Christian improved your life?
by Sondra Rochelle 3 years ago
How do you define the word "Christian"?The word Christian is used so casually anymore. I often wonder if people really understand what it means to be a true Christian. Is it just all about religion, or is there a deeper meaning? I am curious to hear your thoughts.
by Peeples 6 years ago
Is someone only a Christian until they screw up?Many are saying the horrible things happen because of lack of God. Many people who do bad grow up in the church and as an adult suffer a break and do something bad. My question to Christians is this, is someone only Christian until they do something...
by Demas W Jasper 3 years ago
How do you define the traits of a Christian?Anyone can claim to be a Christian. When you consider what that should mean, what do you look for to see whether or not its more than just a claim?
by Beth100 8 years ago
So many times, a child will come up to me and explain that their religion is Christianity. Other times, it is an adult who makes that statement to me. However, when I ask them to explain what a Christain is, they cannot. When I ask what the differences is between the Christain religions...
by Barine Sambaris 2 years ago
What is the difference between being religious and being a Christian
Copyright © 2019 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|