I personally think Jesus's message about Love, and tolerance are FAR more important than his sexual preferences. Why is his sexual orientation so important for some people?
2007-07-02 05:32:30 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
That's a lie. I am a Biblical Scholar and know of no Biblical Scholar that would think that way.
2007-07-02 05:37:08 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 4⤋
Yeah, you really need proof of such an extraordinary statement. And bisexual gives you TWO things to prove, that this Jesus had sex with women and sex with men.
The homosexuals have an "urge" to promote or make homosexuality normative, an almost religious urge all mixed up with the sex-urge. And if they had to hide and deceive others about their homosexuality they soon see no reason to tell the truth about anything. I don't think they're very fun at parties when this urge hits them.
I suppose some fanatic from the Coca-Cola company, if he really, really, is a company man, would probably reason in a similar way, "We GOTTA make people believe that Jesus Christ drank Cherry Coke. We GOTTA!" Then all of a sudden he says most scholars believe from some "reading between the lines" that Jesus drank Cherry Coke. Others thought it was disgusting-tasting, and that's when Jesus said it's not what proceeds into a man that is unclean but what proceeds out of him (the gas and burping). In this he was like any other guy. Sure, why not? It's all the same bull.
And, no, Jack, that verse is not proof of anything unless it were clearly the Greek word "eros" (physical love) and not "agape" (love in the sense of regard). It was "agape".
2007-07-02 05:53:40 · answer #2 · answered by PIERRE S 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I would be interested in your list of Biblical Scholars. I have yet to read any Biblical scholar who has even hinted at this. I read extensively. In my own study as a pastor, I have seen nothing to indicate anything about Jesus' sexuality period.
Pastor John
2007-07-02 05:44:33 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
What Bible scholars? Please direct us to a single article or link which supports that claim? (Which you can not do be cause it is a false claim.)
If you take the time to actual read the Bible records of Jesus (and that is the primary source material a Bible scholar woyld consider) there is not a single verse of the New Testament which indicates a bi- or homo- tendency in Jesus.
Rather, the only time he spoke about sexuality, in Matthew 19, Jesus indicated that the best choice for a person was to be a eunuch, which is someone who foregoes both amrriage and sexual activities in order to dedicate themself full time to serving God and his kingdom. His statement placed him into the group. He was a eunuch.
There are those who take Jesus words about "loving their fellow men" and attempt to turn those into a pro-homosexual statement. But as any Bible scholar can tell you, it is not. The word used by Jesus for "love" is the Greek word "agape", which always speaks of a non-sexual relation between people. What he advanced was not a gay agenda, but a sexless agenda. Once in which the physical relationship were seen as unnecessary.
However, Jesus recognized - even in his eunuch statement - that not all people (in fact most people) are not called to make that deep of a committment to God. So he allowed, and even blessed, marriage for the rest.
The apostle Paul echoes those same teachings in 1 Corinthians 7 were he states that he wishes that all men could be like him - single and dedicated full time to serving Christ. But because most men (and women) would "burn with desire" if they were, God gave them marriage. Each man should have his own wife with whom to share intimacy so that they do not fall into sexual sins.
So the Bible does not indicate a Jesus who was "bi" or any other type of sexually active. Rather it shows a Jesus who was a "eunuch" for the kingdom of God.
2007-07-02 05:54:10 · answer #4 · answered by dewcoons 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The reason that the possibility of Jesus' sexuality bothers most, if not all, Christians is because the idea of dipicting Jesus in any sexual way whatsoever undermines the popular belief that he was divine. The Christian faith is based on Jesus' divinity therefore the idea of Jesus either being married or being in any way sexual undermines their entire belief system.
Although I am Atheist and believe that Jesus may have been married, I have never heard of him having been bisexual. If you have any sources, I'd like to see a link.
2007-07-02 05:44:36 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Since there is absolutely nothing in Scripture to suggest anything about the "sexuality" of God in the Person of Jesus Christ, anyone who conjurs up such an idea is not a "scripture scholar" in any sense, just a misguided daydreamer who really needs to find a hobby.
2007-07-02 05:53:49 · answer #6 · answered by PaulCyp 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
There is absolutely no evidence that supports that Jesus was homosexual or bisexual. Period.
Jesus did not come to earth to get involved in worldly pleasures. Jesus came to teach. Not only that, if people read the scriptures they will see that He did not have time to engage in any sexual encounters or romances. He was extremely busy preaching. The crowds followed Him everywhere. He barely had time to pray.
2007-07-02 05:55:51 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
mostly because it is rather like seeing your dad having sex. People have gotten to the point that they believe he was not human on ANY level (though they will SAY he was but they don't truly believe it) and sex is a human thing. Also that the Bible says that man can't have sex with other men. So they uphold their beliefs no matter what the scientists, scholars or anyone else says.
2007-07-02 05:38:33 · answer #8 · answered by † Seeker of Truth † 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I was under the impression that this was a minority view, though the Christian idea that he was asexual is not generally accepted either.
The Gospel of John is a dubious source for anything. The Synoptics more stronly imply that Jesus was heterosexual. They're still pretty vague, though.
Of course, especially in those days, having a wife didn't necessarily mean he was straight.
2007-07-02 05:47:09 · answer #9 · answered by Minh 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Because they want homosexuality to be accepted so badly, they make up stuff like "Most biblical scholars have concluded that Jesus was probably bisexual."
Yeah, that happened.
It's only important to those who need to find a reason to make Christianity look intolerant and wrong. Please don't make things up like that, you are just trying to get a rise out of people.
2007-07-02 05:39:29 · answer #10 · answered by melissa 5 · 3⤊ 3⤋
That's an interesting contention. Are there links to some of these articles.
Given that there is no independent historical evidence outside of the gospels regarding Jesus, I consider it completely irrelevant that Jesus even existed as a man/god. The only relevant concern is that 2 Billion people believe that he existed- and a fair portion of those feel that he believed that gay people were sinners.
2007-07-02 05:38:49 · answer #11 · answered by Morey000 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋