Just because he was gay, people shouldn't get upset. It's his message of love and tolerance that should count. NOT his sexuality!!
2007-07-23 02:53:37 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Hmmm....let me know where you work out. I want to avoid THAT gym.
2007-07-23 02:57:07 · answer #1 · answered by Seeker 6 · 6⤊ 1⤋
Wait, which scholars think He was gay? Is it the same ones who have spread the misinformation that the New Testament wasn't written until the 4th century? Because it wouldn't surprise me.
It's not true. Jesus spoke out against sexual immorality, and homosexuality (according to the Bible) is considered sexually immoral.
THAT'S why something like that would bother me. That would mean, if Jesus acted on being gay, that He was a fornicator, therefore a sinner, and therefore NOT the Son of God.
2007-07-23 10:06:25 · answer #2 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
1. it doesn't matter.
2. where did you get that?
3. The culture of the time was exactly what he did. men often segregated themselves from women.
4. it was also culture to marry a women, not men. even for the Romans.
5. it doesn't make any sense.
6. it sounds more like some one making a rationalization to cover up there own activities.
7. do you know very many gay Jews?
8. I could go on but I'm sure that your false rationalization has clouded your judge and only fortified in what you now perceive as righteous acts, when they are anything but.
2007-07-23 10:09:25 · answer #3 · answered by Coool 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You have taken the time to actual read the Bible at least in part, right? Then you are probably aware that the statement "Jesus spend most of his time around men" is wrong.
According to the scriputres, Jesus had several women who traveled with his disciples, listed in Luke 5 amoung other places. And according to I Corinthians 7, Peter and other of the disciples took their wives with them. This was unusual because normally in Jewish society, only men were literate and allowed to hear from Rabbis. Jesus was unusual in that allowed women and child to hear his teaching, and to reach his blessings.
When you read the Gospels, you will find that Jesus made four major ":tours" through Judah and Israel over a 3 and 1/2 year period. Most of these last about 3-4 months. During those times, his disciples would join him for teaching. The rest of the year, they returned home to their wives, families, businesses, etc. Several of the disciples are listed in scripture as having businesses. At least four of them (Peter, Andrew, James and John) were still in business for a time after the resurrection fo Jesus.
During his travels, there is not a hint of sexual contact between Jesus and his disciples. It is possible for men to spend time together without screwing each other. In the scriptures, when it speaks of Jesus "loving" his disciples, the word used ("agape") is a word which always has no sexual meaning to it. Rather it specifically means a "Platonic" or non-sexual relationship. So the gospel writers specifically state that there was NOT a sexual relationship between Jesus and his disciples.
Had they wanted to leave the door open for a sexual relationship, the gospel writers could have used the word "philao" for love instead. It is found once in a conversation between Jesus and one of his disciples. In John 21, when Jesus asks Peter if they have an "agape" relationship, and Peter answers yes. Jesus then ask if they have only had a "philao" relationship and Peter denies it. So it explicitly states that there was no sexual relationship between Jesus and at least Peter, if not all the disciples.
So if you read the surviving records the relationships between Jesus and his disciples, you will find no hint of a sexual relationship between himself and any of them. If there was such a relationship, none of them was willing to admit it. Rather all four writers go out of their way to state that there was no such relationship between them.
So while the current "fad" it to try to find a way to "prove" that everyone famous was gay, there is no evidence within either the scriptures or any of the non-bible records of Jesus to suggest such a relationship.
2007-07-23 10:12:29 · answer #4 · answered by dewcoons 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Jesus was not Gay, if you went to a ball game with all men then we could call you Gay.
What your saying is that someone must be gay just because they hang out with men, You know nothing about the culture at the time, Men thought women were less than dogs, but if you really read the Bible you will see that Jesus talked with women also.
Woman at the well
Mary
Martha
The woman caught in adultry and ect.
2007-07-23 10:00:58 · answer #5 · answered by Cookyduster 4 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Biblical scholars?
Jews, as do Muslims, believe in segregation of the sexes. JEWISH MEN DANCE WITH EACH OTHER.
Can't be much of a Biblical Scholar if you don't understand "like must be with like."
Who are these Biblical Scholars. Sounds like they are publishing without peer review.
2007-07-23 09:58:32 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Nice nickname. Obviously you got some good sources. I ain't met a single respected Biblical scholar that has ever said anything thing close to this. I've heard some weired out wackos say that.
But then again with screen name like yours, what can i expect?
List a source or it didn't hapen.
-Pitbull Fever, Catch It!!
2007-07-23 09:57:33 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
No bibical scholar that this one has heard of, nor had the pleasure to study with presumes nor professes the opinon that Yoshua bar Yoseph (i.e., Jesus, in Greek) was a homosexual.
Homosexuality was strictly forbidden in the Hebrew scxriptures and was punishable by death from stoning.
No rabbi (i.e., teacher) would have been homosexual.
The information you are presenting is not only inaccurate but scandalous.
Please, in the future, do your research before opining such dribble.
2007-07-23 10:00:11 · answer #8 · answered by Big Bill 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Other say because of his age, he probably had a wife as well as children- and that also bothers people. I think folks need to be focusing on the MESSAGE not the MESSENGER. He had some nice things to say. What he was in life shouldn't change things unless he was a hypocrit.
2007-07-23 10:20:31 · answer #9 · answered by Frootbat31 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Jesus was spiritually enlightened to the point where he had no sexual preference. He loved us all the same. Jesus was not interested in sex, but was only concerned with the spiritual side of man.
2007-07-23 10:12:46 · answer #10 · answered by monte54que 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They don't like you telling them that their God was or could have been a gay person,but i think you are on to something,
as all i ever heard was that Christ was always hanging around the guy's,is that why church minister's prefere boy's
more so than females.Think about it,how many churches
have had the clergy removed from teaching the word of God.
2007-07-23 10:07:52 · answer #11 · answered by the-Devil-is-King 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋