Can you show me where jesus, not Paul condemns or even speaks of homosexuality?

Question

What besides Paul's teaching and your own bias to you have to suggest jesus would condemed homosexuality?

Jesus seemed to speak more on the sins of the spirit, not of the body. He also seemed most comfortable among what at that time was seen as societies outcasts. Why would you assume he would think differently today?

So is this one of those OT laws you have cherry picked to stay, I thought he got rid of most of them?

Crystal, I said without your own bias or assumptions.

amir el muhammady-I guess thats just another reason I am not at all a fan of Islam.

Kimo-So then all Mosaic law is still in place? Stop cherry picking

Answer 1

Jesus never mentioned homosexuality. Many will try to twist His words about marriage between a man and a woman into some sort of blanket indictment of gay people, but it was nothing of the sort.

Answer 2

Interesting, my wife and I were just talking about this a couple days ago. I had a heck of a time making my point to her, so I have no confidence I can make my point here, but I'll try.

If you read Paul (Romans 1) and Augustine, they both make the point that "Sin" is really the attitude of oneself towards God, specifically elevating oneself into the position of God (i.e. Pride or selfishness). All of the little things that modern Christians like to define as sin (sexual behaviors, lying, greed, etc) are - in the view of Paul and Augustine - rather the CONSEQUENCE of sin, not sin itself. In other words, when you put your self first, your sin is pride, and all these other things are the natural consequence or even the punishment for that sin.

There's a whole different discussion to be had at this point about the modern view of 'homosexuality' which has little in common with Greco-roman sexual practice other than the acts themselves. The Romans particularly viewed sex as power, and the shame or acceptability of homosexual acts was all about who was doing the penetrating or male role. In that light, Paul's words about this kind of sexual practice - which reduces the other to object and has nothing to do with love or mutual respect - is a faily astute psychological assessment.

As far as what Jesus said, then, if my analysis is correct, then Jesus' attitude would coincide with Paul's, although Jesus was a tad more eloquent. Jesus wasn't concerned with sexual acts - he was concerned with the attitude of the heart ("if you look on a woman with lust in your heart, you have already committed adultery with her"). It's not about external behaviors (law), it's about whether you're treating your fellow human beings with the love, respect and dignity they deserve.

Peace to you.

Answer 3

Not that scriptures are literal but esoteric and allegorical, but even the concepts that seem straight forward have a higher depth to them that the common believer and those who only see the surface mess the true nature and depth of.

But the actual historical Yeshua, he couldn't be so ignorant and blind in regards to the laws and the nature of the soul in regards to the process of expressing specific lives for specific purposes and how these lives are necessary for the souls development in this the "Far Country" or the schoolhouse where all conditions and experiences count as courses and classes for growth, but also how the lives that one lives is in conjunction to past interactions in regards to laws, such as karma and the like. He could not be so ignorant as to not know these things, as to not have higher transcendent knowledge which surpasses all that is political correct or opinions in this world, he was his actual higher self in the flesh and he manifested the indwelling kingdom of Light in his physical vessel, how would he not possess the Gnosis? How would he not know that the condition of a homosexual is the laws/conditions they were born into and is the filter through which they are experiencing the world and where they have to work from, in keeping with the reality that every life has a purpose and value towards the ultimate goal to become complete? Also that cosmically the very vibration of a homosexual is necessary, just as the vibration of most of the conditions on in this world is necessary. What does Paul say in Romans, in the very thing that people use as proof? God creates vessels of wrath, dishonor to honor, but this creation is not truly a manifest of "God" but rather in keeping with a Law, that being, "Whatever you sow so shall you reap."

Consider this that Paul said, since people tend to be against him, although he was necessary corrupter (that doesn't excuse the fact that he was wise), "For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now" (Rom 8:19-22 NKJ).

Right here it clearly says that this is the womb, and souls come her to develop in the lesser voids of consciousness, within a vibration that is divided and this is a process of growth. That this is all development, nothing that is in this world is by chance, but because it is vital to be experienced.

The reason why homosexuality have a negative judgment against it in regards scriptures, is because it is not a divine pattern and can't produced a balanced/harmonious principle or product. Male/female together bring forth the child or the reality that transcends them both, as a given the next generation always surpasses the first. To conditions of the same polarity can't bring forth a third force which is salvific and a sort of fullness. In scriptures this is important because scriptures are allegorical and are referencing to realities of mind and being. But homosexuality is not a sin, but it isn't in the divine pattern, but that doesn't mean it should be condemned, it is better to understand then to condemn, as those who judge that which they don't understand their judgment will come back upon them. Those who hate will invoke the movement in the laws to become what they hate.

Answer 4

Jesus never uttered one word about homosexuality.

There is NO basis for Christians to persecute homosexuals, though they've tried to manufacture it in the KJV.


***
Crystal - did you know that females of some species can reproduce without a male? It's called parthenogenesis - or virgin birth, though the offspring is always female, except in snakes.

Also, did you know that you can take ova from two females and produce a baby with two mothers and no father - scientists did this with mice a few years ago. I'm waiting for some couple of power lesbians to pay a doctor to do it for them.

Male cells do not contain the necessary ingredients to produce life without a female cell. All humans - I think all mammals - begin as female. The male is a genetic derivative of the female, not the other way around.

Wonder why we're built that way? Did 'god' plan that?

Answer 5

No. There is absolutely NO mention of the word "homosexuality" in the Bible. That word didn't come into existance until the 19th century coined by German Psychologists.

However, Mark 10:10-12 Jesus speaks of marriage and divorce being between a man and a woman, clearly using feminine and masculine terms. It is clear he never considers man with man or woman with woman.

Jesus didn't mention rape, incest, abusing drugs or internet porn either. The common belief that because He was silent on these matters, Jesus accepted these practices. It is a modern attempt to mold Christ into whatever we want. Instead of remembering that Jesus was a man of His times, we try to impose our modern standards on Him.

Answer 6

The book of Revelation was given to John by the glorified Jesus.

In Rev 21:6 this is said, "But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, they shall have their portion in the pool burning with fire and brimstone, which is the second death. (DRC)

Jesus who was a born Jew upheld the law and that law condemned homosexuality with the death penalty. The scripture above should show you that Jesus who gave this material to John hasn't changed his opinion since then.

That you side step Paul whom the apostle Peter acknowledges as having gotten his wisdom from God just shows that you like ear-ticklers who do not want to obey the commands of the Bible.

Here are the words of Jude:
Yet these [men] are speaking abusively of all the things they really do not know; but all the things that they do understand naturally like the unreasoning animals, in these things they go on corrupting themselves.

11 Too bad for them, because they have gone in the path of Cain, and have rushed into the erroneous course of Ba′laam for reward, and have perished in the rebellious talk of Ko′rah!

Answer 7

Jesus was a practicing Jew; presumably, he obeyed the laws of the Torah, and the Torah clearly condemns homosexuality. That's not to say that I AGREE with it, because I don't, but one would assume that a person of that day and time who was Torah-observant would do so, at least to some degree.

I do agree that Jesus tended to speak more of the spirit of the law than the letter thereof, so I would think that his stance against homosexuality would have been softened to some degree. I don't have proof of it, but it's consistent with his teachings.

Answer 8

No Jesus never mentions it. I don't think Jesus would condemn anyone who is homosexual either, and I'm sure there were some amongst his group of followers at the time just by the law of averages.

Answer 9

IYou can interpret that book as many ways as you would like it to read. Jesus and Paul did not write the bible. It has been re-written so many times by man it really does not matter. Eve was taken from man so the woman does not even have the right of her own creation. It is a sick fariytale.

Answer 10

I hope you have the insight to appreciate Orpheus Rising's answer. It's a jewel.