Was Jesus Gay?

First off, a disclaimer: With this thread I am working on the premise that Jesus wasnt the son of God, just a ordinary dude that was a really good prophet. Not trying to step on some peoples toes (well, truthfully, I dont really care, just felt the need for a disclaimer). Stick to the son of god thing, free of earthly temptations then maybe asexual is a better description. This is posted in the Gay forum, not the religion forum.



Jesus was, by all acounts, mid 30s, no wife, no girlfriend, no kids during a time when everyone was getting married at like 12. Still lived with his parents and had a natural empathy towards women. Does this sound familiar to anyone here?

No one knows exactly what Jesus looked like, but he is always depicted as a tall guy with big sensitive (girls) eyes.



Note: I am not claiming Ricky Martin is as good as Jesus or whatever, just put there pictures together for a visual illustration of what I'm talking about. Still Mr Martin does do a lot of selfless work nowadays fighting child molestation in third world countries and is rather popular.

BTW: I too love Jesus, great guy with a great message much of which is still relevant today

 

Another point too:

The Mary Magdelen thing. If you believe that some Lesbians come from being oversexualised by mostly guys too young and thus sometimes find themselves in the oldest profession in the world as they are the only ones that can truly devalue sexual intimacy with men, whilst shacking up with a female partner. Then fair chance Mary M fits that description and was at least bisexual if not homosexual

 

no. I know jesus and hes not gay.

 

You KNOW Jesus? Give me a break.

I've wondered about this too, though in a less serious sense. I guess he could've been. He did go traveling about with 12 other men. Alone. For months on end.

Another thing I've thought about doing (when I was younger), but would never do, would be to spraypaint "Jesus was a homo" on the side of a conservative church in bright pink, just to see the reaction. Kinda stupid actually.

 

Come ON. This type of shit is ridiculous.

 

Jesus was such a queen, never really thought about it. Explanation-wise it's more plausible than most of the stuff people read and believe in the bible.

 

why is that? because its not what you think? you have no more of an idea about jesus' sexuality than the OP does.

Just like christians are no more right about religion than the pegans were.

I know its a hard concept to grasp but try...for god's sake ; )

 

I'm not even going to bother, idiot

 

Infinito is entitled to his own, if not vague opinion

 

I'm goin with Infinito on this one....

If there is the possibility that there is a God (Which I believe, to an extent) AND that Jesus lived, Then no doubt Jesus was perfect and was God's son.

So Jesus - Not gay.

That's my opinion. But I'm not a christian. Go figure.

 

That you claim that perfection only includes heterosexuality and excludes homosexuals shows you are a homophobe. Congratulations.

I know Christianity has a history of denouncing homosexuality, but I wonder. . . why exactly? What is the justification for homosexuality being wrong? Because it seems "icky" to predominantly heterosexual Christians? Because its "unnatural?" Just about everything we eat is processed and a lot of our vegetable food has been genetically engineered in some form or doused in pesticides. We take cars/buses to work. We wear synthetic clothing. We try to make ourselves normal with pills. Thats fucking unnatural. We're all going to hell then I guess?

Homosexual tendencies occur naturally in those in whom they occur at all - its not like they woke up one day and said "You know, I think I'm gonna go gay."

If being homosexual is immoral because it subverts the "natural" purpose of sex - to create children - then if you've ever worn a condom, taken birth control, or pulled out - you're going to hell, ya damn sinner.

So I ask again - why, besides "The bible said so," or "God said so," could a perfect being not be homosexual? A lot of christians today will tell you that being homosexual is ok as long as you don't act on the urges which, as far as we know, jesus never did (assuming he WAS gay).

So why is there no possibility that he was gay?

 

What I mean is why would homosexuality be a crime against god? Surely he had a logical reason, being the omniscient being that he is.

 

^^^
She is

 

Yes, he was gay. We used to attend Pride together. Such a nice guy...ah, the nostalgy

 

We take pills to get better, we use cars to get around, we wear clothes to keep us warm. All of those, in which WE created ourselves.

Humans however, were created by a higher power and made for one thing. Breeding. And breeding will only work with a mate of the opposite sex. Therefore being gay is wrong and unnatural.

Sure, try again to hide the unnaturalness of being gay into the every day things we do to survive.

 

There is no possiblity that he was gay anyways.

The way I see it. If one things true, everything else would be too, right?

So if there is a God, and there WAS a Jesus. Then why would it not follow the rest of the Bible? It clearly says homosexuality is wrong. Why would it contradict itself?

 

I'm pretty sure the bible doesn't say we were created solely for the purpose of breeding. . .


Even if that were the case. . . is natural behavior defined as purpose? Hell no. Its defined by tendency.

For instance, could you say that a behavior engaged in regularly and widely by any animal species but which does not further its "purpose" is unnatural?

There is a species of primates that commonly engages in homosexual activities - it is one of the only known animals besides humans that seek pleasure in sex. Is this "unnatural" because the monkeys' purpose is to reproduce? I'd say this behavior seems to occur "naturally," wouldn't you? Thus it is a "natural" behavior for these monkeys regardless of their purpose.

Perhaps you are right that pills, automobiles, and synthetic clothing are natural so far as they are used in the pursuit of survival. But. . . People with money will buy extra vehicles and/or clothing purely for pleasure, as well as take pills/drugs for pleasure.

Guess what - I'm gonna say that's natural too! The entire reason we feel pleasure in the first place is to reinforce behavior - part of survival, and something that occurs naturally.

But it follows that gays do what they do for pleasure as well. They are acting on a naturally-occurring desire.

 

I was born sterile does this mean I am going to go to hell if I can not procreate? If I marry knowing this and have a sexual lifestyle knowing that there is no possible way to procreate is that a sin?

 

Yeah, probably. But then again, who gives a flying fuck about the Bible?

 

I do think this is a big point that makes the religious arguements against homosexuality seem even more ludicrous. (Not that they were'nt already!) If the sole purpose of sex is to procreate, then having sex if you're a sterile man/woman, or having sex with a member of the opposite sex who can't naturally conceive children, is just as "wrong" and "unnatural" as homosexuality.

And as mentioned above, using any method of birth control during straight sex would be as much of a sin as homosexuality also. And we all know that lots of straight people engage in sex purely for the pleasure of it, not for the purpose of creating children. And go out of their way to make sure that doesn't happen. Unless every time a straight person has sex its with the purpose of conceiving children, then they are "sinning" just as much as a gay person is.

But we all know that most religious people conveniantly gloss over the sections of the bible that condemns their own behaviour, and just focus on homosexuality only. It's just really stupid