was jesus gay?

Originally posted by galveston75
Don't play with words as it makes you look foolish. Jesus was not gay and other then ones who have no common sense, everyone knows he was not gay.

To what "common sense" are you referring other than a deep rooted aversion to homosexuals and homosexuality?

It is your homophobia that is making you look foolish.

Originally posted by galveston75
Don't play with words as it makes you look foolish. Jesus was not gay and other then ones who have no common sense, everyone knows he was not gay.

First things first, nobody can say with 100% degree of certainty he wasn't gay. It would be slightly ironic if he was considering all the hatred directed towards homosexuals in the Bible..

"If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them."

Leviticus 20:13

Fabs isn't playing with words, just pointing out the view that JW's hold with regards to homosexuality. Practising homosexuals are sinners, non practising homosexuals are not, it's the act not who they are, so we're frequently told.

So if Jesus was gay, but was never expressed his love in a physical way, would that be ok? According to the doctrine of the JW's, and many other Christian groups i imagine, it would.

EDIT - posted it again as it was at the bottom of the page and might have been missed.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
First things first, nobody can say with 100% degree of certainty he wasn't gay. It would be slightly ironic if he was considering all the hatred directed towards homosexuals in the Bible..

"If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them."

Leviticus ...[text shortened]...
EDIT - posted it again as it was at the bottom of the page and might have been missed.

What would make anyone come up with this thought in the first place? He was not gay and there is not indication in the Bible that he was...

Originally posted by galveston75
Don't play with words as it makes you look foolish. Jesus was not gay and other then ones who have no common sense, everyone knows he was not gay.

14.4 million google hit asking he question is not 'everyone know'.

lets say he was gay. would that make a difference in the way you look at him and in religion as a whole?

Originally posted by galveston75
What would make anyone come up with this thought in the first place? He was not gay and there is not indication in the Bible that he was...

Just as there is no indication that He wasn't. So you cannot reasonably believe "He was not gay" with certainty. This leaves Trev's question as valid.

Originally posted by trev33
14.4 million google hit asking he question is not 'everyone know'.

lets say he was gay. would that make a difference in the way you look at him and in religion as a whole?

I don't care about how many google hits there is on this. We just need to hold on and back up here a little.
This picture that most religions have of Jesus is about the laimest thing to begin with. They portray him as this long haired weak and pale looking whimp that the first gust of wind would blow him over kind of look. What's up with this? Even when I was a little kid I always thought how sick to portray the son of God in such a sorry state when first of all no one who drew those pictures ever saw him in person and there are no surviving polaroids that I know of.
First the Bible says that long hair on a man is a dishonor to him. 1Cor 11:14. So in light of that I seriously doubt that he had long hair.
Second he grew up in a time when hard work to survive was common and he became a carpenter. All of that is hard work so he could probably out work any of us on any given day.
And finally he was perfect in body and had no bad back or any other problems we normally have.
So think about this a little and us some reasoning power here.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Just as there is no indication that He wasn't. So you cannot reasonably believe "He was not gay" with certainty. This leaves Trev's question as valid.

So he was gay because he never married? Lol.

Originally posted by galveston75
What would make anyone come up with this thought in the first place? He was not gay and there is not indication in the Bible that he was...

Does it bother you if people question Jesus sexuality?!

Originally posted by galveston75
I don't care about how many google hits there is on this. We just need to hold on and back up here a little.
This picture that most religions have of Jesus is about the laimest thing to begin with. They portray him as this long haired weak and pale looking whimp that the first gust of wind would blow him over kind of look. What's up with this? Even whe ...[text shortened]... er problems we normally have.
So think about this a little and us some reasoning power here.

you spectacularly failed to answer my question, congratulations.

Originally posted by galveston75
So he was gay because he never married? Lol.

I didn't say that. I said that there is no indication that Jesus wasn't gay, so He very well could have been. Do you understand the difference between what you said and what I said?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
I didn't say that. I said that there is no indication that Jesus wasn't gay, so He very well could have been. Do you understand the difference between what you said and what I said?

I can't understand why someone who I think says they believe in the Bible would even go there with a thought like that. It's disgusting. Kind of reminds me of Gen 6:5.

Originally posted by galveston75
Pretty much yes on that...

He is either misquoting my words or as is more probable, fails to understand them.

The act of homosexuality is condemned in the bible, both in the Hebrew text and the Greek text, those who practice such things, stand condemned. However, as christians we are under duress to love all people, but we do not need to love the things they do, and we therefore hope that they repent. If they do not, they stand in opposition to the revealed word of God and they have a reckoning, not with us, but with God.

Originally posted by galveston75
I can't understand why someone who I think says they believe in the Bible would even go there with a thought like that. It's disgusting. Kind of reminds me of Gen 6:5.

would accept a gay son or daughter?

why is two guy or two girls together any more disgusting than a man and a woman together?

Originally posted by galveston75
I can't understand why someone who I think says they believe in the Bible would even go there with a thought like that. It's disgusting. Kind of reminds me of Gen 6:5.

what this is a case of, is an attempt to insinuate something, not through any evidence, but on the contrary, the lack of evidence. Jesus came to fulfil the law and the prophets, he could not have done that and practised homosexuality, for the law stands in opposition to the practice.

As to Trevs question, yes , it would have made a difference, because his credential as the messiah, who was destined to fulfil the law and terminate transgression would be nullified! it would have been sinful (the main purpose of the law was to make sins like homosexuality manifest) and he would be blemished and therefore unfit to serve as either the high priest (in a spiritual sense), or be considered as an unblemished sacrifice.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
He is either misquoting my words or as is more probable, fails to understand them.

The act of homosexuality is condemned in the bible, both in the Hebrew text and the Greek text, those who practice such things, stand condemned. However, as christians we are under duress to love all people, but we do not need to love the things they do, and we t ...[text shortened]... in opposition to the revealed word of God and they have a reckoning, not with us, but with God.

By 'act of homosexuality', do you specifically mean sodomy?!

If so, can homosexuals kiss, engage in oral sex and mutual masturbation or is that forbidden by scripture also?!