Homosexuality

[razovor]

I was wondering if anyone who considers homosexuality a sin, could tell me what is wrong with it.

I'm talking in the sense of utilitarian morals. How does homosexual intercourse, or homosexual marriage, increase the suffering in the world?

[bluethread]

[Replying to post 78 by bluethread] There's nothing in the bible, however, to suggest that Jesus was a heterosexual. And just what did he do during his first 30 years, and what sort of relationships did he have then, and why did his own family and those he grew up with reject him (Matt 13:55-8 John 7:5) as he did them (Matt 12:46-50). Was it because of his relationships with other men, or was it because of his boozing (Matt 11:19) or simply because they, including his mother, didn't recognise or acknowledge anything extraordinary about him?

Oh, you mean apart from, the fact that not being heterosexual would have clearly discredited Him as a rabbi, yet that accusation was never made. Regarding the first 30 years, again are you suggesting that any man who has no record of a romantic relationship with a woman must be homosexual?

RE:(Matt 13:55-8 John 7:5) So, if someone is rejected as a prophet or HaMeshiach, it must be because that one is homosexual?

RE:(Matt 12:46-50) This is not a passage about rejecting His family. As you say, they were not thrilled with His carrier choice. They were no doubt coming to do an intervention. He was rejecting their purpose, not them. Must all family squabbles be somehow associated with sexuality?

RE:(Matt 11:19) He did have a tendency to hang around with "the wrong crowd", which might have caused His family some embarrassment. However, as you have pointed out it was more likely that they didn't recognize or acknowledge anything extraordinary about him. If the other Torah teachers had no problem calling Him a "glutton and a drunkard! A friend of tax-collectors and sinners!", do you think that they would not have cut to the chase and called Him homosexual and be done with Him?

I have not seen this much dedication to a preferred view since I last spoke with a teenage dispensational fundamentalist.

[Goat]

[Replying to post 78 by bluethread] There's nothing in the bible, however, to suggest that Jesus was a heterosexual. And just what did he do during his first 30 years, and what sort of relationships did he have then, and why did his own family and those he grew up with reject him (Matt 13:55-8 John 7:5) as he did them (Matt 12:46-50). Was it because of his relationships with other men, or was it because of his boozing (Matt 11:19) or simply because they, including his mother, didn't recognise or acknowledge anything extraordinary about him?

Oh, you mean apart from, the fact that not being heterosexual would have clearly discredited Him as a rabbi, yet that accusation was never made. Regarding the first 30 years, again are you suggesting that any man who has no record of a romantic relationship with a woman must be homosexual?

RE:(Matt 13:55-8 John 7:5) So, if someone is rejected as a prophet or HaMeshiach, it must be because that one is homosexual?

RE:(Matt 12:46-50) This is not a passage about rejecting His family. As you say, they were not thrilled with His carrier choice. They were no doubt coming to do an intervention. He was rejecting their purpose, not them. Must all family squabbles be somehow associated with sexuality?

RE:(Matt 11:19) He did have a tendency to hang around with "the wrong crowd", which might have caused His family some embarrassment. However, as you have pointed out it was more likely that they didn't recognize or acknowledge anything extraordinary about him. If the other Torah teachers had no problem calling Him a "glutton and a drunkard! A friend of tax-collectors and sinners!", do you think that they would not have cut to the chase and called Him homosexual and be done with Him?

I have not seen this much dedication to a preferred view since I last spoke with a teenage dispensational fundamentalist.

If , as is recorded by the Gospels, that Jesus's father was NOT Joseph, even though he was married to Mary, then, well, Jesus would be disqualified for being a rabbi anyway.

[mitty]

[Replying to post 78 by bluethread] There's nothing in the bible, however, to suggest that Jesus was a heterosexual. And just what did he do during his first 30 years, and what sort of relationships did he have then, and why did his own family and those he grew up with reject him (Matt 13:55-8 John 7:5) as he did them (Matt 12:46-50). Was it because of his relationships with other men, or was it because of his boozing (Matt 11:19) or simply because they, including his mother, didn't recognise or acknowledge anything extraordinary about him?

I have not seen this much dedication to a preferred view since I last spoke with a teenage dispensational fundamentalist.

Not at all. Afterall Jesus was a real live person (assuming he actually existed) who ate his lunch and went to the lavatory and maybe even cut down trees if he was a carpenter in his earlier years. And in the same way that Muhammad and Siddhartha lived similar daily lives to us. And the Arthurian and Robin Hood legends are probably also based on real life people who also ate their lunch and went to the lavatory. What others write about them, however, is entirely another matter and the Jesus story is no exception, but Matt 11:19 13:55-8 John 21:20 etc give a glimpse of the real man behind the legend who also enjoyed a glass or three or more of the doings. And it's also your guess and mine whether or not he also wore high heels, suspenders and a bra like any other good lumber jack, although I understand he wore dresses.

And as for sexual orientation, how many swooning female fans guessed Rock Hudson's? Or how many FBI agents guessed J Edgar Hoover's sexual orientation and his private life? And what's the big deal about Jesus' sexual orientation if it wasn't kosher? And where does the bible say that he was a rabbi accepted by the synagogues.

[99percentatheism]

I was wondering if anyone who considers homosexuality a sin, could tell me what is wrong with it.

There is no such thing as holy homosexuality except for paganism/idolatry. By nature and the odds, a homosexual would have to seek his or her sexual behavior among the sexually normal of society. Literally, seducing and manipulating sexually normal people. What's the odds that two homosexuals would ever be at the same place at the same time and "fall in love" and behave the way the New Testament describes sexual holiness? Not a chance. Gay life is antithetical to Christian life.

Can you name one gay "preacher" out there touting "purity" in a homosexual sermon?

I'm talking in the sense of utilitarian morals.

Anything goes, as in perversion and corrupt behavior, is not exactly decent moral behavior. Not Christian-wise anyway.

And of course, there is no such thing as same gender "marriage" in Christian truth.

How does homosexual intercourse, or homosexual marriage, increase the suffering in the world?

It promotes licentiousness.

[Iam]

I was wondering if anyone who considers homosexuality a sin, could tell me what is wrong with it.

There is no such thing as holy homosexuality Zigmund vhere are you? except for paganism/idolatry. By nature and the odds, a homosexual would have to seek his or her sexual behavior among the sexually normal of society. Literally, seducing and manipulating sexually normal people. What's the odds that two homosexuals would ever be at the same place at the same time and "fall in love" On this planet it happens all the time, how goes it on your planet?and behave the way the New Testament describes sexual holiness? Not a chance. Gay life is antithetical to Christian life. Christianity has proven over and over again that it is antithetical to decent human life

Can you name one gay "preacher" out there touting "purity" in a homosexual sermon?

I'm talking in the sense of utilitarian morals.

Anything goes, as in perversion and corrupt behavior, is not exactly decent moral behavior. Not Christian-wise anyway.

And of course, there is no such thing as same gender "marriage" in Christian truth.

How does homosexual intercourse, or homosexual marriage, increase the suffering in the world?

It promotes licentiousness.

[bluethread]

[Replying to post 78 by bluethread] There's nothing in the bible, however, to suggest that Jesus was a heterosexual. And just what did he do during his first 30 years, and what sort of relationships did he have then, and why did his own family and those he grew up with reject him (Matt 13:55-8 John 7:5) as he did them (Matt 12:46-50). Was it because of his relationships with other men, or was it because of his boozing (Matt 11:19) or simply because they, including his mother, didn't recognise or acknowledge anything extraordinary about him?[/quote}


I have not seen this much dedication to a preferred view since I last spoke with a teenage dispensational fundamentalist.

Not at all. Afterall Jesus was a real live person (assuming he actually existed) who ate his lunch and went to the lavatory and maybe even cut down trees if he was a carpenter in his earlier years. And in the same way that Muhammad and Siddhartha lived similar daily lives to us. And the Arthurian and Robin Hood legends are probably also based on real life people who also ate their lunch and went to the lavatory. What others write about them, however, is entirely another matter and the Jesus story is no exception, but Matt 11:19 13:55-8 John 21:20 etc give a glimpse of the real man behind the legend who also enjoyed a glass or three or more of the doings. And it's also your guess and mine whether or not he also wore high heels, suspenders and a bra like any other good lumber jack, although I understand he wore dresses.

And as for sexual orientation, how many swooning female fans guessed Rock Hudson's? Or how many FBI agents guessed J Edgar Hoover's sexual orientation and his private life? And what's the big deal about Jesus' sexual orientation if it wasn't kosher? And where does the bible say that he was a rabbi accepted by the synagogues.

This is clearly argument by innuendo. We do not have any record as to whether He was a member of the communist party either. By the way, when did you stop beating your mother?

[Iam]

[Replying to post 78 by bluethread] There's nothing in the bible, however, to suggest that Jesus was a heterosexual. And just what did he do during his first 30 years, and what sort of relationships did he have then, and why did his own family and those he grew up with reject him (Matt 13:55-8 John 7:5) as he did them (Matt 12:46-50). Was it because of his relationships with other men, or was it because of his boozing (Matt 11:19) or simply because they, including his mother, didn't recognise or acknowledge anything extraordinary about him?[/quote}


I have not seen this much dedication to a preferred view since I last spoke with a teenage dispensational fundamentalist.

Not at all. Afterall Jesus was a real live person (assuming he actually existed) who ate his lunch and went to the lavatory and maybe even cut down trees if he was a carpenter in his earlier years. And in the same way that Muhammad and Siddhartha lived similar daily lives to us. And the Arthurian and Robin Hood legends are probably also based on real life people who also ate their lunch and went to the lavatory. What others write about them, however, is entirely another matter and the Jesus story is no exception, but Matt 11:19 13:55-8 John 21:20 etc give a glimpse of the real man behind the legend who also enjoyed a glass or three or more of the doings. And it's also your guess and mine whether or not he also wore high heels, suspenders and a bra like any other good lumber jack, although I understand he wore dresses.

And as for sexual orientation, how many swooning female fans guessed Rock Hudson's? Or how many FBI agents guessed J Edgar Hoover's sexual orientation and his private life? And what's the big deal about Jesus' sexual orientation if it wasn't kosher? And where does the bible say that he was a rabbi accepted by the synagogues.

This is clearly argument by innuendo. We do not have any record as to whether He was a member of the communist party either. By the way, when did you stop beating your mother?

Mr thread, I think you have the perfect response available to you. There is no mention of Jesus' sexuality so therefore you don't know. As in every case where that is the conclusion..........goddidit...tada.

[bluethread]

If , as is recorded by the Gospels, that Jesus's father was NOT Joseph, even though he was married to Mary, then, well, Jesus would be disqualified for being a rabbi anyway.

According to my understanding, by rabbinic rules of adoption, Yeshua was Yoseph's son, with all of the rights and privileges attached thereto. However, what you say is at least a valid accusation and it is addressed by Yeshua, in passing, in Jn.8:41 and by Mattityahu in the references to the four women in Yeshua's geneology. There is no such acknowledgement of homosexuality even being on the radar?

[Goat]

If , as is recorded by the Gospels, that Jesus's father was NOT Joseph, even though he was married to Mary, then, well, Jesus would be disqualified for being a rabbi anyway.

According to my understanding, by rabbinic rules of adoption, Yeshua was Yoseph's son, with all of the rights and privileges attached thereto. However, what you say is at least a valid accusation and it is addressed by Yeshua, in passing, in Jn.8:41 and by Mattityahu in the references to the four women in Yeshua's geneology. There is no such acknowledgement of homosexuality even being on the radar?

You are taking a lot misunderstanding about Jewish laws in this statement.

You do realize, for the Jewish laws of adoption, the child keeps the bloodline of the biological father, not the adoptive father, don't you?

You do realize that if a married woman has a child who is not her husbands, that child is considered a mamzer, don't you? Being a mamzer disqualifies someone from being a rabbi.

The genealogies mean nothing, unless, Jesus was indeed Joseph's biological son... not adoptive son. The bloodline goes with the biological father... and the mother's bloodline is totally irrelevant.

Jesus' status would be much cleaner if Mary and Joseph were NOT married at the time of Jesus' birth.. if Jesus was not the son of Joseph.

[bluethread]

If , as is recorded by the Gospels, that Jesus's father was NOT Joseph, even though he was married to Mary, then, well, Jesus would be disqualified for being a rabbi anyway.

According to my understanding, by rabbinic rules of adoption, Yeshua was Yoseph's son, with all of the rights and privileges attached thereto. However, what you say is at least a valid accusation and it is addressed by Yeshua, in passing, in Jn.8:41 and by Mattityahu in the references to the four women in Yeshua's geneology. There is no such acknowledgement of homosexuality even being on the radar?

You are taking a lot misunderstanding about Jewish laws in this statement.

You do realize, for the Jewish laws of adoption, the child keeps the bloodline of the biological father, not the adoptive father, don't you?

You do realize that if a married woman has a child who is not her husbands, that child is considered a mamzer, don't you? Being a mamzer disqualifies someone from being a rabbi.

The genealogies mean nothing, unless, Jesus was indeed Joseph's biological son... not adoptive son. The bloodline goes with the biological father... and the mother's bloodline is totally irrelevant.

Jesus' status would be much cleaner if Mary and Joseph were NOT married at the time of Jesus' birth.. if Jesus was not the son of Joseph.

Interesting discussion, but how would this effect the likelihood that Yeshua would have been questioned about being homosexual"?