Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Susan2 · 09-17-2009, 12:53 PM

Thank Toto,

I googled venereal disease and came up with several reliable sources, including of all places, Pubmed.

One article is titled Dermatology and venereal disease told about in the bible - Lakartidningen - 1971

Unfortunately, it is in Swedish. I can't read the article.

The other found in Pubmed is in Russian, not helpful either.

Hippocrates on skin & venereal disease - 1988 Vestn Dermotol Venerol

Hippocrates? Interesting, that far back.

Another article states that venereal disease is mentioned in The Kahun Paprus c. 1850 bc

Still another article mentions that Laviticus 15 is about venereal disease.

Apparently even the scholars are interested in the............shall we say issue?

Washing ones self with water, as recommened in Liviticus isn't going to cleanse one of their uncleanliness.

But once they are cleansed they offer two turtledoves. Interesting.

Toto · 09-17-2009, 01:38 PM

Spong on "Was the Apostle Paul Gay?"

Quote:

Some have suggested that that Paul was plagued by homosexual fears. This is not a new idea, and yet until recent years, when homosexuality began to shed some of its negative connotations, it was an idea so repulsive to Christian people that it could not be breathed in official circles. This is not to say that our cultural homophobia has disappeared. It is still lethal and dwells in high places in the life of the Christian church, and it is a subject about which ecclesiastical figures are deeply dishonest, saying one thing publicly and acting another way privately. The prejudice, however, is fading slowly but surely. With the softening of that homophobic stance we might consider the hypothesis that Paul may have been a gay male. We might test that theory by assuming it for a moment as we read Paul. When I did this for the first time, I was startled to see how much of Paul was unlocked and how deeply I could understand the power of the gospel that literally saved Paul's life.

...

Paul felt tremendous guilt and shame, which produced in him self-loathing. The presence of homosexuality would have created this response among Jewish people in that period of history. Nothing else, in my opinion, could account for Paul's self-judging rhetoric, his negative feeling toward his own body, and his sense of being controlled by something he had no power to change. The war that went on between what he desired with his mind and what he desired with his body, his drivenness to a legalistic religion of control, his fear when that system was threatened, his attitude toward women, his refusal to seek marriage .as an outlet for his passion-nothing else accounts for this data as well as the possibility that Paul was a gay male.

bacht · 09-17-2009, 01:47 PM

That's interesting. So we could say that for Paul, Christian freedom from the Torah included the freedom to express himself sexually? Or was he just relieved of feelings of guilt and shame, while still shunning his "unnatural" urges?

arnoldo · 09-17-2009, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Susan2

Quote:

arnoldo
So is the consensus in this thread that Paul was an actual historical person, who had the above mentioned character defects, or is all this manufactured outrage directed towards an alleged fictional character?

The question isn’t whether Paul was historical or not, the question is whether or not Paul was gay.

Do you have an opinion?

Scriptures hint that Paul may have been a widower.

jakejonesiv · 09-17-2009, 02:24 PM

After declaring that sodomites will not inherit the kingdom of God, "Paul" is said to declare "Everything is permissible for me..." So which was it? 1 Cor. 6:9-10,12.

Perhaps we are seeing the earlier libertinism based on freedom from the law being toned down by later redactors.

Toto · 09-17-2009, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

...
Scriptures hint that Paul may have been a widower.

Where is this hint?

Susan2 · 09-17-2009, 03:10 PM

Re: Toto’s link to, Spong, was the apostle Paul gay.

I think the author is taking a giant leap off a small pebble.

Paul may have simply been a resigned bachelor.

Paul may have been a germophobic, obsessive compulsive.

Marriage is okay for others, but not for Paul. Yucky stuff. That would not have been unusual given the obsession the Jews had with washing. Maybe even the Romans, given their obsession with water.

Is Paul then twice blessed/cursed with obsessive compulsive disorder?

Paul may have contacted a disease while single, knew he had a disease, and as such not married. If there is a woman who accompanied Paul, she may very well have been a companion that he did not have sex with, who may even have loved him. He very well may have loved her, what then a need for sex, if the relationship still proved successful.

Perhaps Paul is frustrated because he can’t consumate the relationship, hence angry at the body because he can’t control it.

Slaying all the turtle doves in the world will do him no good. There will be no miracles for Paul, and so he consigns himself to live without them.

Paul wants real meat, science, a cure, not baby food. But there will be no cure for Paul.

It certainly wouldn’t go down very well for this new religion that the hero Paul, died of disease.

People with disease would have been reviled. Paul must rather, die for the new faith, a martyr.

The church needs martyr's.

The hint is there, disease, coupled with no more miracles.

As his disease advanced it may have effected his mind, his writings.

Or, maybe the woman that is alleged to accompany Paul it the Lord, Spirit of whom Paul speaks. Maybe she gave Paul the disease. Maybe he killed her, stoned her for infidelity.

Maybe she simply had a yeast infection, innocent.

Paul or any one else may have simply had a yeast infection. Yeast infections are passed back and forth between men and women.

Yeast infection are caused and sustained by diet; high grains/carbohydrates.

When people are sick they often hate their body.

Having said that, as aa points out in another thread, Paul said he can be all things to all people, and so he was a homosexual for some, a Jew, a Roman, an abuser, a lover, a protector, a bastard, a joy, a servant, a germophobic,..................

Quote:

arnoldo
Scriptures hint that Paul may have been a widower.

Yes, I agree. I covered that above. He may have killed her, or she may simply have died.

I think that this more has to do with disease then homosexuality because Paul does away with miracles, the supernatural.

And yet, were the people ready to give up on the hope of prayer, when there was no other answer? People fear change. Conglomerates refuse change.

What then?

arnoldo · 09-17-2009, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

...
Scriptures hint that Paul may have been a widower.

Where is this hint?

1 Corinthians 7:8

arnoldo · 09-17-2009, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jakejonesiv

After declaring that sodomites will not inherit the kingdom of God, "Paul" is said to declare "Everything is permissible for me..." So which was it? 1 Cor. 6:9-10,12. . .

Paul also writes in 1 Corinthians 9:5 that he has a right to have a wife follow him on his journeys.

Toto · 09-17-2009, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Where is this hint?

1 Corinthians 7:8

Nothing there. It is addressed to the unmarried and the widows, and advises them to not get married.

There is this: Was Paul married?

Quote:

In his Ecclesiastical History, Eusebius of Caesaria makes the claim that the apostles Peter, Philip and Paul were married. In Paul’s case, he bases this claim on an interpretation of Philippians 4, in which Paul mentions an unnamed “yokemate” (Gk. syzygos), a word that can refer to a person with whom one shares a common endeavor (such as a fellow apostle), or to a spouse. Eusebius assumes the latter meaning.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-17-2009, 12:53 PM	#31
Susan2 Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: EARTH Posts: 463	Thank Toto, I googled venereal disease and came up with several reliable sources, including of all places, Pubmed. One article is titled Dermatology and venereal disease told about in the bible - Lakartidningen - 1971 Unfortunately, it is in Swedish. I can't read the article. The other found in Pubmed is in Russian, not helpful either. Hippocrates on skin & venereal disease - 1988 Vestn Dermotol Venerol Hippocrates? Interesting, that far back. Another article states that venereal disease is mentioned in The Kahun Paprus c. 1850 bc Still another article mentions that Laviticus 15 is about venereal disease. Apparently even the scholars are interested in the............shall we say issue? Washing ones self with water, as recommened in Liviticus isn't going to cleanse one of their uncleanliness. But once they are cleansed they offer two turtledoves. Interesting.

09-17-2009, 01:47 PM	#33
bacht Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Canada Posts: 2,305	That's interesting. So we could say that for Paul, Christian freedom from the Torah included the freedom to express himself sexually? Or was he just relieved of feelings of guilt and shame, while still shunning his "unnatural" urges?

09-17-2009, 02:24 PM	#35
jakejonesiv Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Atlanta Posts: 2,060	After declaring that sodomites will not inherit the kingdom of God, "Paul" is said to declare "Everything is permissible for me..." So which was it? 1 Cor. 6:9-10,12. Perhaps we are seeing the earlier libertinism based on freedom from the law being toned down by later redactors.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.