DNAinaGoodway

Don't sweat it Jonathan. I asked more out of curiosity than serious academic exploration, although there are some links to that type of material above.

Homosexual love is perverted? That's not very nice to say. Kinky occasionally, but so is heterosexual love.

Anyway, forget the sex, the evidence about Jesus not even being an historical figure is much more interesting.

Magdlyn

Oops, showing my ignorance! Starting new thread for clarification.

Arvel Joffi

You have to introduce the fact that he is God. I haven't seen that.

Was there a gay guy named Jesus that lived somewhere around Jerusalem about 2,000 years ago. Maybe. Maybe not. Is the question anything other than bored rumination? Probably.

Was there a straight guy named Jesus that lived somewhere around Jerusalem about 2,000 years ago. Maybe. Maybe not. Is the question anything other than bored rumination? Probably.

Was there a guy named Jesus that lived somewhere around Jerusalem about 2,000 years ago. Maybe several. Or maybe his name was Emmanuel. I forget.

I'm gonna go beat another dead horse somewhere else.

Magdlyn

But did the "conservative" devoutly Jewish subjects of the Roman Emperor snuggle with their male friends like this while eating lying down? Or should they have, morally speaking, which would be the more appropos question?

Lugubert

Scrap KJV and save yourselves a lot of problems.

I find nothing unusual for the time in John 13:23 "... was reclining close besides Jesus." 13:25 "That disciple leaned back close to Jesus and asked". Revised English Bible, corresponding excellently to the Swedish Bibles of 1917 as well as 2000.

Zeda

Sure Magus, I would define murder as intentionally killing someone, not as in a act of war or in self defense. but because I was angry with them, or jealous of them, or mentally ill. That is a very brief description.

Magus you have been on these boards long enough to know that although God said "Thou shalt not kill," he in no way follows this commandment himself. You have contributed to many theards in which God's actions such as in the Flood that wiped out the world except a few people in a big boat have been discussed.

I am sure you also are aware of the delightful story in 2 Sam. 24, where God incites David to sin by taking a census, and then kills, murders, destroys 70,000 innocent people for the sin he caused David to commit.

But this topic is a tangent and does not address the OP, other than in the fact that you said that Jesus was God, and since God condemns homosexuality, Jesus could not be gay. I merely pointed out that the fact that because God made a rule, that doesnt mean said rule applies to him, as it is quite clear that God believes that Might is Right, and does not in fact follow his own rules.

Magus55

So is government sanctioned assassinations and executions not murder?

Actually, God never said thou shalt not kill. Its a mistranslation that atheists usually fail to recognize. God said "thou shalt not murder."

Actually, God only let David do what david wanted to do, and david chose the means of punishment. God was also punishing all of Israel for their sin, so no God did not kill people just because David sinned.

Not all the rules given to humanity are intended for God. God doesn't need to eat or rest, so there goes any need of obeying the dietary or Sabbath laws. God also has no need for sex or lust, so why would Jesus be at all concerned with that? Jesus was sinless. Sexual immorality is a sin, therefore by virtue of being sinless, Jesus couldn't have been gay, nor would he have needed to have sexual desires. Jesus did not come to Earth to date, get married, and start a family. He came to spread His ministry, and pay for the world's sins.

Nectaris

I've asked this before in another thread, but maybe you missed it. How exactly do you know this? The Hebrew word used in this passage is Ratsach, which can mean either to murder or to kill.

Now, I don't dispute that it could mean murder, but how do you know that it "100% for certain" means murder, when Bibles can't even agree? Even when a single Bible can't agree with itself, i.e. the word is translated as kill in some passage and murder, legal execution, and manslayer in other passages in the same translation of the Bible. Were certain Bibles, like the KJV translated by atheists? Were certain passages in Numbers from the NAS translated by atheists?

Dave

Magus55

If you notice (in the KJV), ratsach is the word used in the Exodus commandment thou shalt not kill. Ratsach applies to killing with pre-meditation (murder). There are different words throughout the OT that mean kill, but don't include premeditation. They refer to killing, slaying, or smiting.

The same distinction is found in the NT. The commandment, thou shalt not kill is a different word than kill in other verses. Also notice Matthew 5:21-22, which states that condition for which murder applies:

Mat 5:21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:

Mat 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

Notice the colon in Mat 5:21? verse 22 is the conditions for murder to be applied, that is being angry without cause. Essentially the 1st century definition of malice.

something_fell

So.... you're saying God does not need to eat or rest, therefore (by your logic) Jesus did not eat or sleep? His "human" form didn't affect his Godlike needs or desires?

Wow, you learn something new every day.