Should the Bible be banned?

[foildad]

To everybody else: Please say something if you're considering taking this seriously. Otherwise, I'm not getting into it.

OK. I'm being completely serious. I don't know alot about Jesus. I know he existed. I know he questioned the social order of his day. I believe there is a great deal of mythology surrounding his life. I believe that many people who worship him today completely miss the point of his teachings, including our President. I believe he taught a tolerance that is seriously lacking in our country today.

I have no idea whether what his sexual orientation may have been. To me that is immaterial.

[ReverseLunge]

I have no idea whether what his sexual orientation may have been. To me that is immaterial.

Good point. That's what I am trying to get at.

More and more studies are showing that Christianity is based in homosexuality. I don't see what the big deal is. There were plenty of great gay greek philosophers.

I don't think sexual orientation has anything to do with greatness.

[Soldier]

Alright, then.

His sexual orientation is material only if he were sexually active. One of the most important parts of who he was is that he was perfect - the only perfect human ever to live, the only human to never sin.

Okay, it gets a bit tricky here; there are some different opinions from here on out. I'll go through my own first, then present the main opposing ones.

The practice of homosexuality is wrong, according to the Bible. While there are some dissenting opinions on this matter, they are vastly in the minority, and weakly founded. The Bible is awfully clear regarding homosexuality.

Note that said the practice of homosexuality. I believe that homosexual orientation is not a choice at all, and therefore no more sinful than, say, kleptomaniacal tendencies. It becomes sinful when you act on it.

It is generally agreed that Jesus remained chaste his entire life, since there is no account of his marrying.

If he was chaste his entire life, it really would not matter whether or not he was gay.

It is, in fact, quite possible he may have married. While I really don't like the book The DaVinci Code, it has a good argument - that it would have been extremely unusual for him to be unwed in that day. Therefore the simple fact that it was never explained why, nor even addressed, makes it seem as though he did marry, and it was just no big deal. This also changes nothing - there is nothing wrong with marriage; he could have married, even fathered children, and still been sinless.

The opposing view, by the way: There are (unfortunately, in my view) many who believe that homosexuality is a choice, and therefore even such an orientation, chaste or no, is sinful. I agree that there are some who choose to "experiment" in bisexuality or homosexuality, and that is sinful; however, I believe that the vast majority of homosexuals are not by any choice of their own.

To sum up a bit: It makes a difference because the allegations are that Jesus was actively homosexual. This would mean he was not sinless (according to the very religion he is supposed to be central to). Or, if you are one of those that believe all homosexuality is by choice, then any allegation of him being homosexual still means the same.

Now, going back to ReverseLunge's allegations.

They stem almost completely from this "secret gospel" of Mark. It is true that the Council of Nicea did a lot of deciding what would or would not be in the Bible (as well as laying down various creeds - hence the Nicean or Nicene Creed). A lot of that may well have been political in nature; more on that if you want to get into roots of Catholicism, especially when related to paganism, etc. However, a lot of manuscripts, "gospels", etc., were rejected for perfectly good reason - really having nothing of value to say, or of questionable validity, or something of that nature.

I see no proof of this "secret gospel". I've heard nothing of it being discovered; I see no talk of who discovered it, where, or when. In short, I have absolutely no reason to believe it exists in the first place, let alone that it is valid.

As for the Church's homosexual roots - make all the accusations you want; I have yet to see any proof of it. Christianity stems from Judaism, which also condemns homosexuality in no uncertain terms.

That much of Helenistic society (from whence come our Greek philosophers, etc.) had strong homosexual tendencies, is completely irrelevant.

The entire list of "evidence" that Jesus was gay was also irrelevant. Didn't have sex with women? See the part about him being sinless. Non-violent? Doesn't make you gay. Spent time with disreputable people? Also spent time with very reputable people. In any case, the time spent with disreputable people strengthens the message of forgiveness. Associated almost exclusively with men? Not accurate. His twelve apostles were all men; this much makes sense - men would be more easily accepted as teachers in that society, after he died. However, there were also a large number of other, generally unspecified people around him, many of whom were female. Physical intimacy between them was also nothing irregular in that society; physical intimacy need not imply sexuality. "Jesus' 'groupies' competed, each claiming to love him the most" - irrelevant, even if it were accurate. There was a debate amongst them, once, concerning who was his favorite. He quickly told them to stop caring about that. In any case, love does not have to mean sexuality. The original Greek actually has multiple words for love - eros, the sexual kind, phileo, brotherly love (hence Philadelphia), and agape, or the love between us and God. Phileo was the most commonly used of these three, followed by agape. John with his head on Jesus' breast? Once again, nothing wrong with it. That's just close friends; it happens all the time in our own culture.

Now, of course, the even more relevant point that it doesn't matter one bit what these would look like in our culture; they didn't live in our culture. In that culture, there was nothing wrong with any of the things they were doing.



So, one final summation:

Jesus' homosexuality would be a problem if he were active, or according to some, even if he weren't - because it would mean he was not sinless.

Additionally, there is no real evidence that he was homosexual.

[ReverseLunge]

Where does it say in the bible that it is wrong to be gay?

So how do you explain this:

"And the youth, looking upon him (Jesus), loved him and beseeched that he might remain with him. And going out of the tomb, they went into the house of the youth, for he was rich. And after six days, Jesus instructed him and, at evening, the youth came to him wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the Kingdom of God".

And this:

"And there followed him a certain young man, having a linen cloth cast about his naked body ; and the young men laid hold on him:
And he left the linen cloth, and fled from them naked. "

[Soldier]

I'm not going to bother trying to explain the first until you can prove to me it's real.

I fail to see how the second necessarily implies homosexuality. Also, it sounds like the guards sent to arrest Jesus were the ones who laid hold of him.

Specific citations of condemnation of homosexuality will take me a few more minutes.

[Soldier]

Romans 1:24-28,32
1 Timothy 1:8-10

These are taken from http://reformedonline.com/view/refor...ne/homosex.htm which provides a pretty good discussion of the matter (if a bit extremely worded in a few parts). It also points out a very important matter - that homosexuals are not to be hated any more than any other type of sinner.

I am quite sure there are more references, but it will take me longer again to go and find them myself.

[ReverseLunge]

I fail to see how the second necessarily implies homosexuality.

That describes a homosexual orgy that took place in Jesus's house.

[Soldier]

1 Corinthians 6:9
Jude 7

Now, to move back to Old Testament:
Leviticus 18:22-24
Leviticus 20:13
Genesis 13:13

Plus many more, if I felt like finding more. Also plenty of verses talking about how much it sucked to be Sodom or Gomorha, cities known primarily for homosexuality.

[Soldier]

That describes a homosexual orgy that took place in Jesus's house.

Not quite. It took place in the Garden of Gethsemene, as Jesus was being arrested.

[ReverseLunge]

I know it is very upsetting. A lot of Christians were programmed to believe without need for proof. The new testiment was wriiten after Jesus died and without his approval. I think most Christian have no idea who the real jesus was or what his real belifes were.

If people are already unwilling to accept that Jesus was gay then i guess it would be totally unerving for them to find out that he was also a muslim. That's right. Islam is actually the true way Jesus wanted us to whorship GOD.

Is Jesus an Arab Muslim?

A Muslim is some one who Submits Their Will to God. This Is What Jesus Did and Taught.

Son of God is a figure of speech which many other Prophets were labeled as for example; in the King James Version of the Bible

(Psalms 2:7) David is the begotten Son of God.

Many others in the Bible are called God's son;

Jacob God's firstborn son (Exodus 4:22 )
Solomon is God's son (2 Samuel 7:13 -14)
Ephraim is God's firstborn son (Jeremiah 31:9)
Adam is the son of God (Luke 3:38 )

Other Prophets were Labeled as Messiah for example {1 Samuel 15:17 } Which in Hebrew means Anointed/Chosen/Prophet;

Solomon (1 Kings 1:39 )
David (1 Samuel 16:13 )
Jewish priests (Leviticus 4)

Other Prophets Preformed similar Miracles as Jesus ;

Ezekiel raised many from the dead (Ezekiel 37:1-9)
Joshua stopped the sun and moon for one whole day (Joshua 10:12-13)
Elisha raised the dead, resurrected himself, healed a leper, fed a hundred people with twenty barley loaves and a few ears of corn, and healed a blind man: (2 Kings 4:35, 13:21, 5:14, 4:44, and 6:11.)
Elijah raised the dead (1 Kings 17:22 and 14.)

Other Prophets were filled with the Holy Ghost;

Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost (Luke 1:67)
Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost (Luke 1:41)
Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost (Acts 4:8)
Paul, filled with the Holy Ghost (Acts 13:9)

Many other Prophets were called Lord for example;

Abraham (Genesis 18:12 )
Esau (Genesis 32:4)
Joseph (Genesis 44:20)
David (1 Samuel 25:24)

Jesus taught to rinse before Praying as Muslims do {John 13:10 }

Jesus bowed down in Submission on the Ground to God as Muslims do {Matthew 26:39}

Jesus said, all of You who Submit your will to God, are my true Brothers and Sisters (Mark 3:31 -35) as Muslims do

Jesus taught Salvation comes from Submitting your will to God and Faith as Muslims do .

(Matthew 7:21-23) "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles? Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'"

In conclusion, Jesus was neither a Jew nor a Christian, Lets see where the name Jew comes from. {Gen 11:31 } we see that Abraham took his family out of his home land " Ur of the Chaldees"

Therefore, Abraham could not have been a Jew because that is a part of Iraq . He was more an Arab than a Jew. Secondly, the name Jew came after the existence of Judah , the great-grandson of Abraham.

Abraham in the Bible is called "a Hebrew" {Genesis 14:13 } which means a human from the other side of the Euphrates . It also means pertaining to Eber a descendant of Shem, clearly not "a Jew".

The descendants of Jacob were called Israelites {Gen 32:28} consisting of twelve tribes. Judah was nicknamed "Jew" so that only Judah 's descendants were called Jews originally.

Moses, was from the tribe "Levite" {Exodus 6:16 -20} therefore also not a Jew. The name Jew {according to the Bible} is not a reflection of "an organized religion" as you put it, but a Tribe, a fore name, an ancestor branch off of a large family tree.

Jesus may have been a Jew by birth right, but a Muslim

[jeff]

Neat trick for anyone to be Muslim before the birth of the Prophet...

[JyJy]

Blah... a lot of stuff about sexual preferences of a person who's historical existence is not certain.. bla, bla.

But why would somebody ban Catch 22 by Joseph Heller? Just curious.


JyJy

[esskreemr]

Alright, then.

Wow, R_L is getting better at this...

[Tazz]

I don't wanna be disrespectful or anything, but one thing I can't understand is why people who have read and understood the bible (esp. the first testament), would actually want to worship the god described in it. I mean, he's completely brutal!!!

[Bokken]

Well, it's good to see that RL's little crusade clearly takes up a lot of "his" time. Beginning fencers from wherever he's from are undoubtedly safer.

That aside, the subject of book-banning is very near and not very dear to me. I think that Soldier (perhaps unintentionally) makes a very good point about information access and action: it's only a problem if you ACT using said information in an inappropriate manner.

Yes, I have a copy of the Cookbook (which has been debunked, I may add). I also have a very extensive personal library on military theory, Japanese history, martial arts, firearms, chemistry, psychology, how to build a fencing practice dummy, and so on.
Does this inherently make me dangerous? Does my possession of such information frighten anyone? If so, why?
Would it make a difference if I mentioned a library of Zen philosophy and medical texts instead?


IMO, it all comes down to fear. Not surprise or ruthless efficiency, but perhaps fanatical devotion to the Pope (Rep point for the first correct citation!). People out there are scared of what they can't control. It makes logical sense, but history has shown bad things happen when a society tries to enforce too much control over its citizens.
In this case, you've got a bunch of Jesus-freaks who've been listening to the local fire-n-brimstone preacher and consider it their right and proper duty to Combat Satan (tm) and Clean Up Smut (tm).
Anything that strikes them as being inappropriate gets slapped on the Ban list. The crap about "Harry Potter Teaches Magic" is so stupid as to be laughable. In fact, let me share this gem with you: http://www.theescapist.com/random011102.htm

Be sure you're seated when reading this. It is entirely too funny.

[Maeve_Mari]

Alright, then.

His sexual orientation is material only if he were sexually active. One of the most important parts of who he was is that he was perfect - the only perfect human ever to live, the only human to never sin.

Okay, it gets a bit tricky here; there are some different opinions from here on out. I'll go through my own first, then present the main opposing ones.

The practice of homosexuality is wrong, according to the Bible. While there are some dissenting opinions on this matter, they are vastly in the minority, and weakly founded. The Bible is awfully clear regarding homosexuality.

The Bible was written LONG after Jesus died. Centuries later, and it continues to be edited and interpreted today. So homosexuality in Jesus' day would not be wrong according to the Bible, because it did not exist then.

I'm not saying I think Jesus is gay - I actually never considered it - I just thought I'd point out the chronology.

[Soldier]

Wow, R_L is getting better at this...

I'd give him credit if I thought it were his own material.

[Soldier]

I don't wanna be disrespectful or anything, but one thing I can't understand is why people who have read and understood the bible (esp. the first testament), would actually want to worship the god described in it. I mean, he's completely brutal!!!

Not completely. In the Old Testament, He's brutal to people who break His rules. The whole deal with Jesus, though, is forgiveness - God is no longer brutal if you break the rules. Now, He'll basically ignore you if you don't care about Him, but if you do worship Him (and believe in Jesus), then He'll make life really good for you.

[Soldier]

In this case, you've got a bunch of Jesus-freaks who've been listening to the local fire-n-brimstone preacher and consider it their right and proper duty to Combat Satan (tm) and Clean Up Smut (tm).
Anything that strikes them as being inappropriate gets slapped on the Ban list. The crap about "Harry Potter Teaches Magic" is so stupid as to be laughable. In fact, let me share this gem with you: http://www.theescapist.com/random011102.htm

Be sure you're seated when reading this. It is entirely too funny.

But a good fire-and-brimstone sermon can be quite entertaining on occasion!

As a sort of aside...please, anybody reading this, don't confuse the average Christian with the zealots and nut-jobs out there.

[Soldier]

The Bible was written LONG after Jesus died. Centuries later, and it continues to be edited and interpreted today. So homosexuality in Jesus' day would not be wrong according to the Bible, because it did not exist then.

I'm not saying I think Jesus is gay - I actually never considered it - I just thought I'd point out the chronology.

Ah...not quite. It was compiled much later. Most of it was written while he was still alive; Paul's epistles were written not too long after.

In any case, the chronology doesn't matter. Jesus was considered sinless even before he died, and the importance was understood then, as well. Also, of course, homosexuality had been condemned for thousands of years beforehand.