Disclaimer: this is a sample of 3 sites' comments concerning gays and the Bible. That's all they are, 3 POVs.
UCC scholar writes that Jesus was actively gay
Critic says he is misinterpreting, misunderstanding Bible
Saturday, May 31, 2003
By RICHARD N. OSTLING writing for Associated Press
Jennings says the opponents can cite only "five isolated verses" in the Bible. Preferring simplicity to credibility, he ignores those verses and the weightiest American treatment of them: The Bible and Homosexual Practice (from the Methodists' Abingdon Press) by conservative Presbyterian Robert A.J. Gagnon of Pittsburgh Theological Seminary.
Asked about Jennings's theory, Gagnon says "the idea that Jesus was a homosexual or engaged in homosexual acts is complete nonsense" and no "serious biblical scholar" has ever proposed this.
Although Jennings belittles a mere five verses, he largely depends on just a few biblical words concerning the disciple "lying close to the breast of Jesus" at the Last Supper (John 13:23,25, 21:20). This unnamed follower "whom Jesus loved" is often thought to be the writer of the Gospel of John or one of his sources.
As Jennings imagines it, this disciple was "lying in (on) Jesus's lap - that is, snuggled up to Jesus." Jesus "loved" all his colleagues, but Jennings thinks this one friendship was "expressed by physical and personal intimacy - what we might today suppose to be a homoerotic or a 'gay' relationship." Most likely it was "sexual in character," he says, though the Bible doesn't describe the "specific practices" the pair used to "celebrate" physical intimacy.
http://www.spiritrestoration.org/Church/All%20About%20Church%20Articles/Was-Jesus-Gay.htmMadeline writes: Given the hoopla surrounding "The Da Vinci Code", this could also have been Mary Magdalene, if you're inclined to believe the book is based on historical fact.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
From our buddies over at "Religious Tolerance" (what a misnomer THAT is!)
Matthew 8:5-13:
These verses describe how a Roman centurion asked Jesus to cure his "pais" who lay paralyzed and in great agony. The centurion stated that all Jesus had to do was to say the right words to effect the cure. Jesus praised the centurion for his faith. If the boy had been the centurion's son, then the author probably would have used the Greek word "uios" (son). If the writer wanted to imply that they boy was a slave or indentured servant, then he probably would have used the word "duolos" (slave). But he did not. He used the Greek word pais which, in this situation, contains the suggestion of a young male kept for sexual purposes by his adult owner. The English word "pederasty" comes partly from this word. Various translations of the Christian Scriptures have suppressed the possible sexual component of the term and translated the word simply as a "servant boy", "serving boy", "young servant," "my son," and "my boy." A present-day relationship of this type would be considered child sexual abuse, a serious crime. However, such arrangements were common in the Roman Empire at the time, and were tolerated by society, as was slavery itself.
The Gospel of Luke, starting at Luke 7:2 told the same story differently. The boy was changed into a slave of undefined age who was "dear to" (KJV) the Centurion. The author used the Greek word doulos which is a generic term for servant or slave. He was described as being very sick and near death; this contrasts with the author of Matthew who description of a boy being paralyzed and in great pain.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibc2.htm---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Very Rev. Hollinshead T. Knight, Interim Rector at St. John's Episcopal Church in Jackson Wyoming, in his essay about the four primary theological stances toward homosexuality, says:
"It isn’t Scripture that creates hostility to homosexuality, but rather hostility to homosexuality that leads certain Christians to retain a few passages from an otherwise discarded law code. We don’t follow biblical teaching on divorce, polygamy, nudity, Paul’s advice not to marry, slavery, or the stoning of a dulterers! Biblical scholar Walter Wink has said that there is no biblical sex ethic. The Bible knows only a love ethic, which is constantly being brought to bear on whatever sexual mores are dominant in any given culture or period."
"The problem is not reconciling homosexuality with scriptural passages that seem to condemn it; the problem is how do you reconcile the rejection and mistreatment of homosexuals with the love of Christ for all people, particularly the oppressed and the rejected? I don’t think it can be done. If the law of love is more important than the laws of biology, I don’t see how Christians can exclude and mistreat people on the basis of sexual orientation. Otherwise you end up with a Matthew Shepherd situation, for which we can all bear some of the blame."
http://members.aol.com/DrSwiney/positive.html
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
