"Jesus was a compassionatie, super-intelligent gay man"

[sonofskeptish]

Why on earth would anyone look to a well-known Christian scholar for guidance on religion?

Damn, you just beat me to it... exactly what I was gonna reply.

 

[Smoke]

Well, that all goes to show you that even a super star like Elton John can be half right...

Try acting the homosexual man in the Middle East and you're as good as dead.

Depends on where in the Middle East, but yeah -- it's always a good idea to be careful when you're around a lot of Muslims or Christians; their religions are very intolerant and violent.

 

[footprints]

Depends on where in the Middle East, but yeah -- it's always a good idea to be careful when you're around a lot of Muslims or Christians; their religions are very intolerant and violent.

Sounds like many atheists and non-believers I know and know of, not to mention people of other types of belief.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

However, I don't know where you got the idea that stupidity and controversy are mutually exclusive.

:clap I stand corrected. :clap

 

[Moonstone]

Just like anybody else, Elton John is entitled to his own perception. If Jesus being gay works for him, what can I say, it works for him. Let us all hope, Elton John now practices what Jesus taught, and still doesn't consider himself a God in his own mind.

:yes: :clap

Can't agree with that more! Like I said on the other thread, that's exactly the same as this one, who gives a poo whether or not Jesus was gay? It doesn't change what he did, does it?

 

[Baydwin]

Based on the scant evidence we have in the New Testament, it seems to me the most likely orientation of Jesus was asexual. He seemed to love everybody to the same degree regardless of their sex, and appeared to be empathic and altruistic in his thinking as opposed to being dominated by sexual competition.

As for intelligence, there's no evidence he was intellectually more intelligent than anyone else, but considering his teachings on mutual love, respect, humility etc, his emotional intelligence was probably higher than usual.

 

[dust1n]

I dont think he meant them to be taken seriously in a way which is more than making a social statement.
we have heard that Jesus was Aryan, Black, Palestinian, etc. and all these were held with passionate religious and political sentiments, 'backed up' by the 'scholarship' of the propagators. Elton John's comment should be viewed in the context of current debate and human rights issues. it is a social statement, no more.

To be fair, it is extremely unlikely that Jesus was the only white person in the region at the time, yet most paintings of him are white.

 

[rusra02]

So says Elton John in an interview with Parade magazine, if you can call it an interview. Parade.com features (here) a collection of random quotes presented without context or elaboration.

His take on Christianity.
"I think Jesus was a compassionate, super-intelligent gay man who understood human problems. On the cross, he forgave the people who crucified him. Jesus wanted us to be loving and forgiving. I don't know what makes people so cruel. Try being a gay woman in the Middle East -- you're as good as dead."
​

Jesus did (does) not take the position it's OK to be a practicing homosexual.
As a Jew who kept God's law perfectly, he endorsed God’s view of homosexuality as described at Leviticus 18:22: “You must not lie down with a male the same as you lie down with a woman. It is a detestable thing.”
Jesus lived a life of singleness to devote himself to Jehovah's service fully. “My food is for me to do the will of him that sent me and to finish his work,” said Jesus. (John 4:34). He was comfortable in the presence of both men and women, and showed loving concern for children.
The Bible is forthright in condemning homosexual acts, but compassionate in offering help to homosexuals: "Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men, nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom. And yet that is what some of you were. But you have been washed clean, but you have been sanctified, but you have been declared righteous in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God." (1 Corinthians 6:9-11)

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Jesus did (does) not take the position it's OK to be a practicing homosexual.
As a Jew who kept God's law perfectly, he endorsed God’s view of homosexuality as described at Leviticus 18:22: “You must not lie down with a male the same as you lie down with a woman. It is a detestable thing.”

Jesus didn't keep Mosaic Law perfectly. There are many points in the Gospels where, through both words and actions, he emphasizes that the law is secondary to higher virtues.

Remember: you're talking about someone who worked on the Sabbath and told people to set aside their Temple obligations if they needed to reconcile with their brothers.

The Bible is forthright in condemning homosexual acts, but compassionate in offering help to homosexuals: "Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men, nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom. And yet that is what some of you were. But you have been washed clean, but you have been sanctified, but you have been declared righteous in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God." (1 Corinthians 6:9-11)

Heh... it always puzzles me when Christians pull out a verse that condemns homosexuals and revilers to defend their revulsion of homosexuality.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

:yes: :clap

Can't agree with that more! Like I said on the other thread, that's exactly the same as this one, who gives a poo whether or not Jesus was gay? It doesn't change what he did, does it?

To some people, it does. A fair proportion of Christian denominations base their theology on the idea that Jesus was a "perfect, sinless sacrifice". If you think like this, then the suggestion that Jesus might've done something that you consider sin is effectively an attack on the whole basis of your religion.

 

[Herr Heinrich]

That's one of the fascinating things about "Jesus" -- that is, not Jesus himself, but the masks people give him. In our culture, a lot of people -- not just Christians, either -- want to believe that Jesus was pretty much just like them and shared their worldview. Visions of white Jesus, black Jesus, Christian Jesus, Muslim Jesus, royalist Jesus and revolutionary Jesus; it just depends whose vision it is.

That's why I like to make remarks every so often implying that I think Jesus was gay. It's not that I really think he was gay; I just enjoying tweaking the heterocentric nose of the majority every so often. The Bible says nothing about the sexuality of Jesus, and in the Christian tradition he's believed to have been sexually abstinent for his entire life, so what possible difference could it make to a Christian whether he was gay or straight? And how could we possibly know? But people assume that he was straight, and take great offense at the idea that he might have been gay. Then there are the people who don't believe he was sexually abstinent, but assume that he must have had a relationship with Mary Magdalene, or even that he had relationships with the Magdalene and also with Mary and Martha of Bethany. They can see him with a woman, some of them can even see him as a polygamist, but the idea that he could have been gay is beyond the Pale. Why? All his closest relationships were with men. But people see what they want to see, and they want to see themselves. If Jesus had any sexuality, it must have been heterosexuality. If he was sexually active, it must have been with women. If there is a Santa Claus, there must be a Mrs. Claus.

Of course Elton John is doing exactly the same thing other people do, and it's just as silly. But heterosexuals don't see it as silly when they do it; Black Jesus, White Jesus, Conservative Jesus and Liberal Jesus all seem plausible in a way that Gay Jesus absolutely does not. That's what I find amusing and interesting.

Well said.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

So says Elton John in an interview with Parade magazine, if you can call it an interview. Parade.com features (here) a collection of random quotes presented without context or elaboration.

His take on Christianity.
"I think Jesus was a compassionate, super-intelligent gay man who understood human problems. On the cross, he forgave the people who crucified him. Jesus wanted us to be loving and forgiving. I don't know what makes people so cruel. Try being a gay woman in the Middle East -- you're as good as dead."
​

Singer, songwriter, entertainer...now theologian. I used to wear his style shoes back in high school.

 

[dogsgod]

For Elton John to come to the conclusion that Jesus was gay, he may have read The Secret Gospel of Mark:

And they come into Bethany. And a certain woman whose brother had died was there. And, coming, she prostrated herself before Jesus and says to him, 'Son of David, have mercy on me.' But the disciples rebuked her. And Jesus, being angered, went off with her into the garden where the tomb was, and straightway a great cry was heard from the tomb. And going near Jesus rolled away the stone from the door of the tomb. And straightway, going in where the youth was, he stretched forth his hand and raised him, seizing his hand. But the youth, looking upon him, loved him and began to beseech him that he might be with him. And going out of the tomb they came into the house of the youth, for he was rich. And after six days Jesus told him what to do and in the evening the youth comes 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 thence, arising, he returned to the other side of the Jordan.

Clement states, between what are verses 34 and 35 of Mark 10
wiki

 

[Jeremiah]

 

[rusra02]

Jesus didn't keep Mosaic Law perfectly. There are many points in the Gospels where, through both words and actions, he emphasizes that the law is secondary to higher virtues.

Remember: you're talking about someone who worked on the Sabbath and told people to set aside their Temple obligations if they needed to reconcile with their brothers.

[/size][/font][/size][/font]
Heh... it always puzzles me when Christians pull out a verse that condemns homosexuals and revilers to defend their revulsion of homosexuality.

Jesus did keep the Mosaic law perfectly. Matthew 5:17-19 quotes Jesus "Do not think I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I came, not to destroy, but to fulfill; for truly I say to you that sooner would heaven and earth pass away than for one smallest letter or one particle of a letter to pass away from the Law by any means and not all things take place. Whoever, therefore, breaks one of these least commandments and teaches mankind to that effect, he will be called ‘least’ in relation to the kingdom of the heavens."
The cures Jesus performed on the Sabbath did not break the sabbath law. The strict and unloving way the Pharisees interpreted that Law caused them to unjustly censure Christ. Jesus ably defended his actions when confronted by these legalists.
Neither did Jesus urge his followers to set aside their temple obligations. He showed that making peace with their brothers was as vitally important to true worship as was offering a sacrifice, even more so. (Matthew 5:23)

It is not reviling anyone to read or quote directly from God's Word to show what his view of some practice is. Shall we hide the truth for fear of offending someone? Or should we share the truth in hopes it will help someone?

 

[dust1n]

Sounds like many atheists and non-believers I know and know of, not to mention people of other types of belief.

:biglaugh:

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Jesus did keep the Mosaic law perfectly. Matthew 5:17-19 quotes Jesus "Do not think I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I came, not to destroy, but to fulfill; for truly I say to you that sooner would heaven and earth pass away than for one smallest letter or one particle of a letter to pass away from the Law by any means and not all things take place. Whoever, therefore, breaks one of these least commandments and teaches mankind to that effect, he will be called ‘least’ in relation to the kingdom of the heavens."

Yeah... Jesus said some conflicting things.

The cures Jesus performed on the Sabbath did not break the sabbath law. The strict and unloving way the Pharisees interpreted that Law caused them to unjustly censure Christ. Jesus ably defended his actions when confronted by these legalists.

By arguing that love and necessity were more importan than the word of the law. If the Pharisees interpreted the law strictly and unlovingly, it's because the commandment itself is strict and unloving:

8 Remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy. 9 For six days you shall labour and do all your work.
10 But the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God; you shall not do any work—you, your son or your daughter, your male or female slave, your livestock, or the alien resident in your towns.

It doesn't say "any work except what's really important", it says "any work".

Neither did Jesus urge his followers to set aside their temple obligations. He showed that making peace with their brothers was as vitally important to true worship as was offering a sacrifice, even more so. (Matthew 5:23)

Right - it was more important than the details of the law, such as offering a specific sacrifice at a specific time.

It is not reviling anyone to read or quote directly from God's Word to show what his view of some practice is. Shall we hide the truth for fear of offending someone? Or should we share the truth in hopes it will help someone?

Attributing your revulsion to God doesn't change the fact that you engage in it as well.

 

[footprints]

To some people, it does. A fair proportion of Christian denominations base their theology on the idea that Jesus was a "perfect, sinless sacrifice". If you think like this, then the suggestion that Jesus might've done something that you consider sin is effectively an attack on the whole basis of your religion.

Rational and logical people know what some twit says, doesn't change reality one little bit. Heaven forbid, next you would have believers start believing atheists and their twisted logic.

 

[footprints]

:biglaugh:

Truth is often funnier than fiction isn't it. :biglaugh:

 

[blackout]

Based on the scant evidence we have in the New Testament, it seems to me the most likely orientation of Jesus was asexual. He seemed to love everybody to the same degree regardless of their sex, and appeared to be empathic and altruistic in his thinking as opposed to being dominated by sexual competition....

Perhaps he was Bi-Poly.