I think it a possibility that jesus kept a woman apostle around and the church didn't like those parts of the story.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Was Jesus gay?
- Thread starter Youtellme
- Start date
fallingblood
Agnostic Theist
THe Mar Saba letter really isn't debated. The vast majority of scholars dismiss it either as a forgery, or as dubious. The fact that the letter is destroyed, and can't be examined, basically make most scholars dismiss it.
As for the Beloved Disciple, that is only in one Gospel. There is no connection to this naked guy (such is nothing more than a leap of faith). As for the Beloved Disciple, they aren't mentioned in the other Gospels, or even in the gnostic texts (I guess Mary Magdalene is referenced in a similar way in a gnostic text). And really, it wouldn't be the first time that a platonic friendship occurred between a leader and a follower. And since there is no suggestion of anything more (and no mention in the other Gospels), there is no reason to think that it was sexual in nature at all.
CynthiaCypher
Well-Known Member
Not according to Ehrman. His criticism in the article cited above is that the vast majority of scholars accept it as a writing of Clement, fact is most scholars accept it as real
CynthiaCypher
Well-Known Member
And you know as well as I do that there is nothing in the NT to suggest Jesus had a close emotional relationship with Magdalene contrary to popular belief. What it does tell us is that he had a strong emotional bond with another man
fallingblood
Agnostic Theist
Which is mentioned only in one Gospel. And even then, it isn't really focused on. More so, some have argued that this nameless disciple was a woman. It could also have been his brother. Or someone who say him as a father figure. Really though, it is only mentioned in one Gospel. The other Gospel writers seem to be oblivious about this.
So one is not born as a homosexual? One can be turned into a homosexual? Not to mention that we have no idea when his father became absent in his life. We only know about Jesus really from the time that he is in his 30's, or at the very least, a man. So we can't really know if his father was always absent.
As for his mother being pushy, we really don't even hear about her. Much less know that she is pushy. I mean, if she was pushy, it wasn't very much, as we really don't hear about her.
As in what way? And how does that suggest one is gay?
Where does he do either? He in fact states that when one is married, there should be no reason for a divorce. That doesn't seem like denigrating heterosexual marriage.
And yes, he mentions eunuchs, but he doesn't say it is better to be one.
Which was in no way unique. Many Essenes were lifelong bachelors. More so, we are not told whether or not he was married or not. There are those who argue he was married to Mary Magdalene, and in fact, there is more evidence for that than him being gay.
That really isn't the case here though. You're trying to shove Jesus into a duck suit, and then shove him into a pond.
Three important caveats:
1) The paucity of evidence when it comes to early christianity, and for Jesus, tends to make historians accept documents which give them more evidence
2) In recent years, the tendency among biblical scholars to use extra-canonical sources has increased, sometimes to the point of the comical.
3) Even if the letter is genuine, it's historical value as a document which provides information on the historical Jesus is slim to none.
Last edited:
CynthiaCypher
Well-Known Member
Wedding in Cana
fallingblood
Agnostic Theist
I have in front of me the book Forged, by Ehrman. He places the "Secret Mark" story in a section called "Hoaxes and other Deceptions."
He also address it in his book Lost Scriptures. Which he again says it is most likely a forgery, or something we can't authenticate.
As for Clement writing it, that would be fine. However, Clement didn't write the Gospel of Mark.
fallingblood
Agnostic Theist
Actually, John Shelby Spong has created quite an argument for it. One being that Mary seemingly thinks that she has a right to the body of Jesus, which suggests a closeness. That and she is at all of the important events in his ministry.
CynthiaCypher
Well-Known Member
That's three. And we are not debating the historicity of JC but his sexuality
fallingblood
Agnostic Theist
Which has actually been used by some to argue that Jesus was married to Mary. They suggest that was Jesus' wedding.
However, in that case, Jesus' mother is hardly pushy. During a party, she tells him to do one thing. Not really pushy.
CynthiaCypher
Well-Known Member
You said that scholars mostly dismiss it, yet Ehrman says most accept. You said scholars aren't debating it, yet Ehrman and other are still debating it. So who is right Ehrman and the scholars he is debating or you?
Of course. No one (well, no historians apart from a tiny handful of exceptions) doubts his historicity.
And I added the third as an afterthought. Thanks for the catch!
CynthiaCypher
Well-Known Member
So he was invited as a guest to his own wedding? How does that happen?
By serious scholars? Really? I didn't know.
CynthiaCypher
Well-Known Member
Just Mormons
fallingblood
Agnostic Theist
Ehrman isn't arguing that it is authentic. He may argue that it was written by Clement; however, Clement wasn't the author of Mark. We don't know who the author of Mark is. And according to his other works, he lists it as a hoax.
fallingblood
Agnostic Theist
The only one I have seen is John Shelby Spong. I do take him with a grain of salt. A very large grain of salt. But it is out there, and I think lot more convincing that Jesus was gay.
Katzpur
Not your average Mormon
Mormonism has no doctrine on whether Jesus was married or not. Some Mormons believe He was. Some people of other denominations may believe He was. I've seen articles written by non-Mormons with evidence suggesting that Jesus was married. Personally, to me, it's of no importance whatsoever that we know His marital status.
fallingblood
Agnostic Theist
Obviously, those who argue that it was the wedding of Jesus, don't think he was invited, but that the story itself is story that was created based on an actual wedding.