Would Jesus have hated on gays?

Jesus mocked Herod (Antipas) for being being a transvestite and being gay

Matthew 11:7-8

As they departed, Jesus began to say to the multitudes concerning John: “What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the wind? 8 But what did you go out to see? A man clothed in soft garments? Indeed, those who wear soft garmentsare in kings’ houses.

The word used for soft ("malakhoi" in Greek) means plush or soft or weak. In secular Greek sources from the era, it is the term used for transvestites. Herod was accused of homosexual acts, and of dressing up as a female. (the same story occurs in Luke 7:25)

Luke 13:31-32

31 On that very day some Pharisees came, saying to Him, “Get out and depart from here, for Herod wants to kill You.”
And He said to them, “Go, tell that fox, ‘Behold, I cast out demons and perform cures today and tomorrow, and the third day I shall be perfected.’

The original language word used here, (Greek "alopex") is the word for fox, using the feminine gender. Literally a vixen. The female fox was a symbol for sluttiness in the ancient world; it was believed that a vixen in heat would walk directly in front of hunters to find the "tod", the male in rut. The implication of Jesus' wording is something like "go tell that bitch Herod" or "go tell that foxy bitch". This is why dramatic portrayals of Herod (as in Jesus Christ Superstar and The Passion of the Christ have portrayed Herod as effeminate.

a reply to: Cuervo

Homosexuality is not a state of being. It is an act just like heterosexuality. We are not our sexuality. I am not sex and neither are you no matter who or what you might prefer to have it with.

So, no matter who or what I might prefer to sleep with, until I actually engage in that behavior ... there is no possible sin except for the possibility of impure thoughts, but I'm divided on how much of a sin those are - Catholics and Nazarenes think they're very sinful, others worry more about the degree to which you let them consume you or if you act on them.

So to me, if a person is gay, that's just what they do at night more or less, not who they are in their totality unless they let it consume them.

a reply to: charles1952

Sir, digging way back into the past, I had the fortune to be associated with a study that illustrated that population densities affected genetic expression in Drosophelia Melanogaster. The Fruit Fly. Studies showed that the higher the population density, the more prevalent, male fruit flies would exhibit female characteristics, thus decreasing the population, ergo preserving the food supply.

Now these were just flies. Not people.

But it showed that genotypic expression had a marked influence brought about by external pressures.

God is in our genes. How many angels dance on the head of a pin?
Their names are
Adenine
Guanine
Cytosine
Thymine

And their dance determines our actions.

a reply to: beezzer

Dear beezzer,

I'm not willing to say that you are in error, even though behavioral genetic scientists wouldn't agree with you. How do you believe your study applies to humans? I suppose the flies were confined to control the density. Humans can, and do, decide to move out to the country.

Further, how do the fly densities translate to human densities? For example, Gibraltar has a population density of over 12,000 people per square mile. Mexico is at 145, and the US has 84.

Do we conclude that Gibraltar is one of the glitter and boa capitols of the world? Or does the density have to be higher than that before genetic effects begin to occur? How about Monaco, at over 42,000 per square mile? I suppose that's all subject to discussion and further analysis.

But it showed that genotypic expression had a marked influence brought about by external pressures.

Might we posit that childhood sexual abuse is a sufficient external pressure to influence said expression?

But I will not ever agree with you that our actions are determined by our genes. I will not surrender the ability to make decisions and exercise choice. I am not a robot, programmed from birth to death.

With respect,
Charles1952

a reply to: charles1952

My friend,

God has granted us two gifts.

The first is the ability to be an artist, poet, teacher, scholar, scientist, etc.

The second gift is Free Will.

What we do with our gifts is up to us but God would never "stack the deck" against someone by making them gay.

Personally, I hate the free will part. Because I can hold no-one responsible for my actions but myself. I've spent too many years believing that it would be "better to lead in Hell than serve in Heaven".

I've basically screwed myself.

But it is the actions taken that I be judged.

Not the gifts that were given to me.

Homosexuals cannot be blamed for what they were born with. Their actions were predetermined by their birth. There is no "free will" about how they were born.

a reply to: beezzer

I guess I got screwed on the first ability...

It seems to me you know what you've done wrong in the past brother...

Pretty sure the main message Jesus taught was repentance...

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: beezzer

I guess I got screwed on the first ability...

It seems to me you know what you've done wrong in the past brother...

Pretty sure the main message Jesus taught was repentance...

I won't even ask for forgiveness. The life we have is made from the choices we made.

Good an Bad.

I am given the gift of free will.

I am responsible for those actions. I was a bad guy.

But being born gay?

Why would God stack the deck?

a reply to: beezzer

Well... theres nothing wrong with asking...

I don't understand what you mean by "stack the deck"

Could you elaborate?

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: beezzer

Well... theres nothing wrong with asking...

I don't understand what you mean by "stack the deck"

Could you elaborate?

If homosexuality is such a mortal sin, then why would God create people that were gay from birth?

a reply to: beezzer

Dear beezzer,

I find that I'm in agreement with most of what you say, and I don't believe I have the science to make a convincing case about the rest.

My friend,

God has granted us two gifts.

The first is the ability to be an artist, poet, teacher, scholar, scientist, etc.

The second gift is Free Will.

What we do with our gifts is up to us

I've basically screwed myself.

But it is the actions taken that I be judged.

Not the gifts that were given to me.

Homosexuals cannot be blamed for what they were born with.

There is no "free will" about how they were born.

I agree with it all, and it applies to me as well.

But after that, I run into some bumps in the road.

Personally, I hate the free will part. Because I can hold no-one responsible for my actions but myself.

I agree, but if that's true, how can you say that your gene' are responsible for your actions? And how does that fit with

Their actions were predetermined by their birth.

but God would never "stack the deck" against someone by making them gay.

Does that mean that homosexuality is a flaw, a fault, a bad break?

I've spent too many years believing that it would be "better to lead in Hell than serve in Heaven".

Me. too. But I put my hope in His forgiveness and His willingness to give me a fresh start even at my age.

I have a tremendous amount of respect for you, and I am truly honored that you call me "friend." Thank you.

With respect,
Charles1952

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: beezzer

Well... theres nothing wrong with asking...

I don't understand what you mean by "stack the deck"

Could you elaborate?

If homosexuality is such a mortal sin, then why would God create people that were gay from birth?

Homosexuality is no more a mortal sin then lying is...

This is actually what I find amusing... Christians tend to vilify gay people, yet go about their way busting out every other "sin" in the book... and somehow think they're much better...

I had this argument with the GF recently... and I got in crap for laughing at her...

Who among us has not sinned?

Which sin is greater then the next?

especially when this particular so called "sin" actually involves love... whether people want to accept it or not

a reply to: charles1952

I take liberties by calling you "friend" when I should be addressing you as "scholar" or "teacher".

(humble nod)

God starts us all off equally. Gay or straight. What we do via free will determines our fate.

I don't believe in a God that would create a child born gay that would imply that the child was "wrong".

If a gay child was born to be an artist and killed instead, that would be wrong. And judgment should be brought.

But if a gay child was born an artist, and was an artist, then a seat in Heaven should be assured.

a reply to: Akragon

I think that many Christians have blinders and are more susceptible to the dogma of Christianity than the true core beliefs of Christianity.

a reply to: beezzer

I seem to believe it comes down to what the parents of said "Christian" believed...

Its only been recently that homosexuality has become recognised as "not your fault" so to speak...

Yet you're correct... Christians base their beliefs around the church and whatever the preacher teaches...

That person's personal issues seem to come out in their sermons from what I've seen... regardless of what the gospels actually say...

a reply to: beezzer

Well heres another way of looking at it.

"Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill.

That sounds to me as though Jesus agreed with the Laws prior to his appearance. Notice how he never intended to end those laws and the teachings of the Prophets. Guess what? The law is against Homosexuality amongst other issues also.

Or maybe he was speaking about Roman occupational law or something.

There is as I recall one section of the Bible where Jesus quite explicitly embraces and heals a Roman centurions gay lover. But it has been largely lost in (deliberate) mis-translation by Church Elders who perhaps had an agenda in covering up Jesus' complete lack of concern with regards peoples sexuality and willingness to love everybody.

Ah, here we go, there's a wiki article about it:


en.wikipedia.org...


So yes, Jesus did love gay people, and we have actual scripture to back it up.

a reply to: beezzer

I think you are correct in regards to how Jesus would have treated sodomites (the word gay means happy), and the word sodomite is used throughout the Bible, at least the KJV. Having said that, Jesus would have also expected them to repent from their sodomy, just like He expected everyone else to repent from whatever their sin(s) were and "take up their cross and follow Him". I think we have a very good idea of what Jesus thought of homosexuality from the numerous passages, like Romans 1. Yes, Paul wrote Romans, but as we see in 2 Timothy 3:16-17...

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Because all scripture is God breathed, then Romans 1 is clearly what God thinks of homosexuality, and Jesus is God, so we don't have to guess what Jesus would have thought about them, because we already know.

A sin only becomes a mortal sin when you refuse to repent of it. In that respect ALL sins have the potential to become mortal. When you acknowledge something as a sin and don't care, it's mortal.

Homosexuality is an act, is a sexual sin just like adultery, fornication, and the rest. Where it becomes mortal is when people choose to admit that it's a sin and don't care.

If homosexuality was what a person was, their very being, then do you think Christ would have had anything to do with gays? They would have, by nature, been unclean and beyond redemption. Since he did it, then it is a signal that your sexuality is a small facet of who you are and something you can act on or not. It is not you.

Or, you aren't born gay and inherently flawed and sinful from the start. You don't see Jesus spending much time trying to redeem the demons he exorcized or trying to redeem the irredeemable.

a reply to: ketsuko


Yes the Bible (OT) says that gays should be killed...But what about all of these "death penalty sins"



Exodus 31:15. “For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day must be put to death.”


Exodus 21:17. “Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.”


Leviticus 24:16. “Anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him. Whether an alien or native-born, when he blasphemes the Name, he must be put to death.”


“If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. They shall say to the elders, ‘This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profligate and a drunkard.’ Then all the men of his town shall stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you. All Israel will hear of it and be afraid.” (Deuteronomy 21:18-21)


As I said in a previous post, if Christians put everyone to death that the bible said deserves it, there would be NOBODY left.... Literally nobody.


Also all of these are punishable by death

Adultery
Lying about your virginity
Worshiping idols (every single Christian with a cross should be put to death according to the bible)
Blasphemy
Being a Medium or Spiritualist
Non-priests going near the tabernacle when it is being moved

Plus many more...

ALL of these are as serious as "being gay" in the bible and all would get you the death penalty.
But how many Christians make threads about "lazy kids" and how they're going to hell??
Or those who work on the Sabbath?
Or those who curse at parents?

None...

Leave the judging up to your God... it is not up to you to judge and persecute and if you do, then be fair and persecute and judge ALL who "deserve" it according to the Bible

Some Christians are the LEAST Christ-like people on the planet.

a reply to: ketsuko

You don't see Jesus spending much time trying to redeem the demons he exorcized or trying to redeem the irredeemable.

Homosexuals are demons? Wow!

If homosexuality was what a person was, their very being, then do you think Christ would have had anything to do with gays? They would have, by nature, been unclean and beyond redemption.

Gotta admire Christian hate disguised as love.