It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What if Jesus was what you would call gay?

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by worldwatcher
Like I said, my God is not your God, however your arrogance and slander of others proves in your God's eyes that it is you that will be blighted and condemned not me, who percieves all with an open mind.





Jeremiah 3:13
Only acknowledge your guilt- you have rebelled against the LORD your God, you have scattered your favors to foreign gods under every spreading tree, and have not obeyed me,' " declares the LORD .

SO, who is this "god" that you so believe in?




posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by lilblam

Was never married, had 3 girlfriends though.


And you base this on?



posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 01:50 PM
link   
The same thing people base anything about Jesus on, divine inspiration


Do I believe it? Nah, but it's possible.



posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 01:52 PM
link   
Well there's this little problem and it's called Jewish Custom.

Jesus was a well respected man in Jerusalem and people called him good teacher or rabbi.

A man in his in 30's, a non-married man is looked upon as a curse in Judaism, especially 2,000 years ago.

There is no way Jesus had the respect and love he had without being married.

That and among many other factors.



posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hamilton
I came to think about this again just the other day. How would you react if Jesjuah came back and appeared to be what you would call gay?

Blessings,
Mikromarius



What has happened to the minds of our children????



posted on Feb, 23 2004 @ 05:56 PM
link   
saying Jesus Christ was or is or going to come back gay is a BIG sin. God says NOT to be gay and Jesus is God soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo why would he be gay????????
Thats just plain stupid



posted on Feb, 24 2004 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by worldwatcher
homosexuality has been around for ages, many ancient cultures had no problems with men being with men, however it is not something that was always openly promoted, it is quite possible that in the times of Jesus back then, men were more commonly involved in homosexual behavior. remember those greeks and romans with their baths? nude olympics, etc, etc.

now if you truly believe that Jesus is God, then in reality shouldn't he be both male and female, since God is both male and female, ying and yang, good and evil, just a thought.


And this is my point. Jesjuah is again and again described as "Monogenes" translated "Only Begotten". However it can be translated something like "him who can beget alone". Like in the Pyramid texts, where a term like the Word of God is explained as being the Divine Utterance God made that created the constellations, stars, moons and planets which are the souls of the gods and the messagers of Heaven, what would be called angels and hosts in the Jewish doctrine. Further in the Papyrus of Ani, Ra and many of the other forms of his is often recognised and worshipped for being the "self-created". If you had translated the Papyrus of Ani into Greek. Ra or Re would have been called Monogenes, the "one begotten". If you had translated the Pyramid Texts, the Word or the Word of God would have been translated "Logos" just like in the Gospel of John.

And the Self Created is HuHu. He is also YHWH. And Like HuHu created himself as Osiris, YHWH created himself as Jesjuah.

Blessings,
Mikromarius

[Edited on 24-2-2004 by Hamilton]



posted on Feb, 24 2004 @ 10:32 AM
link   
I'd bitch slap Jesus if he was gay! Then I would descend to the depths of Hell were I would sleep with all the sluts just to piss off Jesus! I would then rise to the almighty King of Hell and all beautifull women, and destroy Heaven with the sound reverberations of the women moaning from my eternal love making!



[Edited on 24-2-2004 by HumptyDumpty]



posted on Feb, 24 2004 @ 10:34 AM
link   
Continuing from my last post, ignoring the usual godless crap from the usual paople: Which all in all would make him transsexual or a hermaphrodite. He would have a double set of genitals. Just like all the angels and the first humans were. The first Adams were creaded into "malefemales" not males and females, but as hermaphrodites, able to conceive on their own. Just like "the Father" in the original Aramaic texts becomes Fathermother. God and his angels are men able to conceive children on their own.

Blessings,
Mikromarius

[Edited on 24-2-2004 by Hamilton]



posted on Feb, 24 2004 @ 10:38 AM
link   
Maybe your thought of "conceiving" these children is not what was acually happening. Why would he # himself when he could just make it so!



posted on Feb, 24 2004 @ 11:04 AM
link   
I mean do you acually think that The Almighty Creator made these Adam and Eves, then told them to take their penises and stick them in their own pussys and then to apply friction to stimulate the nerves, causing a orgasam and then creating children that only had one set of genitals. Above all did adam's and eve's then have a group discution and say, eve's were like, "well I like having the hole", oh me, me, the Adam's were like " and I like having the pole!". Come on man God wouldnt even be that complicated. Stupid simple, thats the way! He would have just made man and women, Adam and Eve, what ever. And what the hell was the Serpant all about? Sounds like we are missing some HUGE facts here over time or translation.


edit: spelling




[Edited on 24-2-2004 by HumptyDumpty]



posted on Feb, 24 2004 @ 03:10 PM
link   
One day you will maybe die in that puke of yours.

This thread has prooven an effective source of information about certain people's limited sense of judgement and truth. And should be a great tool for people to configure their "ignore lists" and maybe also a couple of votes for those who have infact shown that they have both hearts and minds and have shown great bravory in the fight against ignorance.

Blessings,
Mikromarius



posted on Feb, 24 2004 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by THENEO
ww,

interesting points.

god would send a messenger to us that would promote giving and learning and respect for others.

but everybody cannot always have what they want just because they want it.


No matter who he married, Mary or Lazarus, he would be judged by the unrightious in the spiritual city called Sodom. And no matter how he had explained his existance, he would have to suffer unrightious punnishment in the spiritual town of Egypt in the minds of the unrightious. The Light should have been received with joy and repentance, but both the Light and him who witness about the Light was killed, for they both witnessed about the Father in a way that made the sins of the doctrines of Babylon obvious. The Talmud and the Roman customs are thoroughly debunked and condemned, other Babylonian legacies like repetative prayers and the use of idols and icons is further condemned. Still they don't see this. They choose to deceive themselves instead.

Blessings,
Mikromarius



posted on Feb, 24 2004 @ 03:35 PM
link   
I do not "butter up" my thoughts with big words and biblical underlinings......I do not try to be what Iam not. Your view is interesting, but very disturbing to me. It brings out feeling in me that make me want to argue for the good of Hederosexuality, and mostly the traditional form of Marriage. I do not consider myself Homophobic, Iam not scared of Homosexuality, but I would go to WAR against it if it came down to it!



posted on Feb, 24 2004 @ 03:37 PM
link   
No one expects the Inquisition!



posted on Feb, 24 2004 @ 05:36 PM
link   
You know, I've seen seneral logical arguements in this thread that lead to him beimg gay. The only arguement I've seen to the contrary is that the bible says being gay is bad. So, that's like 50 points for a gay Jesus and 1 point for a straight Jesus. Anyone who can do math can tell that he must have been gay. You christians are worshiping a homosexual. If you weren't, you could come up with some more proofs that he was straight. Jesus was a gay man, deal with it.



posted on Feb, 24 2004 @ 05:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by NotTooHappy
You know, I've seen seneral logical arguements in this thread that lead to him beimg gay. The only arguement I've seen to the contrary is that the bible says being gay is bad. So, that's like 50 points for a gay Jesus and 1 point for a straight Jesus. Anyone who can do math can tell that he must have been gay. You christians are worshiping a homosexual. If you weren't, you could come up with some more proofs that he was straight. Jesus was a gay man, deal with it.


Haven't you heared that the Bible never said that being gay is bad? I have explained this a million times now. Leviticus 18:22 condems child abuse and fornication not homophilia. Saul Paulus condemns adultary and fornication, not homophilia.

Blessings,
Mikromarius



posted on Feb, 24 2004 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hamilton

Haven't you heared that the Bible never said that being gay is bad? I have explained this a million times now. Leviticus 18:22 condems child abuse and fornication not homophilia. Saul Paulus condemns adultary and fornication, not homophilia.

Blessings,
Mikromarius


You seem to be the only christian here who believes that. I wasn't talking to you. I was talking to the rest of them.



posted on Feb, 24 2004 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by NotTooHappy
You seem to be the only christian here who believes that. I wasn't talking to you. I was talking to the rest of them.


Well, I made this thread remember, so you are infact all talking to me in a way. It is not a matter of believing, it's a simple matter of translation. The word translated "Mankind" in Leviticus 18:22 is most other places translated "Children". Like everywhere it says "the children of God" or "the children of Israel". And the word translated "Womankind" in a context such as this should never be translated with anything else than "your wife" or "your wives". Look in the dictionary, it is all there.

Blessings,
Mikromarius



posted on Feb, 24 2004 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hamilton

Well, I made this thread remember, so you are infact all talking to me in a way. It is not a matter of believing, it's a simple matter of translation. The word translated "Mankind" in Leviticus 18:22 is most other places translated "Children". Like everywhere it says "the children of God" or "the children of Israel". And the word translated "Womankind" in a context such as this should never be translated with anything else than "your wife" or "your wives". Look in the dictionary, it is all there.

Blessings,
Mikromarius


I wasn't saying you were wrong in stating that the bible is mistranslated. I was saying that the arguement for a gay Jesus seems to outweigh the arguement for a straight one. I like what you've been up to. Trying to get the other christians to think a little more about what they believe. I don't trust blind faith.




top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join