Elton: Jesus was a gay Lord

Jesus was gay ???


I guess it all makes sense now...... he was always asking for people to get on their knees and " serve god"....

and he also wanted them to " consume his flesh" ....

The long hair, .... the biker beard, ..... it's all coming together.


my remarks may anger some of you, .... and it is you who know Jesus the less. I do not think he would mind humour, in fact I think he would enjoy it, even at his expense.

these men of faith would be the first to turn their backs on the christ if they saw him in the street.

shame on me ? .... shame on all of you, for twisting his teachings to suit yourselves, ... untill they've become something alltogether unrecognizable.

men who claim to know god the most, ... often know him the least.

Originally posted by thedeadtruth
reply to post by EndOfTheWorld7

 

You may want to read this.

www.foxnews.com...

Religion and deep spirituality is linked to brain damage

Personally I don't believe in hired Scientists.
They are hired to prove something.

Like when the tobacco companies hired scientists to prove smoking cigarettes was healthy for you and the Scientists who were hired by the Aluminum plants to prove fluoride is good to drink.

Originally posted by EndOfTheWorld7
Oh great, another Atheist who thinks religion is ridiculous.
Atheist is a religion itself, except your God is Dawrin along with monkey skulls and your Bible is called On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.

Being an Atheist doesn't make you smarter.

Atheism is by no means a religion, and the continued attempt to attach religious devotion to it is intellectually dishonest and wrong.

I hold Darwin in no great esteem, in any way. I am also an atheism who is pro-life, so what?

Where the logic breaks down, is that atheism has no ties to bind it to any particular set of views outside of not believing religious dogma.

That pretty much opens up our world view to encompass anything not religious (which is almost everything we know or think).

Peace
KJ

Elton John really has never struck me as a man who takes intellectual pursuits too seriously, so I tend to take his statements with a car-sized grain of salt.

If Jesus did exist, he might well have been gay. The case might be made by someone well versed, but John isn't what I'd call a historian or scholar. His reasoning is thin, to be kind, so I wouldn't make too much of this.

Have a good chuckle about it. Life's too short to blow a gasket over trivial things singers say.

Originally posted by Romantic_Rebel

Here's a website for you to know the truth between Judaism or what you call it the real Hebrew Israelite. www.pocm.info... Now you can quoting stuff from a bible. But to me it's fake. Influnced by older Babylon Mythology.

You been watching Zeitgeist? one of the most inaccurate movies ever.

Christianity and Judaism is influenced by pegan bullcrap not the actual the Bible.
God of the Bible is against religion.

You gotta do a lot more research on religion before you judge.
You think I haven't heard about Nimrod, Semiramis, Isis and Horus?

Actually reading the Bible helps before judging it.

reply to post by Romantic_Rebel


well, and I highly doubt jesus even existed ...

Elton is a douche.

Those that listen to him are EVEN BIGGER douche bags.

No prophet or messenger was gay.

Oh, and if you Christians think Jesus was a manifestation of GOD HIMSELF then I take it Elton is calling God gay right?

Why did he create man and women and not Elton and George?

All those that listen to degenerate fiends like Elton can simply go to hell.

Have a nice burning.

We of course today have no idea of the sexuality of R. Yehoshua bar Yosef the Galilean Nazir (Gk. Iesous) whom people in America call "Jezzzuzz" for some odd reason.

As a Daviddic pretender organising a rebellion and a Messianic movement against the brutal Roman Occupation in Judaea in AD 36 (on the 100th anniversary of the Roman Invasion of Pompey in BCE 63) he would have fully expected to 'take back the holy land' and lead 'his scattered sheep' (the Jews of the Diaspora) back to the 'Promised Land' making a reference to Genesis 15:16 where he seems to have believed in a kind of Divine TimeTable ("The TIMES [of the AMORITES] are FULFILLED...repent and believe in the Good News of the Kingdom (i.e. of David) although carefully coded "Kingdom of Heaven" - )

Any Daviddic pretender (gay, bi, straight or a-sexual) would have been expected to marry and father SONS ('Thus says YHWH: You shall NEVER lack a SON to SIT on the THRONE of Yisro'el...).

But to say "He wasn't gay because he's my LORD" is just fantasy. Certainly we have some curiour parallels in the Midrash Influenced 4 Canonical Greek Gospels with some very curoius scenes take place with other men, e.g. the 4th Canonical Greek Gospel ('according to John' whoever he was) where 'at the Last Supper' scena, we see him 'reclining' (like gentile Greeks, on mats) at Pesach ('Passover') sharing intimicies 'with the disciple whome Iesous Loved...' - (sounds pretty gay to me, especially the other verse 'and the disciple whom Iesous loved WAS LEANING ON HIS BREAST haring whispers' see 'John' chapter 13:25 -

It is almost as if the writer of the 4th Greek Canonical Gospel, whoever he may have been, was trying to draw a PARALLEL between the SON of DAVID (a title of the Messiah) and DAVID himself who had what can only be regarded as a homosexual relationship with his brother in Law Jonathan, at least to judge from the words in the unpointed Paleo Hebrew see: 1 Samuel 20:30 (and other places like "and it came to pass that the Nephesh of Jonathan was KNITTED with the Nephesh of David, for David loved him as his own Soul' the word N-PH-SH in paleoHebrew means throat, or esophagus, or 'soul' having to do with breathing: did the writer mean to say the were FRENCH KISSING?..)

At any rate, Saul the King seems to have thought so, and called his little sonny boy to task about not making more sons 'to establish' his clan-dom.

1 Sam 20:30 (it can be very tricky to try and translate paleoHebrew without vowels into anything like Modern English, but here goes)

'Then it happened that Saul the King's anger flamed up against [his son] Jonathan, and he spoke to him saying:

'You son of a perverted, mounting female !Do you imagine that I do NOT know that you have chosen-to-marry that son of Jesse, to the CONFUSION of your MOTHER'S NUDITY and TO YOUR OWN CONFUSION? It seems to me that as long as this Son of Jesse is walking the earth, your position in this court won't ever be solidified---nor your [future] kingdom ! Now go get him and bring him here to me, so that I can kill him right now !"

So many homosexual words in so short a space, oh my ! First there's this PERVERSION thingy (naughty naughty...) then there's this 'rebellious woman' phrase (refering to the Sexual Position of the Mounting Female aka Lilith/Lillitu, something that is reflected in the Apocalypse of Yohanon aka Book of Revelation with the Whore of Babylon who (sexually) MOUNTS the RED Beast (in Greek the term means 'where the female sexually positioned on top') i.e. in a sexually 'perverted' position.

The later Rebbes as well as the older superstitious preLiterate preScientific persons in the Middle East in those days believed that when a female mounted the male in sex, any child born of the intercourse would be 'perverted' (if a girl she would act like a boy, if a boy, he would act like a girl), so Saul the King is here accusing Jonathan of being 'the son of a perverted top-mounting female' in other words, a kind of 'pansy' (although I prefer the term NANCY BOY) for doing the deed with David (at least he believed they were exchanging alot more than just underwear...)...

Also thrown into the mix is the reference to CONFUSION which in Hebrew means 'crossdressing' ('a man shall not wear a woman's garments, neither shall a woman dress in man's garments: it is CONFUSION' as we read in the 'happy' book of Leveticus).

'TO THE CONFUSION OF YOUR MOTHER'S NUDITY' well well well....looks like it kinda says it all.

Either way, the sexual relationship with David and Jonathan is generally swept under the rugs by the Rabbi's and by Priests and Ministers today (they generally don't point these passages out to their sheeple) - at any rate when 1-2 Samuel and 1-2 Kings was completely re-written after the Exile under the watchful eyes of Ezra around 450 BCE, you'll notice that the Chronicler (the writer of 1-2 Chronicles, whoever he was) just left the whole thing about thier 'relationship' out of his story...completely.

Much of the gospel material has the SON OF DAVID (i.e. Iesous) doing things that David himself did (like stealing the shewbread when he and his soldiers were hungry, just as Iesous steals the crop stubble (which was perfectly legal if you were in extremis, i.e. starving) with his band of merry men. The Betrayal on the hill by Yehudah bar Shimeon (Judas) parallells the betrayal of David by his son Absolom etc.

This is called 'parallelism' and is part of the Midrashic Tendenz in the gospel material - so when the 4th Canonical Gospel writer has the son of David (Iesous) snuggling up against another Jonathan (sometimes idenfited with 'the disciple whom Iesous LOVED') we can see the parallel between DAVID and the SON OF DAVID in the story...

Then there's that weird story in the 1st Canonical Gospel ('according to Matthew', whoever he was) in chapter 8 where the 'Centurion's PAIS (Greek for 'male lover') was possessed by a fever daemon' and Iesous 'heals him from a distance with a word' - since the 'god fearer' Centurion paid for the local Synagogue, no doubt influencing his decision to heal the boy---but Iesous did not seem to mind healing what he must have known was a homosexual male....

Of course you'd have to be able to read Greek to know what it says....most bibles use 'slave' or 'son' --- as if Centurions on active duty could get married !!






and in the infamous homoerotic poetry to Jonathan in 2 Samuel chapter 1

Personaly I'm sure Jesus wasn't gay.

I believe we all see Him as we will;
red and yellow, black and white, gay, straight; whatever;
it doesn't matter;
He loves us all just the same.

Plus, He has a great sence of humor.






[edit on 18-2-2010 by AmericanDaughter]

Originally posted by RizeorDie
Jesus was not gay. PERIOD.

what does being gay offer the word? there are no advantages and nothing good that comes from it, its completely useless and there is no future in being gay... god create man and women for a reason... and if god didnt create us and we were created by aliens, then they wouldnt be happy that their experiment went wrong and started being gay... total fail

I just wanted to take a moment to thank you for saying the most stooooopid thing I've read all day. What do gays offer the world? Well, let's see. We are your artists, your musicians, your composers, your poets, your playwrites, your novelists. We are your archetects, your engineers, your healers, your visionaries. We create your culture. It is our gift to you. We were your shamans and wise men but then you started dragging us through the streets by our entrails. We are your brothers, your sisters, your parents, your neighbors, your teachers, your students, your friends. We are all this and more....so what we don't make babies? We're a little too busy for that. My question to you is this: What do you offer the world? Thanks for playing.

Originally posted by WickedStar

I just wanted to take a moment to thank you for saying the most stooooopid thing I've read all day. What do gays offer the world? Well, let's see. We are your artists, your musicians, your composers, your poets, your playwrites, your novelists. We are your archetects, your engineers, your healers, your visionaries. We create your culture.

Lets not forget gays brought us the Illuminati and Freemasons.
And also brought us what is considered to be the most evil, sinful, most homosexual civilizations according to the Lord and the Bible.
Babylon - Gay
Sodom and Gorma - Gay
Rome - Men lovers and Lesbians
Greece - Boy lovers
and America.

Oh good grief...Jesus is not gay. Elton John wants everybody to be gay so he can feel more secure in his life style. If Elton wants to be queer as a football bat that's his choice, but he shouldn't be trying to drag my Lord down the same path.

People who believe dont rise to this.
For those who hear and can see you know this stuff is going to get worse .
We all know that people like this including elton are to have there time and we are to be taunted victimised eventually castout from society even beheaded . but its all good because we never loved the world

im normal by the defo in the true book my body was designed to lie down with women take a wife and GO FORTH AND MULTIPLY.
i am a sinner but i want to repent and hate my past i pray every night.

elton thoth donald duck

[edit on 2/18/2010 by dashar]

[edit on 2/18/2010 by dashar]

The title to this thread is offensive, only because if a thread was started that said Michael Jackson was an n word, it too would be deleted. So I refuse to read past the title. Where I grew up when that name was called to someone, feelings were hurt, I remember mine were. And usually it precluded some juvie kid with abusive parents taking thier agressions out on me.

Just my honest opinion.

[edit on 18-2-2010 by psyko45]

reply to post by rainfall


So historians are still debating about whether Jesus even existed and who he was and Elton John thinks he knows the saviors sexual tendencies? Seems like a stupid claim to make, one designed to draw attention like a bad tabloid cover.

Atheist is a religion itself, except your God is Darwin along with monkey skulls and your Bible is called On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.

I'm sorry to say this. You are also not really having one of you brightest moments

First of all Atheism is the opposite of every other theism. An atheist is not in anyway related to Darwin. It's no religion either.

Let me explain.
You believe in God, or Shiva, Allah, Or maybe you're a Hindu.
The A in Atheism can easily be replaced with No in this little list.
The reason many atheist views on the world include Darwinism is because they base there opinion on science. Simple facts evidence and theory backed up with evidence, proof, observations, predicted events or results fitting in these theories.
There is not any physical proof, evidence, predicted results for the existence of any god like being.This and a few others make evolution Darwin style a lot more plausible.

Like in the matrix. The kids are bending some spoon. One of them explains how. There is no spoon.

See it like this . A collector without a collection is no collector at all
As soon as there are no more people create the need to explain why some one does not believe in any god, atheism seizes to exist.
Anyone claiming to be an atheist, telling about a spiritual experience or explaining he does not know for sure, is no atheist.

It is never a belief ! It is a chosen reality based on the fact there is no evidence or proof of any god so there is no god. No denial, just a conclusion.

Everything else has nothing to do with atheism.

Originally posted by EndOfTheWorld7
Personally I don't believe in hired Scientists.
They are hired to prove something.

Like when the tobacco companies hired scientists to prove smoking cigarettes was healthy for you and the Scientists who were hired by the Aluminum plants to prove fluoride is good to drink.

And the scientists who were hired to deny global-warming who also happened to be the same scientists who were hired to deny the tobacco-cancer link. Anyway...

So what if Jesus was gay? Would you stop believing in him? I dunno. People need to leave Jesus alone.

Oh and guys ! There is evidence proving Jezus really is not gay you know.

The problem is you are probably not going to believe it
So, I'm better of not telling what it is.

reply to post by EndOfTheWorld7


The most boy loving these days is happening by priests from the roman Catholic church. Weird huh.

It's even been on the news this week.
The pope even said it was a criminal deed.
He didn't condemn it tho.