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.
I doubt 'eunuch' could be interpreted as 'gay'.... Because it has been scientifically proven(tm) that gays were ''born that way''... and not ''made gay''. As for the last option...I hope you seriously don't think Jesus taught men to ''become'' gay for the kingdom of heaven.
Akragon
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
one could also argue that eunuch could be interpreted as being gay...
For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.
I doubt 'eunuch' could be interpreted as 'gay'.... Because it has been scientifically proven(tm) that gays were ''born that way''... and not ''made gay''. As for the last option...I hope you seriously don't think Jesus taught men to ''become'' gay for the kingdom of heaven.
Akragon
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
one could also argue that eunuch could be interpreted as being gay...
For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.
I doubt 'eunuch' could be interpreted as 'gay'.... Because it has been scientifically proven(tm) that gays were ''born that way''... and not ''made gay''
As for the last option...I hope you seriously don't think Jesus taught men to ''become'' gay for the kingdom of heaven.
sk0rpi0n
It can be deduced that the claim that Jesus had a wife, appeared much after Jesus' exit.
No. I'm saying if the story in question claims Jesus was married when the gospels say he was single, then that story can be dismissed. Though the gospels contradict each other in many matters, they all agree one thing... that Jesus was single. Further, any story in the gospels that contradicts Jesus' own Israelite religion can be dismissed as unreliable.
FlyersFan
sk0rpi0n
It can be deduced that the claim that Jesus had a wife, appeared much after Jesus' exit.
So you are saying that because the story appeared hundreds of years after Jesus died, then it is unreliable?
I was being sarcastic. Given the way some activists insist science has ''proved'' gays are born that way.
@ Akragon...
perhaps a link to said scientific study?
Yeah, so ''eunuch'' is better interpreted as abstaining from sex for the sake of the kingdom of heaven...and not as ''gay'' as you claim.
Somehow I doubt it can be taught...LOL
so that is obviously not what im saying
sk0rpi0n
I'm saying if the story in question claims Jesus was married when the gospels say he was single, then that story can be dismissed.
FlyersFan
sk0rpi0n
It can be deduced that the claim that Jesus had a wife, appeared much after Jesus' exit.
So you are saying that because the story appeared hundreds of years after Jesus died, then it is unreliable? Hmmm .... what other stories about Jesus appeared at about the same time? Those must be unreliable as well. Glad to see you finally agree that - the further you get from the event, the less reliable the 'new' stories are.
Bottom line -
Stories made up about Jesus in the 600s and 700s AD don't match the gospels and are obviously unreliable.edit on 4/12/2014 by FlyersFan because: (no reason given)
sk0rpi0n
any story in the gospels that contradicts Jesus' own Israelite religion can be dismissed as unreliable.
WarminIndy
before going off on FlyersFan because she is Roman Catholic and has a Roman Catholic Bible,
FlyersFan
WarminIndy
before going off on FlyersFan because she is Roman Catholic and has a Roman Catholic Bible,
I have a pre-vatican II Catholic bible (without the modern 'inclusive gender neutral language')... a protestant KJV bible (pre-inclusive language) ... a modern Catholic bible (printed in the 1990s with 'inclusive language'), a Hawaiian bible that I can't read but is fun to have, and the big fat 'The Other Bible' (Gnostic readings). Oh, and we've got the Navarre Bible Commentaries one of them here . We've got tons of stuff here.
ETA .. oh, and a few different kid/teen bibles too.edit on 4/12/2014 by FlyersFan because: (no reason given)
sk0rpi0n
I was being sarcastic. Given the way some activists insist science has ''proved'' gays are born that way.
@ Akragon...
perhaps a link to said scientific study?
Yeah, so ''eunuch'' is better interpreted as abstaining from sex for the sake of the kingdom of heaven...and not as ''gay'' as you claim.
Somehow I doubt it can be taught...LOL
so that is obviously not what im saying
edit on 12-4-2014 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)
DeadSeraph
reply to post by Annunak1
1) This is not proof that Jesus was married. Your own source acknowledges that. It was written in 7 or 800 AD.
2) The vatican's stance on celibacy is not the Christian stance on celibacy. Christian churches allow their pastors to marry. That debate has nothing to do with this papyrus (personally, I find the catholic position on celibacy for priests to be ridiculous).
Oh, and there is already a thread on this with a much less sensationalistic title here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...edit on 11-4-2014 by DeadSeraph because: (no reason given)
Akragon
sk0rpi0n
I was being sarcastic. Given the way some activists insist science has ''proved'' gays are born that way.
@ Akragon...
perhaps a link to said scientific study?
Yeah, so ''eunuch'' is better interpreted as abstaining from sex for the sake of the kingdom of heaven...and not as ''gay'' as you claim.
Somehow I doubt it can be taught...LOL
so that is obviously not what im saying
edit on 12-4-2014 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)
Back to my quote...
For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.
Eunuchs born from their mothers womb... Now the OT says anyone who genitals have been injured can not approach the temple... which would mess up their religious life because all males must go to the temple if they are able...
And clearly we're not talking about a male born without his testicles... that would be a deformity, and if im not mistaken, children with deformities were disposed of just after birth...
A eunuch born from his mothers womb is figuratively saying a man who will never have children... which is a man who will never sleep with a woman... sounds pretty gay to me...
Also notice he said specifically... "he who is ABLE TO RECIEVE IT let him receive it"
Meaning not everyone will accept what he saying... but some will understand...
Jesus had no problem with gay people... and I believe this is what he was saying in his own way... he said it in a way that people wouldn't grasp the idea he was getting at and try to stone him for even mentioning the idea...
Luke 17: 26 And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.
27 They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.
28 Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded;
29 But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.
30 Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.
31 In that day, he which shall be upon the housetop, and his stuff in the house, let him not come down to take it away: and he that is in the field, let him likewise not return back.
32 Remember Lot's wife.