Jesus the Homosexual: Evidence From the Gospels

[TX-Beau]

I think it's important to remember that whether or not there was an actual person or not there were definitely Christians - unfortunately historical evidence of Christians and what they believe do not "prove" Christ was real, otherwise so would Shiva and Baal, and all the other mutually exclusive gods be rea at one and the same time by the exact same faulty reasoning.

I personally think that there was some kind of preacher, but that Christ as we know him is some kind of amalgam of that and things later pasted on him.

 

[kallipolis]

There are no "Roman" sources for the person Jesus Christ, and Ludolfo is not an atheist.

Think as you please.

 

[kallipolis]

I think it's important to remember that whether or not there was an actual person or not there were definitely Christians - unfortunately historical evidence of Christians and what they believe do not "prove" Christ was real, otherwise so would Shiva and Baal, and all the other mutually exclusive gods be rea at one and the same time by the exact same faulty reasoning.

I personally think that there was some kind of preacher, but that Christ as we know him is some kind of amalgam of that and things later pasted on him.

Duly noted.

Your thoughts are a constant reminder here, that historical reference is blasphemy when it is inconvenient.

 

[TX-Beau]

Duly noted.

Your thoughts are a constant reminder here, that historical reference is blasphemy when it is inconvenient.

Your thoughts here are a constant reminder that there will be no critical analysis for anything that supports your religious assumptions.

 

[TX-Beau]

There are plenty of "historical references" to other gods, why then are you not worshiping them?

 

[kallipolis]

There are plenty of "historical references" to other gods, why then are you not worshiping them?

The expert here on many gods is not I. Direct your question to that poster...

- - - Updated - - -

Your thoughts here are a constant reminder that there will be no critical analysis for anything that supports your religious assumptions.

I just provide the historical reference and let the usual suspect play their games.

 

[Mariatenebre]

Reading selectively? Opinterph's link points out that the Bible never says the Pharaoh drowned. And if the source is even half right, quite a bit of his life fits.



That opinion piece is less of a source than Opinterph's.... The guy was bothered by learning the Hebrews didn't build then pyramids? He must have been pretty ignorant to ever have thought they did, since neither the Bible nor any history makes such a claim.



How could Moses have "brought homophobia to the Jews"? He never speaks of homosexuality!


BTW, the Apiru were not just in Canaan, even apart from the Bible. They were "displaced people", both inside and outside the borders of Egypt. And some were taken as slaves, as well -- thousands, in fact.

Actually no the source does not fit Thutmose III's life there are no records of Thutmose III ever owning a whole race of people or anything that matches up with the Bible's story. Also yes the Bible does say that the Pharaoh and his army drowned in the Red Sea.

Also actually my source is backed up by mainstream historians. The consensus of mainstream historians is that the Exodus story never happened.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Evidence_for_the_Exodus

Actually Moses did mention homosexuality or at the very least sex between men. He basically decreed that every male who lies with a male as he does with a woman must be killed and that it is an abomination. It is amazing how Abrahamics ignore what the text clearly says in order to make this text suddenly pro gay when it obviously is not.

 

[ludolfo]

That Christianity remains a potent, and active reminder of the life of Jesus of Nazareth some two thousand years after his death, might well inform the sceptical person that there is a causation for a belief culture called Christianity.

The well esteemed Roman senator, historian, orator and ethnographer Cornelius Tacitus (55/56 BC-118AD) writes in his Annals on the life of the Emperor Nero:



Further reference here for those willing to broaden their knowledge, and understandings on the actual existence of Jesus of Nazareth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus_on_Christ

I quote:

All you have presented as evidence are words/ text, and text can be manipulated, and used for all kinds of propaganda as has been the case with more modern 'historians'. There is no actual physical evidence. And besides, to go all frantic even searching for it, IF you believe the Christian faith -that an actual man was born a Virgin who was the Son of God, and was Crucified and was then Resurrected on the third day, and returned to his Father in heaven. If you are arguing that there coexists physical evidence for such a person with all of that supernaturalism, then you are quite ...not really savvy about myth, and how in its essence it is NOT to be taken literally. To do so is the epitome of naivety
So it is as ironic to try and prove such a character actually existed as it is to prove 'he' was gay!

 

[Kulindahr]

Okay, I got some chuckles about the defense in Opinterph's link about "Thutmoses" v "Thutmose". In terms of the original text, it's a silly point to argue, since in the Hebrew it's "Moshe" (moh-sheh) and only becomes Moses (actually Moises, mo-ee-sase) in the Greek. So apparently the authors aren't that great about original sources.

But they're right about Pharaoh drowning; Cecil B. DeMille got that much right, showing Pharaoh watching his troops charge in and him being left on the shore. Arguments that he did go with his troops rest purely on assumptions, and are not supported by the text.

I don't have enough to go on for the position that the wilderness they reportedly wandered in was the Sinai, though the point that Paul says the mountain was in Arabia is significant. The biggest issue I see is that if they wandered the Sinai, they were on what was essentially Egyptian territory and could have easily been attacked by Egypt (repeatedly, even), whereas in Arabia they would have been just another batch of nomads and pretty much out of Egypt's reach.

 

[Kulindahr]

All you have presented as evidence are words/ text, and text can be manipulated, and used for all kinds of propaganda as has been the case with more modern 'historians'. There is no actual physical evidence. And besides, to go all frantic even searching for it, IF you believe the Christian faith -that an actual man was born a Virgin who was the Son of God, and was Crucified and was then Resurrected on the third day, and returned to his Father in heaven. If you are arguing that there coexists physical evidence for such a person with all of that supernaturalism, then you are quite ...not really savvy about myth, and how in its essence it is NOT to be taken literally. To do so is the epitome of naivety
So it is as ironic to try and prove such a character actually existed as it is to prove 'he' was gay!

If you're looking for "physical evidence", then we have almost no proof of any particular person existing in the past. Consider Homer: all we have is textual evidence (which has allowed some to argue there was more than one person named Homer, or even that it was a catch-all name for highly-regarded poetry from among the Greeks).

 

[Jacquemar]

All these findings agree with what I have read.

 

[kallipolis]

All you have presented as evidence are words/ text, and text can be manipulated, and used for all kinds of propaganda as has been the case with more modern 'historians'. There is no actual physical evidence. And besides, to go all frantic even searching for it, IF you believe the Christian faith -that an actual man was born a Virgin who was the Son of God, and was Crucified and was then Resurrected on the third day, and returned to his Father in heaven. If you are arguing that there coexists physical evidence for such a person with all of that supernaturalism, then you are quite ...not really savvy about myth, and how in its essence it is NOT to be taken literally. To do so is the epitome of naivety
So it is as ironic to try and prove such a character actually existed as it is to prove 'he' was gay!

Like many regulars here posting over the years you are demanding video evidence to satisfy your black, and white view of life.

An historian might invite you to construct a time machine, thereby satisfying your perceived need to view life in black, and white terms. I suspect that two thousand years life was also very colourful.

Here's a tiny sample of history, just to tease you:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilate_stone

I quote:

The Pilate stone is a damaged block (82 cm x 65 cm) of carved limestone with a partially intact inscription attributed to, and mentioning, Pontius Pilate, a prefect of the Roman province of Judaea from AD 26–36. It was discovered at the archaeological site of Caesarea Maritima in 1961. The artifact is particularly significant because it is an archaeological find, of an authentic 1st-century Roman inscription mentioning the name "Pontius Pilatus". It is contemporary to Pilate's lifetime, and accords with what is known of his reported career.[2][3] In effect, the writing constitutes the earliest surviving record and only contemporaneous evidence for the historical existence of this person; otherwise known only from the New Testament and brief mentions in retrospective Roman histories, which have themselves survived only in still-later copies.

 

[ludolfo]

Someone else said, paraphrased: 'OK, you can't get actual physical evidence Homer existed'. Well we are not talking about some old dude with a beard ages ago, we are talking about a man who was said to be the only 'son of God' and crucifiedand resurrected to pay off the debt for humanty's sin, and returned to 'the Father' in heaven, and will some back again to judge everyone. Him.
Now do the ones here trying to support the claim he actually existed in historical time believe all that TOO? or do you just think he was a normal prophet, or teacher? That is first question.

ALL CLAIMS OF JESUS DERIVE FROM HEARSAY ACCOUNTS

No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus. Devastating to historians, there occurs not a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus came well after the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings. Although one can argue that many of these writings come from fraud or interpolations, I will use the information and dates to show that even if these sources did not come from interpolations, they could still not serve as reliable evidence for a historical Jesus, simply because all sources about Jesus derive from hearsay accounts.

Hearsay means information derived from other people rather than on a witness' own knowledge.

Courts of law do not generally allow hearsay as testimony, and nor does honest modern scholarship. Hearsay does not provide good evidence, and therefore, we should dismiss it.

Did a historical Jesus exist?

 

[kallipolis]

Thanks to the computer the words of Josephus provide us with sufficient data to recognise that Jesus walked this earth:

http://www.josephus.org/testimonium.htm

The document is lengthy, and scholarly in not approaching the topic with a priori assumptions.

I note that you chose to overlook my post on the Pilate stone evidencing that Pontius Pilate was procurator of Judaea during the time Jesus of Nazareth walked this earth.

 

[Benvolio]

Thanks to the computer the words of Josephus provide us with sufficient data to recognise that Jesus walked this earth:

http://www.josephus.org/testimonium.htm

The document is lengthy, and scholarly in not approaching the topic with a priori assumptions.

I note that you chose to overlook my post on the Pilate stone evidencing that Pontius Pilate was procurator of Judaea during the time Jesus of Nazareth walked this earth.

You must know that almost all scholars reject those passages as later insertions. For one thing it has Josephus saying that Jesus "was the Messiah". But, if he believed that he would have been a Christian, which he was not.
I have no doubt that there was a historical Jesus, who was crucified, but we can never be sure of very much about him.

 

[ludolfo]

why have you no doubt?

 

[Benvolio]

why have you no doubt?

It is a judgment, based on the totality of the evidence. Crucifixion was a shameful death reserved for traitors. I don't believe any fictional story would have started with a crucifiction. There are wide discrepancies in the various stories, but they agree that he was crucified. Those discrepancies are to be expected when the events were passed down verbally from a number of observers before being written. Such discrepancies would be less likely if it started with a fiction.

 

[Jacquemar]

It is a judgment, based on the totality of the evidence. Crucifixion was a shameful death reserved for traitors. I don't believe any fictional story would have started with a crucifiction. There are wide discrepancies in the various stories, but they agree that he was crucified. Those discrepancies are to be expected when the events were passed down verbally from a number of observers before being written. Such discrepancies would be less likely if it started with a fiction.

Consider that the mythical Christ may have died on the axis mundi just like many other gods before him... No need to call it "historical" when many gods died on or under a tree: variants of the Attis myths, the Mythras myths, the Odin myths, and even the Buddah myths.

I highly recommend Joseph Campbell's THE HERO WITH A THOUSAND FACES and David Adams Leeming's MYTHOLOGY: THE VOYAGE OF THE HERO.

 

[kallipolis]

You must know that almost all scholars reject those passages as later insertions. For one thing it has Josephus saying that Jesus "was the Messiah". But, if he believed that he would have been a Christian, which he was not.
I have no doubt that there was a historical Jesus, who was crucified, but we can never be sure of very much about him.

You're merely quoting the text of the captioned article I posted.

I did say that the article has no preconceived prejudices, assuming a sceptical approach.

The reader should draw their own conclusions.

 

[kallipolis]

Consider that the mythical Christ may have died on the axis mundi just like many other gods before him... No need to call it "historical" when many gods died on or under a tree: variants of the Attis myths, the Mythras myths, the Odin myths, and even the Buddah myths.

I highly recommend Joseph Campbell's THE HERO WITH A THOUSAND FACES and David Adams Leeming's MYTHOLOGY: THE VOYAGE OF THE HERO.

Jesus of Nazareth stands the test of time. The rest are literary creations.