COMMUNITY NOTICE: If you are having trouble in your account access, please do send us a message at [email protected] for assistance.

Mark 14:51-52 - The Jesus Gay Scandal

245

Comments

  • AteoAteo Non est Deus. Fac cum eo. PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
    And the purpose of that "inspired" passage was...?
  • alchemistofophiralchemistofophir Christian Communist PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
    Ateo wrote: »
    And the purpose of that "inspired" passage was...?

    to tell that someone followed him even Jesus is with the Roman soldiers. That even a non-disciple can be better than the disciples, who fled and left him, in terms of belief and faith.

    Faith and bravery from a stranger was the lesson. That sometimes the one who believes in you the most are not your parents, not your brothers and sisters, but your barber. :rotflmao::rotflmao::rotflmao: Not faggotry.
  • ArchimedesArchimedes B?nned by ?dmin PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
    Ateo wrote: »
    Mark is so important in our study, Christianists, because it is considered by scholars (not atheists) as the original gospel. It is what inspired the group of gospels called, Synoptic gospel (Luke and Matthew), which must be the divine way of saying "totally word-for-word plagiarized gospels.

    Anyway, Mark has many curiosities. Mark 10:46, for example, shows proof of massive editing. "46 And they came to Jericho. And as he was leaving Jericho with his disciples and a great crowd, Bartimaeus, a blind beggar, the son of Timaeus, was sitting by the roadside.

    What! They have just arrived in Jericho and the next sentence already said that they were leaving Jericho. Scholars (not atheist writers) AGREED that there is a huge missing passage or story inside that single verse. Why announce an arrival to a city and then proceed to leave the city in the next sentence? If you think Bible writers are stupid, this is one proof.


    Boring! Pag-usapan na lang natin yung Sodom at Gomorrah. Maraming bading doon, magugustuhan mo yun promise!
  • ZyrenaZyrena Love and World Peace PExer
    Sad that many gays have a hard time finding individuals within their community worthy to be emulated by anyone thus they chose to engage in historical revisionism portraying historical personalities such as Jose Rizal, Napoleon Bonaparte, Alexander the Great, King David and in this case Jesus as gays.
  • skye_phoenixskye_phoenix 荒れ狂う稲光のシェルミー PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
    Etong si Ateo, parang lahat na lang ata nang prominent figures, gusto nyang maging bading.

    Pati ba naman si Jesus?!:rolleyes:

    Siguro pati si Adam, bading?

    That's discrimination! Bakit puro bading sila, wala bang mga tomboy? :lol:

    Si Eve din siguro tomboy, si Mary tomboy, si Cleopatra tomboy, si Joan of Arc tomboy. Oh devah!?
  • AteoAteo Non est Deus. Fac cum eo. PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
    Etong si Ateo, parang lahat na lang ata nang prominent figures, gusto nyang maging bading.

    Pati ba naman si Jesus?!:rolleyes:

    Siguro pati si Adam, bading?

    That's discrimination! Bakit puro bading sila, wala bang mga tomboy? :lol:

    Si Eve din siguro tomboy, si Mary tomboy, si Cleopatra tomboy, si Joan of Arc tomboy. Oh devah!?

    No, not all historical figures are gay. Nobody said that Abraham, Pharaoh Ramses, George Washington or King Henry VIII were gay because they clearly were not based on their behaviors, talks of their enemies, and contemporary records. But of all the historical and biblical figures, some percentages have to be gay. Any samplings of any populations will have 7-10% who are gay. Check out your high school class or your relatives, for instance.

    Now, on Jesus, sorry, but the chances are not looking good. He was single, despite Moses ordering all capable Jews to fock and reproduce (go forth & multiply, as per Pacquiao). He never even had a girlfriend, although many fishermen buddies were fighting for his love (do you need the verse for this?)
  • AteoAteo Non est Deus. Fac cum eo. PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
    Okay, let us check out what some experts have to say.

    A Colombian Catholic bishop said that Jesus could have a gay apostle.

    Well, Bishop Cordoba could be right if we recall that there were 12 apostles, and the percentage... Remember?

    Link here: http://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/colombian-bishop-jesus-may-have-had-gay-apostle
  • AteoAteo Non est Deus. Fac cum eo. PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
    Then an Anglican bishop said that Jesus himself could be gay. In that case, he can't be the king of heaven, can He? He can only be the Queen of Heaven, bwahahaha

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1487002/Jesus-might-have-been-homosexual-says-the-first-openly-gay-bishop.html
  • AteoAteo Non est Deus. Fac cum eo. PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
    All of you here who knows their bibles know that the Gospel of John was written with the Hellenistic audience in mind; i.e., the entire educated world (in addition to being written in Koine Greek anyway). And that means telling stories as the Greeks would see it.

    For example:

    1. The "disciple whom Jesus loved" was mentioned six times in John's gospel. Example: John 20:2
    To any Greek reader, it was simply Pederastry, the practice of taking on a young lover, which was common in Greek society. In this practice, one partner was the "Beloved" and the other was the "Lover".

    2. The Beloved was so close to Jesus. John 13:23 recorded, "Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved."

    If you can't picture that, there are many sacred images that depict that. This one for example in Italy.

    Sacro_Monte_di_Varallo_Fig4.JPG
  • iskrotumiskrotum Ako si King Kong! PExer
    Walangyang young man yan susunod lang kay Jeeezas nakabalabal pa ng linens at hubo't hubad sa loob. Obvious na galing sa tsupaan 69 session yan. Hahaha..
  • JagonJagon Don't listen to me PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
    ^e bakit di niyo gawan ng storyang bading yung young man din na nakabalabal sa araw na pagkabuhay muli? Siguro nabuhay muli si Jesus nung chinoopa ng young man sa cave.
  • AteoAteo Non est Deus. Fac cum eo. PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
    Actually, Jagon, we don't invent stories. We are not religious myth-makers.

    How many men in ancient times rose from the dead? Actually, there were a few; each one was based on a myth.

    How many men practiced Pederasty in Ancient Rome and Greece. Actually, you only have to google the word to know the answer.

    The Gospel of John was written with the Hellenistic audience in mind. It picture Jesus as a pederast, with a young lover. The verse of the Bible clearly depict it, especially the coded phrase: "the disciple whom Jesus loved", even as he should be loving all disciples and all of us anyway. That code phrase had a special meaning.
  • benMarcingbenMarcing Member PEx Veteran ⭐⭐
    Ateo wrote: »
    Jesus' Sexuality

    One important dogma of Christianity is that Jesus was fully God AND FULLY HUMAN. As a full human, he must have had sexuality, it would be blasphemous to suggest that he was a fake human with no sexual dimensions -- as all humans have.

    As God, does He have a sexual drive? If assuming as a man he has to have a sexual drive as you claimed, then how is this to play out with Him being God who has no sexual desire? The best that we could have if we apply the principle of two equally opposing force (assuming the two natures of Jesus are equal) would be a state of equilibrium, a steady state neither have anything to do with each. But this means not choosing either to marry or not. But why chose homosexuality?

    Since the scriptures universally affirmed that homosexuality is evil, a perversion of God's purpose, and God has nothing to do with evil, there is therefore no reason why God would engage in what will contradict His nature. So homosexuality is not an option, and yet for you it has to be.

    You misunderstood the scriptures as evidenced by your many misreadings. Please know that there are those who chose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of God. Have you considered Elijah? or John the Baptist? or St Paul who advocated celibacy in order to serve God without distraction? And this is what you are missing in your assessment: there are those who are driven to serve God alone, who deny themselves for God.

    Jesus' life was timed. He had to do certain things at a particular time and place. He had a hour to come. And if a man is driven with a purpose he would not want to deviate from it.
    So, Jesus could be either heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual or any other gradations in between. He is considered a Rabbi, a Jewish designation that would have required him to be married, according to the Law of Moses. But he was single. Why?

    These options are incomplete, therefore your argument is false. You are holding to a thesis is that sexual drive must be fulfilled. This isn't true since sex, like hunger, can be controlled. Sexual drive need not be satisfied; not necessarily, as is the case with those who chose instead to suppress it, Nikola Tesla for example. Do you know that fasting involves not having sex? We have so many monks who remained single until death, among whom actually fell in loved with women, but chose to serve God instead. This is how we understood making oneself eunuch.

    Forgive me.

    benMarcing
  • iskrotumiskrotum Ako si King Kong! PExer
    As man, Jeezas must have testosterone or whatever hormone it is that makes a man horny. As God as God.. there we go again with that silly belief and using it against an atheist.

    Jeezas didn't say anything about homosexuality, but he did say something about looking at women's boobs. "Universally affirmed"? Hehehe.. except by Jeeezas.

    How do you know if those monks don't ***** or fvck a fruit in the privacy of their cells?
  • KidlatNgayonKidlatNgayon Member PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
    Ateo wrote: »
    Actually, Jagon, we don't invent stories. We are not religious myth-makers.

    How many men in ancient times rose from the dead? Actually, there were a few; each one was based on a myth.

    How many men practiced Pederasty in Ancient Rome and Greece. Actually, you only have to google the word to know the answer.

    The Gospel of John was written with the Hellenistic audience in mind. It picture Jesus as a pederast, with a young lover. The verse of the Bible clearly depict it, especially the coded phrase: "the disciple whom Jesus loved", even as he should be loving all disciples and all of us anyway. That code phrase had a special meaning.

    The "disciple whom Jesus loved" was his maternal brother James (John 19:26). James, his flesh brother is also his spiritual brother so that to Jesus is twice more than the love He has for his other brethren.

    There is no "scandal" and you are clearly a scandal starter aka a Liar, a son of the Father of Lies (John 8:44) :D:D:D
  • benMarcingbenMarcing Member PEx Veteran ⭐⭐
    iskrotum wrote: »
    As man, Jeezas must have testosterone or whatever hormone it is that makes a man horny.

    And?
    As God as God.. there we go again with that silly belief and using it against an atheist.

    It is Ateo who premised the Christian dogma that Jesus is both God and man. So if at his premise he assumed and yet on the second breath denies it, then his argument is false. Either he assumes it to be so or deny it outright. You can't have your cake and eat it too. At least he tried, but you have to be in contradiction too soon.
    Jeezas didn't say anything about homosexuality, but he did say something about looking at women's boobs.

    Jesus didn't say anything about drugs either.
    "Universally affirmed"? Hehehe.. except by Jeeezas.

    Jesus followed by the law. That being the case, it is unlikely that Jesus approves homosexuality when the law condemns it. Just because he did not condemn the woman caught in adultery doesn't mean he allows it.
    How do you know if those monks don't ***** or fvck a fruit in the privacy of their cells?

    I won't know, neither can you. But there is no reason that they do; perhaps, there are some. But that does not in anyway prove them homosexual. Moreover, the fact that sins are frequently confessed, what you've suggested, if he is a good monk will confess the deed to his spiritual father; and thus, proving they actually condemn it. So your statement does not help you, makes you silly though.

    Try posting for stuff you do really know.

    Thanks,
    benMarcing
  • iskrotumiskrotum Ako si King Kong! PExer
    benMarcing wrote: »
    ... God has nothing to do with evil...

    Isaiah 45:7King James Version (KJV)

    7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.
    Forgive me.

    benMarcing

    Seek forgiveness from your Catholic brethren.
  • benMarcingbenMarcing Member PEx Veteran ⭐⭐
    iskrotum wrote: »
    Isaiah 45:7King James Version (KJV)

    7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.

    This is just a diversion from the topic, a red herring.

    The fact that you did not reply to my post is a silent admission you could no longer argue against it. I expected as much.

    Thanks,
    benMarcing
  • iskrotumiskrotum Ako si King Kong! PExer
    benMarcing wrote: »
    And?

    Just saying, that an entity declared as FULLY HUMAN would feel the effects of raging hormones and at least though about getting laid a few times in his life.


    It is Ateo who in his premised used the Christian dogma that Jesus is both God and man. So if at his premise he assumed and yet on the second breath denies it, then his argument is false. Either he assumes it to be so or deny it outright. You can't have your cake and eat it too. At least he tried, but you have to be in contradiction too soon.

    I apologize for that.

    Jesus didn't say anything about drugs either.

    Nor about junk food nor laying out in the sun too long. Could cause health problems, you know.


    All who wrote the Gospels are in agreement with St. Paul about homosexuality, and both testaments condemned homosexuality.

    Did the gospel writers form opinions on homosexuality? As far as I know, they just narrated Jesus' story.
    Moreover, Jesus was law abiding. So being the case, it is unlikely that Jesus would not condemn homosexuality (not the person) which the law condemns. Just because he did not condemn the woman caught in adultery doesn't mean he allows it.
    If he was law abiding, he should have dragged the woman to court. Or had the man who was picking up sticks on Sabbath Day executed.
    it is unlikely that Jesus would not condemn homosexuality (not the person) which the law condemns
    .

    Who does Jesus send to hell, the homosexuality or the homosexual person?
    I won't know, neither can you. But there is no reason that they do; perhaps, there are some. But that does not in anyway prove them homosexual. So your statement does not help you, makes you silly though.

    Try posting for stuff you do really know.

    If you won't know if those monks whack their wieners but make them as examples anyway, try posting stuff you do really know.
  • iskrotumiskrotum Ako si King Kong! PExer
    benMarcing wrote: »
    This is just a diversion from the topic, a red herring.

    The fact that you did not reply to my post is a silent admission you could no longer argue against it. I expected as much.

    Thanks,
    benMarcing

    You replied too soon bro.

    But yeah, I proved you wrong, didn't I?

    God has something to do with evil.:rotflmao:

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file