Actually, the Christian-killer Saul of Tarsus Apostle Paul has 'em covered on homosexuality, too. He didn’t much care for sex of any kind, really, but according to him, homosexuality is Right Out.
3 Likes
This depends on how you read Paul’s statements.
For example, in the book of Romans, he appears to be making a rhetorical argument by using his opponent’s words.
Also, whenever the word “Homosexuality” (the word is a neologism never actually used in the Bible) is mentioned, it’s usually within the context of temple worship with false gods and temple prostitution.
Without citing lengthy specifics (but I can), let’s just say that sexuality was eventually classified into “married” and “unmarried.”
The churches have had intermediate cultural behaviors in their own ranks, such as concubinage for priests (which led to a celibacy policy because of land-inheritance rights of church property for Roman Catholics, but not for Eastern Orthodox).
The basic argument is thus:
“The goal of marriage is procreation. A homosexual relationship is not procreative. Thus, by definition, homosexuals cannot be married. If homosexuals are in a relationship replicating marriage, that is a perversion of the roles of heteronormative men and women. If homosexuals cannot be in a marital relationship by default, then they are committing acts of lust due to being incapable of true marriage that would mitigate those attractions.”
So damned if you do, damned if you don’t. But the mindset is that the roles are normative to gender, rather than gender being normative to roles.
In the ancient Greek world, the sexuality of a heteronormative male was determined by his position of power and heterosexual marital status, regardless of whether he was on the “down-low” or not. It was an entirely different range of sexual adaptability, and there was no argument for innate sexual preferences, like we have today.
Which is why the ancient civilizations never would have proposed over 26 different genders: sexuality was not a self-defined autonomous feeling of gender identity. It was rather based upon simple human expression of preference at any given moment within the society-at-large.
It was not tied to a person’s innate identity-process, or measure of self-worth.
Jesus is one of my favorite Liberals!
2 Likes
Apparently those Evangelicals were REALLY eager to give him UNLIMITED “Mulligans”, as long as he keeps pushing the GOP agenda of rape the taxpayers and rig the system for Corporate America into infinity.
1 Like
3 Likes
These “Evangelicals” only see what they want to see when they read the Bible. They skip over everything that Jesus said about loving the neighbor, feeding and clothing the poor and welcoming “the stranger” (i.e. immigrants and refugees). Matthew Chapter 25 vs 21-46 speaks eloquently about what their future is unless they turn around.
5 Likes
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
