My point exactly

Dude, you need some serious help. I suggest you seek help at a church.

So now we attack the source ... cool

That is not the point of the debate. Although I have no issue with this, if what you say is true, then thats fine. Im not arguing its validity.

So, its almost a pre-dated Da Vinci code then.

But

Was Jesus Gay?

and now we have the religious intolerance ... cant provide proof when requested so obviously IM STUPID

Wanna come to church with me, D I'll take you if you want.

lying in bed on a Sunday morning screaming "oh god!" doesn't make it church

No, but the 3 flights of steps to my boudoir would be a "Stairway to Heaven"

You actually have the balls to complain that someone attacked a forgery?

That's awesome man. You rock. "How dare you question an obvious forgery!"



It's not? Seems like it's the heart of the debate. Your evidence that Jesus is gay is an obvious forgery, that seems kinda relavant.

No, Jesus wasn't gay. He wasn't capital G gay either. Jesus is never mentioned having sexual relations with anyone or being promised to anyone. There is no evidence to support your position, so you demand that we supply evidence to support ours? How about the gospels? None of them mention a girlfriend or wife. Jesus commanded his mother into the care of John, but he didn't care about the woman he was plooking? Come on man, get a grip!

I'm tired of you, enjoy your evening.

right on 15 seconds of glory

you're not stupid, btw, i doubt proof will or can be provided for this thread. this is mostly based on speculation and theory but i am pretty sure i and other Christian people would doubt this, i don't deny the possibility, just the bible as we know it today portrays Jesus in a asexual way

In John a term is used that means 'is in love with' with the implication of sexual intimacy.

5 times it is used to define Jesus' relationship with John.

One time it is with reference to Jesus' relationship with Lazarus.

And it is also used to describe his relationship with Martha and with her sister Mary.

So, would it sit better if he was bi sexual then?

Jesus was but a man so naturally he was sexual. Human beings are sexual. I am sure that any and all of the sexual references in the texts were altered to make him as pure as possible for the original intention of the text and his stature as the son of god. That does not make it truth, it makes it par for course with a man made religion that was designed by men to acheive a goal, control.

I forgot this bit ... sorry ... I missed my "questioning the source" line



So, proof that it did exist was provided by an Archmandrite


... and Spider, I wasnt complaining, I was ready for this line of questioning.

As you are tired of me, then I take it I wont be on your Pagan Holiday card list anymore?

Religions are what made sex "dirty" in the first place. Sex was and is a natural thing for us to do. Man made religions are the ones who put this into a bad light. It would make sense that they were having sex back then.

Hmmm ... Hallelujah!



The New Testament is an anthology of stories - man made ones at that. Some of them can be debated and some like this have to be denied or the fabric of society will crumble around our ears.

It doesn't but it sure would give a lot of people egg facials.

... and how do you like your eggs in the morning?

Yes...a librarian who cut the pages out of an old book and then lost them. Makes perfect sense to me.

And that is the sad part to me, why can't they let go of the homophobia and accept the differences of people. Who a person has sex with, unless it is a child, is of no importance to anyone else in the whole world except the person or people the person is having sex with. Why do the religious feel they have the right to judge others based on their sex life anyway???

Quite similar to your "worshipping" a non-entity makes perfect sense to me, I guess.

But I provided you with three different people who have seen this ...

You still fail to provide me with the proof I request.

Oh my...my night is ruin! You have hurt my feelings! I really care what a jaded, biased atheist thinks. Oh dear...oh dear...



A Librarian probably wouldn't cut pages out of a book and a librarian definitly wouldn't cut out pages from a book and then lose the pages.

Maybe it's your arguments that are gay, because they certainly suck.

What a very Christian view you sport there ..


Here is more evidence of the document existing ...


NO! A conspiracy? The Church? Never!




Still waiting for yours by the way ...