| View previous topic :: View next topic |
|
|
|
 |
|
As non-straight orientations are deemed sinful by most onegod denominations - what bearing would it have if the biggest reverend in world religion was found (guilty?) of non straight sexual drivenness - or what are we to believe, according to Occam's razor?
"In the Gospel of John, the disciple John frequently refers to himself in the third person as 'the disciple whom Jesus loved'." 4 One might argue that Jesus loved all of his followers in a non-sexual way. Thus to identify Jesus' love for John in a special way might indicate a sexual relationship. The disciple was "the" beloved. He was in a class by himself.
During the Last Supper before Jesus' execution, the author(s) of the Gospel of John describes how the "beloved" disciple laid himself on Jesus' inner tunic -- his undergarment. See John 13:25 and 21:20. Robert Goss, assistant professor of comparative religion at Webster University in St. Louis, LA, noted that Jesus and the beloved disciple: "... eat together, side by side. What's being portrayed here is a pederastic relationship between an older man and a younger man. A Greek reader would understand."
"In the Book of John a word is used eight times that means 'is in love with' with the implication of sexual intimacy. Five times it is used with reference to Jesus' relationship [...]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexuality_of_Jesus
http://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=65176
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Grant
|
|
|
|
In the spirit of this website I shall refrain from offering any criticism of your theory (and I struggle with French, so certainly can't comment on Greek). However, I will point out that Robert Goss is married...to a man.
In the immortal words of Mel Gibson: "Have you got a dog in this fight?"
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
|
And one would also like to draw a line such that David Icke is on the other side. But we are a broad church.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
Ha!
The authors of the Bible made it clear that the first witness to the resurrected Jesus was...a woman.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ishmael
In: Toronto
|
|
|
|
Jesus never lived. He therefore could not have been either gay or straight.
There is a legitimate question as to whether one gospel portrays the Jesus character as having had a male lover -- and why it might do so.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Hatty wrote: |
Ha!
The authors of the Bible made it clear that the first witness to the resurrected Jesus was...a woman. |
pfff! - so what?
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
|
The dying/resurrected god myth is very old. We agree that the archetype doesn't exist but the authors do so any variations are possibly interesting.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Chad
In: Ramsbottom
|
|
|
|
| Grant wrote: | | In the immortal words of Mel Gibson: "Have you got a dog in this fight?" |
No... Don't tell me he's gay as well as ginger!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
The Jesus Christ story is the Julius Caesar story.
John (the disciple) is Octavian.
So when Caesar's will is read shortly after his assassination it is revealed that he has adopted Octavian as his son and made him his heir....
John 19:26-27
When Jesus saw his mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to his mother, "Dear woman, here is your son," and to the disciple, "Here is your mother.".....
So Jesus love for John was not of the forbidden variety.
Although......
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
What is interesting is that orthodoxy nods towards Nero (and Hadrian...as Nero redivivus) as the antichrist, (eg interpretations of the Sibylline Oracles) but ignores the Jesus/Julius stuff found by Scotty.....
(Good spot Scott).....
The radicals from what I have read also miss the obvious
Chad, there is no point in trying to dig up the old bugger.
N8 was trying to understand the eschatological symbolism, of this mirror, through the numbers and the coinage
Here is an interesting example that orthodoxy thinks is the historical Vercingetorix (King of Kings)?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Coin_Vercingetorix.jpg
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
|
For interested readers, there are pages and pages on Vercingetorix coins in the Matters Arising thread, from page 211 onwards. (They're all modern fakes.)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
OK but whats different about this ugly fella?
Take a closer look
Unlike the other Verties....
He isnt Hellenistic and hasnt got the Vercingetorix plastered round the edge.
There is nothing obviously �Gaulish� about him, unless, like some esteemed contributors on AE, you base your history on hair styles or colour .
(Calm down dear ....I know Becca is yet another evil redhead......come to think about it you might also want to check out Josephine from Spiral).
It does not contain the normal Roman Triumphalism you find on arches or other coinage.
It could be a forgery. But is it?
Your man, is also stamped L. HOSTILIVS SASERN who was a Roman moneyer who produced a number of other coins.....
In short it is an old coin that has been misattributed when the "proud to be a Froggy" Vercingetorix, Celtic, Gaulish idiotic frenzy took off.......
Clearly the coinage needed another look.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
This is more your Roman style after they duffed up the Babas...
http://bit.ly/JZJlUW
Note the hands tied up behind his back and the armamments (including helmet) piled up behind him.....
Judea looks totally gutted. (Bit like a Man U supporter)
The idea that Verti in the coin above was being personified as a noble heroic foe is ....
BONKERS
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
The Library Index 
FAQ 
Search
Register
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in 
