The messiah is gay

a reply to: Kolza

Jesus did not sin. It says so several times, and also it would negate the value of His sacrifice, if He died for His own sins.

Promiscuity of all types is sin.

Jesus clearly also mentioned that "sinning in the heart" is just as much sin, as is committing the act.

Clearly, you have wasted your time chopping up and reinterpreting the words of the scriptures out of any consideration of context.

Misrepresenting someone is "bearing false witness" and a sin.

a reply to: Kolza

Sun of God, sun of man, man of the sun, sun of a b****!!!! The Jupiter, the Sun, and the...I got nothing.

Venus has many different personifications, in somd mythologies, it even has two different personalities, even though its same planet. It just that it shows up at sunset, disappears, then shows up at sunrise.

I wouldn't know how Jupiter would become synonymous with Venus other then they show up pretty much every night ( don't quote me). There some pantheons that have nothing to do with being inspired by planets or constellations, like the nordic Thor could be identified with Jupiter, but it not its inspiration for the gods origins apparently.

Even the thunder god Zeus was worshipped by one or few ancient cults as a sun god though and from reading about Satan, it possible Venus could have been male before the iconic meme of femininity. Again don't know why that is, maybe the endless fueds of not trying to piss off a volcano.

As for Jesus, from what i understand, Jesus was said to have never mated, or be led by the so called sins of the flesh. Usually I think it the taboo that gets to people when it comes to these sort of topics...like Mary Magdalene uterus being the holy grail or nature's rubix cube...or the fact that he hang out with 12 guys all the time.

One of them even kissed for 2 or 300 pieces of silver. Then again that kind of not the point, some times, some cultures would mingle, especially with the greeks, like ancient Persia or Egypt.

a reply to: Kolza

no, king james was gay lol

a reply to: toms54

Hello there, Toms—-

Sorry about that—I was hurriedly writing the other day from memory in my last post about Morton Smith’s shorthand discovery of a lost-snatched from Secret Mark; here are a few minor corrections to my overly hasty-post.

The original letter (from which the shorthand transcript had been hastily scribbled-out and pasted to the back an old book of sermons by Ignatius of Antioch and was re-discovered by accident by Morton Smith in 1958 at the Mar Saba monastery near Qumran in the area of the Dead Sea) was purportedly penned by Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-215 CE) and addressed to some unknown ‘Theodore’, and not by Origen, although Origen did write about the homosexually-oriented Gnostic Carpocratians himself in some of his own letters.

In 1990, the original pasted shorthand-transcript was (apparently) lost, but we do have some good color photocopies made in 1983, as well was some black-and-white photocopies made by Morton Smith himself.

The style of the koine Greek of these two fragments matches very very closely the halting baby-Greek of the canonical 2nd Greek (‘According to Mark’, whoever he was) and show every hallmark of being an authentic part of a longer version of the Gospel which was pared down into its present form early on in its history.

QUOTE

‘And they come into Bethany. And a certain woman whose brother had died was there. And, coming close to them, she prostrated herself before ho Iesous and says to him, “Son of David, have mercy on me.”

But the disciples staved her off from him. But ho Iesous, now angered, went off with her into the garden where the tomb was, and straightway a great scream was heard from inside the tomb. And going near ho Iesous rolls away the stone from the door of the tomb. And straightway, going in where the youth was, he stretched forth his hand and raised him-up on his feet, seizing his hand. But the youth, looking upon him, loved him; and he began begging him that he might be with him.

And going out of the tomb they came into the house of the youth, for he was rich. And after six days ho Iesous gave him instructions on how to prepare himself and during that evening the youth comes to him, wearing a linen cloth over his naked [body]. And he remained with him the whole night, during which [time] Jesus taught him the Mystery of the Kingdom of Theos. And thence, arising, he returned to the other side of the Jordan.’

UNQUOTE

Unfortunately, the transcript is only a small fragment of a larger pericope (now lost) from Secret Mark; it would be fascinating if the rest of Secret Mark were discovered (and—Shock & Awe !—actually published for common people to read…)

Admittedly, ‘the young man, looking upon [ho Iesous], began loving him, and begged that he might be with him’ can refer to the 12 men that Moses surrounded himself ‘in order that they might be with him, one from each tribe’ (see Joshua 3:12) i.e. as royal advisors (i.e. as part of the King’s privy-council) and not to any overt homosexual liaison, but the fact that the baptismal ceremony refers to men being plunged into ‘living water’ naked must have raised some eyebrows in the early Markan community and may have been part of the reason why the passage was eventually excised ‘from the Bible’ (along witchy the phrase, ‘and looking upon [ho Iesous] began loving him’) although, as you correctly mention, another floating fragment of the (same ?) pericope managed (somehow) to remain part of our canonical Greek gospel of Mark 14:51-52, along with several other snatchets of weird stories involving ho Iesous in a series of bizarre actions (e.g. literally spitting into a man’s eyes and placing his hands on him to heal him of blindness, see Mark 8:23).

Either way, the tiny fragment re-quoted in the Morton Smith transcript seems an authentic part of a longer document (it’s very hard to imitate the bad-baby-Greek of Mark’s Gospel as successfully as this snatchet seems to be able to do so effortlessly), and goes to shew just how much early Judeo-Christian source material was supressed by later copyist-generations for their own theological agendas…so perhaps we shall never really know for sure if the all-male priesthood of ‘ho-Iesous’ ever had any homosexual/homoerotic elements. Perhaps we can thank Saul of Tarsus for that, a man who never met ‘Jesus’ in the flesh (only in dreams and visions, like my cook) and who was responsible for silencing the original Nazorean teachings of both ‘Jesus’ and his brother, Yakkov bar Yosef ha-Tzaddiq, aka ‘James the Just’ who is (unfairly) given such short shrift in the NT with a single book that bears his name that barely got voted-into the canon of the NT.

Clear as mud?