I do agree with Michael in that there is an air of these things being a bit of a smokescreen - i.e. as long as I'm pointing over there, you're paying more attention to that than you are to what I'm doing over here ... but what really chills me is that so many people that would say they have your best interests at heart quite patently do not, because they put you under so much pressure to comform with what they believe is the right way of being, that they give little- to no-consideration to what you believe is the right way of being (which, in 99% of cases is just being yourself).
And this is the alarming trend, certainly among the religious people I know. They're pushers !! And no, I'm not tarring them all with the same brush - just the ones I know  .
!?!?! Shadow !?!?!
![[-]](https://gayspeak.com/images/duende_v3_local/collapse.png)
•
Hey Spotysocks.....
From all over the place. I used to have a great website from a professor of theology for ages on my favorites list....which is of course not there anymore...ggrrrrr.
But try Wikopedia and enter religion and homosexuality...or play with google a bit and try some cross references. It's amazing how much disinformation people actually get and repeat...especialy if it suits their needs.
I read on the web a few weeks ago about the different interpretations on "gay" passages in the bible. VERY interesting reading. The one that most people repeat as God being against gays is the passage in Leviticus that goes something like, THEY say, man shall not lay with another man.
What it actually says in the original is that: man shall not lay with another man as in the trappings of a woman. So Hebrew scholars have been arguing for two thousand years exactly what that means.
It could mean man shall never lay with another man.....but why not just say this directly if that's what go meant? He was very clear about forbiding all kinds of things and being right to the point.
It might mean man shall not have sex with another man in a womans bed. Back then that was a huge taboo. Man on man action had been pretty common in Egypt but the Jews had views about a womans bed.
It could also mean you shouldn't be a bottom. Bottoming would be too much like being a woman which no man of those times would ever want to be. Women were worse than pets or slaves....or maybe not much better if they were really lucky.
There was one other that I can't remember. the thing is, almost all of the rules about same sex situations were not total bans, just rules for some situations. Never does it say in the original NO same sex. Any newer versions that do say this are just the authors wishfull thinking.
Sadly though, people never stop to think that the bible has been rewritten hundreds of times. Usually by people who wanted a certain group of people to follow how they wanted them to think according to the morals of their day....not for when the bible was supposed to have been written.
But it gets worse. Most people who say "because the bible says" or "it says so in the bible" have never actually read it. They've been told it says this and that or their minister has said what he thinks god thinks....
And we pay the price for it :-(
•
Apparently Jesus was Gay !!!!
Well a little bit gay because he ran around with 12 men and one of them, whom he "particularly loved" would "lay his head on his [Christ's] breast".
•
Star Twister Wrote:Apparently Jesus was Gay !!!!
Well a little bit gay because he ran around with 12 men and one of them, whom he "particularly loved" would "lay his head on his [Christ's] breast". I assume your comment is meant to be light-hearted? There is little evidence that you can make assumptions about the sexual orientation of a character who may or may not have existed based on information given in the so-called Four Gospels of the New Testament.
A number of women also followed Jesus (would that have made him bi?) and Mary Magdalene is among the most well-known. Various commentators have described her as a disciple, a prostitute and even the wife of Jesus. The new testament refers to her as a follower of Jesus. The other stories did not start to spread until at least a hundred years after the supposed events took place. Definitely not the best way to ensure accuracy.
As for John laying his head on the breast of Jesus (John 13:23) ... that seems very little evidence of sexuality at all. Apart from not taking into account the customs and practices of a culture and society in a very different time and place, there are suggestions that John may have been a cousin of Jesus. Behaviour within a family is frequently more affectionate than with strangers. The event was reported as having taken place at the "last supper", when Jesus had just told his disciples that one of their close band of friends them was going to betray him. Might that disclosure not be enough to prompt a display of affection and grief?
Thanks for bringing this thread to light. It was over before I signed up ...
As to the substantive issue under discussion my views are probably well-enough made in other threads, but I am most definitely not a believer, although I was brought up as one.
•
Star Twister Wrote:Apparently Jesus was Gay !!!!
Well a little bit gay because he ran around with 12 men and one of them, whom he "particularly loved" would "lay his head on his [Christ's] breast".
To add to what Marshlander already pointed out, I have been talking to Sudanese who says that displays of that sort of affection between two men is not uncommon in his country, Sudan, to the extent that if he were to walk hand in hand with a boyfriend, no one would suspect that they were gay, because it is a common way for two male friends to behave. He actually also mentioned resting one's head in the lap of a male friend. Now, that between a man and a woman might create problems in an Islamic country (but then I'm not even sure about that... got to ask Sudanese if it would be acceptable).
•
In 2005 the man I was in love with married a girl because they were both LDS. He told me he loved me, and that if I was a woman it would have been me. We'd been friends for years, always flirtying etc but never doing much. And then that.
I've never stopped crying, and this thread brought it all back tonight 
•
Serfdom Wrote:In 2005 the man I was in love with married a girl because they were both LDS. He told me he loved me, and that if I was a woman it would have been me. We'd been friends for years, always flirtying etc but never doing much. And then that.
I've never stopped crying, and this thread brought it all back tonight So sorry to hear that, Serfdom. Having been brought up LDS, I can say that the conditioning goes very deep :frown: It took me until my fourth decade to begin to face the reality of my situation. Sadly, I believe his wife is probably in for the same kind of shock as mine had a few years ago when I finally came out, first to myself and then to her. For a church that claims to have a "prophet, seer and revelator" at its head on earth, the Mormon leadership is remarkably ill-informed about what makes people tick.
If you have the time here's a link to a long, but beautifully related, true story of a man who, like me, had to face the lies that we'd been told over the years. He is now in a happy relationship with his male partner.
http://www.exmormon.org/boards/w-agora/v...ite=exmobb
I hope you find a way to deal with your sorrow, but if you can find it in your heart, save a little sympathy for the man you loved and specially some for his wife. They are both going to deal with some painful truths over the coming years.
•
The faith thing has given me stange issues to deal with (!) Oh, the joy it brings - clarity of discrimination and social engineering at its best.
•
princealbertofb Wrote:To add to what Marshlander already pointed out, I have been talking to Sudanese who says that displays of that sort of affection between two men is not uncommon in his country, Sudan, to the extent that if he were to walk hand in hand with a boyfriend, no one would suspect that they were gay, because it is a common way for two male friends to behave. He actually also mentioned resting one's head in the lap of a male friend. Now, that between a man and a woman might create problems in an Islamic country (but then I'm not even sure about that... got to ask Sudanese if it would be acceptable).
We have a new channel on tv over here called CurrenTV ( news // current)... it was started by Al Gore. Really great TV. They do all sorts of international programming. Had a piece on a middle eastern country w men holding hands. Filmed at a mall and ALL the men were holding hands :eek: IT WAS REALLY HOT seeing that 
A female interviewer stopped them and asked if they were GAY!!! They looked at her like she was insane. Then she pointed to them holding hands and the men just giggled. Some explained it was a custom to show friendship but others just walked off hand in hand. Really cute 
•
marshlander Wrote:I assume your comment is meant to be light-hearted? There is little evidence that you can make assumptions about the sexual orientation of a character who may or may not have existed based on information given in the so-called Four Gospels of the New Testament.
A number of women also followed Jesus (would that have made him bi?) and Mary Magdalene is among the most well-known. Various commentators have described her as a disciple, a prostitute and even the wife of Jesus. The new testament refers to her as a follower of Jesus. The other stories did not start to spread until at least a hundred years after the supposed events took place. Definitely not the best way to ensure accuracy.
As for John laying his head on the breast of Jesus (John 13:23) ... that seems very little evidence of sexuality at all. Apart from not taking into account the customs and practices of a culture and society in a very different time and place, there are suggestions that John may have been a cousin of Jesus. Behaviour within a family is frequently more affectionate than with strangers. The event was reported as having taken place at the "last supper", when Jesus had just told his disciples that one of their close band of friends them was going to betray him. Might that disclosure not be enough to prompt a display of affection and grief?
Thanks for bringing this thread to light. It was over before I signed up ...
As to the substantive issue under discussion my views are probably well-enough made in other threads, but I am most definitely not a believer, although I was brought up as one.
It was meant light heartedly and I do apologise if anyone takes offence
I have been posting on another forum about the same subject USA based and I get a little irate when all the bigots and the bible bashers keep pushing their ways.
This is such a touchy subject I guess, and again I didn't mean to cause offence.
My heart felt wishes to Serfdom.
xxx
•
|
