The Bible and Love and Christians

[GonzoLeaper]

It's not who I am on the inside, it's what I do that defines me.- Batman in "Batman Begins"

This is true that our actions define our character certainly. But ultimately my character is flawed and bent toward sin from the outset- and I don't claim to have any good in me. Ultimately, the only good in me is Jesus Christ. This is what The Bible talks about when it says that after trusting Jesus as Savior, He imputes His righteousness to us, so that when God looks at us, His wrath is satisfied because He sees the perfect sacrifice Jesus made and instead of our own unworthiness and failure, He sees the righteousness of Christ and declares us holy. The book of Hebrews talks a good bit about this, as does Galatians 3 and Romans.

 

[Fozzie Bear]

Are we all on this forum not 'fanatics?' That's where the term "fan" comes from. Ha ha.

Please offer opinions carefully, gang. Don't try to be 'sneaky offensive' with each other--respect each other's opinion. Careful debate is very welcome, obviously.

But, if the topic is inclusive of "love," why can't the group here share that in discussion topics like this? If you're religious, your hands are tied by your "Christian" rules; if you're not religious, your posts are almost a "friendly fire" attack.

Where da luv, ya'll?

 

[dwmckim]

[like]

 

[frogboy4]

But as far as Jesus' sexuality, I would say He wasn't gay and He wasn't married.

I can respect that point of view, but I'm still not entirely convinced that the historical figure Jesus didn't have a wife and family. Wives are seldom mentioned in the scriptures anyway.

Many Christians claim that Jesus' having a family would have confused his message, but that seems like more of a modern day application. I believe a man of his age without a wife or family would have raised many eyebrows in his society and that would have definitely been noted somewhere. This is one area that I can say with confidence - no one knows Jesus' relationship status for certain. It's all just speculation. I just find it strange how offended some Christians become with the idea that Jesus was "fruitful and multiplied" as most of his peers did.

The only reason people claim Jesus could have been gay, other than to irritate his followers, is due to his lack of attachment. While I understand the argument justifying his single status, it's just a tough idea to accept. I throw that on the pile of many other reasons the Bible just doesn't ring true to me. Still, I can and do respect that others feel differently and stake their lives on their faith.

 

[RedPiggy]

Many Christians claim that Jesus' having a family would have confused his message, but that seems like more of a modern day application.

Well, it's not only a modern spin, though. Remember Jesus is the Guy who told His followers to basically dump THEIR families. One poor guy couldn't even attend his father's funeral without Jesus nagging him. We can plainly see in the bible itself that His followers didn't always have the same outlook that Jesus did. I mean, if Jesus told you to get rid of your family while keeping one, it'd tick you off, right? Maybe that explains the resentment toward MM? Also, I wonder if (and this is just sheer speculation) the apostles who didn't care one way or the other were shunted to "supporting character just above cameo" status. We hear lots of Peter, James, John, and I think maybe one or two others ... but IIRC, there were TWELVE main supporting characters! What did THEY think? Even if their opinions are mentioned, none of those other people made an impression on me at all. Paul's arrival shows there were some "issues" being dealt with within the main group. Maybe this relationship thing is why you can almost hear certain apostles in your head without reading the bible and the others are just random noise in recollection, and why there is a clear effort to get rid of "problem" females, like both MM AND Mary the Mother of Jesus (remember, she wasn't exactly thrilled with Adult Jesus ... the magic of His birth must not have carried over to His frequent misbehaviors and His adult ministry that must have resulted in way too many death threats than she cared to deal with).

The only reason people claim Jesus could have been gay, other than to irritate his followers, is due to his lack of attachment. While I understand the argument justifying his single status, it's just a tough idea to accept.

Well, it happened to me during my teens and even now. So if I get to be "accused" of being gay just because I like being single, I get to amuse myself with thinking such things about others. J/K

 

[CensoredAlso]

Well, it's not only a modern spin, though. Remember Jesus is the Guy who told His followers to basically dump THEIR families. One poor guy couldn't even attend his father's funeral without Jesus nagging him.

No offence but again this reminds me of how people read too much into Lord of the Rings or Bert and Ernie.

and why there is a clear effort to get rid of "problem" females, like both MM AND Mary the Mother of Jesus

I'm not sure what you're referring to?

 

[Fozzie Bear]

I can respect that point of view, but I'm still not entirely convinced that the historical figure Jesus didn't have a wife and family. Wives are seldom mentioned in the scriptures anyway.

One of the things that I'll be most glad of is when the Dead Sea Scrolls are finally online (via Google and the Israeli Museum something-something). When I was in San Diego, I went to the Natural History Museum and saw the Dead Sea Scroll exhibit and I have to say that it is very close to the dates of the actual Biblical texts.

Folks, don't get me wrong, I'm an outspoken Jesus fan and claim Christianity (just not the kind that pickets funerals of slain military personnel or shoot abortionists); but, I think the King James Version of the bible, while making for a great reference tool, is deliberately translated--not particularly correct--but, based on the times of its translation.

I feel certain that the actual meanings and texts will be best described from the Dead Sea Scrolls.

As far as wives not being mentioned, though, don't forget the love story of Ruth appears as a book of its own in the bible, although I have rarely (if ever) attended a church that actually referenced any part of that book for a sermon.

Still, even though this book exists in the bible, King James' time was a male-dominated society and so we are going to see signs of that time appear in the scriptures. We have to face reality that during that time, neither the governments were fair, and to expect a fairly translated scripture from them is a little "out there."

 

[CensoredAlso]

My friend and I were talking about something recently that I found intriguing. I mentioned it in another thread but then realized it should also go here, lol. Anyway, we pondered why the ancient Greeks and Romans chose to envision their gods as arbitrary and cruel beings. I mean, why would you want to believe in such a thing? Then we realized, it's because they correctly observed that the world is in fact arbitrary and cruel. And this influenced their idea of what gods must be like.

In that case, it's interesting how other religions then went in the opposite direction and chose to have an idea of God that was more optimistic and comforting. Especially when such an idea seemed to directly contradict the world they saw around them. Was it a desire to make things better than they were? A need for hope that there was some kind of good in the world, despite all the cruelty they witnessed? What would the ancient Greeks have thought of such an idea?

 

[RedPiggy]

The ironic thing is that a lot of Christianity's optimism stems from Plato, who was a pagan Greek. The whole reason a lot of Christians believe in a "Perfect" God (read: One who never does anything icky), Perfect Forms, etc is that Plato put it in the minds of Greeks, who later brought the academic baggage into Christianity.

 

[GonzoLeaper]

I believe in the One Perfect God because He said He is- Leviticus 11:45
I don't think Plato had any influence on the writing of the Scriptures- the only influence for that was The Holy Spirit, who inspired people to write down the Word of God.