Was Jesus a homosexual?

Philosophy Forums Religion and Spirituality
1

Morton Smith (eminent historian) wrote a seminary book entitled ‘Jesus the magician’.

In its contents, there is the presentation of some evidence to suggest that Jesus may have been homosexual.

I don’t expect anyone will be familiar with the content of Smith’s argument, but can people see where Smith may or may not have a point?

And if so/ not why?

Finally, in the context of Smith’s inference, this evidence is surely the height of irony considering current debates in the Protestant church over the election of gay biships?

Food for thought at the least, then!

2

This quote expands upon my earlier post: feel free to comment on it. Does this stuff surprise anyone? Was smith right?

the only real truth on this question, I think, is that we will never (until our day of judgement at least!) truly know…

"Was Jesus queer? We don’t know. But it is a possibility that cannot be ruled out. One version of St. Mark’s gospel - which is still the subject of academic dispute - alludes to Jesus having a homosexual relationship with a youth he raised from the dead.

According to the US Biblical scholar, Morton Smith, of Columbia University, a fragment of manuscript he found at the Mar Saba monastery near Jerusalem in 1958, showed that the full text of St. Mark chapter 10 (between verses 34 and 35 in the standard version of the Bible) includes the passage:

“And the youth, looking upon him (Jesus), loved him and beseeched that he might remain with him. And going out of the tomb, they went into the house of the youth, for he was rich. And after six days, Jesus instructed him and, at evening, the youth came to him wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the Kingdom of God”.

The veracity of this manuscript is hotly contested by other Biblical scholars. This comes as no surprise. The revelation of a gay Jesus would undermine some of the most fundamental tenets of orthodox Christianity, including its rampant homophobia.

But even if the text is genuine, does this ambiguous, elliptical passage offer evidence of Jesus’s homosexuality? It is hard to say. The precise nature of the relationship between Christ and the youth is not spelled out. Sexual relations are suggested but not explicitly stated.

The Morton Smith document is, in fact, irrelevant to the vexed issue of Christ’s sexual orientation. What we can say for certain is that the standard, accepted Biblical narrative gives us no information at all about Jesus’s sexuality.

This absence of firm information does not, of course, mean that we can take it for granted that Christ was heterosexual. Far from it! The lack of information about his erotic inclinations begs more questions than it answers."

3

I can’t read Greek, but I do know there are several words for love used in the New Testament. For instance, “agape” refers to a specifically non-sexual phenomenon, while “eros” is…well, erotic love. I’m willing to bet that the kind of love mentioned in this fragment isn’t eros: it is highly doubtful that the early Christians would’ve kept a record of Jesus having sex with men–even if it did hapen. And further, it wasn’t uncommon at that time to talk about men “loving” other men in the “agape” sense.

Still, the fragment seems pretty damn suggestive–though I doubt we’ll ever be certain of its authenticity; that’s just the nature of Jesus scholarship.

4

INdeed not.

in fact, there were 4 essental greek loves: eros, agape, storge and philia…

but let us remember that very separate cultural identities existed in the ancient world…

paederasty (sexual love between an older and younger man) was inculcated in greco-roman tradition- see David Konstan’s book ‘Friendship in the classical world’ for examples…

Achilles and Patroclus?? Socrates and his desires for young boys? and what of eunuchs? in the gospel of matthew somewhere in chapter 19, or 18??, eunuchs are praised as worthy of heaven for doing what they do…

i think the main point to emerge here is that jesus was NOT GAY…bu t then NO ONE in the ancient world WAS. Aancients simply didnt conceive of sex and sexuality in the same way we do in terms of fixed divisions between gay and straight…a quick flick in to the Oxford classical dictionary will tell you that.

On this evidence, (the tradition of paederasty and subsequent arguments), it’s unfair to suggest christian fathers would ‘not have allowed’ the text to prevail…

5

My point is (more succinctly) ‘erotic love’ (eros) did exist between men quite publicly in the ancient world…especially in the tradition of paederasty…!!

6

Er…I wouldn’t call the passages “Hotly debated”. Outside of books specifically addressing the issue of homosexuality and Christianity, I don’t think you can find any reference that takes the passages seriously, and even among those, only books that take an extremely liberal view will refer to it.
As to it being surprising, of course it’s not. Among liberal New Testament scholars, it’s the latest fashion to make the most outlandish claim you possibly can about Jesus or Christianity, and then try to support it after the fact. Why not call Jesus gay? homo and bi-sexuality are controversial issues which have a religious element, so someone was bound to do it sooner or later. Some people call Jesus an alien. SO what?
Anyways, what I’m trying to say is that this issue doesn’t rise to the level of something that ought to be taken seriously.

7

Again, I don’t think I can agree: many Christians HAVE taken it VERY seriously!

8

Of course…but not in Jewish communities. It’s one thing for Socrates to have gotten with boys–but quite another for a Jewish Rabbi. However, Jesus did make a name for himself by bucking the trends; who knows? Maybe he crossed the line on sexuality as well.

9

What evidence do we have in jewish texts?

(the old testament aside)

is there any suggestion of inter-male relationships?

10

I don’t know of any Jewish sources that talk about explicit and public homosexual realtionships. No doubt the spectre of stoning, etc., sort of served as a deterrent.

11 
 I think if you looked at the issue objectively, you'd see that only a tiny minority of Christians have ever heard of the passage, and the majority of those consider it baloney.
12

I’m afraid you’re wrong on that one.

The debate (if not the text) is well-known (perhaps not by the average joe) in scholarship…

Scholars determine what gets taught to the young in universities…

and this issue is one that crops up time and again in university syllabuses…

I am not concerned to argue for/against the veracity of the passage…
I was more interested in whether people could believe it/ would be surprised by it…and what christians would think…

13 
 Well yeah, the debate of homosexuality and Christianity is well known, and the 'debate' of whether or not Jesus was a homosexual is well known- all it takes is one drunken frat boy to say "Hey, he did hang out with a lot of guys you know..." and you suddenly have a 'debate'.  What I'm saying is, there's a difference between hearing an assertion, and that assertion being hotly debated.  Nearly every biologist on Earth has heard of Big-Foot, I'm sure, that's not the same as saying "The existence of Bigfoot is hotly debated."  The possibility of Jesus being gay is taken seriously by a very few, loud, controversial scholars and all but ignored by the rest. 
As to it's impact, it should have a huge impact on Christianity if it were likely to be true, but the mere fact that the debate exists should have no impact at all- and it definitely shouldn't surprise anyone.
14

I think that is a more reasonable argument.

Although I don’t define ‘drunken frat boys’ as scholars…

15

I think the extra portion of the text in Mark ch. 10 between verse 34 and 35 is interestiong. But, I do want to say that there is some problem with the additional verse. The additional verse found by Morton Smith says a youth came out of the tomb and that the youth asked if Jesus would remain with him. This verse seems to be out of context. If this verse was authentic, you would think this verse would have some correlation with the verses before and after it. It however does not. Verse 34 has Jesus saying what will befall him when he enters Jersusalem and verse 35 has the disciples James and John asking Jesus a question? - On a different note, I am fluent in Hebrew and Greek, and I am appalled at the deliberate forgery that scholars go to in their english translation of the bible on the subject about homosexuality.
The following are a couple examples. In the (NIV), the translators deliberately add the word “sinful” in their translation of Romans 1:24: “Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.” The word sinful is not in the Greek text, nor in any other English Bible. Also, in 1 Sam. 20:41, the KJV correctly translates literally what the Hebrew says when it says " And as soon as the lad was gone, and David arose out of a place…, and bowed himself three times: and they (David and Jonathan) kissed one another, and wept one with another… But because of some scholars thinking King David and Jonathan had a homosexual relationship, the translators of the New Living Translation (NLT) rip out the words of King David and Jonathan kissing and add words that are not in the Hebrew text. The NLT says this: …they (David and Jonathan) embraced each other and said goodbye…
Also, can someone give me the original greek wording of the additional verse found in Mark. I would also like a photo copy of the Gospel of Mark with the additional words. You can contact me via e-mail at
cute26gayguy@yahoo.com.

16

there was never any original verses found. all that was found was a letter by a church leader that refered to some secret versions of Mark. while they may have been other versions of mark in use early on in the church, it doesn’t imply that they were any more true because the same letter that “extra” verses were taken from also claimed that Mark himself wrote the gospel attributed to him. there is no way, in my opinion that any of the gospels were written by their attributed authors.

17

The statement that Jesus ‘may’ have been homosexual can be proved negative by the message he brought forth. Reguardless of whether or not you believe the bible to be ture one must take time to consider the fact that Jesus spent his time preaching the word of god (aka the bible)
Romans 1:18-32 talks about unnatural acts verses 26 and 27 are quite specific in Both God and Jesus’ perspectives on Homosexuality " For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Like wise also the m,en, leaving natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and recieving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due (NKJV)
NOw taking in to account that Jesus was the son of God and this was God’s word we can now conclude that Jesus was NOT homosexual. I will also point out that his not the only passage in the bible that states God’s disdain for homosexuality.

18

I do not believe that Jesus ever talked about homosexuality…

19

no shit…Jesus wrote Romans?

20

Romans was writen after Jesus so it wouldn’t be possible for Jesus to preaching this book of the bible. Hence this is not the “Word of God” Jesus preached about.

Also, i find it funny that the anti-gay remark was made in Romans when the Romans themselves were quite open about homosexuality…