Queering Jesus: How It's Going Mainstream at Progressive Churches and Top Divinity Schools. But queer theology is a mature, established theological subject of scholarship now in its third decade and armed with well-honed arguments that queerness is grounded in biblical texts and classic commentaries

submitted by Chipit from (realclearinvestigations.com)

all 18 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Datachost 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

So I have some knowledge of the brewing scene and one of the issues right now is that the classic styles aren't enjoying the same popularity right now and the big sellers are monstrosities like vanilla raspberry milkshake IPAs. When you inevitably bring up that going to great lengths to mask the actual taste of beer kind of makes the end result not beer, someone will inevitably reply "Well it's what sells". Point being, if your idea to fix dwindling church attendance is to sell people on non-Christianity, you're not really fixing the issue of Christianity falling out of favour

[–]alladd 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's a solid analogy. Capitalism rules everything, so "what sells" is all that matters, all that can be measured. They can't articulate what the church represents without that aspect, so they're doomed to let that aspect drag it (hehe) into becoming something it's not.

[–]Chipit[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Do you have anything to say about queering?

Not beer?

You know, the topic of the post?

[–]Datachost 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Your inability to understand analogies isn't my problem

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Ah yeah nothing like grounding yourself with the biblical texts to survive that divine wrath. Though you'd probably be better off using a better conductor than paper.

Hmm let's see what the good book says.

Leviticus 18:22

“Do not practice homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman. It is a detestable sin."

Well shit. But wait! No obviously this is only talking about gay incest yes quite. Certainly the people who wrote the bible weren't homophobic. Why the middle east has long been known as one of the most tolerant and loving societies before the white man colonized it and imposed their Judeo-Christian values on it! Yes quite!

https://blog.smu.edu/ot8317/2016/05/11/leviticus-1822/

Obviously we are looking a translation telephone situation. Clearly the original authors loved gay sex and the bible in the original King James version as spoken by God in the sacred language of the Queen's English clearly says.

"Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."

So clearly we see here that as long as you don't have sex with men the same way you have sex with women it's a ok. You've got it gay bros! Rememeber missionary position while gay makes god sad. But sex standing up is fine since you aren't lying down.

Wait I just had a revaluation! Clearly the word lie means telling a lie. So what this verse really means is don't lie to men like you lie to your women. Silly me. It's not about being gay at all!

Amen Awomen and Agender!

Raise congregation and open your sacred BIPOC voices hymnbook!

https://youtu.be/kK4JTwcCp_0

[–]LyingSpirit472 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

BUT, the New Testament said "...and twelve men stepped forward, and they came on him"- most of those men being fishermen and Canaanites (Canaanite, in the Old Testament, usually being shorthand for "this dude LOVES the cock!"), so Leviticus is countered.

Rise, congregation, and as the prophet Lil Nas X did, start twerking on Satan at the pulpit...

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I certainly remember the part in the bible where Judas kisses Jesus.

You know the idea of cultural differences ? Nah fuck that. Clearly those living in Jesus time were millennials. It was the first century after all.

[–]LyingSpirit472 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Exactly. (And being serious about the Bible instead of joking, yeah, Jesus WAS pretty progressive even for the time- he hung out with prostitutes, tax collectors, and homosexuals- all of which were at the dregs of society in the first century- so it's fair to say Jesus had no problem with gay people at all.)

Also, most of the anti-gay stuff put in the New Testament was put there by Paul, who openly hated Christians before a "conversion" and many people claim might have been a self-loathing gay. So there is that as well. Final tally: Jesus was cool with it, but he probably would have laughed at the claim of OP.

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Well I'm really not sure where you would get the idea that Jesus spent time with homosexuals from (no textual basis to that claim as far as I know) I definitely agree that since Jesus did spend time with the dregs of society, and sinners, he would have had no issue with gay people specifically.

I think the issue here comes with the idea that "Jesus was cool with it" Jesus hung out with adulterers and divorcees despite saying both were bad.

I just think modern Christianity can kind of focus on the legalistic punishment aspect rather than Jesus's attitude which was more like "go and sin no more" though you'll find many modern people are uncomfortable with the idea that homosexuality is a sin.

I think a lot of it comes down to your public facing behavior though. It is a bit similar to alcoholism. I don't think alcohol itself is a sin, but people clearly have issues with overindulgence and that is biblically a sin. So many in the church choose to refrain from it. But in the same way that drunks aren't necessarily going to hell if they accept salvation, the same is true for everyone, including gay people. The opposite is true from the most moralistic legalist types that try to follow all the laws and consider themselves morally superior, it isn't a bad thing to try to lead a virtuous life, but since you aren't perfect, you can't meet those standards without accepting salvation as you will fail on some small point and God apparently doesn't give partial credit, but will give full credit if you ask for it.

[–]LyingSpirit472 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well I'm really not sure where you would get the idea that Jesus spent time with homosexuals from (no textual basis to that claim as far as I know) I definitely agree that since Jesus did spend time with the dregs of society, and sinners, he would have had no issue with gay people specifically.

Well, it was said by many to be the same as the other dregs of society, plus again, the fact it's said in many points Jesus hung out with (and had as Apostles) Canaanites [while there was a specific tribe, in most cases in the Bible, Canaanite was code for "gay" all the way back to the leader of the tribe in the Old Testament looking upon his father naked [and hintedly did more than just look].

Other than that, most of the reason religion is hated by the modern era is the same reason the Woke is hated; they both use the whole "you are either with us or you're literally, inherently evil. Meanwhile, we're so good we can be evil and it becomes good because WE did it" aspect.

[–]ClassroomPast6178 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Clearly the original authors loved gay sex and the bible in the original King James version as spoken by God in the sacred language of the Queen's English clearly says.

King’s English…get with the times grandad!

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

You get with the times. It's the 21st century and you've reverted back to a patriarchal form of government? Unthinkable.

[–]ClassroomPast6178 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

We had seventy-odd years of Matriarchy and during that time we gave up a global empire, fought countless wars, suffered a pandemic that killed hundreds of thousands and terrorist attacks killing thousands and saw the rise of both Piers Morgan and James Corden, and worst of all the French won two world cups, so we thought we’d give Patriarchy another go—can’t be much worse.

[–]LyingSpirit472 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Well, yeah, but three months as the king and it still didn't come home, so how much did that give all of you?

[–]ClassroomPast6178 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

He’s been king for almost a year, the crown passes the instant the previous monarch dies, the coronation is just a ceremony.

So yeah… we need a non-binary monarch, stat! Start persuading William or George to change genders!

[–]xoenix 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Just the latest Christian cult.

[–]ID10T 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Churches have always been favorite places for perverts to do their thing.

[–]alladd 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Wow, THREE whole decades?

That's like....hang on a second. I need to do some math in my head.

That's like...THIRTY whole years!

I mean, it's basically settled doctrine, right?