tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15275986.post7084371117012355588..comments2023-10-18T09:23:13.050-05:00Comments on QueerToday.com: Would Jesus Discriminate?Mark D. Snyderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12508873047127283895noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15275986.post-26312446777959034092007-05-07T15:41:00.000-05:002007-05-07T15:41:00.000-05:00I agree that the centurion passages (Matthew 8:5-1...I agree that the centurion passages (Matthew 8:5-13; Luke 7:1-10) raise some interesting questions, though I am less troubled by the ramifications than you. <BR/><BR/>It is indeed possible to conclude that the Jesus of these texts (who isn’t necessarily the same as the historical Jesus) endorsed a pederastic relationship. I don’t think it’s all that significant that Matthew uses παίς (boy) while Luke uses both παίς and δούλος (servant/slave). By itself παίς implies an imbalance of power, but so does the heterosexual marriage being celebrated in Cana (John 2:1-11), which Jesus attended and appears to have blessed. We shouldn’t just throw out these passages as theologically useless to us because the sexual or social ethic at work doesn’t match ours. I think that’s bad practice.<BR/><BR/>To me, it would be very significant if Jesus held up a man considered a sexual deviant by first-century CE Jews as a model of faith worthy of emulation. I think this is entirely consistent with the more radical and iconoclastic elements of Jesus as he is portrayed in the Gospels. That there are, if one looks deeper, potentially troubling elements to the pederastic relationship in question, is not really the point. We could wish that Jesus held up a more egalitarian same-sex relationship, but such were rare. Perhaps they existed in Rome or other urban centers, but not in first-century Galilee. It’s not really the focus of the story.<BR/><BR/>Neither is a discussion of the exploitative nature of prostitution the point of Matthew 21:32 in which Jesus says to the chief priests and temple elders: “I tell you the truth, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God ahead of you.” And yet there is great value in his statement, in spite of the fact that prostitution was then, as now, an exploitative social arrangement. <BR/><BR/>I think it’s fine for us to be ambivalent about many of the things Jesus said, whether or not they affirm GLBT people. There may be valuable lessons in passages and words and episodes from the Gospels that raise questions, just as they teach important lessons. What are we to make of the cleansing of the temple (Matthew 21:12; Mark 11:15; John 2:14-16), for example? For me, that episode contains all kinds of valuable lessons about speaking truth to power, standing up against oppression and economic injustice, and yet I’m troubling by the violent nature of Jesus’ protest. That ambivalence is a reminder that we need to be critical when it comes to the Gospels. Moreover, it’s rare for a passage to be either all good or all bad. Sometimes the same passage can be both. Perhaps the problem is that we expect too much from the Gospels (and Jesus for that matter). We shouldn’t expect perfect clarity or perfection.Sandouri Dean Beyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04011264634870571789noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15275986.post-24465816280583792372007-05-04T13:47:00.000-05:002007-05-04T13:47:00.000-05:00Jesus defines sex as lack of love. What is sinful...Jesus defines sex as lack of love. What is sinful about a loving homosexual relationship?Mexjewelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04071033365993536235noreply@blogger.com