My I've thought long and hard about this, so bear with me here.The contemporary Christian religion (and I'm talking about every denomination here) is being flipped upside down over the topic of sexuality, and how homosexuals should or shouldn't (depending on your personal views) be entitled to worship in the same way, have the same rights, and share in the same God as the rest of their congregations.
Personaally, I think any prejudices against homosexuals within any religion is totally screwed up.
I am fascinated with the conspiracy theories over the Church, though, and, so, I've probably seen 99.9% of everything published and/or broadcasted on the topic since the dawn of DaVinci's supposed code, and I came up with a question of my own: could Jesus have been homosexual?
My intention is not to offend anyone with conservative views and beliefs, but to raise a serious question that could possibly change everything, in terms of morality within religion in our nation and world.
The idea didn't come out of nowhere, though. This is my hypothesis (and if I'm wrong, God forgive me, I just think too much sometimes):
- Studies of DaVinci's painting, The Last Supper, show that the man at the right of Jesus (supposedly John) is feminine, and most likely Mary Magdalene.
What if he is just an androgenous male?
And, if he was pictured at such a key position in the painting in terms of relationships to Jesus, what if they were together?
They might have been cousins, but much of the time (in those days), people wanted to stay within the same bloodline, which would especially apply to Jesus and his family since they were supposedly both descendants of David.
They were always together, and it is entirely possible. Plus, when John the Baptist was executed, his head was chopped off; although it was suppsoedly because he was an evangelist, they didn't do that to the rest of the apostles- doesn't it seem a little severe?
- Secondly, I am not refuting the possiblity that Mary Magdalene and Jesus might've married; it would actually be more possible with my theory.
In those days, it was considered socially disgraceful for a man not to marry, and the lifespan of a man was shorter then. They were expected to produce families. What if theirs was a marriage in name only, and to produce children and move on? No one can truly tell either way, but it seems more plausible this way.
In this way, he could have a family, be with his significant other, and continue preaching. People have said that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute, and many say this charge was brought against her because the Catholic Church believed their marriage a threat to the religion, but what if it was because she was supportive of His way of life?
I love God, and I am a faithful Catholic, but I have always been taught to question and encouraged to wonder.
Plus, if this ever was shown to be the case, how could we justify the Christian Churches' treatment of homosexuals?
How could biggots answer in heaven to a homosexual God? (IN THEORY, REMEMBER).
I just think we should really rethink our social attitudes and views, because if this is the case, society is in serious trouble.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Disclaimer
No responsibility or liability shall attach itself to either myself or to the blogspot ‘Clerical Whispers’ for any or all of the articles placed here.
The placing of an article hereupon does not necessarily imply that I agree or accept the contents of the article as being necessarily factual in theology, dogma or otherwise.
Sotto Voce
Disclaimer
No responsibility or liability shall attach itself to either myself or to the blogspot ‘Clerical Whispers’ for any or all of the articles placed here.
The placing of an article hereupon does not necessarily imply that I agree or accept the contents of the article as being necessarily factual in theology, dogma or otherwise.
Sotto Voce