Blasphemy and the Sexuality of Jesus

[★Bandiera Rossa☭]

In 1977 the English author of a poem showing Jesus as a homosexual was charged and convicted of blasphemy.

The Poem (Warning, it is pretty explicit): http://torturebyroses.gydja.com/tbrkirkup.html

Does a work of fiction about Jesus (or another figure) qualify as blasphemy, and if it does, should there be laws regarding blasphemy?

[Marie Louise von Preussen]

Saying that Jesus was a guru, a homosexual, a swindler or a madman has gotten so old it's no longer worth even mentioning. But I agree he shouldn't have been convicted of Blasphemy.

[Stavroforos]

Yes, it was blasphemy, but he should have been punished by a church and on matters of faith if he was part of any Christian church, and not by any government.

[xcorps]

Does a work of fiction about Jesus (or another figure) qualify as blasphemy, and if it does, should there be laws regarding blasphemy?

Yes, it is blaphphemy. No, there should be no laws regarding blaphemy.

[RO Citizen]

JESUS WAS GAY!!! OMFFFFFG!!!!! LET'S CALL THE INQUSITION!!!!!!!!! BLASPHEMY!!!!1111

Excuse me, I always love mocking Jeezux. Now, seriously talking, laws about blasphemy would throw us back in the Middle Ages, and would deny the freedom of expression. Everyone is free to say that he/she/it? doesn't like a certain person, because of a thing or another. It's human nature, and it's good this way! Unless, of course, violence and serious injuries appear.

[Col. Tartleton]

That was ridiculous. Hilarious actually.

Though I'm kind of more concerned as to what the hell the poet sought to accomplish. If he just was making a joke it was tasteless. It's not particularly well written either...

I'd lock him up for making a poor attempt at being clever.

[basics]

It is written that such was His uncomeliness that none should desire Him in any way. The concern I have is that homosexuals in their drive to get authentication for their perverse lifestyle have to try to get God on their side by any means.

Since Jesus Christ is the author of all the commandments including the ones that condemn how they live, I find it rather silly that they should not keep their mouths shut whilst continuing the things they do. But then that is not the style of the modern gay is it?

Of course it is blasphemous to bring down the name of God but then it is not just gays that do that is it?

[Col. Tartleton]

It is written that such was His uncomeliness that none should desire Him in any way. The concern I have is that homosexuals in their drive to get authentication for their perverse lifestyle have to try to get God on their side by any means.

Since Jesus Christ is the author of all the commandments including the ones that condemn how they live, I find it rather silly that they should not keep their mouths shut whilst continuing the things they do. But then that is not the style of the modern gay is it?

Of course it is blasphemous to bring down the name of God but then it is not just gays that do that is it?

Idk from what I've seen on the shroud of Turin he was sort of an Adrian Brody kind of guy.

[★Bandiera Rossa☭]

Since Jesus Christ is the author of all the commandments including the ones that condemn how they live, I find it rather silly that they should not keep their mouths shut whilst continuing the things they do. But then that is not the style of the modern gay is it?

Actually, Jesus never mentioned gays explicitly. Most biblical condemnations of Homosexuality are in the Old Testament.

[Nietzsche]

It is written that such was His uncomeliness that none should desire Him in any way.

Since Jesus Christ is the author of all the commandments including the ones that condemn how they live...

Not to quibble... well, let's do quibble... can you provide some scripture to defend these claims?

[removeduser_487563287433]

The case is one of the greatest judicial disgraces of the post-WWII United Kingdoms and is an obvious assault on freedom of speech.

[Claudius Gothicus]

The case is one of the greatest judicial disgraces of the post-WWII United Kingdoms and is an obvious assault on freedom of speech.

I remember you posting the poem a while back. You got infracted if i remember correctly

[justicar5]

I remember you posting the poem a while back. You got infracted if i remember correctly

Forums don't have freedom of speech, nations should

[removeduser_487563287433]

I remember you posting the poem a while back. You got infracted if i remember correctly

Haha, yeah, ironically enough. But I got off on appeal. I now post it as often as I can on principle.

[The Million Dollar Prons]

Basics, where did it say in the bible that Jesus was ugly?

[xcorps]

It doesn't actually say ugly.

"For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he has no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him."

Isiah 53:2

Here's the NIV:

He grew up before him like a tender shoot,
and like a root out of dry ground.
He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,
nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.

I don't think that these verses can be interperted to mean that Jesus was ugly. It is more likely that he was of indistinguishable features. (Judas had to do something meaningfully drastic to point him out to the Romans, he slipped away into the crowds unnoticed in Luke 4:30).

And he certainly didn't have long hair.

[justicar5]

And he certainly didn't have long hair.

it would have been unusual if he didn't, roman military cut there heair short, not many other people did and certainly not jews, who where faous for resissting the cultural mores of occupiers (having rebelleb against the selcuids for trying to helenise them). (Try cutting anything with the type of shears they had seriousyl tricky)
http://seedsofchristianity.com/wordpress/?p=2279

[wilpuri]

Finnish blasphemy laws are only invoked these days when somebody says naughty things about Islam.

I don't like blasphemy laws. Neither do I like people who are intentionally and aggressively offensive against peoples' religious feelings for cheap publicity and a place in the sun among "progressives".

[xcorps]

it would have been unusual if he didn't, roman military cut there heair short, not many other people did and certainly not jews, who where faous for resissting the cultural mores of occupiers (having rebelleb against the selcuids for trying to helenise them). (Try cutting anything with the type of shears they had seriousyl tricky)
http://seedsofchristianity.com/wordpress/?p=2279

That's the exact opposite of what I think to be accurate, but I could be wrong. I don't have a source, but I was under the impressions that the typical Jew of that period wore short hair because the typical Roman wore long hair.

But I could be wrong.

[Col. Tartleton]

That's the exact opposite of what I think to be accurate, but I could be wrong. I don't have a source, but I was under the impressions that the typical Jew of that period wore short hair because the typical Roman wore long hair.

But I could be wrong.

They both wore short hair. Romans didn't wear long hair... Have you ever seen a Roman?

Jews wore it as an afro sort of thing or longer.

Jesus probably had longish hair for a man, but not long hair.