Home › Forum Online Discussion › General › The Intersex Immortal Jesus and His Student, Lao Tzu
- This topic has 29 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 10 months ago by c_howdy.
-
AuthorPosts
-
December 21, 2014 at 3:34 am #43478Fool TurtleParticipant
Jesus the Intersexual by Bruce L. Gerig
Jesus the Intersexual
HOMOSEXUALITY AND THE BIBLE
Key Passages: Luke 1:31,35, 2:21; Matt 19:12[see previous post], 23:37b; John 8:41b, 13:3-5,23By Bruce L. Gerig
Jesus androgynous birth. Every Christmas we return again to the Nativity story, which relates how the archangel Gabriel appeared to Mary and told her, [Y]ou will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you will name him Jesus (Luke 1:31 NRSV). When Mary asked how this could be since she was a virgin, he explained: The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be holy; he will be called the Son of God (v. 35). Indeed Mary became pregnant, her womb grew as she hid out with her relative Elizabeth (v. 39), and nine months later she gave birth to her firstborn son and wrapped him in bands of cloth, and laid him in a manger . . . (2:7). Now there is no doubt that the Bible presents this as a miracle; yet can anything more specific be known about how a woman might give birth to a child all by herself? In fact, Edward Kessel, emeritus professor of biology at the University of San Francisco, has offered just such a scenario in his article A Proposed Biological Interpretation of The Virgin Birth, in the Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation (9/83), a publication which presents an evangelical perspective on science and the Christian faith. Such parthenogenetic births (reproduction from a female alone) have been known for centuries to occur naturally among lower forms of the animal kingdom (e.g., in bees, flies, ants, fish, lizards, and beetles);1 and scientists in the laboratory have observed spontaneous division of unfertilized germ cells from various kinds of organisms (e.g., in worms, cats, guinea pigs, and humans), induced by artificial stimuli. While none of these latter cases resulted in a viable (surviving) young, embryologists are convinced that such unfertilized eggs could develop to full term and maturity under optimal conditions. Artificial stimuli used in such cases have included mechanical agitation, temperature shock, and pricking the eggs with a needle. Therefore, female unfertilized eggs have within themselves the potential for successful embryonic development; and various stimuli may trigger cell division in them.2 Helen Spurway of London University said that she supports the view that virgin birth is probable among humans, and in fact some mothers in the past who claimed that they gave birth without intercourse with a man could well have been telling the truth. R. A. Beatty of Cambridge University agrees that human parthenogenesis is possible, as well.3
Yet, how could God have brought about a Virgin Conception and Virgin Birth by using natural processes? Well, the Holy Spirit might have provided the environmental stimulus, like a simple cold shock which has worked so well in animal studies. Lacking male chromosomes, Jesus would have possessed an XX (female) sex chromosomal genotype, at conception and throughout his life. But how was he born a male phenotype (with male anatomical and psychological features)? Geneticists have now discovered two genes that might explain this: The histocompatibility-Y (H-Y) gene is believed to direct the first steps toward testes formation, after which testicular hormones take over the job of converting the nondifferentiated embryo into the male form. However, the H-Y gene, normally on the male Y chromosome, can also be transplanted to the female X chromosome, where normally it is inactivated by a regulatory gene (S) which suppresses H-Y gene expression in the female. Now if Jesus had developed from a diploid germ cell (containing all of Marys chromosomes), he would have had exactly the same chromosomal makeup and look of his mother. But if he developed from a haploid germ cell (containing only a single set of unpaired chromosomes, i.e., half of Marys genes), this could have displayed an Hs genotype (including the H-Y gene but with the S gene missing), which then split into HHss, lacking the S gene which had been passed down to Mary so that she formed into a functioning female.4 However, the masculinizing factor (S) which had been submerged in Marys line for centuries now expresses itself in the embryo of Jesus, producing an individual with chromosomal identification as a woman, but with anatomical and psychological expression as a man. Thus God could have used a natural biological process of sex reversal which is fully supported by known facts in the field of genetics.5 Jesus became male not instead of female but as well as female. Although Kessel is careful to assure the reader that Jesus was not bisexual, nor an hermaphrodite or a pseudohermaphrodite (all of which he views as pathological and defective),6 Virginia Mollenkott cannot help but think how Christ reflects the Father, who is imaged in the Bible as both male (Ps 68:5, 98:20; Isa 64:8; Jer 31:9; Matt 6:9) and female (Gen 3:21; Ps 22:9; Isa 49:15, 66:13; Hos 11:3-4), and yet is neither (without genitals). God is presented as an androgynous Being, a Creator who made both male and female in his image (Gen 1:27). Yet Mollenkott asks, dont intersexuals come closer to a physical resemblance to Jesus than anyone else, unless we think of a postoperative female-to-male transsexual?7
Jesus blurred gender boundaries. The New Oxford American Dictionary (2005) defines intersexual as relating to or having the condition of being intermediate between male and female.8 Jesus was not a hermaphrodite (displaying both male and female genitals); and we know nothing about his development as a fetus and how this might or might not have been affected by chromosomal or hormonal variations that can lead to homosexual, bisexual or transgendered feelings or orientations.9 Still, at one point Mary must have told Jesus that he was different, that he was born without a human father; and continuing rumors about his illegitimate birth (John 8:41; and son of Mary, Mark 6:3 NRSV10) could only have increased this feeling in him. One could forgive Jesus, Marys special son who no doubt was especially loved by his mother, if he felt sometimes like a mommas boy, very attached to her (cf. John 19:26-27). Yet during his ministry, Jesus turns away from his biological family and its patriarchal system, his disciples also become displaced persons who flout traditional gender roles (by not getting married), and the women followers of Jesus seem most responsible for supporting him as an itinerate preacher (Luke 8:1-3).11 These outsider women leave their homes to be with Jesus, even accompanying him to the cross (Mark 15:40-41); and they are the first witnesses to his resurrection (Luke 24:1-8). Probably they were not married and didnt have children, they were widowed or divorced or older, or they had not wanted to marry―i.e., they were irregular women (Moxnes).12 In any case, a demasculinized Jesus is being supported by women, rather than being a wage earner. In not having a household Jesus did not behave like a real man.13 He was out of place. He rejected marriage (or at least the Bible does not mention him being married at all), and he abandoned his family name, power and status. He also called his disciples to abandon their households (Luke 9:59-62, 14:26), removing them from their normal gender roles in society.14 Instead of promoting traditional family values, when Jesus brothers show up, they are not allowed through to speak to Jesus, who tells those around him that My mother and brothers are those who hear the word of God and do it (Luke 8:19-21 NRSV). Probably his brothers wanted to complain of rumors circulating that Jesus had lost his senses.15 In fact, he adds: Whoever comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and even life itself, cannot be my disciple (Luke 14:26 NRSV).16
In ancient times it was traditional for women (or slaves) to wash mens feet when they came in from outside (1 Sam 25:41, 1 Tim 5:10);17 yet at the Last Supper, Jesus removes his robe, gets down on his hands and knees, and begins washing all his disciples feet, to Peters outspoken rebuke (John 13:1-17). On another occasion we find Jesus cooking breakfast for his disciples (John 21:9-10). Jesus tender emotions are repeatedly noted in the Gospels:18 He picks up little children in his arms, speaks softly to them, and blesses them, against his disciples objections (Mark 10:13-16, 9:36-37; Matt 19:13-15). When Lazarus dies, the crowd marvels at Jesus weeping in public, remarking, See how he loved him! (John 11:35). His disciples find him weeping over Jerusalem (Luke 19:41); and he declares to the city, How often I have desired to gather your children together as a hen gathers her brood together under her wings, and you were not willing! (Matt 23:37b NRSV, italics added). He is [m]oved with pity when he sees the sick (Mark 1:41) and feels compassion for people in general (Mark 6:34). He offers gentle invitations like Come to me, all you that are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest (Matt 11:28 NIV). So, Jesus was not afraid to do menial tasks, to spend time with children, to cry in public, to feel empathy for the needy, or to speak tenderly―which some might consider feminine qualities and expectations, rather than masculine. Aristotle (Politics) claimed that men were by nature more fit to lead, self-controlled, courageous, and rational than women.19 Yet, this seems like an arbitrary presumption when one views those women who bucked societys norms to follow Jesus, who stand bravely near him hanging on the cross (when all his male disciples, except for the beloved disciple, have left him, cf. Matt 27:55-56, John 19:25b-27), and who are the first to believe that Jesus has risen from the dead, as he had predicted (Luke 24:1-10). Still, Jesus could also show so-called masculine qualities, e.g., when he bluntly denounces the Jewish leaders who oppose him (Matt 23:13-36), angrily drives out greedy money changers and animal sellers from the Temple and overturns their tables (John 2:13-17, Matt 21:12-13), and responds to the Pharisees trick questions with strategic answers, and then with questions of his own which they could not answer (Matt 22:15-46). Also, as a carpenter, following in his adoptive fathers footsteps (Matt 13:55), Jesus worked in a manual trade, requiring physical strength and stamina and probably giving him muscled arms and calloused hands.20 Phipps notes, Qualities that many cultures have considered feminine or masculine were harmoniously blended in his lifestyle, and Jesus illustrates the artificiality of gender stereotypes.21 Even though Jesus spent most of his time with men, he highly respected women, sharing long conversations with them (as with the Samaritan woman, John 4:7-26), teaching them as opposed to Jewish protocol (as with Mary of Bethany, Luke 10:38-41), and defending them in the face of male injustice (as with the adulteress brought to him, John 8:1-11). In the end, as Phipps declares, Jesus was both a brawny he-man [shout-out to HOWDY – lol] and a sensitive she-man.22
Jesus enigmatic sexual nature. Augustine (City of God) believed that Christ had no strife of flesh and spirit: he had no infirmity of human nature and only experienced emotions when he chose to.23 One can recall Jesus saying in the Sermon on the Mount, that everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart (Matt 5:28 NRSV). Therefore, a supremely pure Jesus could not have felt sexual desire. However, as Phipps points out, the Greek verb for lust here (epithumeō, G193724) is morally neutral, and the subject is really adultery. In fact, woman (gunē, G113525) is better translated as another mans wife, as in the Renaissance Great Bible (and cf. Strongs Greek-English dictionary and Van der Pools Septuagint translation).26 John Robinson notes that the real difficulty for many is to admit that Jesus had any sexuality―and was therefore a normal human being.27 Yet Tom Driver affirms that Jesus indeed had sexual feelings, because Jesus lived in his body as other men do.28 Phipps notes that the fact that Joshua (Hebrew: Yehoshua), or Jesus (Greek: Iēsous), was circumcised (Luke 2:21) shows that he had a penis;29 and Edwin Bennett, in writing about Jesus sexuality, adds, I would be very surprised if Jesus never masturbated, for example; every boy does.30 And Paul Johnson asks, are we to suppose that Jesus never had a wet dream . . . ?31 One can see how much guilt and sin Christians still associate with even the most basic natural sexual acts.
Now many Jewish scholars believe that Jesus must have married. Schalom Ben-Chorin writes, I am convinced that Jesus of Nazareth, like any rabbi in Israel, was married. Many notable men of that era were married and their wives are never mentioned; surely if they were not married their adversaries would have pointed this out.32 A Talmud passage notes that the last of the five duties laid down for a Jewish father was to arrange a marriage for his son, and children were usually given little voice in this decision.33 Well, according to Marks Gospel, Jesus had four brothers (James, Joses, Judas and Simon), as well as sisters (Mark 6:3), so Joseph fulfilled his sacred duty. Yet maybe Josephs premature death freed Jesus from this pressure (or one can imagine his mother telling Joseph, Leave Jesus alone!). Scholars have suggested numerous reasons why Jesus did not marry. In Jesus (in)famous saying about eunuchs (Matt 19:12) he seems to justify his single life, although Theodore Jennings notes also that he is scandalous in linking a rabbi like himself, who did not marry for his ministrys sake, with other eunuchs who would not produce children, like males who had been castrated to become boy prostitutes or who had cut off their own testicles to honor the goddess Cybele, or who were those peculiar hermaphrodites, or others who preferred having sex with their own gender rather than marrying. How shocking to link the reign of God to such outrageous behavior!34 Joseph Blenkinsopp suggests that Jesus was celibate because he was too poor to marry,35 and indeed Jesus noted during his public ministry that he had no place to lay his head (Matt 8:20 NIV), probably indicating that he and his disciples often slept outside under the stars. On the other hand, many have proposed that Jesus did marry. The Gospel of the Holy Twelve, allegedly written by Jesus disciples, claims that he married a Jewish girl named Miriam when he was eighteen, but she died seven years later.36 A more popular candidate for Jesus wife has been Mary Magdalene, who in the Synoptic Gospels heads the list of women who supported Jesus (Luke 8:1-3; Mark 15:40-41,47, 16:1-8; John 20:1-2,11-18; and possibly Luke 7:36-39, although unnamed here). Nikos Kazantzakis in his highly-criticized novel on Jesus (1960) describes The Last Temptation, a dream which Jesus has on the cross, after fainting. It seems that the Passion never happened; and now a green-winged angel produces Mary Magdalene, whom Jesus kisses passionately, and then they have sex. However, later when she is stoned to death as a whore, Jesus is transported to the home of Mary and Martha in Bethany, where he sleeps with Mary; and then late one night Martha slips in, like Ruth with Boaz (Ruth 3:7-9), and Jesus lies with her as well. Jesus lives to be an old man, while Mary and Martha compete to give him the most kids. Then, however, when a soldier puts a sponge of vinegar up to Jesus nose, he revives and realizes that he is indeed on the cross and that he has been faithful to his cause.37 Returning to the Bible, one interesting moment after the Resurrection is when Jesus tells Mary from Magdala, Do not hold on to me, because I have not yet ascended to the Father (John 20:17 NRSV), or Do not continue to hug me (Phipps).38 Now in the Gospels there is nothing that indicates that Jesus felt sexually attracted to Mary Magdalene, or to any other woman, for that matter; and here at the end, whatever physical intimacy Mary desired, Jesus backs off. Jesus’ statement here is hard to explain for spiritual reasons, since later he invites Thomas to put his hand into his side (John 20:27).
Many decades ago, even before Stonewall, Anglican bishop Hugh Montefiore made headlines in 1967 when he told a conference meeting at Oxford University that Jesus might have been a homosexual. After all, he said, women were his friends, but it is men he is said to have loved [especially the beloved disciple]. Another delegate complained that Canon Montefiores words simply smear our Lord. Yet Montefiore argued that this view helps explain Gods efforts, through Jesus, to identify with societys outcasts, just as he himself was born out of wedlock.39 In a related sermon preached at Great St Marys University Church, Cambridge, on August 6, 1967, Montefiore explained, It is precisely my concern to show Christs complete identification with mankind that raises for me a question about our Lords celibacy. If Jesus was fully a man, which he was, why then during all those hidden years at Nazareth did he not marry? Could the answer be that Jesus was not by nature the marrying sort? This does not mean that he was less than perfect in any way, and it is important not to confuse temptation with sin. However, this shows in a particularly vivid way, how God in Christ identifies himself with the outsider and the outcast from society.40 And what it meant for Jesus to be sinless was to be perfectly and entirely obedient to his Heavenly Father41―although this often turned out to be different than what people expected. Of course, there are valid questions to raise here, and to try to answer. It is true that Jesus loved all his disciples (John 13:1,34, 15:9,12). But with regards to the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus is only specifically said to have loved a young man who came to him, asking what he must do to inherit eternal life (Mark 10:21).42 And in the Fourth Gospel Jesus is said (once) to have loved the sisters Mary and Martha (11:5); but then we are told how much more (3 times) he loved their brother Lazarus (11:3,5,36). Even more striking in this Gospel are repeated references (5 times) made to an unnamed male disciple whom Jesus loved (13:23, 19:26, 20:2, 21:7,20), held traditionally to be John and the author of this Gospel. Of course, conservative interpreters are not going to easily acknowledge that Jesus had homoerotic feelings, or that he felt pleasure from touching another man―although Catholic theologian James Conn has said, I have always been intrigued by the closeness between Jesus and his beloved disciple, John. John was apparently young and strong and handsome.43 Letha Scanzoni and Nancy Hardesty wrote that Jesus must have ached to share love in the most intimate way.44 One should also remember about forbidden fruit, as one New Jersey psychologist explained (who spent the sixties in a Catholic seminary): Celibacy, by its very prohibitions, guarantees a preoccupation with sexuality. You always want what you dont have or think you cant get.45 In most young people sex is a driving, undeniable force (which is the why the human race has always so successfully reproduced itself); and why should Jesus not also have experienced strong sexual, even homoerotic, feelings if he was fully human?
In summary, Kessels human parthenogenesis theory explains how God the Father could have utilized natural (genetic) processes in a woman alone with supernatural intervention (the Holy Spirit) to produce a human body for his Son (John 1:14). Whether by this pathway or another, Jesus was born, and with a male anatomy (Luke 2:21). Yet in his public ministry he displayed a surprising intersex psychological profile, sometimes displaying more feminine qualities (e.g., a love for children, a nurturing instinct, and an emotional identification with those in need), and at other times more masculine qualities (e.g., an assured self confidence [in the Father], a strong assertiveness in his outreach, and a combativeness toward his enemies). Of course today we know that both males and females possess testosterone and estrogen, as well as other sex hormones, in varying degrees, although their interactions are still not well understood.46 Anyway, Jesus surely felt different (considered illegitimate on the grapevine) and displaced (with no personal home nor income during his public ministry); and he transgressed patriarchal and gender expectations in his society by criticizing marriage and family, by accepting women as full members in his new community, and by doing many unmanly things, such as washing mens feet, cuddling children, cooking breakfast, and crying in public. At the same time, he reached out to sexual outcasts in his culture, e.g., a woman living with a man not her husband, an adulteress brought to him for punishment (Jesus had no trouble setting aside the Law, when compassion and injustice called for it), and eunuchs, both physically and figuratively, who do not marry for one reason or another. Of course, the matter of Jesus own sexuality is a highly controversial subject (as charged as sex itself); and to understand this, one must be willing to set aside ones preconceptions and prejudices, speak forthrightly about sexual matters, and study carefully what the Biblical text actually says related to this subject. Of course, Jesus loved all of his disciples and followers; yet later in the Fourth Gospel one special person appears unexpectedly and repeatedly: the disciple whom Jesus loved, and one has to ask what set this love, between Jesus and this man, apart from the full spiritual and friendly love which Jesus felt toward all of his disciples? Later articles will explore this enigma, along with other aspects in Jesus teaching and ministry that a growing number of interpreters believe actually point to a very special (homoerotic) understanding and friendship that Jesus had during his earthly life.
FOOTNOTES: 1. Kessel, pp. 129-130. 2. Ibid., p. 132. 3. Ibid., pp. 132-133; Spurway, p. 652. 4. Kessel, pp. 133-134. 5. Ibid., p. 135. 6. Ibid., pp. 129, 133. 7. Mollenkott 2001, pp. 105-106; Mollenkott 1977, pp. 56-60. 8. New Oxford American Dictionary, intersexual. 9. Roughgarden, pp. 207-279. 10. Robinson, p. 57. 11. Bohache, p. 509. 12. Moxnes, p. 100. 13. Ibid., p. 96. 14. Goss, p. 536. 15. Scanzoni and Hardesty 1992, p. 200. 16. Cf. Goss, p. 537. 17. Keener, 2, pp. 903-904; Phipps, p. 112. 18. Phipps, pp. 112-113. 19. Aristotle, 1.12-13, pp. 21-24. 20. Phipps, pp. 114-115. 21. Ibid., pp. 115, 112. 22. Ibid., p. 115. 23. Augustine, pp. 369-370. 24. Strong, G1937 (epithumeō). 25. Strong, G1135 (gunē). 26. Phipps, pp. 91, 94; also Strong, G1135 (gunē), and Van der Pool, Matt 5:28. 27. Robinson, p. 63. 28. Tom Driver, 1965; quoted in Phipps, pp. 95-96. 29. Phipps, p. 35. 30. Edwin Bennett, 1981; quoted in Phipps, p. 106. 31. Johnson, n.p. 32. Schalom Ben-Chorin, 1967; quoted in Phipps, pp. 58-59. 33. Talmud, Yabamot 62b; noted in Phipps, pp. 39-40. 34. Jennings, p. 153. 35. Joseph Blenkinsopp, 1968; quoted in Phipps 1996, p. 67. 36. Phipps, p. 5. 37. Kazantzakis, chaps. 30-33, pp. 444-496. 38. Phipps, p. 132. 39. Anonymous, Was Jesus an Outsider?, p. 83. 40. Montefiore, p. 182. 41. Ibid., p. 179. 42. Jennings, p. 106. 43. James J. Conn, 1991; quoted in Phipps, p. 71. 44. Scanzoni and Hardesty, 1974; quoted in Phipps, pp. 80-81. 45. Anonymous source, quoted in Ohanneson, p. 104. 46. Cf. Sullivan, online pp. 4.2-3; and Abrams, online pp. 1-2)
REFERENCES:
Abrams, Douglas Carlton. Father Nature: The Making of a Modern Dad, Psychology Today, 35(2), March-April 2002, pp. 38-47. Online,
http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200203/the-making-modern-dad, accessed 9/18/09.Anonymous. Was Jesus an Outsider?, Newsweek, 70, 8/7/67, p. 83.
Aristotle. Politics. Trans. from Greek with Introduction and Notes by C. D. C. Reeve. Indianapolis and Cambridge: Hackett, 1998.
Augustine. The City of God: Books VIII-XIV. Trans. from Latin by Gerald G. Walsh and Grace Monahan. New York: Fathers of the Church, 1952.
Bohache, Thomas. Matthew. In Deryn Guest, ed., The Queer Bible Commentary, pp. 487-516. London: SCM Press, 2006.
Goss, Robert W. Luke. In Deryn Guest, ed., The Queer Bible Commentary, pp. 526-547. London: SCM Press, 2006.
Jennings, Theodore W., Jr. The Man Jesus Loved: Homoerotic Narratives from the New Testament. Cleveland: Pilgrim Press, 2003.
Johnson, Paul. Christ Condemns Those Who Spoke Ill of Gays. Privately published pamphlet, n.d.
Kazantzakis, Nikos. The Last Temptation of Christ. Trans. from Greek by P. A. Bien. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1960.
Keener, Craig S. The Gospel of John: A Commentary. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2 vols., 2003.
Kessel, Edward L. A Proposed Biological Interpretation of The Virgin Birth, Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation, 35(3), 9/83, pp. 129-136.
Mollenkott, Virginia Ramey. Omnigender. Cleveland: Pilgrim Press, 2001.
————. Women, Men & the Bible. Nashville: Abingdon, 1977.
Montefiore, Hugh. Our Lord Jesus Christ. In Hugh Montefiore, ed., Sermons from Great St Marys, preached 8/6/67, pp. 178-184. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1969.
Moxnes, Halvor. Putting Jesus in His Place: A Radical Vision of Household and Kingdom. Louisville and London: Westminster John Knox, 2003.
New Oxford American Dictionary. Oxford: University Press, 2nd ed. 2005.
Ohanneson, Joan. And They Felt No Shame: Christians Reclaim Their Sexuality. Minneapolis: Winston Press, 1983.
Phipps, William E. The Sexuality of Jesus. Cleveland: Pilgrim Press, 1996.
Robinson, John A. T. (Arthur Thomas). The Human Face of God. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1973.
Roughgarden, Joan. Evolutions Rainbow: Diversity, Gender, and Sexuality in Nature and People. Berkeley, Los Angeles and London: University of California Press, 2004.
Scanzoni, Letha Dawson, and Nancy A. Hardesty. All Were Meant to Be: Biblical Feminism for Today. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans (1974, 1982), 3rd ed. 1992.
Spurway, Helen. Virgin Births, Statesman and Nation, 50(1289), 11/19/55, pp. 651-652.
Strong, James. The Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible . . . King James Version . . . With Greek Dictionary of the New Testament. Nashville: Abingdon (1890); 39th repr. 1980.
Sullivan, Andrew, The He Hormone, New York Times Magazine, 4/2/00, pp. 46-51, 58, 69, 73-79. Online, http://www.nytimes.com/2000/04/02/magazine/the-he-hormone.html, accessed 9/17/09.
Van der Pool, Charles. The Apostolic Bible: Polyglot (Septuagint Greek, with English translation). Newport, OR: Apostolic Press (1996), 2006.
TRANSLATIONS: New International Version, 1978. New Revised Standard Version, 1989.
© 2009 Bruce L. Gerig
December 21, 2014 at 6:32 am #43479StevenModerator>>> Helen Spurway of London University said
>>>that she supports the view that virgin birth
>>>is probable among humans, and in fact some
>>>mothers in the past who claimed that they
>>>gave birth without intercourse with a man
>>>could well have been telling the truth.Or even more simply, the woman and her boyfriend were engaged in mutual masturbation with no penetration, and the ejaculate splashed on her vagina. Pregnancy can happen in this fashion, and centuries ago, people may not have understood why. And, if they had any vague idea, they likely would not want to own up to having been fooling around (if they were unmarried at the time).
Who’s to say that that really didn’t happen with Mary?
Assuming it is not just an embellished story to begin with.S
December 22, 2014 at 11:45 pm #43481Fool TurtleParticipantOn looking yourself in the mirror
Hobbes: So the secret to good self-esteem is to lower your expectations to the point where theyre already met?
Hey, as for androgynous Jesus, I’m just recognizing that Grandmaster Mantak Chia recognizesor once recognizedJesus as atheWestern Immortal.
🙂
Seriously, I may not like the farmer, but his life work sustains mine. It would be ironic if all we ever did was negate each other as possible.On the gaping hole in contemporary arts soul
Calvin: People always make the mistake of thinking art is created for them. But really, art is a private language for sophisticates to congratulate themselves on their superiority to the rest of the world. As my artists statement explains, my work is utterly incomprehensible and is therefore full of deep significance.
On playing Frankenstein with words
Calvin: Verbing weirds language.
On realising God is more Woody Allen than Michael Bay
Calvin: They say the world is a stage. But obviously the play is unrehearsed and everybody is ad-libbing his lines.
Hobbes: Maybe thats why its hard to tell if were living in a tragedy or a farce.
Calvin: We need more special effects and dance numbers.
The trouble with “believing that there is no God” is that at a certain point one may feel confused about what self there is to believe or disbelieve in, after all.
It’s better to be certain about everything, which is why the sciences are so wonderful as long as you don’t wonder too often about the unknown. Ditto Religion.What is the sound of one person spontaneously conceiving?
Atheists are complaining about Nothing when they complain about God.
Unless there’s Something to the idea that there is Nothing.On the tragedy of hipsters
Calvin: The world bores you when youre cool.
Han Shan Te’-Ch’ing, c 1600
“In 1573, I went to Wu Tai Shan. I bought a copy of The Life Story of Qing Liang and visited the
places mentioned in the text. I found Han Shan (Silly) Mountain so serene and strangely beautiful
that I decided to appropriate its name for myself. The mountain inspired me to compose the
following poem:This Silly Mountain doesnt go around aping people,
Playing the clown, societys fool.
It sits here alone, contented in solitude, perfect in peace.
I should be so silly.”– The Autobiography of Han Shan Te’-Ch’ing
On the unspoken truth behind the education system
Calvin: As you can see, I have memorized this utterly useless piece of information long enough to pass a test question. I now intend to forget it forever. Youve taught me nothing except how to cynically manipulate the system. Congratulations.
On the cruel reality of commercial art
Hobbes: Van Gogh wouldve sold more than one painting if hed put tigers in them.
On the future
Calvin: Trick or treat!
Adult: Wheres your costume? What are you supposed to be?
Calvin: Im yet another resource-consuming kid in an overpopulated planet, raised to an alarming extent by Madison Avenue and Hollywood, poised with my cynical and alienated peers to take over the world when youre old and weak. Am I scary, or what?
On the tears of a clown
Calvin: Isnt it strange that evolution would give us a sense of humour? When you think about it, its weird that we have a physiological response to absurdity. We laugh at nonsense. We like it. We think its funny. Dont you think its odd that we appreciate absurdity? Why would we develop that way? How does it benefit us?
Hobbes: I suppose if we couldnt laugh at things that dont make sense, we couldnt react to a lot of life.
Calvin: (after a long pause) I cant tell if thats funny or really scary.
On the truth
Calvin: Its a magical world, Hobbes, ol buddy Lets go exploring!
FEB 6, 2012
To paraphrase E.B. White, the perfect sentence is one from which nothing can be added or removed. Every word plays its part.Thanks to http://bookriot.com/2012/02/06/sixteen-things-calvin-and-hobbes-said-better-than-anyone-else/
December 23, 2014 at 12:06 am #43483Fool TurtleParticipant>A HREF=”http://killingthebuddha.com/mag/exegesis/the-gospel-of-primordial-androgyny/”>THE GOSPEL OF PRIMORDIAL ANDROGYNY
by Samuel ZinnerForget one man, one woman. Jesuss marriage could have been much, much more interesting.
The international press is buzzing with news of a purported ancient Coptic fragment in which Jesus speaks of my wife. Professor Karen L. King of Harvard University announced the existence of a tiny piece of papyrus on September 18, 2012, at the 10th International Congress of Coptic Studies, held at the Vaticans Institutum Patristicum Augustinianum in Rome. Sensationalistic headlines immediately filled the front pages of press organs like Reuters and the BBC. Initially, coverage left out the fact that most of the scholars in attendance at the Congress, major authorities, were either skeptical or outright dismissive of the fragments authenticity. (For more on this, see Daniel B. Wallace, Reality Check.)
…
To her credit, Professor King has been clear that the fragment in question does not constitute historical evidence that Jesus was married. However, reports continue to insist that it is our first evidence that some early Christians believed that Jesus had been married; thats the assumption I want to take issue with. First, scholars have long known of an early reference to a wife of Jesus, which can be found in a document whose authenticity cannot be called into question: the Heiland, a fully orthodox gospel harmony, apparently commissioned by the Munster bishop Liudger, composed ca. 840 CE, in the Werden monastery, near Essen in present-day Germany.
The Heiland explicitly calls Mary Magdalene the wife in the context of her meeting with Jesus after his resurrection: And straightway she came closer, the wife (uuib), with good will, and recognized her savior himself. In her love (minnia) she could not refrain, but with her hands she longed to hold him, the woman (fehmia) to touch the World-Lord. (lines 5929-5932) These lines parallel the Gospel of John 20:15-17. Admittedly, the Old Saxon uuib, like the modern German Weib or Frau, can mean both woman and wife, but so can the Sahidic Coptic hime, which can also mean woman and wife, or the ancient Greek term gyne.
That Professor King takes my wife as conclusive evidence that the text reflects an ancient belief that Jesus was married is, in my judgment, unwarranted. While the Heiland refers to Mary Magdalene as the wife, obviously meaning Jesus wife, the Harvard papyrus contains but a sentence fragment that ends with the words my wife, in Sahidic Coptic, ta-hime. The phrase is grammatically clear in Coptic, since my in the Harvard text obviously implies that the woman specified is a spouse. But the words my wife are by no means unambiguous semantically or theologically. Indeed, those theological and semantic vagaries can lead in other, fascinating directions, far beyond the simple male-female reading of marriage in this case.
…
The Gospel of Thomas can also take us beyond allegorical, spiritual marriage, to something more complicated and mystical. Saying 114 gives us a possible understanding of Jesus as a New Adam and Mary Magdalene as a New Eve, who together constitute the eschatological androgyne, a sort of re-instantiation of the primal androgyny of Genesis. The Lesser and Greater Questions of Mary (Magdalene), secret books referred to disparagingly by the church father Epiphanius (Pan. 26.8.2-3), reference this idea memorably. They record that the resurrected Jesus meets Mary, and out of Jesus side emerges a woman: Jesus granted to Mary a revelation, took her aside to the mountain, and prayed, and from his side he brought forth a woman with whom he began to unite, and taking his efflux he demonstrated that we must do this so that we may live. When Mary fell to the ground shocked, he lifted her up again and said to her once more: Why did you doubt, O you of little faith? The importance for present purposes of this exotic sexual narrative is that it portrays Jesus as the Adamic androgyne of Genesis, a primordial human created in the divine image and likeness, which is simultaneously male and female, according to Genesis 1:26-27, and who is therefore bi-sexual or androgynous.
Intriguingly, the Harvard fragments eighth line, which follows material similar to Thomas 114, contains the Coptic word for image, hikon, a loanword from Greek eikon. Thomas 114 also contains the word eine, which in Coptic translations of Genesis 1:26-27 bears the meaning, likeness. Thomas sayings 83-84 contain both terms of the same Genesis verses, namely, image and likeness. Again, if it is not a forgery, the Harvard texts image in line eight might offer supportive evidence for the argument that the traditions underlying Thomas 114 deal with the primordial androgyne.
December 23, 2014 at 2:58 am #43485StevenModeratorLet me comment on just a few aspects of your post.
I am going to make another bold statement, so please be prepared . . .>>>Hey, as for androgynous Jesus, I’m just recognizing that
>>>Grandmaster Mantak Chia recognizesor
>>>once recognizedJesus as atheWestern Immortal.
>>>:)
>>>Seriously, I may not like the farmer,
>>>but his life work sustains mine. It would be
>>>ironic if all we ever did was negate
>>>each other as possible.
>>>
>>>The trouble with “believing that there is no God”
>>>is that at a certain point one may feel confused
>>>about what self there is to believe or disbelieve
>>>in, after all.
>>>It’s better to be certain about everything,
>>>which is why the sciences are so wonderful
>>>as long as you don’t wonder too often about
>>>the unknown. Ditto Religion.Who said anything about not believing in God?
Atheists might not, but I’m not an Atheist.If you ask if I believe in the Christian God, then the answer is most decidedly NO.
I do NOT believe in some entity, often personified by a wizened old man, who looks down on us, watches us “ants” crawling about and makes all kinds of judgments “good/bad” based on what he sees. Then after determining that all kinds of things are “bad” (e.g. sin) condemns us to punishment, eternal torment, etc. UNLESS we feel bad about who we are, apologize for who we are, and ask forgiveness for who we are.
I DO believe in a source of consciousness (“God”) that is pure love, infinite wisdom, and complete compassion. I believe that this source loves creation completely–in all aspects–without judgment. With unconditional love and acceptance, it is pleased with everything it has created and it does not view anything/anyone to be a mistake. It loves you infinitely; it accepts you infinitely; it knows everything that occurs is divine play and an opportunity for creative growth . . . an opportunity for learning as well as an opportunity to more deeply understand the nature of love in all its aspects. It knows everything about your life personally, understands and empathizes with every choice you make, and only hopes that you can feel its complete unconditional love. For me, this extends beyond “belief” to what has been my direct experience in many different attempts to connect with it directly and to try to hear its voice unfiltered.
Unfiltered by what?
Unfiltered through the human ideas of others. Unfiltered by religious texts written by men, often sexually-repressed men from thousands of years ago, operating from a principle of fear . . . and a false earthly hope to control the actions of others in society through an agenda of fear.
For me, what these people said, what Master Chia currently believes, Michael Winn believes, whoever believes, to me is totally and completely irrelevant. I, personally, am not interested in the hearsay rumors about the true source from any other person–living or dead. I would like to hear from the true source itself, and let it speak to me on its own behalf, completely unfiltered. I think I would like to trust what it has to say about itself rather than what other humans tell me I should believe either through spoken words or through recorded written words in various religious texts.
That said, if others are happy with their path, GREAT. It’s not for me to judge. Just as I believe the opinions of others are irrelevant to me personally, I also believe that my opinion is equally irrelevant to others. The connection to the divine should–in any case–be a deeply personal one, without the clouded interference of a third party. I only comment for the interest of sharing, not in the interest of trying to force anyone to my view. Only to make people aware that there is a completely different perspective that one can take that is not atheism, nor subscription to one of the many religions on the planet. It is up-to-the-reader to personally evaluate whether such an idea resonates with them.
But, as an exploration question for you to consider, one you need not answer but just explore if you feel called to, is this:
What feels better to you?
To try to search through old recorded religious texts for the opinions of others that might make you feel as if you have actually have a “normal” place in existence, one where you don’t feel like such an outcast . . .
OR
To realize that you are already infinitely loved, completely accepted, perfect in every way already, and that the true source is just waiting for you to engage with it directly rather than through the proxy imperfect mental ideas that others have.To me, the second approach is much more empowering and provides a much more direct connection. For me, I would rather see the sun itself (for example) than hear stories about it third-hand that may not even be true.
I encourage you to contemplate these issues, to ask yourself if maybe you’d like to hear the “true source”‘s voice directly, rather than through the filter of somebody else.
But hey, whatever makes you happy.
Everyone has to find their own path.
No one can choose it for you.Whatever path you are on, I hope it provides you with personal growth and ultimate happiness. I am completely 100% serious about that in every way.
Smiling to you and your path,
StevenDecember 23, 2014 at 8:27 am #43487frechtlingParticipant“Freewill”
There are those who think that life has nothing left to chance
A host of holy horrors to direct our aimless danceA planet of play things
We dance on the strings
Of powers we cannot perceive
‘The stars aren’t aligned
Or the gods are malign…’
Blame is better to give than receiveYou can choose a ready guide in some celestial voice
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice
You can choose from phantom fears and kindness that can kill
I will choose a path that’s clear
I will choose freewillThere are those who think
That they were dealt a losing hand
The cards were stacked against them
They weren’t born in LotuslandAll preordained
A prisoner in chains
A victim of venomous fate
Kicked in the face
You can’t pray for a place
In heaven’s unearthly estateYou can choose a ready guide in some celestial voice
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice
You can choose from phantom fears and kindness that can kill
I will choose a path that’s clear
I will choose freewillEach of us
A cell of awareness
Imperfect and incomplete
Genetic blends
With uncertain ends
On a fortune hunt that’s far too fleetYou can choose a ready guide in some celestial voice
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice
You can choose from phantom fears and kindness that can kill
I will choose a path that’s clear
I will choose freewillDecember 23, 2014 at 3:10 pm #43489StevenModeratorGreat song, isn’t it?
You should have included a clip with the music though. 🙂
Including it now:
“Freewill”
There are those who think that life has nothing left to chance
A host of holy horrors to direct our aimless danceA planet of play things
We dance on the strings
Of powers we cannot perceive
‘The stars aren’t aligned
Or the gods are malign…’
Blame is better to give than receiveYou can choose a ready guide in some celestial voice
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice
You can choose from phantom fears and kindness that can kill
I will choose a path that’s clear
I will choose freewillThere are those who think
That they were dealt a losing hand
The cards were stacked against them
They weren’t born in LotuslandAll preordained
A prisoner in chains
A victim of venomous fate
Kicked in the face
You can’t pray for a place
In heaven’s unearthly estateYou can choose a ready guide in some celestial voice
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice
You can choose from phantom fears and kindness that can kill
I will choose a path that’s clear
I will choose freewillEach of us
A cell of awareness
Imperfect and incomplete
Genetic blends
With uncertain ends
On a fortune hunt that’s far too fleetYou can choose a ready guide in some celestial voice
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice
You can choose from phantom fears and kindness that can kill
I will choose a path that’s clear
I will choose freewillDecember 23, 2014 at 9:09 pm #43491Fool TurtleParticipantSchool Kids Perform Amazing Cover Of 46 And 2 By Tool
School Kids Perform Amazing Cover Of 46 And 2 By Tool
School Kids Perform Amazing Cover Of 46 And 2 By Tool
TOOL FORTY-SIX & 2 LYRICS
My shadow’s
Shedding skin and
I’ve been picking
Scabs again.
I’m down
Digging through
My old muscles
Looking for a clue.I’ve been crawling on my belly
Clearing out what could’ve been.
I’ve been wallowing in my own confused
And insecure delusions
For a piece to cross me over
Or a word to guide me in.
I wanna feel the changes coming down.
I wanna know what I’ve been hiding inMy shadow.
Change is coming through my shadow.
My shadow’s shedding skin
I’ve been picking
My scabs again.I’ve been crawling on my belly
Clearing out what could’ve been.
I’ve been wallowing in my own chaotic
And insecure delusions.I wanna feel the change consume me,
Feel the outside turning in.
I wanna feel the metamorphosis and
Cleansing I’ve endured withinMy shadow
Change is coming.
Now is my time.
Listen to my muscle memory.
Contemplate what I’ve been clinging to.
Forty-six and two ahead of me.I choose to live and to
Grow, take and give and to
Move, learn and love and to
Cry, kill and die and to
Be paranoid and to
Lie, hate and fear and to
Do what it takes to move through.I choose to live and to
Lie, kill and give and to
Die, learn and love and to
Do what it takes to step through.See my shadow changing,
Stretching up and over me.
Soften this old armor.
Hoping I can clear the way
By stepping through my shadow,
Coming out the other side.
Step into the shadow.
Forty six and two are just ahead of me.Thanks to Josh Harper for submitting Forty-Six & 2 Lyrics.
December 23, 2014 at 11:52 pm #43493StevenModeratorthat’s real change
releasing yourself from your own inner prison
allowing the true self to emerge
this courageous but challenging step
the final result is true bliss 🙂December 24, 2014 at 12:13 am #43495Fool TurtleParticipant46&2
Mixotricha
About complexity and stuff[A] List of animal species with 46 chromosomes
Humans have 46 chromosomes. But what about other animal species ?
There are surprisingly few comparative lists of chromosome numbers to be found on the internet. I admit : it does not make a lot of sense. What would be the scientific value of that ?
Just out of curiosity I searched around and as far as I know, below is the only list of animal species with 46 chromosomes. I mean: at first it was the only list. Then many people just bluntly put copies of it all over the internet without even mentioning the source. So feel free to use/copy small parts of this list. But do not copy the entire list, thats just plain stealing. Instead I would very much appreciate if you provide your audience with a link to here.
Chromosome Fact Sheet from NHGRI
How many chromosomes do humans have?
Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes, for a total of 46 chromosomes.In fact, each species of plants and animals has a set number of chromosomes. A fruit fly, for example, has four pairs of chromosomes, while a rice plant has 12 and a dog, 39.
Top of page
How are chromosomes inherited?
In humans and most other complex organisms, one copy of each chromosome is inherited from the female parent and the other from the male parent. This explains why children inherit some of their traits from their mother and others from their father.The pattern of inheritance is different for the small circular chromosome found in mitochondria. Only egg cells and not sperm cells keep their mitochondria during fertilization. So, mitochondrial DNA is always inherited from the female parent. In humans, a few conditions, including some forms of hearing impairment and diabetes, have been associated with DNA found in the mitochondria.
Top of page
Do males have different chromosomes than females?
Yes, they differ in a pair of chromosomes known as the sex chromosomes. Females have two X chromosomes in their cells, while males have one X and one Y chromosome.Inheriting too many or not enough copies of sex chromosomes can lead to serious problems…
Funnel Brain: Chapter 13
Last update by mayur on 03/27/2014
680006 People have viewed this QuizFor a species with a haploid number of 23 chromosomes, how many different combinationsof maternal and paternal chromosomes are possible for the gametes?
A) 23
B) 46
C) 460
D) 920E) About 8 million
Homologous chromosomes move toward opposite poles of a dividing cell during
A) mitosis.
B) meiosis I.
C) meiosis II.
D) fertilization.
E) binary fission.B) meiosis I.
If I once was neither Male nor Female, then…
Was I both? Or, was I in a third state which contained the possibility of my becomingwhich may or may not have been limited to What I’ve Become.. Always a longing… Becoming.
[i was just having a little fun. Otherwise I’d be quietly smiling in the darkness with a candle. When I woke up, my lightbulb died. And now my phone charger. I’m just smiling.
Love as from Lilith, Hekate, Isis, and a curious Fool
December 24, 2014 at 1:16 am #43497Fool TurtleParticipantFrom The Light of All Stars Illuminates the Way
“This is a great powerful statement from some spiritually achieved ones: ‘My life depends on me, not on Heaven.’
Excessively religious people may think those people had no God, but I don’t see it that way. I think that these were spiritually self-responsible people who did not rely on external authority to make themselves behave correctly. The did not relinquish authority over their lives to other people and external circumstances, trading in Heaven’s support to become dependent on others. They did what was right and depended upon their own attainment and achievement to see them through life.
This kind of achievement is called spiritual independence, and it is above the realm of ordinary religious followers. I regard it as highly respected elucidation of the Way.”– Hua-Ching Ni, The Light of All Stars Illuminates the Way, 1994, p.26
December 24, 2014 at 1:24 am #43499Fool TurtleParticipantThanks for an original poem
🙂
I always tell people that they usually are far better artists than I am. If only they believed me…
December 24, 2014 at 4:03 am #43501Fool TurtleParticipantTo the Dear Reader from Dr. Wu Dhi
“At times, when stress is so high and you are
pushed to your limits, the force and intensity of
the situation will move you to a leave of learning
and quicken your growth. One usually tries to hide
from these stressful situations, but the pressure
will force you to grow beyond yourself. When you
face these growth periods head on, they have a
tendency to move you into a stronger position. The
pressure and intensity of the situation pushes
ones internal energy to the point where change
rapidly occurs. Like taking a black piece of coal
and applying so much pressure that it transforms
to a brilliant diamond. In this alchemical
process, we change and grow and new traditions
begin to emerge.Here is a Christmas story that my cousin, Bari,
sent to me showing how stress can change a
situation in your life forevermoreWhen four of Santa’s elves got sick, the trainee
elves did not produce toys as fast as the regular
ones, and Santa began to feel the pre-Christmas
pressure.Then, Mrs. Claus told Santa her mother was coming
to visit, which stressed Santa even more.When he went to harness the reindeer, he found
that three of them were about to give birth and
two others had jumped the fence and were out,
Heaven knows where.Then when he began to load the sleigh, one of the
floorboards cracked, the toy bag fell to the
ground and all the toys were scattered.Frustrated, Santa went in the house for a cup of
apple cider and a shot of rum. When he went to the
cupboard, he discovered the elves had drunk all
the cider and hidden the liquor. In his
frustration, he accidentally dropped the cider
jug, and it broke into hundreds of little glass
pieces all over the kitchen floor. He went to get
the broom and found the mice had eaten all the
straw off the end of the broom.Just then, the doorbell rang, and an irritated
Santa marched to the door, yanked it open, and
there stood a little angel with a great big
Christmas tree.The angel said very cheerfully, ‘Merry Christmas,
Santa. Isn’t this a lovely day? I have a beautiful
tree for you. Where would you like me to stick
it?’And thus, began the tradition of the little angel
on top of the Christmas tree.Not very many people know this. You may want to
share it with your friends and family.”Thanks to Dr. Wu Dhi
FT wonders:
If one mixes red with blue, do they (does it?) cease to exist? Or, is there a color purple?My honors dust. Everyone sees my disgrace.
But shame doesnt mark me.
I dont care what others may think.Impossible burdens, obstacles beset me.
But I dont cry. I smile with pride.
Look at me! No worry lines.Sorrow has lived with me for many years.
But I dont fret. I battle despair.
Defeated, it skitters away.Callous Fate may work its cruelty on me,
but heavenly breezes carry what I crave:
the fragrance of my Love.Zeb-un-nissa rendered by Lisa
December 24, 2014 at 2:15 pm #43503StevenModeratorI find that either folks vigorously defend their training wheels, refusing to give them up, and treating them with some bizarre reverence–or they throw away the whole assembly, bike and all. Neither one actually sees the bike.
December 25, 2014 at 3:38 am #43505Fool TurtleParticipantIf you choose not to decide,/You still have made a choice.
To me, this is one of Pearts greatest quotes. How many people do we see all around us decrying the responsibility of making choices, crying out that we should have fewer choices (less freedom), wanting to let government or celebrities in commercials make choices for them, eschewing decision making? Well, much as they try these people cant get out of it: as Pythagoras wrote, Choices are the hinges of destiny. And even if you choose not to decide, to be wishy-washy, to refuse to have conviction, to be pressured into compromising your values you have still made your choice.
We are secrets to each other,/Each ones life a novel/No-one else has read.
…
Were only immortal for a limited time.
…
Though we might have precious little,/Its still precious.
Rabbit’s clever,” said Pooh thoughtfully.
“Yes,” said Piglet, “Rabbit’s clever.”
“And he has Brain.”
“Yes,” said Piglet, “Rabbit has Brain.”
There was a long silence.
“I suppose,” said Pooh, “that that’s why he never understands anything.Benjamin Hoff, The Tao of Pooh
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.