Quote:
Originally Posted by knucklesplitter
It's not a "fault", or a defect, it's a feature... to illustrate a point. My point was not that homosexuality is okay with Jesus, my point is that if is so fucking important, then why isn't it spelled out more clearly and talked about more often by Jesus in the New Testament? It is barely mentioned even by his surrogates (including one who never even met him), but it is never ever talked about specifically by him at all, aside from what you mentioned - presumptively lumping it in with general fornication/adultery/<insert any "sexual immorality" here>. Jesus was too caught up in other shit like feeding the poor and loving thy neighbor. For all I know homosexuality is as bad and unclean as premarital sex... or menstruation... or other Leviticus abominations like eating pork and shellfish... based on the NT. Just seems to be pretty low on the priority list I guess.
|
There are many details about the law that Jesus didn't address specifically...mostly because it was unnecessary. His audience at the time was made up mostly of torah-observant jews, who needed no clarification on points of torah law. When speaking to jews (which was practically all of the time), Jesus had no need to explain that homosexuality fell under the category of sexual immorality any more than people in here need to know that street racing falls under the category of stupid driving. You don't go into details about something that everyone already knows about. This is the reason why Paul DOES go into details...because he was preaching to non-jews (gentiles) who had no prior knowledge of torah law, and who needed to be brought up to speed on specific details, or at the very least have the definitions explained. In any case, the issue of homsexuality had been clearly dealt with in the torah...a book that Jesus refered to and quoted from constantly. Many people don't seem to understand that the Old and New testaments aren't isloated form eachother, but you do have to account for cultural differences.
Just as a note about your facts...the "surrogate" who you claim never met Jesus (I assume you are talking about Paul) did in fact know Jesus, and would have heard Him teach directly. Paul was a Pharissee (part of the jewish leadership), and would have been in Jerusalem every time Jesus came there to teach. Paul and Jesus could have easily met and talked beforehand. Just because the bible doesn't specifically record an event, doesn't mean it didn't happen. In addition, the bible teaches that Paul did talk to Jesus on several occasions after Jesus' resurrection, most notably on his trip to Damascus. I have no doubt that you would not believe that account, but for what it's worth , it is in the scriptures. Also, if you believe that Jesus spent most of His time being concerned about the poor and teaching "love thy neighbor", then it seems likely that you have not actually read the gospel accounts, or at least remembered what was in them. Jesus spoke on many subjects, including pointing out hypocricy in other people. Jesus clearly taught that sin of any kind was serious, but He did not find it necessary to define every single point of sin, since that had already been done in detail in the torah, specifically Leviticus. His audience would have known that. People today only seem to have issues with it because they cannot recognize that the New Testament compliments and completes the Old Testament...they were never meant to be seperate, and Christians who actually study the entire bible know this.