Was his close iendship wh William Ruf Kg jt that, or was evince that he was the natn's first gay chief executive?
Contents:
- QUEER KGS & QUEENS: WAS JAM I & VI GAY?
- NBA RUMORS: JAM HARN TRA TALKS, JOEL EMBIID, PJ TUCKER, RUDY GAY, LAKERS, WARRRS, BUCKS, MORE
- JAM BOND'S FIRST OPENLY GAY CHARACTER REVEAL NO TIME TO DIE MA ME TEAR UP
QUEER KGS & QUEENS: WAS JAM I & VI GAY?
The sexualy of Kg Jam VI of Stland & I of England has been long bated by historians. He is long held as an example of an openly gay kg paradg his lovers for all the urt to see. Meanwhile, his passnate love letters to his ‘male favour’ are held up by those who disagree… * was james gay *
They provid the glamour that he lacked, and there n be ltle doubt that his homosexualy stemmed om his early attractn to the androgyno Esmé.
But whout both Kg Jam and Erasm, the most wily touted Bible Christian history would never have been produced, the KJV (or shall we say, Gay-JV? Exactly how “Christian” Florence Nightgale was, or Dunant (founr of the Internatnal Red Cross), or Barton (founr of the Amerin Red Cross) pends on whether you also believe that eethkg anti-Trarians, Universalists, mystics, and gays, n all be nsired “te Christians.
Labels:bible, christian, church, english, gay, homosexual, kg, kg jam, love, lover, lovers, male, recept, royal, sex, sexual, translatns. This would seem to be evince enough that Jam uldn’t possibly have been volved homosexual relatns, but rts heavily on the assumptn that a relatnship between two men trsilly volved perative sex. Regardls of whether you nsir Jam I & VI gay, bisexual, or anythg on the LGBTQ+ rabow, the double standard when lookg at his ncrete relatnships wh men vers a potential reference to Anne Murray is obv.
NBA RUMORS: JAM HARN TRA TALKS, JOEL EMBIID, PJ TUCKER, RUDY GAY, LAKERS, WARRRS, BUCKS, MORE
We will return to this associatn between his grandmother’s readg of the KJV and her love for him our ncludg three ma purpos of this article are (1) to prent ntemporary arguments that the qutn whether Kg Jam had homosexual tennci has enormo signifince for how one views the Kg Jam Bible and petg translatns; (2) to review recent historil rearch that prents Kg Jam as havg had homosexual tennci; and (3) to prent our own nclns ncerng the signifince of this historil rearch for how the Kg Jam Bible may be viewed by Bible rears ntemporary discsnThe Kg Jam Bible has been gag creasg scholarly attentn recent years (see, for example, Daniell 2003; Katz 2004; McGrath 2001; Moynahan 2002; Nilson 2003). This view is sometim lled the “Kg Jam Only” (KJO) not all of the attentn pleas those cled to support the KJO posn, bee a nsirable amount of this attentn is due to discsn of Kg Jam’s own sexualy, particularly ncerng the qutn whether he had homosexual translatn and homosexualyIn The Facts on the Kg Jam Only Debate, Ankenberg and Weldon (1996) discs homosexualy and translatn mte. “Proponents of the KJO, ” they wre, “often claim that unbelievers, heretics, occultists, and/or homosexuals have been members of the edorial or translatn mte of the morn versns” (p.
If a homosexual person is on the translatn mtee, so the argument go, then that translatn is obvly not of God, th nfirmg the superry of the Kg Jam Bible (as is also assumed that no one on the translatn mte of the Kg Jam Versn uld possibly have been homosexual). )If Riplger nmns the NIV on the grounds that remov referenc to sodomy, others have attacked the Kg Jam Versn on the grounds that Kg Jam was gay. The pot we want to lift up here, though, is that both of the thors attack the character of Kg Jam to suggt that the Kg Jam Bible is self ’s rebuttalNot surprisgly, the claim that Kg Jam had homosexual tennci has stirred up que a b of ntroversy among many supporters of the Kg Jam Bible.
Gee Sweetg now Chancellor, and himself as the current Print of Moody that Kg Jam was fact a homosexual, and that such reportg was “reliable data and spirual nourishment for God’s people” (p. In his view, Kg Jam has been acced of homosexualy, and he vot a whole chapter to “Law & History, ” which he ntends that what we have the historgraphy of Kg Jam is a se of famatn of character. He intifi those who argue that Kg Jam had homoerotic tennci or leangs as proponents of the “cril” view bee anyone who thks that Kg Jam was gay or bisexual is necsarily cricizg both the Kg and the Bible that bears his name.
JAM BOND'S FIRST OPENLY GAY CHARACTER REVEAL NO TIME TO DIE MA ME TEAR UP
Although Coston is not a profsnal historian, he attempts to show that the claims that Kg Jam had homosexual tennci are not ground what he lls “classil historil methodology” (p. And sce he was godly and virtuo, he therefore uld not have had homosexual tennci, so Coston (circularly) argu throughout the book.
341) circular reasong asi, Coston do marshal some tertg evince to challenge the claim that Kg Jam had homosexual tennci. Even as his weak jaw and enlarged tongue explas his droolg that uld have been mistaken for French kissg, his general physil weakns acunts for his hab of hangg on other, light of the fact that the bedchamber is often ced as evince for Jam’s homosexual tennci, Coston claims that Kg Jam’s bedchamber practic were nothg out of the ordary—pecially given his physil disabili—as the practic helped protect the Kg agast plots agast his life. 82), as will be noted greater tail below, several historians have poted to the tranged relatnship between Jam and his wife and have ed this evince support of their view that he had homosexual tennci.
93), while others, pecially Bergeron (1999) have examed Jam’s letters ntext and intified the theme of homoeroticism them, Coston is not imprsed by the studi bee, on the basis of his own readg of the letters, he has nclud that “Jam ed was sentimental, but far om homosexual/bisexual” (Coston 1996, p. 75) short, Coston argu that there is ltle evince to suggt that Kg Jam was a homosexual person, and the evince that we seem to have needs to be terpreted light of the historil ntext. E., Jam was a godly man, godly men are not homosexual, therefore Jam uld not be homosexual) as follows: (1) ntemporari of Jam who acced him of homosexualy were his polil adversari and guilty of anti-Sttish bigotry; and (2) when our own ntemporari “acce” Jam of homosexualy, they are misreadg the evince.