The Twisted Fate for Men Who Claimed J Was Gay

Contents:

• NO, OF COURSE THAT UFC GUY DIDN'T YELL ABOUT "NOT FOR GAY J" ON TV
• WAS J GAY?
• WAS J GAY? PROBABLY
• THE JOURNEY OF A GAY J
• THE TWISTED FATE FOR MEN WHO CLAIMED J WAS GAYLOVE THY NEIGHBORWHILE THE MOST FAMO (AND MON) CLAIM IS THAT J HAD A RELATNSHIP WH MARY MAGDALENE, MAJOR WAV HAVE BEEN MA THROUGHOUT HISTORY ARGUG THAT J WAS GAY.CANDIDA MOSSUPDATED MAR. 23, 2020 4:57AM EDT / PUBLISHED MAR. 22, 2020 5:07AM EDT PHOTO ILLTRATN BY ELIZABETH BROCKWAY/THE DAILY BEAST/PIERO LLA FRANCON MAY 30, 1593, THE PLAYWRIGHT AND POET CHRISTOPHER “K” MARLOWE WAS FOUND BTALLY MURRED. ACRDG TO AN TOPSY REPORT AND SEVERAL EYEWNS REPORTS, MARLOWE HAD SPENT THE DAY AT THE HOE OF MRS. ELEANOR BULL DEPTFORD, SOUTH LONDON, BEFORE BEG FATALLY STABBED THE EYE. THE DAGGER STCK SLIGHTLY ABOVE HIS RIGHT EYE AND DROVE TWO CH TO HIS BRA. THOUGH HE WAS NOT EVEN 30, MARLOWE HAD ALREADY MA HIS IMPRSN ON THE ENGLISH LERATI WH HIS DOCTOR FST. HIS EXCLAMATN “WAS THIS THE FACE THAT LNCHED A THOAND SHIPS?” LIV ON LERARY AND POP-CULTURAL FOLKLORE EVEN TODAY. SO, WHO WOULD WANT TO KILL HIM? QUE A FEW PEOPLE, AS TURNED OUT, AND NSPIRACY THEORI ABOUND. ONE EXPLANATN IS THAT MARLOWE’S ATHEISM AND HIS SNDALO BELIEF THAT J WAS A HOMOSEXUAL RELATNSHIP WH THE DISCIPLE JOHN PLAYED A ROLE HIS MISE. IF RRECT, THIS WOULD MAKE MARLOWE ONE OF A CLTER OF DIVIDUALS WHO HAVE FACED STRONG, SOMETIM FATAL, OPPOSN FOR ASKG QUTNS ABOUT THE SEXUALY OF J.THE MORE NVENTNAL-YET-INOCLASTIC THEORY ABOUT J’S ROMANTIC LIFE IS THAT HE WAS A RELATNSHIP WH MARY MAGDALENE. SOME SAY THEY WERE EVEN MARRIED. THIS THEORY IS MOST FAMOLY ARTICULATED THE BTSELLG DA VCI CO BUT THERE ARE SOME AMICS WHO HAVE MA SIAR CLAIMS. ONE MAN, WALTER FRZ, EVEN FED AN ANCIENT DOCUMENT TO TRY TO ADD WEIGHT TO THE CLAIM THAT J AND MARY WERE MARRIED. THERE IS SOME GOOD EVINCE FOR THKG THAT THE RELATNSHIP BETWEEN MARY MAGDALENE AND J WAS PLAYED DOWN BY LATER CHRISTIAN THORS, BUT THERE’S NOTHG THE EARLIT TRADN THAT NCRETELY SUGGTS THEIR RELATNSHIP WAS ROMANTIC.   NEWSLETTERSBEAST TRAVEL DIGTGET THE ENTIRE WORLD YOUR BOX.SUBSCRIBEBY CLICKG "SUBSCRIBE" YOU AGREE TO HAVE READ THE TERMS OF USE AND PRIVACY POLICY WHAT THIS POPULAR NSPIRACY THEORY NVENIENTLY OVERLOOKS IS THE TENSY OF J’S RELATNSHIPS WH HIS RE GROUP OF DISCIPL. THE CLOSE RELATNSHIP OF J AND THE “BELOVED DISCIPLE” (TRADNALLY INTIFIED AS JOHN THE EVANGELIST) HAS LED SOME TO SUGGT THAT THEIR RELATNSHIP WAS HOMOEROTIC. THE EVINCE IS SUGGTIVE; AFTER ALL THERE IS A DISCIPLE WHO IS REPEATEDLY SCRIBED AS A PERSON WHOM J “LOV.” THERE’S A NVERSATN BETWEEN J AND PETER WHICH J ASKS PETER THREE TIM IF HE LOV HIM AND, WHEN PETER RPONDS, ASKS HIM TO RE FOR HIS FLOCK (JOHN 21:15-17). A MAN WHO SPENDS MOST OF HIS PERSONAL TIME ALONE WH 12 OTHER MEN? YOU MIGHT SAY THAT THERE’S SOMETHG CREDIBLY HETERONORMATIVE ABOUT THKG THAT J WAS TERTED MARY MAGDALENE.WHILE THE SCRIPTURAL TEXTS SOUND QUE SUGGTIVE ENGLISH, THE EROTICISM EVAPORAT OUT OF THE NVERSATN WHEN YOU READ THE ORIGAL GREEK. GREEK HAS MULTIPLE WORDS TO SCRIBE DIFFERENT KDS OF LOVE. AND, AS ISMO DUNRBERG, A PROFSOR OF NEW TTAMENT AT THE UNIVERSY OF HELSKI, HAS SHOWN, THE GREEK DO NOT SUGGT EROTIC RELATNSHIPS. IN JOHN 21 THE WORD J IS “AGAPE” A WORD THAT NNOT BROAD AFFECTN AND RE FOR OTHERS. THE WORD FOR SEXUAL LOVE OR SIRE IS “EROS” (OM WHICH WE GET THE ENGLISH WORD “EROTIC”), BUT THAT LANGUAGE IS NEVER ED TO SCRIBE J’ LOVE FOR ANY OF HIS PANNS.BUT IF JT SPENDG TIME TOGETHER IS ENOUGH TO BUILD A WHOLE THEORY ABOUT THE RELATNSHIP BETWEEN J AND MARY MAGDALENE, THEN CERTALY THE ARGUMENT J WAS SEXUAL RELATNSHIPS WH OTHER MEN HAS AT LEAST AS MUCH PLSIBILY? FOR MARLOWE, AN OUTSPOKEN CRIC OF ELIZABETHAN ENGLAND’S STRONG PROHIBNS AGAST HOMOSEXUALY ( WAS A PAL CRIME), THERE WAS SUFFICIENT EVINCE OF HOMOEROTICISM. THE SAME MONTH THAT MARLOWE DIED A POLICE RMANT AND ON-AND OFF-SPY RICHARD BA PILED A DOCUMENT OF K’S “MONSTRO OPNS.” THE POT OF THE BA NOTE, AS HISTORIAN AND THOR CHARL NICHOLL HAS WRTEN, WAS “TO CRIMATE MARLOWE.” ACRDG TO BA, MARLOWE WAS AN ATHEIST WHO DOUBTED THE EXISTENCE OF GOD, THOUGHT THE BIBLE WAS “FILTHILY [I.E. POORLY] WRTEN,” AND BELIEVED THAT THE SACRAMENT OF MUNN WOULD BE GREATLY IMPROVED IF THE BREAD AND WE WAS REPLACED WH A TOBAC PIPE. HIS MOST SHOCKG STATEMENT, HOWEVER, WAS THAT “ST. JOHN THE EVANGELIST WAS BEDFELLOW TO CHRIST AND LEANED ALWAYS HIS BOSOM, THAT HE ED HIM AS THE SNERS OF SODOM.” THE FIGURATIVE LANGUAGE OF LEANG TO THE BOSOM IS ACTUALLY ANCIENT AND IS ED THE WRGS OF THE FOURTH CENTURY CHURCH HISTORIAN EEBI WHO SCRIBED JOHN AS “THE ONE WHO LAY ON [J’] BREAST.” IN ANCIENT TEXTS THIS IS AN IMAGE FOR NON-SEXUAL TIMACY, BUT YOU N SEE WHAT MARLOWE WAS GETTG AT.MARLOWE WASN’T THE ONLY RENAISSANCE-ERA FIGURE TO ASK QUTNS ABOUT THE RELATNSHIP BETWEEN J AND JOHN. JT 40 YEARS EARLIER A YOUNG VEIAN IAR NAMED FRANC CALGNO WAS EXECUTED FOR BLASPHEMY FOR CLAIMG THAT JOHN WAS J’ TAME (A PUBCENT BOY WHO ENGAGED A SEXUAL RELATNSHIP WH AN OLR MAN). FOR CALGNO, LIKE MARLOWE, HIS BELIEFS ABOUT J’ SEXUALY ARE NNECTED TO A PARTICULAR FORM OF 16TH CENTURY ATHEISM THAT FOCED ON THE IA THAT J WAS HUMAN. HE APPARENTLY SAID THAT CHRIST “WAS MERELY HUMAN, AND THAT HE OFTEN HAD RNAL KNOWLEDGE OF ST. JOHN,” THAT HE HAD MORE NFINCE THE LAT POET OVID THAN THE BIBLE, AND “THAT HE WOULD RATHER WORSHIP A PRETTY LTLE BOY THE FLH THAN GOD.” ONE OF CALGNO’S ACQUATANC TTIFIED AT HIS TRIAL THAT CALGNO SLEPT WH A BOY “ALMOST EVERY NIGHT” BUT ’S UNCLEAR IF THIS WAS SLANR. IN 1550, AT THE AGE OF 22, CALGNO WAS TERROGATED BRCIA, AND WAS EXECUTED VENICE TWO DAYS BEFORE CHRISTMAS.MORE THAN ONE NEW TTAMENT SCHOLAR HAS SHARED MARLOWE AND CALGNO’S VIEW THAT THE GOSPEL OF JOHN IS RIPE FOR HOMOEROTIC READGS. SJEF VON TILB, FOR EXAMPLE, HAS WRTEN THAT “ACRDG TO MORN DISURSE” THE FOURTH GOSPEL IS “POSIVELY ATTUNED TO THE VELOPMENT OF POSSIBLY HOMOSEXUAL BEHAVR.” BUT THE KDS OF SCHOLARLY NFIRMATNS PALE NEXT TO COLUMBIA ANCIENT HISTORIAN MORTON SMH’S EXPLOSIVE 1960 ANNOUNCEMENT THAT HE HAD DISVERED A “SECRET GOSPEL OF MARK.” TWO YEARS EARLIER, SMH CLAIMED, HE HAD DISVERED A PREVLY UNKNOWN LETTER WRTEN BY THE LATE SEND/EARLY THIRD CENTURY THEOLOGIAN AND TEACHER CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA THE GREEK ORTHODOX MAR SABA MONASTERY, 20 KILOMETERS TO THE SOUTH-EAST OF JESALEM. SMH PHOTOGRAPHED THE LETTER AND PUBLISHED HIS STUDY OF THE TEXT 1973.WHAT SHOCKED THE WORLD WAS THE NTENTS OF THE LETTER WHICH CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA SCRIBED AS AN EXTEND VERSN OF THE GOSPEL OF MARK. IN THIS VERSN J RAIS A YOUNG MAN OM THE AD AND THGS GET TERTG OM THERE ON. QUOTG WORD FOR WORD, THE SECRET GOSPEL READS: “BUT THE YOUTH, LOOKG UPON [J], LOVED HIM AND BEGAN TO BEECH HIM THAT HE MIGHT BE WH HIM. AND GOG OUT OF THE TOMB, THEY ME TO THE HOE OF THE YOUTH, FOR HE WAS RICH. AND AFTER SIX DAYS J TOLD HIM WHAT TO DO, AND THE EVENG THE YOUTH TO HIM, WEARG A LEN CLOTH OVER HIS NAKED BODY. AND HE REMAED WH HIM THAT NIGHT, FOR J TGHT HIM THE MYSTERY OF THE KGDOM OF GOD. AND THENCE, ARISG, HE RETURNED TO THE OTHER SI OF THE JORDAN.” THERE’S NOTHG EXPLIC ABOUT A SEXUAL ENUNTER BETWEEN J AND THE YOUNG MAN, BUT THE REAR DON’T GET THE IMPRSN THAT THEY SPENT THE NIGHT JT CHATTG, EHER.AS YOU MIGHT IMAGE, THE DISVERY OF THIS SECRET GOSPEL SHOCKED THE WORLD AND DIVID AMICS. SOME BELIEVED THAT SMH HAD FED THE DOCUMENT, AND OTHERS FEND SMH’S IMPECBLE REPUTATN AS A SCHOLAR. SOME OF THE ACCATNS OF FERY TURNED PERSONAL WH SOME ACCG SMH, HIMSELF A GAY MAN, OF FG THE LETTER HIMSELF. THE MOST SUGGTIVE EVINCE WAS THAT THE ORIGAL LETTER, PHOTOGRAPHED BY SMH, HAD BEEN LOST (FOR ALMOST 60 YEARS NOW!) AND WHOUT THAT DOCUMENT THERE IS NO WAY TO TT S THENTICY G SCIENTIFIC MEANS. THE WEIGHT OF THE CURRENT EVINCE SUGGTS THAT IS A FERY, AS SCHOLAR STEPHEN CARLSON CLEARLY ARGUED HIS THE GOSPEL HOAX, BUT FOR MANY THE JURY IS STILL OUT. IF HE DIDN’T FE THE TEXT WHAT PETER JEFEY LLS “AN ASTOUNDGLY DARG ACT OF CREATIVE REBELLN” THEN THIS ENORMOLY EDE AND DISTGUISHED SCHOLAR WAS LLED A FER PURELY ON THE BASIS OF HIS PERSONAL LIFE.WHAT’S TERTG ABOUT THE ATTACKS ON THOSE WHO HAVE QUTNED THE PRUMPTIVE HETEROSEXUALY OF J IS HOW QUICKLY THEY ARE NNECTED TO THE PERSONAL LIV OF THOSE ASKG QUTNS. THE SEX LIV OF CALGNO, MARLOWE, AND SMH HAVE ENTERED THE NVERSATN WAYS THAT THE SEXUAL ORIENTATN OF THOSE WHO THK J AND MARY MAGDALENE WERE MARRIED HAS NOT. TO MY KNOWLEDGE, NO ONE HAS EVER SAID THAT DAN BROWN IS BIASED BEE HE’S HETEROSEXUALLY PARTNERED. IN NEW TTAMENT SCHOLARSHIP THERE’S AN ALMOST CLICHéD OBSERVATN THAT EVERY SCHOLAR SE THEMSELV J: IF YOU’RE A LIBERAL J IS A LIBERAL, IF YOU’RE A FEMIST J IS A FEMIST, AND SO ON. “BUT,” AS TAYLOR PETREY AN ASSOCIATE PROFSOR OF EARLY CHRISTIANY AT KALAMAZOO COLLEGE, TOLD THE DAILY BEAST, “WHEN TO J’S SEXUALY THE SCHOLARS WHO ARGUE FOR A NON-NORMATIVE J HAVE BEEN PUNISHED PECIALLY HARSHLY, WHILE THOSE WHO ARGUE THAT J LIVED A NVENTNAL LIFE OF MARRIAGE HAVE BEEN TREATED AS DISPASSNATE OBSERVERS.”THE REASON FOR THIS, PETREY OBSERVED, IS THAT “J’S SEXUALY IS MORE THAN JT A HISTORIL QUTN. IT SUPPOSEDLY THORIZ OR UNTHORIZ CERTA KDS OF RELATNSHIPS AND SEXUAL EXPRSNS.” FOR RELIG LEARS, PECIALLY THOSE NOMATNS THAT SEE HOMOSEXUALY AS A S OR “TRSILLY DISORRED,” THE ASSUMED HETEROSEXUALY OF J IS EASY TO EXPLA: RNATE GOODNS NNOT BE DISORRED. BUT ’S NOT SO CLEAR WHY OTHERS ASSUME THAT J WAS HETEROSEXUAL, PECIALLY WHEN SCRIPTURAL EVINCE SCRIB ONLY HIS CELIBACY AND NOT HIS SEXUAL ORIENTATN. IN TTH, AS PETREY SAYS, “THE AMBIGUY OF THE EVINCE OF J’S SEXUALY IS ENTICG TO SPECULATE ABOUT NOT JT BEE IS AN UNANSWERABLE MYSTERY, BUT BEE WE TEND TO THK THAT THE ANSWER UNLOCKS SOME GREAT TTH ABOUT RELIGN, SEX, AND OURSELV.” CANDIDA MOSS
• 'WAS J GAY?’: THE CLASS UNVERG HIDN QUEER HISTORI
• GAY J – WHO WAS THE BELOVED DISCIPLE?
• IS J GAY: DIVG INTO THE CONTROVERSIAL SPECULATN OF J’ SEXUAL INTY
• SYNONYMS FOR NOT GAY

NO, OF COURSE THAT UFC GUY DIDN'T YELL ABOUT "NOT FOR GAY J" ON TV

This isn’t the first time Pope Francis has shown himself to be a progrsive lear when to, among other thgs, gay Catholics. As a biblil scholar, I would suggt that church lears who e their cultur and theology to exclu homosexuals don’t read Scripture refully.

Those who would exclu homosexuals om God’s kgdom choose to ignore J, turng stead to the Old Ttament – most particularly to Genis 19, the stctn of the ci of Sodom and Gomorrah. Levic 18:22 and 20:13, for example, are not about “homosexualy” as we now unrstand – as the rg, lovg and sexual relatnship between people of the same sex.

Christians – no matter which church they belong to – should follow Pl and extend to the heterosexual-homosexual distctn. Many who support same-sex marriage and gay rights argue that, sce J never mentned homosexualy, He did not nsir to be sful. It is technilly te that J did not specifilly addrs homosexualy the Gospel acunts; however, He did speak clearly about sexualy general.

WAS J GAY?

The pot is that J did not need to emize s, pecially when the further revelatn ntaed the Epistl remov all doubt as to homosexualy’s sfulns. In addn, unbelievers who practice homosexualy stand need of salvatn jt like any other unbeliever.

WAS J GAY? PROBABLY

Christians are lled to pray for those who do not know Christ, to serve others love, and to share the msage of J wh all people, cludg those volved homosexualy. ” Some people heard, “Not for gay J, ” which is kd of a stupid thg to hear bee would also be a stupid thg to say.

So when a Cuban is misheard to say “not for gay J, ” the first reactn, for some, isn’t to square that agast mon sense. Takg a left turn toward gay J at the end of a basele relig pamphlet pch do not make sense as a tra of thought or argument.

THE JOURNEY OF A GAY J

”I haven’t done much diggg on Romero’s polics, beyond several old articl notg his Bible-humpg, and, sure, ’s possible the hardre relig si of him shas his views about gay marriage. Today, stead of civil rights and antiwar protts, we are divid ncerng women's rights, the tragedy of abortn, and the issue of lengthy articl uld (and should) be dited to the issu of women's rights and abortn, this article is voted to the social issue of homosexualy.

THE TWISTED FATE FOR MEN WHO CLAIMED J WAS GAYLOVE THY NEIGHBORWHILE THE MOST FAMO (AND MON) CLAIM IS THAT J HAD A RELATNSHIP WH MARY MAGDALENE, MAJOR WAV HAVE BEEN MA THROUGHOUT HISTORY ARGUG THAT J WAS GAY.CANDIDA MOSSUPDATED MAR. 23, 2020 4:57AM EDT / PUBLISHED MAR. 22, 2020 5:07AM EDT PHOTO ILLTRATN BY ELIZABETH BROCKWAY/THE DAILY BEAST/PIERO LLA FRANCON MAY 30, 1593, THE PLAYWRIGHT AND POET CHRISTOPHER “K” MARLOWE WAS FOUND BTALLY MURRED. ACRDG TO AN TOPSY REPORT AND SEVERAL EYEWNS REPORTS, MARLOWE HAD SPENT THE DAY AT THE HOE OF MRS. ELEANOR BULL DEPTFORD, SOUTH LONDON, BEFORE BEG FATALLY STABBED THE EYE. THE DAGGER STCK SLIGHTLY ABOVE HIS RIGHT EYE AND DROVE TWO CH TO HIS BRA. THOUGH HE WAS NOT EVEN 30, MARLOWE HAD ALREADY MA HIS IMPRSN ON THE ENGLISH LERATI WH HIS DOCTOR FST. HIS EXCLAMATN “WAS THIS THE FACE THAT LNCHED A THOAND SHIPS?” LIV ON LERARY AND POP-CULTURAL FOLKLORE EVEN TODAY. SO, WHO WOULD WANT TO KILL HIM? QUE A FEW PEOPLE, AS TURNED OUT, AND NSPIRACY THEORI ABOUND. ONE EXPLANATN IS THAT MARLOWE’S ATHEISM AND HIS SNDALO BELIEF THAT J WAS A HOMOSEXUAL RELATNSHIP WH THE DISCIPLE JOHN PLAYED A ROLE HIS MISE. IF RRECT, THIS WOULD MAKE MARLOWE ONE OF A CLTER OF DIVIDUALS WHO HAVE FACED STRONG, SOMETIM FATAL, OPPOSN FOR ASKG QUTNS ABOUT THE SEXUALY OF J.THE MORE NVENTNAL-YET-INOCLASTIC THEORY ABOUT J’S ROMANTIC LIFE IS THAT HE WAS A RELATNSHIP WH MARY MAGDALENE. SOME SAY THEY WERE EVEN MARRIED. THIS THEORY IS MOST FAMOLY ARTICULATED THE BTSELLG DA VCI CO BUT THERE ARE SOME AMICS WHO HAVE MA SIAR CLAIMS. ONE MAN, WALTER FRZ, EVEN FED AN ANCIENT DOCUMENT TO TRY TO ADD WEIGHT TO THE CLAIM THAT J AND MARY WERE MARRIED. THERE IS SOME GOOD EVINCE FOR THKG THAT THE RELATNSHIP BETWEEN MARY MAGDALENE AND J WAS PLAYED DOWN BY LATER CHRISTIAN THORS, BUT THERE’S NOTHG THE EARLIT TRADN THAT NCRETELY SUGGTS THEIR RELATNSHIP WAS ROMANTIC.   NEWSLETTERSBEAST TRAVEL DIGTGET THE ENTIRE WORLD YOUR BOX.SUBSCRIBEBY CLICKG "SUBSCRIBE" YOU AGREE TO HAVE READ THE TERMS OF USE AND PRIVACY POLICY WHAT THIS POPULAR NSPIRACY THEORY NVENIENTLY OVERLOOKS IS THE TENSY OF J’S RELATNSHIPS WH HIS RE GROUP OF DISCIPL. THE CLOSE RELATNSHIP OF J AND THE “BELOVED DISCIPLE” (TRADNALLY INTIFIED AS JOHN THE EVANGELIST) HAS LED SOME TO SUGGT THAT THEIR RELATNSHIP WAS HOMOEROTIC. THE EVINCE IS SUGGTIVE; AFTER ALL THERE IS A DISCIPLE WHO IS REPEATEDLY SCRIBED AS A PERSON WHOM J “LOV.” THERE’S A NVERSATN BETWEEN J AND PETER WHICH J ASKS PETER THREE TIM IF HE LOV HIM AND, WHEN PETER RPONDS, ASKS HIM TO RE FOR HIS FLOCK (JOHN 21:15-17). A MAN WHO SPENDS MOST OF HIS PERSONAL TIME ALONE WH 12 OTHER MEN? YOU MIGHT SAY THAT THERE’S SOMETHG CREDIBLY HETERONORMATIVE ABOUT THKG THAT J WAS TERTED MARY MAGDALENE.WHILE THE SCRIPTURAL TEXTS SOUND QUE SUGGTIVE ENGLISH, THE EROTICISM EVAPORAT OUT OF THE NVERSATN WHEN YOU READ THE ORIGAL GREEK. GREEK HAS MULTIPLE WORDS TO SCRIBE DIFFERENT KDS OF LOVE. AND, AS ISMO DUNRBERG, A PROFSOR OF NEW TTAMENT AT THE UNIVERSY OF HELSKI, HAS SHOWN, THE GREEK DO NOT SUGGT EROTIC RELATNSHIPS. IN JOHN 21 THE WORD J IS “AGAPE” A WORD THAT NNOT BROAD AFFECTN AND RE FOR OTHERS. THE WORD FOR SEXUAL LOVE OR SIRE IS “EROS” (OM WHICH WE GET THE ENGLISH WORD “EROTIC”), BUT THAT LANGUAGE IS NEVER ED TO SCRIBE J’ LOVE FOR ANY OF HIS PANNS.BUT IF JT SPENDG TIME TOGETHER IS ENOUGH TO BUILD A WHOLE THEORY ABOUT THE RELATNSHIP BETWEEN J AND MARY MAGDALENE, THEN CERTALY THE ARGUMENT J WAS SEXUAL RELATNSHIPS WH OTHER MEN HAS AT LEAST AS MUCH PLSIBILY? FOR MARLOWE, AN OUTSPOKEN CRIC OF ELIZABETHAN ENGLAND’S STRONG PROHIBNS AGAST HOMOSEXUALY ( WAS A PAL CRIME), THERE WAS SUFFICIENT EVINCE OF HOMOEROTICISM. THE SAME MONTH THAT MARLOWE DIED A POLICE RMANT AND ON-AND OFF-SPY RICHARD BA PILED A DOCUMENT OF K’S “MONSTRO OPNS.” THE POT OF THE BA NOTE, AS HISTORIAN AND THOR CHARL NICHOLL HAS WRTEN, WAS “TO CRIMATE MARLOWE.” ACRDG TO BA, MARLOWE WAS AN ATHEIST WHO DOUBTED THE EXISTENCE OF GOD, THOUGHT THE BIBLE WAS “FILTHILY [I.E. POORLY] WRTEN,” AND BELIEVED THAT THE SACRAMENT OF MUNN WOULD BE GREATLY IMPROVED IF THE BREAD AND WE WAS REPLACED WH A TOBAC PIPE. HIS MOST SHOCKG STATEMENT, HOWEVER, WAS THAT “ST. JOHN THE EVANGELIST WAS BEDFELLOW TO CHRIST AND LEANED ALWAYS HIS BOSOM, THAT HE ED HIM AS THE SNERS OF SODOM.” THE FIGURATIVE LANGUAGE OF LEANG TO THE BOSOM IS ACTUALLY ANCIENT AND IS ED THE WRGS OF THE FOURTH CENTURY CHURCH HISTORIAN EEBI WHO SCRIBED JOHN AS “THE ONE WHO LAY ON [J’] BREAST.” IN ANCIENT TEXTS THIS IS AN IMAGE FOR NON-SEXUAL TIMACY, BUT YOU N SEE WHAT MARLOWE WAS GETTG AT.MARLOWE WASN’T THE ONLY RENAISSANCE-ERA FIGURE TO ASK QUTNS ABOUT THE RELATNSHIP BETWEEN J AND JOHN. JT 40 YEARS EARLIER A YOUNG VEIAN IAR NAMED FRANC CALGNO WAS EXECUTED FOR BLASPHEMY FOR CLAIMG THAT JOHN WAS J’ TAME (A PUBCENT BOY WHO ENGAGED A SEXUAL RELATNSHIP WH AN OLR MAN). FOR CALGNO, LIKE MARLOWE, HIS BELIEFS ABOUT J’ SEXUALY ARE NNECTED TO A PARTICULAR FORM OF 16TH CENTURY ATHEISM THAT FOCED ON THE IA THAT J WAS HUMAN. HE APPARENTLY SAID THAT CHRIST “WAS MERELY HUMAN, AND THAT HE OFTEN HAD RNAL KNOWLEDGE OF ST. JOHN,” THAT HE HAD MORE NFINCE THE LAT POET OVID THAN THE BIBLE, AND “THAT HE WOULD RATHER WORSHIP A PRETTY LTLE BOY THE FLH THAN GOD.” ONE OF CALGNO’S ACQUATANC TTIFIED AT HIS TRIAL THAT CALGNO SLEPT WH A BOY “ALMOST EVERY NIGHT” BUT ’S UNCLEAR IF THIS WAS SLANR. IN 1550, AT THE AGE OF 22, CALGNO WAS TERROGATED BRCIA, AND WAS EXECUTED VENICE TWO DAYS BEFORE CHRISTMAS.MORE THAN ONE NEW TTAMENT SCHOLAR HAS SHARED MARLOWE AND CALGNO’S VIEW THAT THE GOSPEL OF JOHN IS RIPE FOR HOMOEROTIC READGS. SJEF VON TILB, FOR EXAMPLE, HAS WRTEN THAT “ACRDG TO MORN DISURSE” THE FOURTH GOSPEL IS “POSIVELY ATTUNED TO THE VELOPMENT OF POSSIBLY HOMOSEXUAL BEHAVR.” BUT THE KDS OF SCHOLARLY NFIRMATNS PALE NEXT TO COLUMBIA ANCIENT HISTORIAN MORTON SMH’S EXPLOSIVE 1960 ANNOUNCEMENT THAT HE HAD DISVERED A “SECRET GOSPEL OF MARK.” TWO YEARS EARLIER, SMH CLAIMED, HE HAD DISVERED A PREVLY UNKNOWN LETTER WRTEN BY THE LATE SEND/EARLY THIRD CENTURY THEOLOGIAN AND TEACHER CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA THE GREEK ORTHODOX MAR SABA MONASTERY, 20 KILOMETERS TO THE SOUTH-EAST OF JESALEM. SMH PHOTOGRAPHED THE LETTER AND PUBLISHED HIS STUDY OF THE TEXT 1973.WHAT SHOCKED THE WORLD WAS THE NTENTS OF THE LETTER WHICH CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA SCRIBED AS AN EXTEND VERSN OF THE GOSPEL OF MARK. IN THIS VERSN J RAIS A YOUNG MAN OM THE AD AND THGS GET TERTG OM THERE ON. QUOTG WORD FOR WORD, THE SECRET GOSPEL READS: “BUT THE YOUTH, LOOKG UPON [J], LOVED HIM AND BEGAN TO BEECH HIM THAT HE MIGHT BE WH HIM. AND GOG OUT OF THE TOMB, THEY ME TO THE HOE OF THE YOUTH, FOR HE WAS RICH. AND AFTER SIX DAYS J TOLD HIM WHAT TO DO, AND THE EVENG THE YOUTH TO HIM, WEARG A LEN CLOTH OVER HIS NAKED BODY. AND HE REMAED WH HIM THAT NIGHT, FOR J TGHT HIM THE MYSTERY OF THE KGDOM OF GOD. AND THENCE, ARISG, HE RETURNED TO THE OTHER SI OF THE JORDAN.” THERE’S NOTHG EXPLIC ABOUT A SEXUAL ENUNTER BETWEEN J AND THE YOUNG MAN, BUT THE REAR DON’T GET THE IMPRSN THAT THEY SPENT THE NIGHT JT CHATTG, EHER.AS YOU MIGHT IMAGE, THE DISVERY OF THIS SECRET GOSPEL SHOCKED THE WORLD AND DIVID AMICS. SOME BELIEVED THAT SMH HAD FED THE DOCUMENT, AND OTHERS FEND SMH’S IMPECBLE REPUTATN AS A SCHOLAR. SOME OF THE ACCATNS OF FERY TURNED PERSONAL WH SOME ACCG SMH, HIMSELF A GAY MAN, OF FG THE LETTER HIMSELF. THE MOST SUGGTIVE EVINCE WAS THAT THE ORIGAL LETTER, PHOTOGRAPHED BY SMH, HAD BEEN LOST (FOR ALMOST 60 YEARS NOW!) AND WHOUT THAT DOCUMENT THERE IS NO WAY TO TT S THENTICY G SCIENTIFIC MEANS. THE WEIGHT OF THE CURRENT EVINCE SUGGTS THAT IS A FERY, AS SCHOLAR STEPHEN CARLSON CLEARLY ARGUED HIS THE GOSPEL HOAX, BUT FOR MANY THE JURY IS STILL OUT. IF HE DIDN’T FE THE TEXT WHAT PETER JEFEY LLS “AN ASTOUNDGLY DARG ACT OF CREATIVE REBELLN” THEN THIS ENORMOLY EDE AND DISTGUISHED SCHOLAR WAS LLED A FER PURELY ON THE BASIS OF HIS PERSONAL LIFE.WHAT’S TERTG ABOUT THE ATTACKS ON THOSE WHO HAVE QUTNED THE PRUMPTIVE HETEROSEXUALY OF J IS HOW QUICKLY THEY ARE NNECTED TO THE PERSONAL LIV OF THOSE ASKG QUTNS. THE SEX LIV OF CALGNO, MARLOWE, AND SMH HAVE ENTERED THE NVERSATN WAYS THAT THE SEXUAL ORIENTATN OF THOSE WHO THK J AND MARY MAGDALENE WERE MARRIED HAS NOT. TO MY KNOWLEDGE, NO ONE HAS EVER SAID THAT DAN BROWN IS BIASED BEE HE’S HETEROSEXUALLY PARTNERED. IN NEW TTAMENT SCHOLARSHIP THERE’S AN ALMOST CLICHéD OBSERVATN THAT EVERY SCHOLAR SE THEMSELV J: IF YOU’RE A LIBERAL J IS A LIBERAL, IF YOU’RE A FEMIST J IS A FEMIST, AND SO ON. “BUT,” AS TAYLOR PETREY AN ASSOCIATE PROFSOR OF EARLY CHRISTIANY AT KALAMAZOO COLLEGE, TOLD THE DAILY BEAST, “WHEN TO J’S SEXUALY THE SCHOLARS WHO ARGUE FOR A NON-NORMATIVE J HAVE BEEN PUNISHED PECIALLY HARSHLY, WHILE THOSE WHO ARGUE THAT J LIVED A NVENTNAL LIFE OF MARRIAGE HAVE BEEN TREATED AS DISPASSNATE OBSERVERS.”THE REASON FOR THIS, PETREY OBSERVED, IS THAT “J’S SEXUALY IS MORE THAN JT A HISTORIL QUTN. IT SUPPOSEDLY THORIZ OR UNTHORIZ CERTA KDS OF RELATNSHIPS AND SEXUAL EXPRSNS.” FOR RELIG LEARS, PECIALLY THOSE NOMATNS THAT SEE HOMOSEXUALY AS A S OR “TRSILLY DISORRED,” THE ASSUMED HETEROSEXUALY OF J IS EASY TO EXPLA: RNATE GOODNS NNOT BE DISORRED. BUT ’S NOT SO CLEAR WHY OTHERS ASSUME THAT J WAS HETEROSEXUAL, PECIALLY WHEN SCRIPTURAL EVINCE SCRIB ONLY HIS CELIBACY AND NOT HIS SEXUAL ORIENTATN. IN TTH, AS PETREY SAYS, “THE AMBIGUY OF THE EVINCE OF J’S SEXUALY IS ENTICG TO SPECULATE ABOUT NOT JT BEE IS AN UNANSWERABLE MYSTERY, BUT BEE WE TEND TO THK THAT THE ANSWER UNLOCKS SOME GREAT TTH ABOUT RELIGN, SEX, AND OURSELV.” CANDIDA MOSS

Like never before our natn's history, Christ-followers now have to fend the sancty of marriage and the Scriptur that our God breathed to should seem obv that when speakg out agast homosexualy would be a reasonable and natural thought to quote the words of our Savr J Christ on the subject.

However, when locked to the heat of a bate on homosexualy, many evangelils are surprised to fd that when they sift through the Gospels, J don't have much to say about the subject. Absolutely who support same-sex marriage love to pot out to Christians that J never addrsed homosexualy His three year mistry.

Certaly, every evangelil would love to pot to a passage of Scripture red that stated, "Homosexualy is wrong, " but is not there.

'WAS J GAY?’: THE CLASS UNVERG HIDN QUEER HISTORI

" John 17:1-5 (emphasis add)J did not directly addrs the subject of homosexualy bee directly rrectg every social issue of mankd was not His purpose g to this earth. J Held a Very High View of the Old TtamentJ didn't directly addrs the subject of homosexualy bee He didn't have to.

GAY J – WHO WAS THE BELOVED DISCIPLE?

When J spoke of the Scriptur, He was speakg of the Old, what do the Old Ttament say about homosexualy?

IS J GAY: DIVG INTO THE CONTROVERSIAL SPECULATN OF J’ SEXUAL INTY

Homosexualy Wasn't a Proment Issue J' SocietyToday, as evangelil Christians, we have to battle the issue of homosexualy bee we live a society of homosexualy.

In a 2019 Ameri, a homosexual n proudly proclaim his/her homosexualy wh no fear of nsequence. Our culture has legalized gay marriage and the media glorifi people of the same-sex g was not the se J' have already seen what the Old Ttament says about homosexuals:"If a man li wh a male as wh a woman, both of them have mted an abomatn; they shall surely be put to ath; their blood is upon them.

SYNONYMS FOR NOT GAY

If their were any homosexuals, they certaly would not have been open about didn't brg up the subject of homosexualy bee wasn't a subject that need to be brought up - He didn't live a society that stggled wh the issue of homosexualy. To brg the subject up would have been que did, however, brg up and rebe the subjects of anger/murr (Matthew 5:21-26), lt/adultery (Matthew 5:27-30), divorce (Matthew 5:31-32), swearg/oaths (Matthew 5:33-37), vengeance/retaliatn (Matthew 5:38-42), love (Matthew 5:43-48), fivens (Matthew 6:14-15), rrect fastg (Matthew 6:16-18), the Sabbath (Le 6:1-6), addrsed the issu bee they were prevalent problems His society - issu that were wildly misunrstood and need immediate did not brg up the topic of homosexualy and speak on bee was not a prevalent issue of His society.

J Clearly Stated What a Biblil Marriage isIt is always a joy when someone who fends same-sex marriage brgs up the fact that J never directly addrsed the subject of homosexualy. It is a joy bee opens up the avenue to the prentatn of an equally powerful tth of J' mistry: though He did not directly addrs the subject of homosexualy, He most certaly addrsed the subject of what a Biblil marriage is and looks ancient Palte, wicked humany did what wicked humany do and perverted God's Word regards to divorce.

His mol of marriage leav no room for J clearly stat that He views Biblil marriage to be a unn between a man and a woman, go whout sayg that He views homosexualy as an unnatural abomatn to God. Beg God spired, the books hold the same thory as J' words do the New Ttament say about homosexualy? Do not be ceived: neher the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexualy, nor thiev, nor the greedy, nor dnkards, nor revilers, nor swdlers will her the kgdom of God.