"Was Jesus Gay? Probably"

**Testimony of truth gospel which later was used for Book of Revelations had this odd commentary:
But the Son of Man came forth from Imperishability, being alien to defilement. He came to the world by the Jordan river, and immediately the Jordan turned back. And John bore witness to the descent of Jesus. For it is he who saw the power which came down upon the Jordan river; for he knew that the dominion of carnal procreation had come to an end. The Jordan river is the power of the body, that is, the senses of pleasures. The water of the Jordan is the desire for sexual intercourse. John is the archon of the womb. (is there any clearer a picture that John was his booty)

***Missing Fragments from St. Mark's Gospel According to the US Biblical scholar, Morton Smith, of Columbia University, a fragment of manuscript he found at the Mar Saba monastery nearJerusalem in 1958, showed that the full text of St. Mark chapter 10 (between verses 34 and 35 in the standard version of the Bible) includes the following passage:
"And the youth, looking upon him (Jesus), loved him and beseeched that he might remain with him. And going out of the tomb, they went into the house of the youth, for he was rich. And after six days, Jesus instructed him and, at evening, the youth came to him wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the Kingdom of God".

To confirm this is legitimate and not forged texts: there is a letter from Clement of Alexandria to one Theodore in which this passage is quoted from what is now known as "The Secret Gospel According to Mark".

****A newly translated Gnostic gospel, entitled The Secret Book of Judas of
Kerioth, According to this seemingly
authentic early Cainite-Ophite text, translated from the Coptic by Mohammed al-Murtada and Francis Bendik, said Jesus had an active bisexual love life,
including relations
with John, Lazarus and Mary Magdelene, served an LSD-like psychedelic at
the Last Supper, faked his own crucifixion in collaboration with Judas and
Joseph of Arimathea [as in the Koranic account] and died a natural death.

But there’s more verses:
"...there followed him a certain young man, having a linen cloth cast about his naked body; and
the young men laid hold of him: And he left the linen cloth, and fled from them naked." (Mark 14:51-52). Was this the companion that Luke observed with Jesus inside the garden?

"...he that is courageous among the mighty shall flee away naked on that day..."(Amos 2:16----the Hebrew 'labab' translated 'flee away' here, actually means 'transported with love', and also 'ravished'). Now that certainly fits this episode of the young man fleeing away naked from Jesus outside the garden of Gethsemane.

Who was this young man if not perhaps the rich man whom "Then Jesus
beholding him, loved him..."(Mark 10:21).
Perhaps it was the rich man Lazarus, of whom "...he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth..."(John 11:11----The Greek 'philos' translated 'friend', also means 'dear' and 'fond of').

Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his deciples, whom Jesus loved." (John 13:23----the Greek word 'anakeimai' translated 'leaning', also means 'recline' and 'outstretched'). Several passages later
again "He then lying on Jesus' breast saith unto him, Lord, who is it?"(John 13:25----the Greek word 'epipipto' translated 'lying' also means 'embrace with affection').

A very intimate portrait begins to emerge of Jesus' close physical contact with certain male friends. They are seen "...stretched out...", and "...in close embrace...", and "...lying together...", and "...kissing...", and affection-ately (and publicly) displaying their 'phileo' and 'agapao' for each other.
 
See

You can't play "What if" without the seriously devout damning everyone!

.

So, would that imply that Jesus is a self hating schizophrenic homosexual deity? Who's father is not of this earth?

Boy, just when you thought you heard everything, a new rabbit hole pops up.
Don't forget the incestual part where he impregnates his own mother, or the canibalism in eating his flesh and drinking his blood.....wait these should go in the bizzarre religion post. Yikes!

the eating of the flesh and drinking of blood is symbolic, although why would someone 'symbolically' go through such a ritual is beyond me.

Then the incest--you know something, these concepts are more disgusting than bizarre.
 
It is not discrediting Jesus, it is just accepting of all people. Homosexuality exists in nature, and in man kind. God created this, it is natural and has been part of almost every culture in every corner of the world.
This is an old debate. Why is this becoming an issue again? Laying down with a naked youth is not new in the bible. Why the surprise?

Mark 10? I came across that reading around earlier. Seems iffy. Even the supposed text is ambiguous at best. Think a better case can be made through inference as with his not being married than scripturally.

Lie or lay in biblical vocabulary means intercourse.
 
It is not discrediting Jesus, it is just accepting of all people. Homosexuality exists in nature, and in man kind. God created this, it is natural and has been part of almost every culture in every corner of the world.
This is an old debate. Why is this becoming an issue again? Laying down with a naked youth is not new in the bible. Why the surprise?

Mark 10? I came across that reading around earlier. Seems iffy. Even the supposed text is ambiguous at best. Think a better case can be made through inference as with his not being married than scripturally.

Lie or lay in biblical vocabulary means intercourse.
uh no......there are Hebrew words which mean intercourse which are translated into the English words "lie down with".......that has nothing to do with the Greek of the NT.......
 
It is not discrediting Jesus, it is just accepting of all people. Homosexuality exists in nature, and in man kind. God created this, it is natural and has been part of almost every culture in every corner of the world.
This is an old debate. Why is this becoming an issue again? Laying down with a naked youth is not new in the bible. Why the surprise?

Mark 10? I came across that reading around earlier. Seems iffy. Even the supposed text is ambiguous at best. Think a better case can be made through inference as with his not being married than scripturally.

Lie or lay in biblical vocabulary means intercourse.
uh no......there are Hebrew words which mean intercourse which are translated into the English words "lie down with".......that has nothing to do with the Greek of the NT.......
Would you be personally offended at the jeebus appearing during a gay pride event, swishing around in ass-less chaps?
 
**Testimony of truth gospel which later was used for Book of Revelations had this odd commentary:
But the Son of Man came forth from Imperishability, being alien to defilement. He came to the world by the Jordan river, and immediately the Jordan turned back. And John bore witness to the descent of Jesus. For it is he who saw the power which came down upon the Jordan river; for he knew that the dominion of carnal procreation had come to an end. The Jordan river is the power of the body, that is, the senses of pleasures. The water of the Jordan is the desire for sexual intercourse. John is the archon of the womb. (is there any clearer a picture that John was his booty)

***Missing Fragments from St. Mark's Gospel According to the US Biblical scholar, Morton Smith, of Columbia University, a fragment of manuscript he found at the Mar Saba monastery nearJerusalem in 1958, showed that the full text of St. Mark chapter 10 (between verses 34 and 35 in the standard version of the Bible) includes the following passage:
"And the youth, looking upon him (Jesus), loved him and beseeched that he might remain with him. And going out of the tomb, they went into the house of the youth, for he was rich. And after six days, Jesus instructed him and, at evening, the youth came to him wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the Kingdom of God".

To confirm this is legitimate and not forged texts: there is a letter from Clement of Alexandria to one Theodore in which this passage is quoted from what is now known as "The Secret Gospel According to Mark".

****A newly translated Gnostic gospel, entitled The Secret Book of Judas of
Kerioth, According to this seemingly
authentic early Cainite-Ophite text, translated from the Coptic by Mohammed al-Murtada and Francis Bendik, said Jesus had an active bisexual love life,
including relations
with John, Lazarus and Mary Magdelene, served an LSD-like psychedelic at
the Last Supper, faked his own crucifixion in collaboration with Judas and
Joseph of Arimathea [as in the Koranic account] and died a natural death.

But there’s more verses:
"...there followed him a certain young man, having a linen cloth cast about his naked body; and
the young men laid hold of him: And he left the linen cloth, and fled from them naked." (Mark 14:51-52). Was this the companion that Luke observed with Jesus inside the garden?

"...he that is courageous among the mighty shall flee away naked on that day..."(Amos 2:16----the Hebrew 'labab' translated 'flee away' here, actually means 'transported with love', and also 'ravished'). Now that certainly fits this episode of the young man fleeing away naked from Jesus outside the garden of Gethsemane.

Who was this young man if not perhaps the rich man whom "Then Jesus
beholding him, loved him..."(Mark 10:21).
Perhaps it was the rich man Lazarus, of whom "...he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth..."(John 11:11----The Greek 'philos' translated 'friend', also means 'dear' and 'fond of').

Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his deciples, whom Jesus loved." (John 13:23----the Greek word 'anakeimai' translated 'leaning', also means 'recline' and 'outstretched'). Several passages later
again "He then lying on Jesus' breast saith unto him, Lord, who is it?"(John 13:25----the Greek word 'epipipto' translated 'lying' also means 'embrace with affection').

A very intimate portrait begins to emerge of Jesus' close physical contact with certain male friends. They are seen "...stretched out...", and "...in close embrace...", and "...lying together...", and "...kissing...", and affection-ately (and publicly) displaying their 'phileo' and 'agapao' for each other.

Jesus is often called rabbi. Rabbis expected to be married. Having sex (homo or hetero) was part of life. Until, and even after in some cases, marriage was common place.
Imposing victorian or even modern morality on the ancients is not logical. Bible actually has more admonishments on heterosexuals than on homosexuality by a 60 to 1 margin. Celibacy in the NT is suggested as an option years after the death of Jesus. It was rare and not a requirement during Jesus ministry or before.
Sex as part of abuse or pagan temple rituals was sinful. Even in Sodom, sex was not the sin. That was medieval explanation of the story, much like saying Mary was a prostitute.
 
That would be Theudas by the Jordan who died in 45ad, whose apostles were Martyrs, he was most likely the Rabbi teaching Abraham type love thy neighbor, Torahs ethos stuff that Christian keep attributing to Jesus like he invented the stuff. It's Torah rehashed by a Rabbi, when our Rabbis teach from the Torah or oral traditions we don't dare atttibute those as from our Rabbi like he invented the conceots nor lift him high.
That being said the 3 christs used to make the idol Jesus seem real were: Yeshu son of Mary of 100 bc who was a student of a Rabbi but fell away from Judaism when he flead towards Egypt during the Jannaeus revolt. He was the traveling maggic show scam artist like Benny Hinn, but not a Rabbi, just as you would not call Benny Hinn a priest. Then there is Yehuda the Galilean christ of the Herod era, he was a tax revolter, Theudas by the Jordan river of the AD era is most likely where James and all the Torah like teachings come from. The sorcerer sun worshiping death cultism definitely comes from Yeshu, but physical light worship might have also been a Theudas belief depending on which era John and their Hanotzrim cult stem from. It's hard to tell since Rome creating the image converged the apostles as well as they did with the idol.
 
It is not discrediting Jesus, it is just accepting of all people. Homosexuality exists in nature, and in man kind. God created this, it is natural and has been part of almost every culture in every corner of the world.
This is an old debate. Why is this becoming an issue again? Laying down with a naked youth is not new in the bible. Why the surprise?

Mark 10? I came across that reading around earlier. Seems iffy. Even the supposed text is ambiguous at best. Think a better case can be made through inference as with his not being married than scripturally.

Lie or lay in biblical vocabulary means intercourse.

Does in Lev 18:22 but because the NT authors are different than the OT authors (and seperated by about a thousand years) it could be different. May not be, but it could. So hanging your hat as it were isn't good theological practice.
 
It is not discrediting Jesus, it is just accepting of all people. Homosexuality exists in nature, and in man kind. God created this, it is natural and has been part of almost every culture in every corner of the world.
This is an old debate. Why is this becoming an issue again? Laying down with a naked youth is not new in the bible. Why the surprise?

Mark 10? I came across that reading around earlier. Seems iffy. Even the supposed text is ambiguous at best. Think a better case can be made through inference as with his not being married than scripturally.

Lie or lay in biblical vocabulary means intercourse.
uh no......there are Hebrew words which mean intercourse which are translated into the English words "lie down with".......that has nothing to do with the Greek of the NT.......
Would you be personally offended at the jeebus appearing during a gay pride event, swishing around in ass-less chaps?
does that change the Greek language somehow?.....oh wait, you didn't intend your post to be responsive did you.......
 
Wishful thinking on the part of a lot of people who want to discredit Christ.

If I hadn't cut the cable cord last week, I would be watching Killing Jesus on Palm Sunday, National Geographic channel, 8 and 11 pm. I should be able to find it elsewhere, in the near future, though. Roku streams many channels including network and cable.
 
Last edited:
It is not discrediting Jesus, it is just accepting of all people. Homosexuality exists in nature, and in man kind. God created this, it is natural and has been part of almost every culture in every corner of the world.
This is an old debate. Why is this becoming an issue again? Laying down with a naked youth is not new in the bible. Why the surprise?

Mark 10? I came across that reading around earlier. Seems iffy. Even the supposed text is ambiguous at best. Think a better case can be made through inference as with his not being married than scripturally.

Lie or lay in biblical vocabulary means intercourse.
uh no......there are Hebrew words which mean intercourse which are translated into the English words "lie down with".......that has nothing to do with the Greek of the NT.......
Would you be personally offended at the jeebus appearing during a gay pride event, swishing around in ass-less chaps?
does that change the Greek language somehow?.....oh wait, you didn't intend your post to be responsive did you.......

If David and Jonathan were a couple that made a covenant then stripped naked to lay together, why would there be any surprise that Jesus might have laid with a naked boy or Judas?
David was twice a son-in-law to Saul, with Michal and with Jonathan.
The sin is the hate people have towards people in love. The church even frowned on passion between a man and woman. Sad when the body was designed to enjoy sex and to be a bond between two people.
 
Mark 10? I came across that reading around earlier. Seems iffy. Even the supposed text is ambiguous at best. Think a better case can be made through inference as with his not being married than scripturally.

Lie or lay in biblical vocabulary means intercourse.
uh no......there are Hebrew words which mean intercourse which are translated into the English words "lie down with".......that has nothing to do with the Greek of the NT.......
Would you be personally offended at the jeebus appearing during a gay pride event, swishing around in ass-less chaps?
does that change the Greek language somehow?.....oh wait, you didn't intend your post to be responsive did you.......

If David and Jonathan were a couple that made a covenant then stripped naked to lay together, why would there be any surprise that Jesus might have laid with a naked boy or Judas?
David was twice a son-in-law to Saul, with Michal and with Jonathan.
The sin is the hate people have towards people in love. The church even frowned on passion between a man and woman. Sad when the body was designed to enjoy sex and to be a bond between two people.
lol.....if you pretend one happened I suppose you can pretend anything you want.....doesn't make you rational.....just makes you a pretender.....I suppose next you're going to say that Uriah's wife was really Uriah's husband.....and Solomon's mother was a guy......
 
Lie or lay in biblical vocabulary means intercourse.
uh no......there are Hebrew words which mean intercourse which are translated into the English words "lie down with".......that has nothing to do with the Greek of the NT.......
Would you be personally offended at the jeebus appearing during a gay pride event, swishing around in ass-less chaps?
does that change the Greek language somehow?.....oh wait, you didn't intend your post to be responsive did you.......

If David and Jonathan were a couple that made a covenant then stripped naked to lay together, why would there be any surprise that Jesus might have laid with a naked boy or Judas?
David was twice a son-in-law to Saul, with Michal and with Jonathan.
The sin is the hate people have towards people in love. The church even frowned on passion between a man and woman. Sad when the body was designed to enjoy sex and to be a bond between two people.
lol.....if you pretend one happened I suppose you can pretend anything you want.....doesn't make you rational.....just makes you a pretender.....I suppose next you're going to say that Uriah's wife was really Uriah's husband.....and Solomon's mother was a guy......

I gather you have not read Samuel or Daniel, or at least no recently.
 
Was Jesus gay Probably Paul Oestreicher Comment is free The Guardian

"That disciple was John whom Jesus, the gospels affirm, loved in a special way. All the other disciples had fled in fear. Three women but only one man had the courage to go with Jesus to his execution. That man clearly had a unique place in the affection of Jesus. In all classic depictions of the Last Supper, a favourite subject of Christian art, John is next to Jesus, very often his head resting on Jesus's breast. Dying, Jesus asks John to look after his mother and asks his mother to accept John as her son. John takes Mary home. John becomes unmistakably part of Jesus's family.

Jesus was a Hebrew rabbi. Unusually, he was unmarried. The idea that he had a romantic relationship with Mary Magdalene is the stuff of fiction, based on no biblical evidence. The evidence, on the other hand, that he may have been what we today call gay is very strong. But even gay rights campaigners in the church have been reluctant to suggest it. A significant exception was Hugh Montefiore, bishop of Birmingham and a convert from a prominent Jewish family. He dared to suggest that possibility and was met with disdain, as though he were simply out to shock.

After much reflection and with certainly no wish to shock, I felt I was left with no option but to suggest, for the first time in half a century of my Anglican priesthood, that Jesus may well have been homosexual. Had he been devoid of sexuality, he would not have been truly human. To believe that would be heretical.

Heterosexual, bisexual, homosexual: Jesus could have been any of these. There can be no certainty which. The homosexual option simply seems the most likely. The intimate relationship with the beloved disciple points in that direction. It would be so interpreted in any person today. Although there is no rabbinic tradition of celibacy, Jesus could well have chosen to refrain from sexual activity, whether he was gay or not. Many Christians will wish to assume it, but I see no theological need to. The physical expression of faithful love is godly. To suggest otherwise is to buy into a kind of puritanism that has long tainted the churches."


The story of jesus has him prancing around with twelve men in the wilderness, any rational person can see what that is about. Why do fundamentalist christians then continue to attack gay people :dunno:
 
Was Jesus gay Probably Paul Oestreicher Comment is free The Guardian

"That disciple was John whom Jesus, the gospels affirm, loved in a special way. All the other disciples had fled in fear. Three women but only one man had the courage to go with Jesus to his execution. That man clearly had a unique place in the affection of Jesus. In all classic depictions of the Last Supper, a favourite subject of Christian art, John is next to Jesus, very often his head resting on Jesus's breast. Dying, Jesus asks John to look after his mother and asks his mother to accept John as her son. John takes Mary home. John becomes unmistakably part of Jesus's family.

Jesus was a Hebrew rabbi. Unusually, he was unmarried. The idea that he had a romantic relationship with Mary Magdalene is the stuff of fiction, based on no biblical evidence. The evidence, on the other hand, that he may have been what we today call gay is very strong. But even gay rights campaigners in the church have been reluctant to suggest it. A significant exception was Hugh Montefiore, bishop of Birmingham and a convert from a prominent Jewish family. He dared to suggest that possibility and was met with disdain, as though he were simply out to shock.

After much reflection and with certainly no wish to shock, I felt I was left with no option but to suggest, for the first time in half a century of my Anglican priesthood, that Jesus may well have been homosexual. Had he been devoid of sexuality, he would not have been truly human. To believe that would be heretical.

Heterosexual, bisexual, homosexual: Jesus could have been any of these. There can be no certainty which. The homosexual option simply seems the most likely. The intimate relationship with the beloved disciple points in that direction. It would be so interpreted in any person today. Although there is no rabbinic tradition of celibacy, Jesus could well have chosen to refrain from sexual activity, whether he was gay or not. Many Christians will wish to assume it, but I see no theological need to. The physical expression of faithful love is godly. To suggest otherwise is to buy into a kind of puritanism that has long tainted the churches."
Jesus was a rabbi? Don't think so. He was much more wise and holy then just a rabbi, especially today's version of them. As for proof of Jesus homosexuality it's thin at best. Like any teacher of love or anything for that matter, there are always favorite teachers pets. dah. Jesus knew more of love then any men so if he loved his fellow man sexually, so what is it to you oh stupid one? grow up with the Jesus attacks. Go after murdering Moses cause it's his heatred of men that will be israels and the jews down fall Jesus tried to tell you jews morons that but you only wanted to sleep with him not wake up to him.
 
Was Jesus gay Probably Paul Oestreicher Comment is free The Guardian

"That disciple was John whom Jesus, the gospels affirm, loved in a special way. All the other disciples had fled in fear. Three women but only one man had the courage to go with Jesus to his execution. That man clearly had a unique place in the affection of Jesus. In all classic depictions of the Last Supper, a favourite subject of Christian art, John is next to Jesus, very often his head resting on Jesus's breast. Dying, Jesus asks John to look after his mother and asks his mother to accept John as her son. John takes Mary home. John becomes unmistakably part of Jesus's family.

Jesus was a Hebrew rabbi. Unusually, he was unmarried. The idea that he had a romantic relationship with Mary Magdalene is the stuff of fiction, based on no biblical evidence. The evidence, on the other hand, that he may have been what we today call gay is very strong. But even gay rights campaigners in the church have been reluctant to suggest it. A significant exception was Hugh Montefiore, bishop of Birmingham and a convert from a prominent Jewish family. He dared to suggest that possibility and was met with disdain, as though he were simply out to shock.

After much reflection and with certainly no wish to shock, I felt I was left with no option but to suggest, for the first time in half a century of my Anglican priesthood, that Jesus may well have been homosexual. Had he been devoid of sexuality, he would not have been truly human. To believe that would be heretical.

Heterosexual, bisexual, homosexual: Jesus could have been any of these. There can be no certainty which. The homosexual option simply seems the most likely. The intimate relationship with the beloved disciple points in that direction. It would be so interpreted in any person today. Although there is no rabbinic tradition of celibacy, Jesus could well have chosen to refrain from sexual activity, whether he was gay or not. Many Christians will wish to assume it, but I see no theological need to. The physical expression of faithful love is godly. To suggest otherwise is to buy into a kind of puritanism that has long tainted the churches."


ROFL

Oh the shit you moron bigots come up with....
 
Was Jesus gay Probably Paul Oestreicher Comment is free The Guardian

"That disciple was John whom Jesus, the gospels affirm, loved in a special way. All the other disciples had fled in fear. Three women but only one man had the courage to go with Jesus to his execution. That man clearly had a unique place in the affection of Jesus. In all classic depictions of the Last Supper, a favourite subject of Christian art, John is next to Jesus, very often his head resting on Jesus's breast. Dying, Jesus asks John to look after his mother and asks his mother to accept John as her son. John takes Mary home. John becomes unmistakably part of Jesus's family.

Jesus was a Hebrew rabbi. Unusually, he was unmarried. The idea that he had a romantic relationship with Mary Magdalene is the stuff of fiction, based on no biblical evidence. The evidence, on the other hand, that he may have been what we today call gay is very strong. But even gay rights campaigners in the church have been reluctant to suggest it. A significant exception was Hugh Montefiore, bishop of Birmingham and a convert from a prominent Jewish family. He dared to suggest that possibility and was met with disdain, as though he were simply out to shock.

After much reflection and with certainly no wish to shock, I felt I was left with no option but to suggest, for the first time in half a century of my Anglican priesthood, that Jesus may well have been homosexual. Had he been devoid of sexuality, he would not have been truly human. To believe that would be heretical.

Heterosexual, bisexual, homosexual: Jesus could have been any of these. There can be no certainty which. The homosexual option simply seems the most likely. The intimate relationship with the beloved disciple points in that direction. It would be so interpreted in any person today. Although there is no rabbinic tradition of celibacy, Jesus could well have chosen to refrain from sexual activity, whether he was gay or not. Many Christians will wish to assume it, but I see no theological need to. The physical expression of faithful love is godly. To suggest otherwise is to buy into a kind of puritanism that has long tainted the churches."
Jesus was a rabbi? Don't think so. He was much more wise and holy then just a rabbi, especially today's version of them. As for proof of Jesus homosexuality it's thin at best. Like any teacher of love or anything for that matter, there are always favorite teachers pets. dah. Jesus knew more of love then any men so if he loved his fellow man sexually, so what is it to you oh stupid one? grow up with the Jesus attacks. Go after murdering Moses cause it's his heatred of men that will be israels and the jews down fall Jesus tried to tell you jews morons that but you only wanted to sleep with him not wake up to him.

Mark, John, Matthew

Jesus Many Faces - Jesus As Rabbi From Jesus To Christ FRONTLINE PBS
 
uh no......there are Hebrew words which mean intercourse which are translated into the English words "lie down with".......that has nothing to do with the Greek of the NT.......
Would you be personally offended at the jeebus appearing during a gay pride event, swishing around in ass-less chaps?
does that change the Greek language somehow?.....oh wait, you didn't intend your post to be responsive did you.......

If David and Jonathan were a couple that made a covenant then stripped naked to lay together, why would there be any surprise that Jesus might have laid with a naked boy or Judas?
David was twice a son-in-law to Saul, with Michal and with Jonathan.
The sin is the hate people have towards people in love. The church even frowned on passion between a man and woman. Sad when the body was designed to enjoy sex and to be a bond between two people.
lol.....if you pretend one happened I suppose you can pretend anything you want.....doesn't make you rational.....just makes you a pretender.....I suppose next you're going to say that Uriah's wife was really Uriah's husband.....and Solomon's mother was a guy......

I gather you have not read Samuel or Daniel, or at least no recently.
and I gather you got your information from some pro-gay website instead of from reading scripture.......
 

Forum List

Back
Top