Pro-Gay Jesus Billboards Going Over Well in Indiana
Remember those billboards put up around Indianapolis by the Jesus Metropolitan Community Church challenging Christian assumptions about homosexuality?
In addition to this defacement, "a billboard on Kentucky Avenue carried the original message 'The early church welcomed a gay man' but had the word 'man' sprayed with black paint..." according to the Indianapolis Star.
Said the church's pastor Jeff Miner: "I think it shows the lengths some people will go to suppress ideas rather than have a dialogue."
The Star adds: "Several church leaders in the city say the ad campaign is built on false statements and distorted readings of scripture. But Rev. Andy Hunt of Body of Christ Community Church said vandalism is always a wrong response. 'It ignites passions whenever someone brings a lie against the god you worship,' Hunt said. 'But we can’t go down to their level.'"
Posted Apr. 25,2007 at 10:00 AM EST by Andy Towle in Advertising, Indiana, Jesus Christ, News, Religion | Permalink
Jesus lies???????
Posted by: W=WIMP | Apr 25, 2007 10:04:03 AM
Thank GOD I'm an Athiest!
Posted by: Rad | Apr 25, 2007 10:04:14 AM
Yeah...these passages are based on inaccurate scripture, and I think this billboard campaign is a complete waste of time and money, HOWEVER, it sure makes the religious right seem even more batshit crazy to the moderate public when vandalism like this is on display.
Thank god I live in a country where I can avoid this clusterfuck of a religion.
Posted by: scientitian | Apr 25, 2007 10:26:50 AM
Hell, the cops probably did it.
Posted by: shane | Apr 25, 2007 10:32:31 AM
Damn...some people are too wound up.
Posted by: Karim | Apr 25, 2007 10:38:52 AM
well pick up any 5 copies of the bible and you will get 5 different versions of the same story. So why not use your own interpretation on a billboard. Seems consistent to me.
Posted by: W=WIMP | Apr 25, 2007 10:41:39 AM
Cult versus cult -- film at 11!!!!
Posted by: Becks07 | Apr 25, 2007 10:41:40 AM
The only "lie lie lie" is religion itself.
Stop trying to use these people's own fairy tales against them. They'll just move the goal posts.
That's the whole point: they just supply their own answers to *everything*!
Posted by: nuflux | Apr 25, 2007 10:47:33 AM
I read the Matthew passages, and I didn't find a gay couple there--they were about a centurion and his paralyzed servant.
There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and scripture.
Posted by: travis | Apr 25, 2007 10:49:12 AM
Said the church's pastor Jeff Miner: "I think it shows the lengths some people will go to suppress ideas rather than have a dialogue."
Apparently, this *IS* considered dialogue by these fuckwits.
I 'half' agree with "scientitian" that billboards like these are a waste of money. HOWEVER, they serve as a great magnet for narrow-minded assholes to spray paint on and show themselves for what they really are: common thugs and bullies.
Posted by: Patrick W. | Apr 25, 2007 10:56:31 AM
Travis, if you look at their website, they are basing their interpretation on the original greek words used. It still might seem like a stretch but at least it takes into account problems of translation; most protestant christian churces do not, even as they see Jesus as 'the word' (John 1:1).
Posted by: GBM | Apr 25, 2007 10:57:53 AM
It seems that Scripture can be interpreted in many ways but lets just see for a moment what the Church was actualy up to for 1,400 yrs with regards to Gays & Same Sex Mariage-Unions. Take a gander of what was & see what is so you know what has changed in the party (Rel).
I have decided to lift up a book & give you a little insight into the movie of the “300” or “The Sacred Band of Thebes” (Text: Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe by John Boswell -ISBN 0-679-75164-5 (By the way a wonderful read that would curl the toes of the Chr. Church of out day for it Outs them big time-Hypocrites.
Pg 61-63 “In the same symposium Phaedrus argued that no one’s behavior is better than that of those who are in love, because they would rather behave badly in sight of father or comrade than in view of those they love. He even advanced the idea that “if we could somewise contrive to have a city or an army composed of lovers & those they loved, they could not be better citizens of their country than by thus refraining from all that is base in a mutual rivalry for honor; & such men as these, when fighting side by side, one might almost consider able to make even a little band victorious over all the world. For a man in love would surely choose to have all the rest of the host rather than the one he loves see him forsaking his station or flinging away his arms; sooner than this, he would prefer to die many deaths,: while, as for leaving the one he loves in the lurch, or not succoring him in peril, no man is such a craven that the influence of Love cannot inspire him with a courage that makes him equal to the bravest born; & without doubt what Homer calls a “fury inspired” by a god in certain heros is the effect produced on lovers by Love’s peculiar power. Moreover, only such as are in love will consent to die for others.” (Symposium-Cambridge, 1967 pp 101-103.
Perhaps inspired by this recommendation (although it merely expressed common sense in relation to the social relations of men in antiquity), about 20 yrs later (378 B.C.E.). Gorgidas did create such a company of three hundred men, composed of pairs of lovers. They were known as the “Sacred Band” of Thebes, because, as Plutarch later explained, “even Plato calls the lover a friend ‘inspired of God’” Living long after, Plutarch was in a position to know that the troop had played a crucial role in many military engagements (e.g., Tegyra,375, & Leuctra, 371), “& ….was never beaten, until the battle of Chaeronea [338 BCE] & when, after the battle, Philip [of Macedon, who won the battle] was surveying the dead, & stopped at the place where the three hundred were lying, all where they had faced the long spears of his phalanx, with their armor, & mingled one with another, he was amazed, & on learning that this was the band of lovers, burst into tears & said: “Perish miserably they who think that these men did or suffered aught disgraceful.”
“Much later (3rd century of the Christian Era), Athenaeus (13.602) would echo the idea that young men become exceptionally brave under the influence of love for each other, & added that “This was proved, at any rate, by the Sacred Band organized at Thebes.”
Posted by: ter | Apr 25, 2007 11:17:16 AM
Funny, I thought Fundamentalism was built on false statements and distorted readings of scripture.
Posted by: mark m | Apr 25, 2007 11:36:04 AM
Everyone should go to the wouldjesusdiscriminate.com site and read up on the research/beliefs that back up the statements made on the billboard.
People today seem to think that the world 2000 years ago was pretty much like the world today. They seem to ignore the cultural, historical, linguistic and social differences between ourselves and people living 2000 years ago.
Most fundamentalists believe that the Bible is a literal document. This is the basis of the campaign, to take those who have a literal interpretation of scripture and challenge them on their prejudices. If Jesus blessed a same-sex couple then how can modern Christians fail to follow his example today?
A great campaign. Wish I had thought of it.
Posted by: Jonathon | Apr 25, 2007 11:42:55 AM
Sorry every one I ment to Post a great text on Chr. Rel & same sex unions etc. but put the wrong material up. I can't find the Qt. right now but please read a Great Mind Opener
SAME-SEX UNIONS in Premodern Europe by John Boswell (A gay Brother who shook up the Vatican) Pub. Vintage Books 1995-ISBN 0-679-75164-5
(Both the Western & Eastern Churches were blessing same sex union-mariages (with full liturgies that can still be found) for 1,400 yrs. So scripture was not an impediment in those days. Only around the peried of the Reformation did scripute begin to be interpreted against gay people as is still taking place together! It is good that Some Chr. are starting to say no to this misinterpretation of the texts.
Again sorry about the other material about the gay army stuff!
Posted by: Ter | Apr 25, 2007 11:43:07 AM
Yeah, those stories about the Sacred Band of Thebes are so romantic.
Nothing like using a man's love for another man as a tool to get him to more passionately slaughter other men right up until the point that he's slaughtered himself.
I'm sure there are some die hard DADTers that would reconsider their positions if we could just find a way to replace our current military with gay male couples. Could they imagine a more win-win situation? Let the homos fight and DIE (woohoo) to protect the rights and privileges of the heteros back home; ESPECIALLY when they don't have to give those rights and benefits to those who fought and died for them when they get home.
I understand why the Band of Thebes stories are brought up but as a gay man and a masculist I don't find them to be romantic or positive at all.
I find it to be especially frustrating and offensive that the recent movie 300 added insult to injury by completely ignoring the gay angle of the 300 and instead portraying them as being rabidly homophobic and, just for good measure, making the main evil villain a 7 foot tall negative gay stereotype.
Nothing like homophobic historical revisionists.
As for the billboards, I'm afraid they'll do more harm than good but to those of you who claim that the verse is being misinterpreted with a pro-gay bias, I think you are wrong. The historical, contextual and linguistic study offered by the website is much more convincing to me than the commonly accepted interpretation of the Elizabethan English version.
I don't think we will ever convince fundamentalist by engaging them in a verse against verse debate. I applaud the good intentions of those who put up the billboards but I can't imagine that anything positive will come from it.
You can't have an informed and reasoned debate with uninformed and unreasonable people.
Posted by: Zeke | Apr 25, 2007 11:45:10 AM
It's unlikely the vandals understand ancient Greek or read alternative Bibles.
Posted by: anon | Apr 25, 2007 11:46:45 AM
Someone should put the dung-eating and piss-drinking verses from the Bible on a billboard:
2 Kings, 18:27 But Rabshakeh said unto them, Hath my master sent me to thy master, and to thee, to speak these words? Hath he not sent me to the men which sit on the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you?
Also Isaiah 1, 32:12. It's god's word (allegedly) so it must be okay, right?
Posted by: John C | Apr 25, 2007 1:44:59 PM
As a Gay Christian (and a native Hoosier) I have to say this was a stupid campaign that garnered an equally stupid response. Tit for tat-type debate will get us no where with conservative Xians. There's something to be said for sitting down over a cup of coffee with someone you don't know and/or agree with and having an actual civil discussion.
Posted by: Schlatty | Apr 25, 2007 2:50:56 PM
And what's up with a supposedly 'progressive' church perpetuating the use of Sallman-esque, wildly inaccurately Caucasian images of Jesus, et al in this campaign? Just saying.
Posted by: Schlatty | Apr 25, 2007 2:55:49 PM
As a Gay Christian (and a native Hoosier) I have to say this was a stupid campaign that garnered an equally stupid response.
Posted by: Schlatty |
It's no more stupid than the 972,7833,8485 otther campaigns that used Jesus to condemn homosexuality.
Posted by: please.. | Apr 25, 2007 3:38:34 PM
I do not necessarily find the arguments about the centurian to be compelling. However, most non-religious people believe "the Bible says it's a sin" and "You can't be Christian and gay". So it's nice for average Joe to realize that not everyone thinks the Bible says what Dr. Dobson says that it says. And not everyone thinks that God Hates Fags.
It will give non-religious folks an opportunity to question whether one can be "a good Christian" without being anti-gay and it may help topple the moral pillar that anti-gays set up for themselves.
Posted by: Timothy | Apr 25, 2007 4:18:43 PM
"And what's up with a supposedly 'progressive' church perpetuating the use of Sallman-esque, wildly inaccurately Caucasian images of Jesus, et al in this campaign? Just saying." -- SCHLATTY
That would be because this campaign is directed toward people who believe that Jesus was an Italian renaissance man who spoke Elizabethan English. :)
Posted by: Zeke | Apr 25, 2007 4:38:30 PM
Well Zeke you have just discribed the Jesus of Western Culture. Go to a Catholic Church & look at the stain glass window of Jesus. There you will find a blond haird blue eye God Man. Boy does that plays into the steriotype Evangelization to the Gay Nation!What can I say but Western Curlture zaped the Jesus of Israel a very long time ago. Such immages are oviously still being portrayed. But if you go to Africa you will find a Black Jesus so thing they are a changing. In New York in the Esp. Cath. you have a woman figure on the cross by the way. Even in our day immages set the tone for debate.
I agree Zeke with your view "You can't have an informed and reasoned debate with uninformed and unreasonable people." & I would add that blind Rel. just a blind politics prevents sight for those who will not see. But reality has it that differing views will be expressed & that is fine. What is violting is that there are those who hold views for or against who would hate & kill for their side. Rel & Pol. have this as a creed so Jesus got crucified because he loved those others who were not loved by the establishment & he didn't abide those whom others did (Temple -tipping over the Money table.") So in my view we gays are at least loved by God & the rest will just have to take a chance on fate & destiny when meeting a Blue Eyed Blond haired God Man. Who by the way loved, to death, Gays, when they meet him on judgement day. There is something delicious about this image. Now let us bow our heads & ponder these reflections. Great!
Posted by: ter | Apr 25, 2007 7:21:31 PM
Man created God in his own image, not the other way around.
Posted by: Zeke | Apr 25, 2007 10:43:27 PM