Elton John: Jesus Was a Super-Intelligent Gay Man

Eltonjohn  

Elton John gives an interview to Parade magazine that touches on love, drugs, celebrity, and Christianity.

Says Elton about Jesus: "I think Jesus was a compassionate, super-intelligent gay man who understood human problems. On the cross, he forgave the people who crucified him. Jesus wanted us to be loving and forgiving. I don't know what makes people so cruel. Try being a gay woman in the Middle East — you're as good as dead."

Comments

  1. says

    Lots of people have speculated that Jesus might have been gay. Never getting married and hanging out with men. But who really cares? Does it matter either way? You’d think it shouldn’t.

  2. Chitown Kev says

    @Patrick NYC

    Well, Superman was a thinly veiled allusion to Jesus Christ.

    Thing is, people and societies and cultures see themselves in the god(s) that they serve and the prophets that they esteem.

  3. stevetalbert says

    Jesus is the repackaged Horus myth with a little Jainism and Mithra mixed in from the 100s, The closest thing to being a real person is Apollonius of Tyana who was born in about 2 AD and was the founder of Essene Chistrianity that mixed in Buddist teachings into the Old Testament and then went around Palestine teaching it.

  4. stevetalbert says

    Oh, and also astology, since the sun of the heavens begins at the winter solistis, hangs dorment for about 3 days, and then ascends again into the heavens. The sun then crosses the equinox in Spring. The Catholic Church chose Dec as the birth of ‘Jesus’ and Easter as the ‘Crucification/Crossing, Rebirth, and Accession of Jesus’ to overlay European Pagan festivals to get people to join the Church. Eventually people forgot why they joined in the first place and by then you had to believe or be tortured or put to death… and so it goes.

  5. Chitown Kev says

    @Stevetalbert

    And, of course, the famous Madonna/Child sculptures and paintings are a blatant ripoff of Isis/Horus (which was the primary competition to Chritianity in the Roman Empire outside of Palestine.)

    That was a fantastic piece of marketing.

    Oh, and there were a lot of faith healers around the Roman Empire at that time, so in terms of those miracles, Christ wasn’t alone. In fact, Apollonius was another faith healer.

    Oh, you can throw a little Dionysus in that mix too. (Hence, that may be where the gay part comes in as Dionysus was androgynous

    @Tank- Maybe nothing. Maybe everything. Just pointing out that the mythical background behind who we’ve come to know as Jesus Christ was extremely rich and diverse.

  6. stevetalbert says

    It doesn’t, but it has something to do with the post. Not all of the stuff on Towleroad has something to do with homosexuality. That is why people come here rather than, say The Advocate’s website.

  7. TANK says

    “Maybe nothing. Maybe everything.”

    Yah, Ima go with nothing. Sure whatevs, I don’t even think jesus was an historical figure–didn’t exist. Yeah, life of brian theory, or a composite of several different people and fictional characters. But even if he were an historical person, so?…fuckin’ yawn.

    You know, if you’ve read “the teachings of jesus”, it’s hard to disagree with a lot of them. They’re not really the teachings of jesus, though…as everything he had said is a composite of morality that preceded him. In fact, they’re a very primitive version of actual philosophers who came before him; like Aristotle, for example. Christianity has introduced a very watered down, sickly version of virtue ethics. The so-called golden rule has been around for thousands of years, and has no religious origin, but a practical one!

  8. Chitown Kev says

    @Tank

    Of course, this was all the Mediterranian basin; of course JC was going to be influenced by all of that, no mistaking. No doubt, much of it came from the Judaism of his time. Some of it also appears to me to be an offshoot of Stoicism and Cynicism.

    And as a system of ….whateva, it’s really hard to beat Buddhism in amny respects (and Jesus Christ may have been influenced by some of that) since that was (and is) more or less a form of psychology.

    And, uh, let’s not get started on Aristotle, please…Aristotle’s enitre system of morality was entirely too empirical to appeal to the Jews of that time.

  9. TANK says

    “And as a system of ….whateva, it’s really hard to beat Buddhism in amny respects (and Jesus Christ may have been influenced by some of that) since that was (and is) more or less a form of psychology.”

    As a religion? I dunno, it does make a lot of supernatural claims (even sans god). If you want to understand how to answer the Socratic question of what the good life amounts to…I don’t think any religion is gonna be able to provide an answer to that one. Ethics is much more important than religion, and doesn’t require it; but encompasses it. And provides better answers to what one should do; more practical and well reasoned…because rationality and logic matter in ethics–not so much for religion. I’m not talking about phil. of relg or theology, which do sometimes employ sophisticated reasoning…but in the defense of superstition, not in the defense of ethics…not ethical arguments, really. Thomas Aquinas, the obese catholic italian philosopher, synthesized aristotelean thought with christianity…was arguably the greatest christian thinker (augustine and others come to mind, too) and yet, one is left with that sallow, sickly version of virtue ethics that christianity offers up as a good way to live your life…by threat rather than reason.

    “And, uh, let’s not get started on Aristotle, please…Aristotle’s enitre system of morality was entirely too empirical to appeal to the Jews of that time.”

    “Hear me, oh hear me! All pay heed! The lord jehovah has given unto you these fifteen…oy…Ten! Ten Commandments for all to obey!”

    I’d defend the superiority of Aristotelian virtue ethics against the teachings of any religion as a superior ethical theory and better way to live. And not all eastern thought is religion (e.g., taoism). I’m not a virtue ethicist, but given the fact that it relies on no unsubstantiated supernaturalist claims and elevates a life worth living above such baseless, frivolous concerns as make believe…it seems more capable of being relevant to human life.

  10. Chitown Kev says

    Uh, Tank, I was not juxtaposing notions of Aristotelian virtue ethics with Christian ethics (or even ancient Jewish notions of virtue ethics, although THAT might be interesting). That’s why I explicitly threw Stoicism and Cynicism in there (which were two schools of thought that were opposed to Aristotlean virtue ethics).

    (I am a big fan of the book of Job, though…not for all the double dealing between God and satan but how Job responds to it.)

    And, of course, I am very well acquainted with Thomas Aquinas, although he owes a great deal to Islamic philophers like Averroes for making sure that Aristotle’s teachings got to Europe and into the universities.

    I was speaking of Mediterrainian philosophies that would have had an influence on very very very early Christianity.

    And even with Taoism (and if I were to become religious, that would be it) much of that comes out of Chinese folk religion. Some of it was made into a philosophy.

  11. TANK says

    Stoicism is not opposed to Aristotelianism. Stoic ethics is a type of virtue ethics whose proponnents borrowed heavily from the works of Aristotle. So much so, in fact, that there wouldn’t be a stoic ethic without arostotle.

    A great deal of taoism was made into a secular theory, btw.

  12. Chitown Kev says

    @Tank

    Uh, actually, the Stoics are more properly the “saner” descendents of the Cynics (which is personally my favorite Greek philosophy).

    The Stoic connection with Aristotle comes moreso from Aristotle’s biology than his ethics (though you are correct to say that they are not all that diametrically opposed to one another).

  13. TANK says

    I didn’t say that the stoics aren’t descendants of the cynics, but that their moral theory is informed by the works of Aristotle. In fact, the few parts of disagreement–and aristotle wins–are just a reaction to it. You can’t properly assess their theory of ethics without an understanding of Aristotle’s.

  14. Chitown Kev says

    @Tank

    “A great deal of taoism was made into a secular theory, btw.”

    Uh, didn’t I SAY that? Although Confucianism
    (which I can’t stand) really is a purer form of an ethical philosophy.

    Anty-way, what were we talking about? Oh, the possible influences on Jesus (who has been interpreted by some philosophers and theologians as a “Jewish Cynic”…which sounds about right, actually.)

  15. TANK says

    Really? A jewish cynic…I don’t get that at all. Just because he was an outlier? I don’t that cynic views might have influenced his teachings (if he even existed) or the descriptions of him in the gospels, but a jewish cynic? C’mon, he wasn’t that interesting minus the miracles.

  16. Chitown Kev says

    @Tank

    The street preaching? The ill respect in which he held authority figures? His rebuke of the wealthy in society? Throwing the moneychangers out of the temple? Opting for a life of poverty?

    Diogenes (my favorite philosopher, who embarassed the hell out of Plato) would have done all of those things. In fact he did all of those things

    Now of course, I can’t imagine Christ masturbating in the market place or counterfeiting coins or anything like that.

  17. TANK says

    “C’mon, he wasn’t that interesting minus the miracles.”

    More to the point, he wasn’t that consistent with cynic principles in his behavior, which causes me to doubt that he was a cynic– as he would have made a pretty bad one (esp. in light of his observance of ritual and religious justification). He was a jew, though. But it’s not entirely sensible to distinguish judaism (at the time) from hellenistic thought, so there is a good case to be made that cynicism and stoicism–and thereby platonism and aristotelianism–influenced his teachings, which were practically all derivative. Equality amongst men, as some christian scholars like to insist, was an invention of christianity…which went on to perpetuate the class system in europe and the rest of the world to this very day… That’s not true, either. You can find egalitarianism in cynicism.

  18. TANK says

    “The street preaching?”

    The street preaching was also performed by many religious figures. Socrates, who influenced the cynic movement more than any one else, arguably, held court in the streets. That alone is no indication that jesus was a cynic. And there’s scant evidence that explicitly cynic philosophy was available for jesus to read and identify as a cynic…not to say he wasn’t indirectly influenced…but I don’t hink he was a willful, practicing cynic.

    “The ill respect in which he held authority figures?”

    He dined with many of them…instead of rebuking them.

    “His rebuke of the wealthy in society?”

    But only at the temple in jerusalem. He didn’t protest any other wealthy member of society.

    “Throwing the moneychangers out of the temple?”

    He didn’t stage protests at any of the other temples where moneychanging occurred and in which he had the opportunity to do so. He didn’t lead revolts against oppressive government taxation. Instead, it makes more sense to think he was revolting against the faith the temple represented than the lack of financial equality.

    “Opting for a life of poverty?”

    Not an overt act of giving up a life of wealth, or active denial of the pleasures of wealth. He never begged on the streets to sustain himself as the cynics did. His asceticism could be classed tame compared to say, diogenes.

  19. Chitown Kev says

    @Tank

    OK, we’re getting close now with your last statement especially with the egalitarinism that you can find in cynicism.

    And yes, Judaism (which you would know better than I) in that point in is not that distinct from the hellinistic thought of that period (which Paul was to use to a ruthless advantage).

    [Oh, everybody…this is kinda sorta the reason why Tank and I do get along with each other, we can get kinda deep into this…]

    Yes, Jesus was a Jew but (allowing for his existence) he was unlike any rabbi ever seen before.

  20. Chitown Kev says

    @Tank

    Waitaminute sweetie, he rebuked the wealthy man who put down the woman who entered his house to annoit Jesus’ feet with oil.

    (Yeah, I have to look up the name and verse)

    Simon the Leper.

    Now as far as Jesus ascetism as compared to Diogenes, I think that would agree with you although there was an active denial of the pleasures on Jesus part-he did go out into the desert for 40 days and nights, after all… (and that too, was not altogether an uncommon thing in the Mediterranian, that goes back as far as Pythagoras)

    I am not saying that Jesus was a Cynic, only that one can read him as a Cynic-type.

  21. TANK says

    Yeah, I suppose that’s fair that one can read him as a cynic-type. I doubt the 40 days without food story, though. It was an exaggerration, of course, and might have actually occurred as a fasting, purification ritual, which was common. I doubt it had much to do with the cynic principle of denying the conventions and material comforts of life (all outside influences) to live a life of contemplation of nature and the virtues (which has an echo in plato…who stated that the closer we are to death, the less we are to be influenced by our emotions, which cloud reason and cause us to have false beliefs and act against reason compounding suffering, e.g., sexual lust…I imagine he was talking about a pain free death). I doubt it had much to do with attaining happiness at all.

    I don’t see jesus as being this crusader against wealth accumulation that others do. I mean, there’s definitely what he preached…but he had a home and could afford to feed large groups of people on expensive delicacies…and those groups weren’t composed of poor people, often…but wealthy men–including herod’s tax collectors. I don’t get a consistent message.

  22. Felix says

    Even five year olds know that Jesus was a docetistic spirit so He couldn’t be gay anyways.

    ..and Tank and Chitown Kev, its about time for you to start making out.

  23. dion says

    David Nimmons would say Jesus’ empathy and pacifism certainly fit the profile of a gay man. Although Dan Brown made the general public familiar with the theory that he married Mary Magdalen, there were other heretical stories floating around about sexual relationships with Judas, John, and Lazarus as well. Morton Smith’s theory is VERY provocative. And there is no scriptural basis for saying that he was NOT attracted to men…

  24. David B. 2 says

    but mostly importantly guys — in Elton’s own inimitable words “and Jesus he wants to go to Venus and leave Levon far behind … take a balloon and go sailing while Levon, Levon surely dies…”

  25. hephaestion says

    I was discussing the possdible gayness of Jesus with a friend in a cafe in Dupont Circle when an Indian tourist sitting nearby interrupted me. She said that “in much of the world everyone assumes that Jesus was gay. It is only here in America that you never hear this idea.”

  26. says

    Elton John saying Jesus was gay is inflammatory, dumb, and more to the point—historically inappropriate. Assuming the Asexual Jesus hypothesis, he didn’t care—assuming the Mary Magdalene hypothesis, he was straight, and assuming Mary Magdalene looked anything like Monica Belluci, that actress that played the part in The Passion- he also had game.

Leave A Reply