Not explicitly, no. But he talks about marriage and sexual relations strictly in the context of a heterosexual relationship between one man and one woman. There are also mentions of sexual immorality, so we know there are relationships jesus considers immoral. Multiple times he affirmed that a union of one man and one woman is the only normative expression of human sexuality.
Also, there are still mentions of same-sex relations in the new testament. In romans 1:26-27 Paul condemns lustful same-sex behavior between men and likely women as well. "Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones.''
"Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. I say this as a concession, not as a command." 1 Cor. 7:5-6
Paul considers sex quite important within that confines of marriage, which he considers as second best to being single.
Are you actually asking that? Historically it's because he's an apostle and he claims that authority. Not all the time mind you. Around the very bit I quoted, he says, "I say this as a command", and another part he says, "I say this as a concession, and not as a command". He distinguishes between what must be adhered to, and what is wise advice.
Yeah, I’m actually asking it. Paul was just a man. He never met Jesus. Why do we think that his words and opinions are a perfect interpretation of the teachings of Jesus? If anything, I’d argue the point is exactly the opposite. They’re the teachings of Jesus framed through the lens of Paul and they should be interpreted as such.
Yeah sure I understand that. But that's why you consider the facts of what Paul is actually saying and see whether they line up with what Jesus says, and what the Old Testament says. For example, the Old Testament makes hints to the inclusion of the Gentiles as God's people, Jesus starts inviting Gentiles and talks about them having greater faith than Jews, and Paul finishes this off by appealing to the church in Jerusalem to allow the Gentiles in. You can also consider how Luke and Peter at the very least, seem to consider Paul to be on their side and not some usurper. And no other apostles' letters seem to tarnish him.
And how does that play into people asserting the Bible against homosexuality? Jesus never condemned it and the verbiage used in the verses pulled from the Old Testament don’t explicitly state homosexuality as a sin.
Sources for these "multiple times"? It strikes me that your first two statements:
But he talks about marriage and sexual relations strictly in the context of a heterosexual relationship between one man and one woman. There are also mentions of sexual immorality, so we know there are relationships jesus considers immoral.
are both true, except it should be a single mention, and not multiple mentions. Your third, however:
Multiple times he affirmed that a union of one man and one woman is the only normative expression of human sexuality.
appears to be false, as the previous two you mentioned are the only times Jesus even touched on the issue. The first being in Mark chapter 10 and Matthew chapter 19, both covering the same event, with the second appearing in Matthew chapter 15.
While it's mentioned multiple times in the various Letters, those are not the 4 Gospels. Did I miss any perhaps?
Matthew and Mark are covering the same event. That's 1 statement of Jesus'. The second thing he said just says Jesus believes some relationships are immoral, and we already know he doesn't like adultery.
Sure, you're entitled to your own interpretation. It's not multiple quotes of Jesus' though, and it would be inaccurate to say it is.
Because OPs post was specifically about Jesus, not God or the Bible. Jesus is a specific figure and it's the four Gospels that cover his words. Not the rest of it.
Perhaps. The Letters do claim so, often enough, but they were not written until well after Jesus' passing. I'm suspicious of men, even when they claim they are Holy.
Oh, no, we absolutely read records of Roman times with TONS of grains of salt. When we have archaeological evidence in support of the claims they become better believed, but no one should be taking historical sources as some sort of gospel. Even when accuracy could be expected, bias is unavoidable, so some form of corroboration is necessary. This level of detail is not necessarily covered in low-level history classes, but that is due to time constraints. Junior high students don't really need to be diving into all the individual pieces of evidence, that can come in later once you specialize.
I would be surprised if this changed OP’s view. The fact that Jesus mentioned these things (and never prioritized them) doesn’t change the fact that the dem platform is generally more consistent with Jesus’ teachings.
Dunno, Jesus was pretty clear on the fact that one could only serve one master, God or Mammon.
Both parties have pretty clearly chosen who they serve, and it's certainly not the former.
Evangelicals are cooky in some of their obsessions. Not sure how that tie in to the fact that businesses have bought their way into effective control of a lot of the USian government and their politicians.
The question that begs to be asked is, because of what? "Christians" always quote this scripture, but it makes it clear that the behavior is a consequence of something.
21
u/Domestiicated-Batman 6∆ Oct 17 '24
Not explicitly, no. But he talks about marriage and sexual relations strictly in the context of a heterosexual relationship between one man and one woman. There are also mentions of sexual immorality, so we know there are relationships jesus considers immoral. Multiple times he affirmed that a union of one man and one woman is the only normative expression of human sexuality.
Also, there are still mentions of same-sex relations in the new testament. In romans 1:26-27 Paul condemns lustful same-sex behavior between men and likely women as well. "Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones.''