Re: Vatican

From: gordon brown <gbrown@euclid.colorado.edu>
Date: Thu Nov 10 2005 - 12:24:02 EST

On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 RFaussette@aol.com wrote:

> No, the idea is that Jesus was complete in himself and had no desire. I
> suggest that this is why his celibacy was assumed, from both the Nag Hammadi and
> Jewish conception of the messiah. Not at any time was Jesus both man and woman
> as in a hemaphrodite, nor did I say anything about his masculinity, a secondary
> sexual characteristic.
> Nag Hammadi AND Jewish scholars. It is absolutely clear from the Nag Hammadi
> texts which explicitly state you must be male and female to enter the kingdom.
> Jesus said to her: "I am He who exists from the undivided."
> gospel of thomas 61
> It is Adam who was divided into male and female. Before that he was undivided.

Celibacy does not prove lack of desire. Jesus was tempted in all point
like as we are (Heb. 4:15 KJV).

The context of I Tim. 2:13 assumes that God created Adam male.

Commenting on another post, the passage beginning in Gen. 2:18 does not
suggest that Adam's primary need was for sexual satisfaction. Rather it
says that he was alone. The poor guy needed help in tending the Garden.
There is no hint that only a sex partner could help. Why have him look at
the animals? Of course, the solution ultimately produced more than one
potential helper.

Gordon Brown
Department of Mathematics
University of Colorado
Boulder, CO 80309-0395
Received on Thu Nov 10 12:24:59 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Nov 10 2005 - 12:24:59 EST