Original sentence: " Frederick the Great wrote to similar effect in his 1748/9 poem Palladium, which includes the lines: "This good Jesus, how do you think/He got John to sleep in his bed." Theologian Ismo Dunderberg argues that the absence of accepted Greek terms for "lover" and "beloved" discounts an erotic reading.(...) It is not true that the Gospel of Philip calls Mary Jesus' spouse./Can't you see he was his Ganymede.A Greek reader would understand.A non-canonical 3rd-century text known as the Gospel of Philip, using Coptic variants of the Greek κοινωνός (koinōnos), describes Jesus' relationship with Mary Magdalene.Author John Dickson argues that it was common in early Christianity to kiss a fellow believer by way of greeting, thus such kissing would have no romantic connotations.Bart Ehrman concludes that historical evidence tells us nothing at all about Jesus' sexuality—"certainly nothing to indicate that Jesus and Mary had a sexual relationship of any kind".Bob Goss, theologian, LGBT activist, and the author of Jesus Acted Up, A Gay and Lesbian Manifesto and Queering Christ, Beyond Jesus Acted Up, said of the interaction between Jesus and John, it "is a pederastic relationship between an older man and a younger man.Christ had his son John, and I have my George.For example, LGBT scholar Louis Crompton says Saint Aelred of Rievaulx, in his work De spiritali amicitia ("Spiritual Friendship"), referred to the relationship of Jesus and John the Apostle as a "marriage" and held it out as an example sanctioning friendships between clerics.Gene Robinson, an openly gay priest, discussed the possible homoerotic inclinations of Jesus in a sermon in 2005.In contrast, the writer and theologian Robert Gagnon has argued that the Greek word translated as "loved" is agape (used, for example, in John ; "for God so loved the world"), rather than the Greek word referring to sexual love,.In subsequent centuries the reference was used by those who implied a homosocial or homoerotic reading of the relationship.James I of England may have been relying on a pre-existing tradition when he defended his relationship with the young Duke of Buckingham: "I wish to speak in my own behalf and not to have it thought to be a defect, for Jesus Christ did the same, and therefore I cannot be blamed.Jennings Jr.Kripal writes that "the historical sources are simply too contradictory and simultaneously too silent" to make absolute declarations regarding Jesus' sexuality.On the other hand, Theodore W.Others who have given voice to this interpretation of the relationship between Jesus and John have been the philosophers Denis Diderot and Jeremy Bentham.Robinson's claim has been criticized, including by David W.That work uses cognates of koinōnos and Coptic equivalents to refer both to the literal pairing of men and women in marriage and sexual intercourse, but also metaphorically, referring to a spiritual partnership, and the reunification of the Gnostic Christian with the divine realm.The Gospel of John makes references to the disciple whom Jesus loved (John , , ), a phrase which does not occur in the Synoptic Gospels.Virtue, who editorialized by calling it an "appalling deconstructionism from the liberal lobby which will spin even the remotest thing to turn it into a hint that Biblical figures are gay".notes that "eros does not occur either in the New Testament or in the Septuagint" and that these use agape to refer to "the love of a husband for his wife or even to the illicit loves of inordinate desire", including throughout the Song of Solomon
Edited sentence: <ref name="dickson95">The Christ Files: How Historians Know What They Know About Jesus, John Dickson, p.A wave out of Christianity, (not part of the Holy Scriptures) of the 3rd-century text known as the Gospel of Philip, using Coptic variants of the Greek κοινωνός (koinōnos), describes Jesus' relationship with Mary Magdalene.All these theories are not in any way a legit proof and are contradictory since homosexuality is comdemned in the Bible and a blockage to enter the kingdom of Heaven.Another unrealistic and human-like theorie is that The Gospel of John makes references to the disciple whom Jesus loved (John , , ), a phrase which does not occur in the Synoptic Gospels.Author John Dickson argues that it was common in early Christianity to kiss a fellow believer by way of greeting, thus such kissing would have no romantic connotations and he being the Son of God loved everyone with equal love.Bart Ehrman concludes that historical evidence tells us nothing at all about Jesus' sexuality—" There is no real evidence, only speculations, certainly nothing indicates that Jesus and Mary had a sexual relationship of any kind".But it was only McCleary's opinion.In subsequent centuries the reference was used or (misused) by those who implied a homosocial or homoerotic reading of the relationship.It is not true that the Gospel of Philip calls Mary Jesus' spouse.That work uses cognates of koinōnos and Coptic equivalents to refer both to the literal pairing of men and women in marriage and sexual intercourse, but also metaphorically, referring to a spiritual partnership, such as a strong friendship and the reunification of the Gnostic Christian with the divine realm