Post a response:
|
No, I wasn't making an overly serious argument. Couldn't resist raising it, though, because I find it a fascinating article -- as much for the way it's done -- that level of intellectual endeavor is something I admire from the gallery. But I think Mader is careful not to over-egg his case. Would you dispute the possibility the centurion may be a boy-lover? Or at least the likelihood that the average observer at the time would have perceived the possibility? If so, what are the implications? To me it speaks more to the general climate at the time. Hence your blessing doesn't apply THEN, even if it's a good fit NOW. Your contention Jesus was angrier than we believe today only adds to the importance of his being unfazed by a potential boy-lover coming to him. I don't really understand what sort of Christian Mader was supposed to be. And if he wanted to fuse boy-love with his faith, why not pursue a Platonic form of love? No, Jesus certainly wasn't a "hedonistic hippy or tolerant libertine", and a 70s boy-love movement that eschewed such things would have been a very worthwhile endeavor (such a thing is also available to pagans). A "Centurion" movement, devoted to good practical works centered on boys--health, fitness, education--and leaving sex as quietly in the background as the boy/servant in the story. |