The Boy-Loving Jesus Controversy

[Tru2form]

Okay, so does one of the old guard want to explain what on earth is the controversy with Ron saying Jesus was a pedophile?

Is there a controversy that those materials are the real OT8 materials?

I keep reading all these unintelligible reports:

"Ron said Jesus was a pedophile in OT8."

"Those docs are forged."

"No they're not."

I wasn't around for this debate, and I've never seen the OT8 materials with my own eyes, so anyone care to confirm/explain?

[Grundy]

Two facts do in fact back up that theory slightly;

1. Contraceptives = none. So the only way to ensure bed happiness without children being the end result was homosexuality. It was therefore regarded as a form of recreational sex rather than reproductive sex. The funny thing is that contraceptives is part of the reason why hatred towards homosexuality has sprung up, now that non-homosexual relationships can have recreational sex. And also the extremely pious nature that sprung up around the middle of the last milennia.

2. Having lots of children was still important. Therefore if someone was old enough to breed, they were old enough to have sex with. It's a simple concept and widespread in the animal kingdom, and humans are animals. Although now we have evolved past the point of needing many of the species, and rather needing quality before quantity and therefore only those capable of understanding what's going on, the consequences and reasonings behind, should "breed".

HOWEVER;

In light of the biblical texts it seems that those who wrote them did have a problem with frivolousness when it comes to sex as indicated in the story of sodom and gomorrah. An interesting story and passage in the bible since many seem to think it they were struck down due to homosexuality, however the passage does not specifically mention homosexuality, rather it is a part of the extreme sexual frivolousness that existed within the two cities.

Having sex with your own gender was normal in large parts of the roman empire at that time, but mister Hubbard claiming Jesus had sex with young boys seems a bit odd.. (If there were any records of that I think someone would've found that) but so are a lot of things he claimed in my opinion, I sort of want to know too.

Remember that the texts chosen for the new testament of the bible are not all that were written, they were simply the most useful, convenient, or least revealing. There is a huge period of Jesus life missing from the texts. There is supossedly some credit to the (conspiracy)theory that they were removed to protect his family. And the gnostic texts are widely known by now, they glorify Judas, the man who betrayed Jesus and gave him to the romans.

Who knows what else is in those texts. We will probarbly never know what were in them either, since there was no need to preserve them, most of them simply have not.

Don't think I'm trying to defend Hubbards theory here. I would rather take advice from my own asshole before believing a word of whatever he cooked up. Just trying to point out that it is possible to make these claims without it being heresay. And it's also an interesting subject of debate and study.