Please Christians, get angry at Wikipedia and boycott it, so that Elon Musk can buy it.
Also, how can something be biased if they feature a whole plethora of opinions on the subject?
The Fox News's idea of non-bias is featuring only one opinion but the "right" one.
Also, how can something be biased if they feature a whole plethora of opinions on the subject?
The Fox News's idea of non-bias is featuring only one opinion but the "right" one.
Quote:Wikipedia articles on Jesus reflect bias issues at site
Type "Jesus’ sexuality" into Wikipedia, and you’ll find citations on homoerotic interpretations of Christ, speculative theology, even debates about whether the disciple John was his true beloved — all instances where boundaries sacred to Christianity are crossed in ways that have no equivalent for other religious topics on the site.
One of the first results you’ll get is an article whose very title hints at content Christians could find deeply offensive. The article on "Sexuality and marital status of Jesus" includes extensive discussion of the notion that Jesus was gay, although it does note atop the article that churches and theologians traditionally hold Jesus was celibate and never married, and that article of faith has not "prevented alternative and fringe theories of his sexuality."
Under the heading of "Homosexuality" (which redirects from the "Gay Jesus" search term), Wikipedia explains that the reference to "the disciple whom Jesus loved" from the Gospel of John has been "used by those who implied a homosocial or homoerotic reading of the relationship." The article then discusses the work of a theologian who wrote a book titled "Queering Christ", which characterizes the relationship between Jesus and John as "a pederastic relationship between an older man and a younger man."
A separate, standalone article, "List of works depicting Jesus as LGBT," where Wikipedia catalogs works that show Christ as gay, states, "Jesus’ sexuality is a topic of significant academic discussion." The article is written almost entirely by the editor who created it, a site admin who identifies as "nonbinary" and "trans" and rejects the notion of gender identity.
Other Wikipedia articles are focused entirely on specific works of art, film and literature that depict Jesus as gay. For example, one article is dedicated to a Danish screenplay, "The Many Faces of Jesus", which portrays Christ engaging in various sexual acts or wrongdoing.
Some may argue that these texts and theologians hold these opinions, and therefore warrant inclusion in Wikipedia. But that misses the point. Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger recently published a series of essays called the "Nine Theses," in which he characterizes the site’s most dominant editors as Global Academic Secular and Progressive (GASP), the same worldview that mainstreams once-fringe academic notions, like the claim that Jesus was gay. Views that diverge from the GASP consensus are sidelined or minimized.
The reality is that Wikipedia has a serious bias problem, as at least one important study has shown. One solution may be expanding the number of viewpoints on the site, by onboarding editors with more conservative or traditionally religious views.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/wikipedia-...s-site.amp
teachings of the Bible are so muddled and self-contradictory that it was possible for Christians to happily burn heretics alive for five long centuries. It was even possible for the most venerated patriarchs of the Church, like St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, to conclude that heretics should be tortured (Augustine) or killed outright (Aquinas). Martin Luther and John Calvin advocated the wholesale murder of heretics, apostates, Jews, and witches. - Sam Harris, "Letter To A Christian Nation"
