In the Gospel of John, there are four verses (John 13:23; 19:26; 21:7; 21:20) which refer to the "disciple whom Jesus loved", generally interpreted to be John himself.
Several scholars have used these verses to argue that Jesus and John had a homosexual relationship, recently most notably by Jennings (2003). Jennings argues that these verses and the intimacy displayed between Jesus and John, especially at the Last Supper where John is described (John 13:23) as "reclining next to him" (TNIV) or "leaning on Jesus' bosom" (KJV), strongly implies that they were in a homosexual relationship.
However, this interpretation is rejected by most Biblical scholars. For example, Vasey (pp.121-124) uses the "deepest intimacy" of the friendship of Jesus and John to affirm homosexual relationships, but rejects the idea that Jesus and John themselves were in a homosexual relationship.
What are your opinions?
2007-01-21 16:28:23 · 21 answers · asked by Scarlet Crusader 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Cultures & Groups ➔ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender
I suppose it's possible that Jesus was gay. Does it matter??
2007-01-21 16:31:13 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
I really doubt that this passage in John is indicative of a homosexual relationship between Jesus and John. Many customs that seem homosexual to us in the modern West would not have seemed so to people in 1st century Israel. I don't know about this specific custom of leaning on one's bosom, but I know that Arab males today still greet each other with a kiss on the cheek. Such behavior would elicit snickers and jokes if done in the West, but it's perfectly normal to them. Even scholars are prone to cultural misinterpretations.
If there's any evidence in favor of the view that Jesus was homosexual, it would be in the fact that he never married. It was simply assumed that every man would get married, and it must have been suspicious that Jesus never did, and that he hung around with twelve males all the time. I really don't think there's enough evidence to support this view, because it's entirely possible that Jesus never got married simply because he believed in abstaining from material pleasures. But unlike others who answered this question, I don't reject the possibility that Jesus was gay out of hand or accuse its supporters of blasphemy.
2007-01-21 17:28:22 · answer #2 · answered by Leon M 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It reminds me of the gossip about all the movie stars; who's gay, who's not, like we need them to be in our club or something.
You know, it could very well be a cultural thing; I just returned from my second trip to Conakry, Guinea, West Africa, and let me tell you something.
ALL males there hold hands when they are walking places together. It's completely natural for them. It's very intimate, yes? But it's not a homosexual thing. It's a friendship thing. I was amazed and pleased to see such a lack of homophobia.
So, perhaps there was things that people did in their friendships in Jesus' time that were just as regular as this.
If I wrote a journal about what I saw in Guinea, without knowing I needed to SPECIFY that they were all just friends, and someone translated it into a widely read book some hundreds of years later AND in a completely different language, I believe the same assumptions could be made. They probably would make up some story like the whole city was gay. Look at the misinterpretations of Sodom and Gomorrah.
2007-01-21 19:23:36 · answer #3 · answered by Alias400 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Theories are the only theories for which evidence against them is actually construed as evidence in favour of them.
In the television program, 'Karen King' of Havard University quoted a line from John's Gospel as evidence that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene.
I believe that there is just no good evidence that Jesus was married, nor that he was homosexual.
2007-01-21 23:38:41 · answer #4 · answered by Kedar 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
I.. have never heard that one. Though I guess I'm not surprised..
But intimacy and love don't necesarily mean anything sexual or romantic, despite the fact that they tend to be interpreted that way.
I think if Jesus ever had a romantic relationship, of any kind, it would be in there and actually *say* so. I guess I just don't think of Jesus as having that kind of relationship at all.
2007-01-21 17:15:44 · answer #5 · answered by enaronia 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think is the most ridiculous distortion of the word of God that I have ever seen. Been gay/lesbian is a sin from which you could repent, but saying that..... Whatever is it that does not allowed a son to have sex with his mother is what does not allowed man be with another ma, or a woman be with another woman, that is not sex, that is bestiality. If homos want an excuse, better yet, their sins will condemn them, what else do they need, it looks like they need to make sure that they would go to hell.
Ephesians’ 4:17-24
So I declare and testify in the Lord that you must no longer live as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their minds; darkened in understanding, alienated from the life of God because of their ignorance, because of their hardness of heart, they have become callous and have handed themselves over to licentiousness for the practice of every kind of impurity to excess. That is not how you learned Christ, assuming that you have heard of him and were taught in him, as truth is in Jesus, that you should put away the old self of your former way of life, corrupted through deceitful desires, and be renewed in the spirit of your minds, and put on the new self, created in God's way in righteousness and holiness of truth.
2007-01-21 16:56:40 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Hi, I am of the opinion that John and Jesus were in fact brothers, which explains their close relationship. As to Jesus being homosexual it is highly doubtful.
2007-01-21 16:39:19 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
the thought is ridiculous and could be an attempt by skill of human beings who help the gay schedule to get Jesus "on their facet". evaluate this passage. John eleven:5 Now Jesus enjoyed Martha and her sister and Lazarus. somebody with an schedule could desire to distort that line to declare that Jesus grow to be truly bisexual and engaged in a foursome. yet that would contradict something of the Biblical record that asserts that Jesus lived a sinless existence so as that He could desire to serve because of the fact the acceptable sacrifice for our sins. Jesus is the only man or woman who could desire to pay somebody else's sin debt because of the fact he's the only man or woman who did no longer have certainly one of his very own to pay. yet people who desire to stay of their sins are consistently seeking to distort the Scriptures so as that they are able to have an excuse to no longer repent and turn to Jesus as their LORD and Savior.
2016-11-26 01:26:53 · answer #8 · answered by kull 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually history is now showing that the apostle that Jesus loved was Mary of Magdalene, not John. Further for Jesus to lie with John as a man does with a woman would constitute a sin under the Mosaic Law and would condemn both to death by stoning. Considering that the claims of perfection of living by Jesus and his disciples, for him to commit this sin would nullify his ministry and ultimate sacrifice. In order for a man to be considered a man at that time he had to marry. Jesus was considered to be a man. So he had to be married.
2007-01-21 16:35:28 · answer #9 · answered by mcdomnhal 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I have heard this by so called scholars and that David and Jonathan also did I don't believe either There are always people who want to make a big name for themselves by throwing mud on the names of great people
2007-01-21 16:35:16 · answer #10 · answered by devora k 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I think the man written bible can be interpreted (and has been) to fit the wishes or ideals of any group of individuals.
2007-01-21 16:31:33 · answer #11 · answered by xovenusxo 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋