Seeing this post on the speculation about Jesus having a wife, I was reminded of something I’ve thought briefly about before: nobody much talks about the orientation of Jesus, so 1) Does that mean everyone has just been assuming He is/was heterosexual? — and if so, 2) Why?
I find it much easier to believe He was either completely asexual or bi/pansexual. There’s no actual support I can give either of these hypotheses, of course; it’s just what I’m the most ready to believe.
Because… c’mon. Jesus, straight? Why would He be straight? What reason would there be for it?
You could argue, “Well, because most people are straight,” but if the idea is for Jesus to experience life as a human and achieve maximum relateability, then it is pansexuality that accomplishes this best: He could relate to people of all orientations except asexuality, by being able to relate to people who are attracted to men, people who are attracted to women, etc. I generally see Jesus as an asexual figure, though, (which you might attribute to egocentricism or projection on my part, if you wish) and presuming He was ever sexually attracted to women (and women exclusively) just seems… weird.
I mean, there’s no particular evidence either way, but if you’ve got to take a guess…
And given the way some Christians kick up a fuss about sexual orientation, I don’t know why Christ’s own orientation is never mentioned. It’s not even that they say, “See, look, the Messiah was a straight man, and we should follow His example” — they just don’t address what His orientation might’ve been at all. And I have to wonder if they’re just projecting heteronormativity onto Him without a thought, or if, like me, they’ve always subconsciously presumed Him to be kind of asexual.
Anyway, I wanted to share this quote from Corbin’s post:
Argument 4: We need a Jesus who is more human, not less, and marriage does that.
Criticism: Asserting that Jesus took a wife might seem to make the man more human, at least initially. I understand the impetus for the sentiment since marriage is so prevalent among us bipeds and thus more of us can relate to a married character rather than one who chooses to be single and celibate. Nevertheless, the inverse and not-so-subtle implication of this is that folks who choose to be single and celibate are less human or that Jesus would be less human if he remained single his whole life. I have a problem with that, and I think the rest of us should as well.