I am back to ranting that Jesus Christ was a gay man. Since you were a priest versed in all the jargon and able to be viewed as a credible source on the subject, I want you to tell the rest of humanity that there is not one shred of evidence he was heterosexual. Am I correct? It is time to challenge these fundamentalists with their own distorted beliefs. I say if the "gay community" can and should do anything as a collective group, it is to reclaim our first and truest unapologetic gay activist.
I have given this matter a good amount of thought over the years and I have come to some conclusions.
Most of us are comforted to imagine Jesus as being like us in thought, desire and appearance. Take a look at the appealing Maybelline Jesus of post-war America for a shining example.
Wishfully thinking may lead you and me to believe that Jesus was gay. Before jumping to that sweet conclusion, pay these tolls on the road:
a) The bible contains no specific affirming reference to the sexual desire or preference of Jesus, except for one veiled reference to John being "the disciple whom Jesus loved". Of course, there has been endless exegetical squabbling about what that meant. Unless other texts are discovered, I suspect we will never know what those words really meant, but we do know that credible scholars cannot rule out the possibility that they indicate a gay relationship between the two.
b) I wish the bible told us more about the close male friends of Jesus, such as Lazarus and Joseph of Arimethea. I've always had a gaydarish feeling that they were gay, but that might also be wishful thinking. I've had the same feeling about John the Baptist who I think looked like Colin Farrell gazing into the eyes of Jesus who looked like Keanu Reeves.
c) Some disciples left their wives to be with Jesus. This is significant no matter what we conclude about the sexuality of Jesus. You've got a bunch of sexually active men who turn from their wives to a single charismatic magnet of a man. We can't automatically conclude that they were all doing the nasty after breaking bread together, but we cannot conclude that they weren't.
d) The women friends of Jesus certainly do seem to contain the classic elements of fag hags, if you'll pardon a designation that many find offensive. Neither Martha nor Mary who were the sisters of Lazarus seem to have been romantically attached to him. Mary Magdalene was part of the "family" but also doesn't come off as his lover. More of a "Will and Grace" relationship.
e) Mary the mother of Jesus seems to have been exactly the sort of Jocasta/Jewish mother to produce a gay son. I suspect she planted in his head the seeds of his messiahship, singing to him like Mama Rose in Gypsy "I had a dream, Jesus. I dream about you, Jesus, it's gonna come true, Jesus..."
f) There are apocryphal gospels that say Jesus had kids, but we can buy that story only if we assume that he and his disciples staged the crucifixion and that he blew town after the hoax was done, taking on a secret identity and working as a carpenter in the south of France with wife Mary Magdalene bitterly complaining throughout their marriage about how she had ended up with a loser (think Liz Taylor as Martha in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf). Again, wishful thinking on the part of folks who look for his descendents. Also, that further history would not preclude him having been gay all the while.
g) Jesus would not have thought in terms of gay vs straight. That kind of labeling is a more recent - and I hope temporary - phenomenon. I suspect he was more like the contemporary Italian man who has sex with his childhood male friends, gets married to a woman, has some kids, and then goes back to having sex with the guys, with maybe a mistress on the side. Those Italian men do not consider themselves gay and are puzzled about the strident American insistence that one needs to buy into and proclaim an exclusive and clear cut membership in one camp or another. Even the label bi constitutes a needless hobbling for them. Fluid and carefree might be the best adjectives to describe the sexual preference of Jesus.
h) Do we have any reason to suspect that Jesus was celibate? No. Nor do we have any reason to suspect that he was sexually active. It is extremely frustrating for all of us to have to admit that there is simply no indication one way or the other. The best we can do is say that the resounding silence on the matter seems to support one side or the other. Personally, I can't imagine that Jesus never had an erection. Never rubbed one out. Never looked at a man or a woman with some sexual appreciation. Never had a wild and crazy night with someone.
i) Is there anything in the bible to indicate that being anointed for a messianic role, or having a destiny as a king of the Jews, or being a prophet meant that a man had to have no wife and no sex? No. Quite the contrary, the Old Testament is full of kings and prophets who were married and remarried. If Jesus chose to be unmarried and to hang with the guys, it's not because the job of savior demanded it.
The biggest indication we have that Jesus might have been gay is the overall impression we get of a single man, living unconventionally with other men (fishermen, as in sailors), breaking rules, challenging the establishment and spending his nights in the company of disreputable types. It's just all very undeniably gay. But if it's proof you want, forget it.
And, ewe, if all that doesn't answer your question, perhaps this will: