gay jesus?

[milomorris]

A few thoughts...

- Blanchard's work is fantasy. There's nothing wrong with that, but I think that Cherry's article places a little too much gravity on the work. To say that this fantastical "what if" about Jesus is theologically important is a bit of an overstatement.

- Cherry is right when she points out that "Every group envisions Christ in their own image from their own context." But it is important to understand that those tailored images are not the object of worship. In other words, while we might a see a black Jesus in a few places and churches around the US, very few African-Americans actually think Jesus was black. Images of the standard Plantagenet Jesus are not a barrier to the full exercise of Christian faith to black people, and I don't see how the idea of a gay Jesus opens any doors of faith for sexual minorities.

- I would be interested to read the source material used by those that posit that Jesus had a male lover.

- I don't see the suffering of Christ being in any way analogous to the plight of sexual minorities--or ethnic minorities for that matter. Sexual minorities have been persecuted because of innate behavioral traits. Ethnic minorities have been persecuted because of innate physiological traits. Conversely, Jesus was persecuted because of his ideas and his message.

[brokeplex]

A few thoughts...

- Blanchard's work is fantasy. There's nothing wrong with that, but I think that Cherry's article places a little too much gravity on the work. To say that this fantastical "what if" about Jesus is theologically important is a bit of an overstatement.

- Cherry is right when she points out that "Every group envisions Christ in their own image from their own context." But it is important to understand that those tailored images are not the object of worship. In other words, while we might a see a black Jesus in a few places and churches around the US, very few African-Americans actually think Jesus was black. Images of the standard Plantagenet Jesus are not a barrier to the full exercise of Christian faith to black people, and I don't see how the idea of a gay Jesus opens any doors of faith for sexual minorities.

- I would be interested to read the source material used by those that posit that Jesus had a male lover.

- I don't see the suffering of Christ being in any way analogous to the plight of sexual minorities--or ethnic minorities for that matter. Sexual minorities have been persecuted because of innate behavioral traits. Ethnic minorities have been persecuted because of innate physiological traits. Conversely, Jesus was persecuted because of his ideas and his message.

a very interesting post Milo!

yes, the historical Jesus is undoubtedly rather different than how he has been portrayed over the past 2000 years by various Christian cultures. an interesting popular book about the historical Jesus, although not an academic history text per se, is O'Reilly's "Killing Jesus" - his other books in the "killing" series are also interesting.

but what the works of Blanchard concern are really not the historical Jesus but the perception of Jesus by countless millions thru the millennia. As Christianity evolved as a "personal religion", the adoration of Jesus, and for that matter Mary his mother, and other saints became less and less historically accurate and more a reflection of the personal needs and wishes of the believer. after all to "take a leap of faith" (salvation) is to encounter an emotional personal experience. so naturally various cultures have rendered Jesus in the forms that they are most comfortable with. the fact that gay Christians are seeing Jesus in a "gay" formulation is not a surprise and is entirely within the experience of Christians for 2000 years. you mentioned the fact that Blacks have often perceived Jesus with African features, Europeans have painted him often with Northern European features - as a cases in point.

and as a theological point: the belief in the death and resurrection of Jesus implies strongly the Jesus paid the sacrifice for our separation from the Creator, and offered us a gateway back to God. that in itself would imply that Jesus identified (s) with all of us, all races, ethnicities, genders, and sexual orientations.

whether Jesus historically had or didn't have a sexual relationship with John "his beloved" isn't the point (see the Gospel of John). the fact that he could have, and it is no where excluded, is what is important.

[Jeff Wrangler]

- I would be interested to read the source material used by those that posit that Jesus had a male lover.

I recall reading--but I don't recall where reading  --that the supposition has been that it was John, because John is referred to as "the disciple Jesus loved." Also, apparently the Last Supper was actually a Greco-Roman--style banquet, with everybody reclining on couches of some sort, and John apparently shared a couch with Jesus. As he was dying Jesus also gave his mother into John's care--or so the Gospel says.

Personally, I think it's wishful thinking.

[milomorris]

and as a theological point: the belief in the death and resurrection of Jesus implies strongly the Jesus paid the sacrifice for our separation from the Creator, and offered us a gateway back to God. that in itself would imply that Jesus identified (s) with all of us, all races, ethnicities, genders, and sexual orientations.

Agreed. So what he looked like, or whom he might have had sex with doesn't matter because he came for the salvation of all of humanity.

[brokeplex]

Agreed. So what he looked like, or whom he might have had sex with doesn't matter because he came for the salvation of all of humanity.

within the context of "personal salvation" it matters to the individual.

within the context of a historical Jesus or Christianity as a whole, it doesn't matter at all.

[milomorris]

I recall reading--but I don't recall where reading  --that the supposition has been that it was John, because John is referred to as "the disciple Jesus loved." Also, apparently the Last Supper was actually a Greco-Roman--style banquet, with everybody reclining on couches of some sort, and John apparently shared a couch with Jesus. As he was dying Jesus also gave his mother into John's care--or so the Gospel says.

Personally, I think it's wishful thinking.

hehehe...I'm sitting here laughing at the idea of Jews lounging around during Seder.

Giving one's mother (or wife, or any other family member) into the care of another man is something that was done among men who shared a personal brotherhood bond. These types of bonds were quite common in ancient times, and I have read where Peter and Andrew, and Phillip and Bartholomew also shared something like it. It is easy to draw homoerotic conclusions about men who form these bonds, and many have done so with the bond between St. Sergius and St. Bacchus which was formalized via the ritual of Adelphopoiesis. And I'm not saying that homosexual men did not engage in these bonding rituals, I only point out that most of the men who did so were not romantically involved with each other.

[milomorris]

within the context of "personal salvation" it matters to the individual.

I suppose it can be important to an individual. But I have to wonder: does a woman (for example) need to consider Christ in a female form in order to achieve personal salvation?

[Jeff Wrangler]

hehehe...I'm sitting here laughing at the idea of Jews lounging around during Seder.

That is kind of funny, isn't it? And perhaps an indication that the Last Supper was NOT a Passover Seder.

[southendmd]

"Every group envisions Christ in their own image from their own context."

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XR5vupwpRJc[/youtube]

[milomorris]

That is kind of funny, isn't it? And perhaps an indication that the Last Supper was NOT a Passover Seder.

Well, according to Mark 14, it was a Passover meal.