This week’s winner is Paul Oestreicher, for this dilettantish piece in the Guardian in which he, without foundation or exegetical reason, asserts that Jesus was gay and in love with ‘John’ whom Oestreicher equates with the ‘beloved disciple’.
… That disciple was John whom Jesus, the gospels affirm, loved in a special way. All the other disciples had fled in fear. Three women but only one man had the courage to go with Jesus to his execution. That man clearly had a unique place in the affection of Jesus. In all classic depictions of the Last Supper, a favourite subject of Christian art, John is next to Jesus, very often his head resting on Jesus’s breast. Dying, Jesus asks John to look after his mother and asks his mother to accept John as her son. John takes Mary home. John becomes unmistakably part of Jesus’s family.
Guess what, Paul, John is never equated with the ‘Beloved Disciple’ except in later tradition by imbeciles. The Gospel of John itself NEVER ONCE says that John is he. Furthermore, the fact that Jesus handed his mother over to the beloved disciple (whoever that was) for safe keeping is not at all as remarkable as you pretend.
Perhaps before you preach again you should read the text exegetically instead of importing into it readings you wish were there simply to satisfy your own ideology. It is exceedingly tiresome to see this sort of misrepresentation of the biblical text over and over again by, you would think, people who should know better.
Here’s you’re award. Congratulations.