The Gayspel According To Gene

I read stories like this and I just can't help chuckling:

The first openly gay Episcopal bishop said Tuesday he is being falsely accused of suggesting that Jesus might have been homosexual.

What could possibly have led anybody to believe that "Bishop" Robinson was "suggesting" that our LORD "might have been" a pole-smoker? Here's what he said at a February 13th forum on sexual issues at Christ Church in Hamilton, MA:

"Interestingly enough, in this day of traditional family values and so on," Robinson says in one of the recordings, "this man that we follow ... was single as far as we know; who traveled with a bunch of men, although there were lots of women around; who had a disciple who was known as 'the one whom Jesus loved'; who said my family is not my mother and father, my family are those who do the will of God - none of us like those harsh words. That's who Jesus is, that's who he was, at least in his earthly life."

Let's employ some common sense here: first off, the highlighted phrases in the context in which they were offered certainly can be taken as hinting that Jesus was a Hershey Highwayman. Secondly, and more to the point, how can they be interpreted any other way when offered by a man who is himself a homosexual?

One also cannot help but laugh at "Bishop" Robinson's feigned incredulity and faux wounded surprise at the furor his wayward comments generated.

"[Jesus] lived a very untraditional lifestyle," Robinson told The Associated Press. "Which is not to say that I in any way asserted that he was gay, or anything about his sexual orientation."

Robinson told the New Hampshire Union Leader he is "being flooded with angry messages" because of his forum comments. He said he was making the point that the nuclear family is a relatively new idea and that, even for his time, Jesus apparently led a nontraditional life.

"What I recall is that the question was trying to get me to say that Jesus affirmed the nuclear family as the only way a family can be," Robinson said. "I was just pointing out that you best check Scripture again before you use the life of Jesus to try to pronounce a blessing on that."

The "man" can't backpedal fast enough. And in the process of his pell-mell denials, he steps squarely on another rake by his new spin that Jesus' life "proves" that there's nothing special or worth preserving about the traditional family, which not only is an apostate stance for a purported member of the clergy to take, but boomerangs right into the sodomarriage controversy through the, er, "back door."

Perhaps a bishop who wasn't a practicer of a "lifestyle" that his own Scriptures uncategorically condemn would be able to recognize that the reason Jesus' life was "non-traditional" was because of the mission of salvation and redemption His First Coming was ordained to carry out.

That such a "man" is in the clergy at all is the true outrage - though this sort of thing, too, was foretold by the Scriptures. To be taken aback at the ensuing lavender hermeneutics constitutes naivete of Laodecian proportions.