(A recent conversation between my wife Catherine ["Cat"] and me.)
Me: So I’m thinking about doing a blog post exploring the idea of Jesus on the one hand being fully man, but on the other hand not having a sex drive.
Me: Yeah. Because how can Jesus be fully man, see, yet not have a sex drive? And if he does has a sex drive, then how can he be sinless? Matthew 5:27 says that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery in his heart. But no man in the world (who isn’t gay) doesn’t look at at least some women lustfully.
Me: What? Don’t you think it’s interesting? That according to Christians Jesus has to be sinless—yet, by the Bible’s definition, can’t be, since being fully man means that he necessarily and regularly commits adultery? If Jesus was fully man, then he must have lusted. And if he lusted, then he couldn’t have been sinless. Don’t you think that’s at least vaguely interesting?
Cat: Not really.
Me: Of course it is! It’s core to the whole Christian conception of Jesus being fully man but without sin.
Cat: Look. You don’t lust after your sister, do you?
Me: Ew. No.
Cat: And you don’t lust after your mom, do you?
Cat: Because they’re not potential mates for you. That’s why you don’t have those feelings for them.
Cat: Well, that’s the same way Jesus saw all women. Just like no sane father can lust after his own daughter, Jesus couldn’t lust after any woman. Because to him every woman was his daughter. Literally.
Me: So there’s no psychological place for him to experience lust.
Cat: None. Plus, he’s God. All-knowing. All powerful. Immortal. The alpha and omega of all creation. Not exactly a suitable match for any woman. Talk about an unequal relationship.
John: So no mate for Jesus.
Cat: No mate for Jesus.
John: And he remains sinless.
Me: You know, I probably would have reached that same conclusion. I’m sure I would have thought of that myself.
Cat: I wonder if I should start my own blog?
Also read The myth of the Christian eunuch.