Critics Say Wikipedia Shows Bias in Coverage of Jesus and Religion — Calls for Broader Editorial Diversity

Overview

In recent months, Wikipedia has come under intensified scrutiny for perceived bias in its coverage — not only in politics and geopolitics but also in matters of faith and morality. Critics point to edits that recast public figures such as Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk and sections of articles describing President Donald Trump as an "authoritarian." They also highlight religious topics where some readers see an editorial slant.

Controversy over articles about Jesus

A simple search for "Jesus' sexuality" on Wikipedia returns pages that discuss homoerotic readings of Christ, speculative theological claims, and debates over whether the "disciple whom Jesus loved" in the Gospel of John implies more than a spiritual relationship. These treatments, many Christians argue, cross long-held doctrinal boundaries and have no clear equivalents for other religious figures on the site.

One prominent result, the article titled "Sexuality and marital status of Jesus," contains extended discussion of alternative theories about Jesus' sexuality while also noting at the top that mainstream churches and theologians traditionally regard Jesus as celibate and unmarried. Searches for the term "Gay Jesus" redirect to a section labeled "Homosexuality," which summarizes arguments that the phrase "the disciple whom Jesus loved" has been interpreted by some as evidence of a homosocial or homoerotic relationship. That page cites works such as a book called "Queering Christ," described by its author as offering a nontraditional reading of the relationship between Jesus and John.

There is also a separate article, "List of works depicting Jesus as LGBT," which catalogs artistic and literary portrayals of Christ as gay and states that Jesus' sexuality is a topic of academic discussion. That list appears to have been created and largely contributed to by a single editor who, in their user profile, identifies as nonbinary and trans.

Scope and context

Several standalone entries focus on films, plays and novels that depict Jesus in sexualized or transgressive ways; one example cited in media accounts is a Danish screenplay titled "The Many Faces of Jesus," which reportedly portrays Jesus engaging in various sexual acts.

Wikipedia's "Homoeroticism" section notes that mainstream Christian traditions generally condemn homoerotic behavior, while also reporting that some theologians and historians have suggested non-heteronormative readings of certain New Testament passages. That section carries a notice indicating it was flagged for containing fringe theories; that tag has been present for more than three years.

Claims of systemic editorial bias

Supporters of including these materials argue the views are documented in scholarship and therefore merit coverage in a public encyclopedia. Opponents say the broader pattern reflects an editorial consensus that privileges a secular-progressive academic outlook. Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger has described the site's dominant editorial culture as "Global Academic Secular and Progressive" (GASP) in his essays, arguing that perspectives outside that consensus are often marginalized.

Academic studies and media reports have also documented instances of bias on Wikipedia, prompting calls for reforms. Proposed remedies include recruiting editors with conservative or traditional religious perspectives to broaden the range of viewpoints, improving oversight on controversial topics, and ensuring stronger adherence to neutrality policies.

Responses and next steps

Some observers believe Wikipedia should actively recruit a wider diversity of contributors and editorial projects to better reflect differing worldviews, while others caution that editorial standards and reliable sourcing must remain central to any changes. With reported declines in site traffic, commentators suggest restoring public trust will require demonstrable commitments to neutrality and balanced coverage.

Note: Fox News Digital contacted the Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit that operates Wikipedia, for comment.