Sticking to the Bible to learn about Jesus is selective reading. There is more information about Jesus from his early followers than what made it into the Bible. The Bible as we know it today was compiled generations after Jesus, out of motivations that were as much political than anything else, with the aim of solidifying the primacy of one early Christian group over its competitors (e.g. Gnostics).
Some of these excluded documents suggest that Jesus did, indeed, have the usual carnal desires, perhaps even having a relationship with Mary Magdalene. Notice that the fact that Mary seems to have been the first to see the supposedly risen Christ gives her no traction in later interpretations of events.
Yes, the equation of sin with carnal desire and sometimes all manner of physical pleasure is a hurtful and insidious legacy. It has been used to justify much unhealthy behavior, misogyny being one large subset of this. Adultery is mentioned in just one of the 10 commandments, though coveting one's neighbor's wife could be seen as a precursor "sin". A better indication of the connection between sin and sex is that, when Israel sinned by disobeying God, they were compared not with a murderer, or a traitor, or a liar, but with a harlot. The repeated use of the harlot metaphor suggests that sexual promiscuity was viewed as the worst sin of all.
I make a distinction between the historical Jesus, and the mythical Jesus Christ. From the limited historical writing, we can gather that Jesus led a life of unusual spirituality and openness, reaching out to the marginalized in society to offer compassion and hope. In doing so, he made enemies in both the Jewish establishment and the Roman authority (status quo of his day), leading not unpredictably to his execution.
The idea of virgin birth, descent into the Hell, and subsequent resurrection is a story present in mythologies that predate the time of Jesus. The story seems to have been overlaid on the historical Jesus by early followers, perhaps to gain supporters, or tap into a grander if figurative interpretation of the often harsh events of his actual life. There is nothing wrong with finding inspiration or solace in this version of events. Indeed, many other cultures and belief systems have done so. What strains credibility is claiming factual validity for what is a figurative and spiritual truth.
For a historical account of much of this, see Riane Eisler's The Chalice and the Blade. For a fictionalized account, see Clysta Kinstler's The Moon Under her Feet. The second stands the Jesus story on its head so completely, but in a way that causes me to have if anything more respect and regard for Jesus, not less.