Two British Scholars Claim That Jesus Christ Could Have Been Transgender

The relentless pro-transgenderism campaign truly knows no boundaries. On the 20th November, during an Anglican Sunday evensong sermon at the Trinity College chapel at the University of Cambridge, UK, a research student, Joshua Heath, acting as a guest preacher, presented a collection of medieval and Renaissance paintings that depicted Jesus Christ’s crucifixion. The controversy arose, however, when Heath pointed out the wound in Jesus’ side and went out of his way to claim that the wound resembled a vagina and that Jesus may have had a “trans body”. As one might expect, the congregation – which, it must be pointed out, included children – did not take kindly to this claim, especially after Dr. Michael Banner, the Dean of Trinity College, expressed support for Heath’s hypothesis by saying that the guest preacher’s theory was “legitimate”. Further outcry erupted, with one churchgoer shouting “Heresy!” at the Dean prior to leaving the service. Heath concluded the turbulent sermon with the words, “In Christ’s simultaneously masculine and feminine body in these works, if the body of Christ [is], as these works suggest, the body of all bodies, then his body is also the trans body…”

This is not the first time that Heath has been embroiled in controversy over his pro-transgender theories in his academic studies on religion. He had also observed so-called “non-erotic” images of Jesus’ penis in historical works of art – for reasons which continue to elude us all and which imply the existence of erotic images of such things (such is the hypersexualised nature of the pro-transgenderism campaign) – and claimed that such images “urge a welcoming, rather than hostile, response towards the raised voices of trans people”. Dr. Michael Banner himself addressed the wave of complaints by stating the following:

…We might think about these images of Christ’s male/female body as providing us with ways of thinking about issues around transgender questions today…For myself, I think that speculation was legitimate, [and] whether or not you or I or anyone else disagrees with the interpretation, [that] says something else about that artistic tradition, or resists its application to contemporary questions around transsexualism…

In another statement that further highlights Dr. Banner’s evident lack of self-awareness on the matter at hand, he also claimed that he “would not issue an invitation to someone who I thought would deliberately seek to shock or offend a congregation or who could be expected to speak against the Christian faith…” Judging by the content of the sermon and the subsequent closing words, it is pretty clear that Dr. Banner’s guest preacher and student seemed to do just that. It might also be useful to bring to Heath’s attention that the wound in Jesus’ side was the result of a Roman soldier – named Longinus in contemporary accounts – driving his spear into the flesh to check if Jesus had indeed died by that point of the crucifixion. It is quite bizarre how a so-called religious scholar would not have already known this, when this is one of the most significant moments of the entire account of the crucifixion of Christ. But, at the end of the day, it only just goes to show even further that ignorance within the modern pro-LGBT activist community continues to run rampant even within the academic circle.

Leave a Comment