Merry Christmas: A Special Bonus Gift of Christmas Funnies Just for You
Simply ‘Wonderful’: Classic Holiday Film Reminds Generations It’s Okay to Cry at Christmas
A Lump of Coal in Her Stocking! Crypto Influencer Gets BURIED for Not...
Political Pivot? Many Question ‘Young Turk’ Cenk Uygur’s Sudden Willingness to Talk with...
'The View' Panelist Says Problem for Dems Is That Gov't Won't Regulate Social...
Man Vs. History: Bear Grylls Gets DROPPED by Community Notes for Awful Take...
Scott Jennings: Dem Party Must Flush the Fringe and Embrace Common Sense to...
HO HO OH LOL-NO! Leftist Mocked for Whining About the Midwest DAD We...
Bah Humbug! Dems Put Fetterman On The Naughty List
NewsGuard Rates the Headlines Covering Woman Set on Fire by Illegal
CNBC: Biden Administration Withdraws Student Loan Forgiveness Plans
University Employee Who Told Trump Supporters to Kill Themselves Sent Packing
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand Still Pushing to Publish the Equal Rights Amendment With 'One...
Global Engagement Center for Countering 'Disinformation' Closing Down

'Mary Was An Earthworm:' J.K. Rowling Absolutely Roasts India Willoughby's Take on Christian Doctrine

Joel Ryan

Christmas is upon us, and you know what that means in the legacy media: Suddenly new articles related to Jesus, Mary and so on. Some of them are basically respectful, and some are basically ‘fan-baiting:’ Artificially creating controversy in order to gain attention. We saw it with articles that pointed out that non-Christians suggested Mary wasn’t a virgin after all (of course they thought that), and just tonight the bizarre claim that Jesus came from a dysfunctional family. The goal is to garner hate-clicks from Christians, angry at this latest slap to our faith and we suggest you don’t let them get what they want.

Advertisement

And then there is India Willoughby, born Jonathon, a transgender journalist who just can’t cope with the holidays. In other words, we don’t think he is fan baiting, we think he really can’t deal with the idea of many Christians celebrating one of their holiest days (the holiest day, depending on whom you ask). So, in a bit of pique, he shared this lovely thought:

The cut off text reads:

Which means she would have been banned from athletics by @sebcoe and called a man by my sis. Happy Christmas everybody 

Oy vey, we don’t know where to begin with this. He is showing a picture of an article, but not bothering to link to it—which we consider to be a pretty scummy practice since it robs the writer of clicks. That article can be found here:

Advertisement

This is not a fan-baiting article, so much as a report on a controversy at Cambridge. It is a reporting on a dumb argument, rather than making one. From the article:

Jesus could have been transgender, according to a University of Cambridge dean.

Dr Michael Banner, the dean of Trinity College, said such a view was ‘legitimate’ after a row over a sermon by a Cambridge research student that claimed Christ had a ‘trans body’, The Telegraph can disclose.

The ‘truly shocking’ address at last Sunday’s evensong at Trinity College chapel, saw Joshua Heath, a junior research fellow, display Renaissance and Medieval paintings of the crucifixion that depicted a side wound that the guest preacher likened to a vagina.

Worshippers told The Telegraph they were left ‘in tears’ and felt excluded from the church, with one shouting ‘heresy’ at the Dean upon leaving.

The sermon displayed three paintings, including Jean Malouel’s 1400 work Pietà, with Mr Heath pointing out Jesus’s side wound and blood flowing to the groin. The order of service also showed French artist Henri Maccheroni’s 1990 work ‘Christs’.

That’s right, he decided Jesus might have been trans… based on various paintings and not photographs. (Not that photographs existed about two thousand years ago, but you get our sarcastic point.) The mind boggles at the stupidity, but it is legitimate for the Telegraph to have covered the controversy.

As for Mr. Willoughby, unlike the fan baiting article suggesting Mary was either willingly or unwillingly bedded by a roman soldier, he seems to accept that it was a virgin birth, but thinks that means that Jesus was a genetic copy of his mother. No, obviously, Jesus is the son of God, and therefore God added at least enough genetic material to make him distinct from Mary—if only adding a Y chromosome to make him a son, and not a daughter. We never thought that God actually mated with Mary or anything crude like that (we have heard weird people make that claim, believe it or not). But being an omnipotent being, He could simply will that a child be conceived with the appropriate genetic material.

Advertisement

Of course, you could imagine that Jesus was born a woman and transitioned into a man if you ignore the actual text of the Bible. Heck, maybe Jesus was actually a Native American lesbian, because when you ignore history and text, anything is possible. /sarcasm

And the Bible didn't say God cloned Eve, only that she was made from his rib.

But our dry, logical takedown has nothing on J.K. Rowling’s mockery:

See what we mean? We can’t top that.

Yes, of course, they had sex change surgery back then, or something. Look, logic is not one of the strong suits for transactivists, because transgender ideology can’t stand up to logic. Its their kryptonite.

Seriously, maybe whoever depicted Rudolph just didn’t know about all that, or they didn’t care. Hasn’t anyone ever heard of poetic license?

Advertisement

The cut off text reads:

Do they talk about the tooth fairy and boogiemen constantly? To them it should be equal ground.

We find that there are two types of atheists. The first are perfectly nice people who are courteous to people of other faiths, but don’t share that faith. Then there are the militants, who are constantly, obnoxiously attacking other people’s faiths and, if you interrogate them long enough, you realize that they actually do believe in God: They’re just mad at Him.

The cut off text reads:

Also, India is a parasite.

Heh.

Respectfully, we would have to disagree with ‘Ellyll’ on the issue of the Virgin birth: That has never been our understanding. If it really meant anything so ordinary as a first child, the Bible wouldn’t have made such a big deal of it—indeed we don’t recall them using that term to describe any other first children in the Bible. The point of noting it is to make it clear to everyone who knew of the facts that this was a miracle—she conceived without losing her virginity—strengthening the claim that Jesus was the Son of God and the Messiah.

Advertisement

We don’t think Rowling was concerned.

And we always enjoy a translated response, because often they are the funniest:

The alleged translation from Dutch:

The only question that comes to mind is: do people like Willoughby actually believe this nonsense themselves?

Advertisement

As the late William Hoge III used to say ‘embrace the power of ‘and.’’

That … is a fair point.

Finally:

Heh.

In any case, if this author doesn’t get the chance to write again before Christmas is over… Merry Christmas. Whether you celebrate the birth of Christ or not, we hope your day is good.

RELATED: Joe Biden’s Potential Incompetence Threatens Chaos in Our System (And We Should Embrace the Chaos)

Vox Tries to Explain Why We Praise Daniel Penny and Condemn Luigi Mangione … and Faceplants

Ana Navarro-Cárdenas Gets Wrecked on Bad Pardon History (And Let’s Talk about Hunter’s Pardon)

Eleventh Circuit Judge Absolutely Embarrasses CNN on Misinformation and We Are Here for It

WATCH: CBS News’ 60 Minutes DECEPTIVELY EDITS Kamala's Word Salad Response on Israel

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement