Professor Tat siong Benny Liew teaches the “New Testament” to undergraduate students at Holy Cross, but in the interpretation that he teaches he claims that Jesus was a “transgender” and a “drag king.”
Holy Cross is a private, undergraduate, Roman Catholic, Jesuit liberal arts college located in Worcester, Massachusetts, United States. Founded in 1843, Holy Cross is the oldest Catholic college in New England and one of the oldest in the United States. The university is also the only Catholic college among the top 50 liberal arts schools on the U.S. News list.
In an all-out blasphemous book, Tat siong Benny Liew, the colleges Chair of New Testament Studies, “a distinguished professorship associated with the Religious Studies department,” teaches his students his sexually immoral and perverted interpretation of the Gospel.
Professor Liew is often responsible for teaching “New Testament,” the College’s primary New Testament class for undergraduate students. It’s telling that he also teaches, “Sex, Money, Power, and Sacred Texts.”
Please prepare yourself as you read on, the quotes taken from the original article are graphic and disturbing. I will leave them without comment because the blatant deception speaks for itself. The Following is from an article entitled, “New Ways in Theology at Holy Cross” from the Fenwick Review, the College of the Holy Cross’ newspaper.
“John is clear that Jesus is an Ioudaios (4:9, 22; 18:33– 35; 19:40); what John is less clear about is whether Jesus is a biological male. Like a literary striptease, this episode is suggestive, even seductive; it shows and withholds at the same time.
Professor Liew asserts that Jesus’s “excessive” and “deceptive” speech would be considered “feminine” in the culture of the time.
I am suggesting that John’s constant references to Jesus wanting water (4:7; 19:28), giving water (6:35), and leaking water (19:34) speak to Jesus’ gender indeterminacy and hence his cross-dressing and other queer desires…
He clarifies that he is not suggesting that Christ is actually a woman, but that he is neither male nor female.
Professor Liew’s contribution to this volume, a chapter entitled “Queering Closets and Perverting Desires: Cross-Examining John’s Engendering and Transgendering Word across Different Worlds,” demonstrates the centrality of sex and gender to his way of thinking about the New Testament. In the chapter, Professor Liew explains that he believes Christ could be considered a “drag king” or cross-dresser. “If one follows the trajectory of the Wisdom/Word or Sophia/Jesus (con)figuration, what we have in John’s Jesus is not only a “king of Israel” (1:49; 12:13– 15) or “king of the Ioudaioi” (18:33, 39; 19:3, 14– 15, 19– 22), but also a drag king (6:15; 18:37; 19:12),” he claims. He later argues that “[Christ] ends up appearing as a drag-kingly bride in his passion.”
Oddly, John defines Jesus’ masculinity with a body that is being opened to penetration. 24 Even more oddly, Jesus’ ability to face his “hour” is repeatedly associated with his acknowledging of and communing with his Father (12:27– 28; 14:12, 28; 16:10, 17, 28; 17:1– 25; 18:11), who is, as Jesus explicitly states, “with me” (16:32) throughout this process, which Jesus also describes as one of giving birth (16:21– 22). What I am suggesting is that, when Jesus’ body is being penetrated, his thoughts are on his Father. He is, in other words, imagining his passion experience as a (masochistic?) sexual relation with his own Father.”
This is the type of blasphemy filling Bible colleges around the nation. This is a demented and twisted version of the Gospel that perverts our savior Jesus Christ. The attack on Christianity seems to be on the uptick lately as this isn’t the only professor teaching that Jesus was “stripped.” Katie Edwards of the University of Sheffield wrote an article titled “#HimToo – why Jesus should be recognized as a victim of sexual violence” in which she asks the readers to focus on the “stripping of Jesus,” but Liew sexualizes the Gospel way further than that.
Students from the Catholic and Jesuit College of the Holy Cross are being taught Liews perversion that endorses homosexuality, eroticism, sado-masochism, incest, androgyny, and sexualizing the Word of God. Could this be why so many Catholic priests are sexually immoral? How many Catholic colleges have a curriculum like that of Professor Liew?
The Fenwick Review says, “He (Liew) continues to be held up as an example and a bold successor to the learned and discerning tradition of our Catholic and Jesuit College of the Holy Cross. Professor Tat-siong Benny Liew received bachelor’s and master’s degrees from Olivet Nazarene University and completed his doctorate at Vanderbilt University. One of his recent publications is “Queering Closets and Perverting Desires: Cross-Examining John’s Engendering and Transgendering Word across Different Worlds.”
Revelation 22:19 says, “And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.” Please pray for Liews students.
Works Cited
Elinor Reilly. “New Ways in Theology at Holy Cross - March 2018.” The Fenwick Review. . (2018): . . http://bit.ly/2pMrLjc
Revelation from the Prince of airwaves. Lack of knowledge is being falling away from the Truth…tragedy. But such are the days of Noah…they will be eating,carousing and drinking from Satan’s hand.
The Lord speaks of ‘man wearing women’s clothes’ as wrong. He speaks of ‘man laying with man’ as an ABOMINATION to God Himself. He also mentions those who ‘applaud these people for doing so’. So why do you even toy with the fact that He would first say these things then turn from God and do it?! He is a Righteous King…therefore your argument/ideas make no sense as they go against the Lord’s commands/nature.. BUT…He also says that ‘those who speak blasphemies against Him will be forgiven (forgiveness comes with repentance)! 14 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet. 15 Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment, than for that city!!!!
Matthew 12:31
“Therefore I say to you, any sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven people, but blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven.
2 Timothy 3:13
“But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.”
Wouldn’t all you christians like this not to be true. You people out there in La La Land have no idea what Jesus was all about, or how the writings of the day used metaphor to express what could not be stated outright. When a man surrounds himself with other men exclusively, who adored him, you don’t think that he didn’t do so purposefully? There is no problem with Jesus loving men as well as women, but to go catatonic over this issue show just how bored and simple minded most Christians are. Read the Lessons of Jesus and keep your minds out of his sexual proclivities. If you can’t, then it is you who are problem, not Jesus.
Sorry buddy, but I and millions of other similarly situated people have a GREAT IDEA what Jesus was and is still all about. I for one met him as a little boy of 5, having spent hundreds of hours with Him alone communing with Him and reading His Word and still striving to know Him, recognize and follow His voice better and to walk with Him as one of His people as a 61-year old adult. To assert that Jesus was a homosexual, transvestite, cross-dresser, androgynous, hermaphroditic, sexually promiscuous, etc. is without any rational underpinning. It is slanderous, blasphemous, insulting, ridiculous, ludicrous, disgusting, fallacious, erroneous and just plain stupid…The veracity and accuracy of “Professor Pervert’s” Biblical scholarship, as reflected by his absurd and utterly unfounded conclusions rates a grade of F-. After studying the Bible for 50 years (and Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees in Philosophy, a Juris Doctorate, law license and 30 years practicing law) would give him a zero! Ever heard of the psychological defense mechanism of projection??? This is another classic case of same and of begging the question, simply assuming with absolutely no probative, relevant, or cogent exegetical or historical, archeological, historiographical, empirical or scientific proof or evidence whatsoever that the historical Jesus was any of these thing, and then detecting illusory, hallucinatory, utterly biased and delusional “proof” for what the “Professor” assumed was there ab initio and then projected same onto the Bible and predictably found same in accordance solely with his own reprobate mind, seared conscience, carnal appetites and personal sexual perversions. In truth and in fact, Jesus was a Torah-observant Judahite whom was very aware of the Torah’s(and the Law of Moses”) proscription and condemnation of various sexual perversions, including homosexuality, heterosexual sexual promiscuity, adultery, bestiality and all of the others…Perhaps instead of seeing everything through the lens of projected and presumed homosexual or other sexual perversion, we can interpret His behavior in accordance with the actual Biblical record, which establishes beyond any doubt His holiness, sinlessness and sexual chastity. The main reason He hung out more with men than women was because under the law and Biblical strictures, it was men who bore the main responsibility for teaching, preaching and shepparding their spiritual flocks. He spent 3.5 years preparing, teaching and grooming them for their ministries spreading His word, faith and teachings! Believe it or not it is certainly clearly the obvious case that most men can (and in millions of cases do) hang around with other men almost exclusively for their entire lives as friends, pure and simple, without any hint of homosexual desire or behavior… Of course the vast majority of heterosexual men clearly know, understand and agree with these salutary and self-evident facts. It’s amazing to me that homosexual men cannot seem to see, recognize or understand this simple inviolable fact… Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ, the Son of the Living God was a lot of things, but one thing He was and is categorically and definitively not is any kind of practitioner of or advocate for any type of perverted, unlawful, sexual immorality. You can take that to the Cosmic Bank!!!
Is this what the world has come to? Is this same professor going to start marketing Adolf Hitler as a dancing ballerina martyr?