According to Dr. Susannah Cornwall, Manchester University\u2019s Lincoln Theological Institute.<\/p>\n
It takes the perspective of a 21st<\/sup> century theologian to come up with the cockamamie idea of studying Jesus\u2019 genitals rather than his divinity, resurrection or atoning sacrifice and then to compound the tommyrot by suggesting that, because it is impossible to prove otherwise, he may have had a duplicate set of them.<\/p>\n I bet Michael Ingham wishes that he had thought of it first.<\/p>\n From here<\/a>:<\/p>\n Dr Susannah Cornwall claimed that it is \u201csimply a best guess\u201d that Jesus was male.<\/p>\n Her comments, which are bound to provoke fury in some quarters, were published in response to the ongoing debate about women bishops in the Church of England.<\/p>\n Dr Cornwall, of Manchester University\u2019s Lincoln Theological Institute, describes herself on her blog as specialising in: \u201cResearch and writing in feminist theology, sexuality, gender, embodiment, ethics and other fun things like that.\u201d<\/p>\n In her paper \u201cIntersex & Ontology, A Response to The Church, Women Bishops and Provision\u201d, she argues that it is not possible to know \u201cwith any certainty\u201d that Jesus did not suffer from an intersex condition, with both male and female organs.<\/p>\n In an extraordinary paper she says: \u201cIt is not possible to assert with any degree of certainty that Jesus was male as we now define maleness.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n h\/t: mcj<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" According to Dr. Susannah Cornwall, Manchester University\u2019s Lincoln Theological Institute. It takes the perspective of a 21st century theologian to come up with the cockamamie idea of studying Jesus\u2019 genitals rather than his divinity, resurrection or atoning sacrifice and then … Continue reading