When the left wants to disparage those that believe in Jesus they usually hone in on his appearance bringing up such things as his skin tone and eye color.

But the Daily Beast brought this leftist idiocy to a whole new level.


The shroud of Turin is one of the most famous relics of the Roman Catholic Church and has been a target for the liberal left to disparage Christianity, and Christians for decades.

But in a story published by the Daily Beast titled ‘How do we know if Jesus had male genitalia?’

They attempt to use the Shroud of Turin to question Jesus’ gender.

I must say this Daily Beast article, while making their pathetic attempt to incite controversy, is a perfect example of how liberal logic works.

The Daily Beast’s “GENDERING JESUS” article opens with:

When people talk about the appearance of Jesus, the controversy is almost always about his skin tone and eye color. A whole tradition of Western artwork and moviemaking erroneously depicts the Galilean rabbi with light-colored eyes and skin, when archaeological evidence and, shucks, common sense maintain that he had much darker features. But what about the rest of his body? In particular, what about those body parts that mark him as male, which are so central to our understanding of who Jesus was?

Newly published scientific investigations into the Turin Shroud have identified the outline of the scrotum and right hand thumb of the man outlined on the cloth.

Let’s just immediately destroy their whole imbecilic story. 

Before we break down the Daily Beast’s latest effort to show their nothing more than mental midgets with access to a computer, let’s end their charade immediately.

The article implies that based on a peer-reviewed paper, questions can be raised whether Jesus was, in fact, a man.

Not surprisingly, once you do a little research, you’ll find that the Daily Beast had written their story based more on “Feelings” than “Fact”.

The peer-reviewed journal paper the author used didn’t claim that Jesus was a woman, but claimed:

“…the Shroud of Turin was originally wrapped around a man who had suffered multiple traumas [to his scrotum]”

Oh, by the way, this paper that the Daily Beast uses as their evidence, has since been retracted after the quality of its research was called into question.

This most likely answers why the links that are sprinkled among the Daily Beast article no longer go anywhere.

So the whole Daily Beast article is based on their coming to an insane conclusion based on a research paper that has since been retracted due to its ineptness. OK, moving on.


Nevertheless, let’s unpack this little bit of Daily Beast’s insanity.

After the left has spent decades spewing their idiocy about why The Shroud of Turin simply can not be the burial cloth of Jesus, due to some scientist’s carbon dating of a small fragment of the cloth back in the 1980s.

The Daily Beast, who defends the Koran at every opportunity, is now saying that The Shroud of Turin shows evidence that Jesus may not have been a man?

Amazingly, right after author Candida Moss, who seems to write stories that only disparage Christianity, wrote the line:

Newly published scientific investigations into the Turin Shroud have identified the outline of the scrotum…”

Moss follows it up with:

But a recent book by Giulio Fanti and Pierandrea Malfi aside, the majority of scholars believe that the Shroud is almost certainly a medieval forgery.

Umm, just sayin’, if the research paper stated “identified the outline of the scrotum” wouldn’t that end any liberal fantasy about Jesus being a woman? 

Moving on…

Despite many Christians believing otherwise, Candida Moss, without doubt, believes that the Shroud of Turin is a fraudulent religious relic.

Nevertheless, Moss still uses the Shroud of Turin, despite her belief in its lack of authenticity, as evidence in order to question Jesus’ gender?

WOW! Talk about having it both ways.

Candida Moss claims the Shroud of Turin shows evidence that Jesus wasn’t a man, despite showing an outline of his scrotum. But then cites evidence that the Shroud of Turin is a forgery. All in the same paragraph.

That, in a nutshell, is using liberal logic to its finest!


  1. I needed to write you that bit of remark to finally thank you
    as before over the great basics you’ve shown at
    this time. This is certainly seriously generous of
    you to supply publicly what numerous people would have made available for an e
    book in making some profit for their own end, particularly considering the fact that you could
    possibly have tried it in the event you wanted.
    Those secrets likewise served to be the good way to be certain that most people have
    the same eagerness really like my own to see great deal more with
    reference to this problem. I think there are numerous more fun opportunities ahead for individuals who see your site.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here