printable version

Deity in Drag?
By J.R. Ensey

You saw it coming.

You knew it was inevitable when schools and libraries began featuring men wearing gaudy women’s attire while entertaining and reading to the kids. Someday soon Jesus would be presented as a transgender drag queen. Sure enough, you can now Google “Jesus as a drag queen” and the images will fill your screen. To be considered relevant, Jesus had to be cast as something other than an absolute male to fit into the current culture. Sacrilege has staked its claim as part of the new Leftist parochialism permeating America. Lower and lower we go, down into the nether world of shameless debauchery that may soon make Sodom and Gomorrah look like a Sunday school picnic.

Judging from the sources of media, politics, and educational classrooms, there seems to be no bottom to the moral abyss into which America is falling. Movements based on idealism often begin as seemingly innocent organizations merely opposing discrimination of certain elements of society. But when the bud begins to blossom, we see the real flower of purpose revealed: to fundamentally change this nation into a pluralistic entity that opposes all things Christian, that despises individuality and personal freedoms, and that is willing to fashion a god in its own image. Into the depths of atheistic heathenism we tumble from Reagan’s lofty image of “a shining city upon a hill.”

Hold on—I am not giving up on America just yet. I am still screaming, “Devil, you can’t have my children, my grandchildren, my church or my country.” It will be after the fight. I want to fight for all of those values and virtues that have made my church and my nation find their place at the top of the international heap.

A blind person can see the role that radical feminism is playing in the effort to collapse the political and economic system of America. Such may be expected from those who know not the God of the Bible. But when Pentecostal believers pitch their tents in that direction, it evokes concern. When we see the tide of these allied movements reaching our own Apostolic shores, spilling their language and concepts into the minds of our faithful families, it is time to raise our voices. As we embrace the mindset and motifs and language of the culture, we will inevitably move in its direction.

Why pander to the culture on the Left by contemplating whether God has a “feminine side”? Do women have a lock on the virtues of kindness and compassion? We all know Christian men who manifest those characteristics, but that advertises neither the attributes nor the men themselves as being in any way “feminine.” The Bible uses masculine pronouns for God. Let them stand. Rewriting certain passages as some publishers do to accommodate political correctness is not necessary. Some feminists have begun calling God “She,” even giving Him feminine names from mythology. Female “empowerment” is the underlying motivation—transforming the biblical image and role of womanhood from “help meet” into an expression of “gender equality.”

Yes, God is loving, compassionate, kind and caring, but when He manifested Himself in flesh, it was as a man with no question about His gender. He was circumcised the eighth day. Jesus had female followers and female friends. He was kind and considerate of them, and He was often for the underdog that religious bigots despised. Does that earn Him a feminine tag? Must we sympathize with cultural experts who insist on expressing deity in drag? Jesus manifested compassion and loving care, but no apostle ever viewed those attributes as His “feminine side.” It seems beyond the scope of Scripture or our own understanding to even hint at it, especially in these times of cultural upheaval regarding personal sexual identity.
The new wave of women in politics and in church leadership have pressured constituents to openly support the agenda of the LGBTQ crowd or be ostracized as hate mongers. Human “rights” been twisted into human wrongs. The popular causes of the new Left have captured many of the female clergy who are turning the Bible into some ancient document with no relevance to the 21st century. Their feminine attributes may motivate them to give support to those whom they perceive to have been mistreated or discriminated against in some way in the past, suggesting that the Bible and most conservative male pastors are simply not in line with post-modern thinking, and thank God they are not. 1 Those acquiescing to the LGBTQ lobby give this segment of our society undue leverage, forcing the culture to elevate them above the general public, even granting them protections, power and privilege denied to others.

Strangely, aging former president Jimmy Carter has jumped on the bandwagon, suggesting that Jesus would approve of gay marriage if He were still here. He further stated that “homosexuality was well known in the ancient world, well before Christ was born, and Jesus never said a word about homosexuality. In all his [sic] teaching about multiple things—he never said that gay people should be condemned.” 2

Really? Who was it that anointed Moses to write Leviticus 18, or inspired Paul to write Romans 1? Jesus didn’t come to contradict the Law but to fulfill it. Jesus was well aware of what was in the Law. John said Jesus was “in the beginning,” (John 1:2) therefore what was done and said in the beginning, He knew quite well. Also, many things Jesus addressed never made it into Scripture. If it had all been recorded, all the world’s books could not have held it all, John metaphorically opined (John 21:25). Who can say that He never mentioned these things? Homosexuality had already made it into Scripture in the Torah as a condemned practice. So, for liberals it comes down to attacking the parts of God’s Word they don’t like, denigrating the pastors and teachers who hold it all to be inspired. They must bring the Word down from its lofty position of trust. Those who believe and teach it are to be cast as “hate-mongers.” What else in the Bible do they plan to trash in favor of cultural accommodation?

And what about the biblical view of male headship and authority? It is also under attack and must be pulled down like the statue of General Robert E. Lee and the reputation of President George Washington. Eisegetically reading current culture into the Bible so that it matches what the university professors and the new white-clad representatives in Congress are pushing, is tantamount to surrender of all other scriptural admonitions.

The anti-Christian culture is pressing Americans to believe that there is no difference in men and women other than the physical plumbing, and some have begun rearranging even that. Picking up and using the language of those pounding us with “gender equality” suggests capitulation to—or at least a lean toward—the spirit of the age. The church need not fall at the feet of that dumb idol just because liberal trumpets are blaring and the call is coming from the media to comply or be cast into the fiery furnace of vitriolic condemnation. So many clergy, both men and a seeming inordinate percentage of women clergy, have opted to support gay causes, particularly gay marriage. There is no way, however, that the Bible can be honestly interpreted to legitimize homosexuality. Cultures and societies may change, the courts may change, the media may adjust its coverage to stimulate opinion change, but the Word of God never changes.

Why are Leftists promoting these socialistic issues and pushing the gender equality theme so avidly? I imagine they know that, as a group, women are more likely than men to capitulate to pressure from organizations that promote liberal causes. 3 One may easily observe it in the leadership trends of various Christian denominations. The tendency has been there from the beginning. Adam was not deceived; it was Eve. It was when Adam succumbed to her persuasive ways, and foolishly acted on her suggestion, that trouble came to the human family. Adam was ultimately responsible and knew it. God did not come calling, “Eve, where are you?”

Marriage equality may sound rather benign to the average person on the street, but its application by some sociologists and religious authors is anything but benign. It has been a centerpiece of religious liberals’ agenda for decades. Egalitarians’ favorite scripture is Galatians 3:28. However, using that verse to prove gender equality in all areas of life is not “cutting it straight” (II Timothy 2:15 Greek). The Books of Ephesians, 1 Corinthians and the Pastoral Epistles are still in the New Testament to help put that verse in perspective. In Galatians, Paul is pointing out that one’s position before Christ at the foot of the cross—where the ground is level—is equal to that of all others. However, one’s function in the home and in the body of Christ is another matter as the apostle points out in several epistles. The Christian experience has not altered the marriage principles we see in the initial chapters of Genesis. Perhaps all will be changed when we get our new bodies in the future, but there is no drastic change in male headship expressed in the New Testament following one’s conversion.

If husband and wife are totally co-equal in all ways, and marriage of a man and woman is a type of Christ and the church (Ephesians 5:22-32), then is the church co-equal with Christ? Is He subjected to us in the same ways the church is to be subject to Him? Is Paul really just nuancing the concept that man is the “source” of woman in his practical teaching to new converts in Ephesus? Is he negating a whole body of Scripture to bring out this subtle idea? Or is this just another cultural accommodation that flies directly in the face of 2000 years of scriptural teaching by exegetes from every Christian stripe? Just as the wife is to be subject to her husband “in every thing” [sic] (Ephesians 5:24), we are to be submitted to Christ in all things. These admonitions do not include the language or sense of “superiority” of one gender over another.

Women virtually abandoning the home to become political leaders and executives at every level of national and religious life is part of the force that is collapsing the core of American society. Can some of them perform well at traditional male positions and responsibilities? Can some women lift more weights than some men? Can some run faster than some men in a foot race? Can some govern as effectively as men in certain areas of civic life? Obviously yes, on all counts—although not generally. Can do is not always the equal of should do. One’s basic philosophy is not to be determined by the exception and the anomaly. Women are often manipulated into many situations by a philosophical bias introduced by powerful feminists in the cultural revolution begun in the 1960s

Emasculating the American male is the aim of many Leftist organizations. 4 There are some things for which men are not specifically fashioned—either physically or psychologically—to do. Likewise, there are some things women are not naturally built to do. God created them “male and female.” Deal with it. Girls are now being pushed into positions into sports for which they are not qualified. They are being masculinized and boys are being feminized. This is confirmed by the ads on the Internet, social media and probably television. Movies are being made for the sole purpose of promoting this toxic ideology.

Even casual observers can see monumental changes being wrought in every segment of society. Confusion is the result, including gender confusion. Many children are being encouraged by teachers and misguided parents, mostly single mothers, 5 to identify as another gender. Take note of the political confusion emanating from “The Squad” of female Representatives in Congress during the last two years. God is not the author of confusion. If one does not wish to wind up in Sodom, he does not pitch his tent in that direction. Following the clear fundamentals of authority and leadership expressed in the Scriptures is the wiser path. The world is going to do what the world does, but we do not have to embrace those same low standards and debilitating values in the Christian community. Thankfully, some conservative denominational pastors and civic leaders have begun to speak out about these issues.

Must they stand alone without our voice?


1. Examples of the Left-leaning female clergy in support of gay marriage can be seen at;; and many other sites on the Internet.
2. What a lame observation! Jesus never specifically mentioned pedophilia, snorting cocaine, or sacrificing children to Molech, so are we to consider them appropriate practices for Christians? What Paul wrote, Jesus inspired (II Timothy 3:16). Christians are not condemning people, per se, but the evil practices that will condemn them in the judgment. In love for their souls, we preach the Word, “cutting it straight” (2 Timothy 2:15) but leaving the actual judgment and penalty up to God and government.
3. The “income equality” theme particularly appeals to women, and their feminist leaders and lobbyists push it to get more women onto the revolution bandwagon. Phrases like “same job, same pay” appears to encompass a fair and equitable cause. However, it is likely more of a way to lure women into the socialist camp than a compassionate expression from the politicians and labor leaders. One wonders if women haven’t figured out that socialism, which promises “income equality,” will not be rewarding innovation, hard work, and creativity but will give everyone a similar wage as they work for the almighty Deep State. Only those in power will be financially rewarded, mostly through corruption. Individualism, self-motivation and honest labor will be historical relics. Women should take a look at the way their gender is treated in most socialist countries before voting to turn America into one.
4. Please see The Criminalization of Masculinity, excerpted from the book The Politics of Sex by Stephen Baskerville. It is found at the site of F. Roger Devlin at Many articles and books have expressed this fact, but inundation by catchy slogans, memes, peer pressure and the power of the classroom above parental authority have brainwashed a generation of millennials. See also the suggested articles on the next page (7).
5. The attack by feminists in the 1960s and 1970s on the institution of marriage was agenda driven. The promotion of fewer marriages, denigration of males and husbands, and easier divorces have produced a bumper crop of single mothers depending on the State to take care of them. Dependence on the State was one of the subtle goals of the Women’s Liberation Movement. This greases the slide into socialism.

For extra research check out these:

1. Our culture degrades women by trying to make them men By Annie Holmquist Other interesting articles by Annie Holmquist:
2. Camille Paglia: Neo feminism teaching women to live in ‘a permanently juvenile condition’
3. Boys are Growing Frustrated by Living in a Feminized Society… and That’s Showing Up in Their Friendships

back to top