I honestly don’t know why far leftists continue to surprise me.
Every time I think they’ve jumped the shark, they prove me resoundingly wrong.
I hoped and wished I could tell you that the leftist outrage over Rudolph was the zenith of attacks on Christmas this year, but as per usual when it comes to the far left, I’m wrong yet again.
I present to you Dr. Eric Sprankle, associate professor of psychology and sexuality studies. He also holds the title for perhaps the most despicable and inane attack on Christianity to date.
Considering the drivel leftists have used to attack Christmas and Christianity, that’s actually quite the accomplishment.
Mere weeks before the celebration of the birth of Christ, Sprankle took to Twitter to post a truly abhorrent take on Christmas.
The virgin birth story is about an all-knowing, all-powerful deity impregnating a human teen. There is no definition of consent that would include that scenario. Happy Holidays.
— Eric Sprankle, PsyD (@DrSprankle) December 3, 2018
Yes, that is a man with a doctorate and a verified Twitter check mark essentially accusing God of being a rapist.
Words cannot even begin to describe how atrocious of an opinion that is. An opinion, it should be noted, that is patently false to anyone who has actually bothered to read the biblical text, as Twitter user Tom Cleary and others have done. (Note to “Professor” Sprankle: Whether or not you believe the truth claims of Christianity, it behooves anyone to take an actual look at the biblical text before trying to skew it for their own purposes.)
In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. And the virgin’s name was Mary. And he came to her and said, “Greetings, O favored one, the Lord is with you!” But she was greatly troubled at the saying, and tried to discern what sort of greeting this might be. And the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.”
And Mary said to the angel, “How will this be, since I am a virgin?”
And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy — the Son of God. And behold, your relative Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son, and this is the sixth month with her who was called barren. For nothing will be impossible with God.” And Mary said, “Behold, I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word.” And the angel departed from her. (Luke 1:26-38, ESV)
Sprankle then tried to defend his opinion, albeit to little success considering how callously he glossed over the facts. Then again, it’s not like leftists have ever let facts get in the way of an obtuse attack.
The biblical god regularly punished disobedience. The power difference (deity vs mortal) and the potential for violence for saying “no” negates her “yes.” To put someone in this position is an unethical abuse of power at best and grossly predatory at worst.
— Eric Sprankle, PsyD (@DrSprankle) December 4, 2018
Sprankle apparently has a problem with written English, as nothing in the angel’s statement was written in the imperative mood. (I’m going to go out on a limb here and assume that, since he apparently didn’t read the text in the first place, he probably hasn’t tried to read the original Greek.) In other words, there was nothing for Mary to “disobey” if she refused to offer “consent,” because nothing had been presented as a command.
In fact, the opposite is clearly implied. Had Mary not had the option to refuse, there would be no point in God’s informing her of the plan in the first place.
But, according to Sprankle, God raped the Virgin Mary, even though she agreed to what was proposed, because God was abusing his position of power.
In other words, Sprankle has trouble differentiating between God and Harvey Weinstein. The absurdity and disgusting nature of his comments is readily apparent.
Many Twitter users had little patience for his claims.
So courageous. Now do Mohammed.
— Herk Driver, Overhead Keg Press Champion (@G130J) December 5, 2018
Thank you for this perfect satire of academia in 2018. . . . . Wait. What? You’re serious? Haha haha. Even better.
— Jeff Droubay (@Dr_Oubay) December 7, 2018
I did it. I found the absolute worst take of 2018. Not much time left for anyone to top this.
— PNW Conservative (@PNWCon) December 5, 2018
It’s not an understatement to say that Sprankle represents the very worst of leftism. Godless, grossly biased and pathetically unaware, Sprankle is the perfect microcosm of leftism in the 21st century.
Worst of all, Sprankle’s a flaming hypocrite. His bio claims that he’s “promoting sexual health by reducing shame and respecting bodily autonomy.”
In that very same bio, he claims he “religiously” reads Edgar Allen Poe and “watches horror films.”
Sorry, but last I checked, given the rampant bodily mutilation present in both Poe and horror films, he’s not exactly “respecting bodily autonomy” by giving those mediums credence.
It’s one thing to be grossly blasphemous and misleading about the Bible in an attempt to attack Christianity. But to throw in a tinge of hypocrisy to complete that potpourri?
We might have just found the perfect leftist.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.