I’ll make this as simple as possible. There are so many verses that address human sexuality and how we should conduct ourselves, but I’ll spare you the time.
I’m sure, as time develops, I will also make adjustments to what is my first-ever response to this issue.
*** This article is not intended to be pejorative in any sense; it is simply descriptive from the view of faith. God loves all people, regardless of gender identity. ***
Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness.”…God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. God blessed them; and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it…”
This is the first chronological text in the Bible about human sexuality, and it’s huge. The image and likeness of God are manifest in gender exclusivity (male and female) while His will is made manifest in our unity (fruitful…multiply). The “piercer” (male) and “pierced” (female), the literal meanings of these Hebrew terms, come together to form the family, the basis for any society. (see Gen. 2:18-26 for the rest of humanity’s origins)
For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and shall be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. This mystery is great; but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the church.
This passage continues the thoughts expressed in the Genesis passages above. Somehow, in a “mysterious” way, the relationship between only a man and woman within the context of covenantal marriage reflects Christ’s relationship to the Church.
“How could you be so insensitive and cruel?!”, the postmodern asks.
Is it cruelty or consistency? I am operating within a paradigm. And so is the postmodern. We all are. You could label my paradigm “Christian,” and therefore, I espouse a Christian or biblical worldview — surprised?
Does that logic catch you off guard? I’ll give you a moment for the shock to ware off.
Now then, even if I didn’t hold a Christian worldview, transgenderism disregards science and history in the name of preference. And I believe that statement is not fed by religious persuasion; it’s just fact. (see, for example, The National Center for Biotechnology Information’s peer-reviewed article, “Gender Differences In Neurological Emergencies Parts 1-2”)
Many believe that there is a tension between science and faith. We are told that science nobly holds to what is normative and dismisses that which is abnormal (i.e. the supernatural). This is why so many see science as absolute and decry any religious affiliation.
But how ironic that our world is completely flipping this logic when the topic of sexuality is introduced. The normal is being forced to step aside for the abnormal.
So the same science-oriented individuals that decry unseen abnormalities (the miraculous) now endorse the pursuit of abnormality, simply because our technology can now express such passions. Gender struggles are not and never will be simply scientific; they are moral. The authority and discipline of science only recognizes XX or XY. All of science is moral, for in every “what” there is a “why” and a “how”.
Ravi Zacharias reminds us that there are three basic types of cultures we have observed throughout history: theonomous, heteronomous, and autonomous.
1 Theonomous culture: Governed by God; subject to God’s authority. Everyone holds the same morals. All laws are self-evident and ingrained in the heart.
2 Heteronomous culture: Mainstream of the culture is dictated by the leadership at the top — e.g. Marxism, Islam (In truly Islamic countries, the Mulahs or the Shakes dictate when adherents must fast or when they can eat, or who they can be seen with and who they cannot be seen with, how to wash their hands and feet, etc.)
3 Autonomous culture: Self-Law; each person determines their own moral prerogative.
Which culture is America today? Hint, it’s number 3. Two seconds spent researching the topic of gender makes this abundantly clear.
Now, if autonomy is something individuals accept and purport, why is it that they often switch to the “heteronomous” mode when someone does not agree with them? In order to benefit from autonomy, they must also grant it to others, or else they truly are not proponents of autonomy and therefore have no ground to stand upon in expressing it.
Cultural standards are contradicting Christ’s standards. Who will Christ-followers follow? That’s rhetorical, but it is really being complicated today.
G.K. Chesterton said, “Whenever you remove any fence, always pause long enough to ask yourself, ‘Why was it put there in the first place?’”
This applies to our science, history, and ultimately our humanity.
And, even if we are born with certain proclivities that deny logic, health, or God’s image and purpose, how much more important are Jesus’ words that, “You must be born again.” (John 3:1-8)
We are far more than feelings and genitilia — how denigrating?! We are the possessors of God’s image and likeness and together we are the procreators of God’s will in space-time history.
P.S. See the following for a great article on the underlying issues: