This blog article is adapted from the Joint Youth Fellowship 2019 and from the Reformed Baptist Youth Camp 2019 Workshop on Gender Identity both prepared, conducted, and delivered by the blog author. Photo Thumbnail of this article courtesy of Adrian Torres.
In the midst of worldwide pandemic which sets our life into the “new normal”, gatherings of all kinds and of whatever nature faces some form of restriction. The style of such gatherings may be affected but the substance perhaps is left unaffected. The current situation could present itself as a tool to all the more intensify and serve as fuel for the cause.
One particular gathering in the month of June that our contemporary world celebrates globally is called LGBT Pride Month. It started in the United States of America as a way to commemorate the Stonewall Riots, which occurred at the end of June 1969. As a result, many pride events are held during this month to recognize the impact LGBT people have had in the world (1). Pride, as they claim, is opposed to shame and thus should be the outlook of most LGBT rights movements.
We can see here that the LGBT Pride Month can be considered as a relatively new event. While the Stonewall Riots had just turned half-a-century, we know for certain that years go by as fast as ideologies are propagated and ideas are being advanced. In like manner, the LGBT agenda developed through various stages from the past century until now. Even though the rapid “progression” of humanity is in their lens, one certain thing this movement gives to us is an even more deeper dive of humanity into sin.
Definition of Terms
Three basic terms that are tossed into the discussion of LGBT agenda. These are:
Gender Expression – refers to the way a person communicates gender identity to others through behavior, clothing, hairstyles, communication or speech pattern, or body characteristics.
Gender Identity – refers to the personal sense of identity as characterized, among others, by manner of clothing, inclinations, and behavior in relation to masculine or feminine conventions. A person may have male or female identity with physiological characteristics of the opposite sex, in which case this person is considered transgender.
Sexual Orientation – refers to the direction of emotional, sexual attraction, or conduct towards people of the same sex (homosexual orientation), or towards people of both sexes (bisexual orientation), or towards people of the opposite sex (heterosexual orientation), or to the absence of sexual attraction (asexual orientation).
All three of these terms are an increasing trend and a major worldview challenge to professing Christians.
How Did We Get Here?
As mentioned above, the current “form” of the LGBT agenda underwent several phases of evolution and expansions of its concepts and scope. Just over the span of seventy years or so, the sexual revolution can be comparable to the industrial revolution in terms of its rapid “progress”. Let us look directly to the implications of its evolution.
Feminism and Sexual Revolution (1960s)
The first wave of feminism is focused on women’s legal rights, especially the right to vote, the second-wave feminism of the women’s rights movement touched on every area of women’s experience—including politics, work, the family, and sexuality (3). In the wake of the fresh ideology of feminism, change not of only social in nature but more so of sexual in context. Many men have lost any sense and responsibility in the family. They’ve turned out to be passive and self-focused. Many women feel great tension between their career and home. There was an increase in “competition” between sexes. The point that I want to make is that these troubling developments represent phase one of the transformation of men and women. Gender Roles were given new form as role-refusal is being made into a norm. Feminism gathered supporters from “empowered” women and politicians for political reasons.
Homosexual Movement (Mid 1970s – 1980s)
When Gender Roles are redefined through role-refusal, it would only be logical to look at men and women, as it is assumed, were not different in any meaningful way. Gender Roles can now be reversed and negated. Romantic love was not subject to any shape or design. It was just a feeling. It had no duties and no enduring commitment.
The Homosexual Movement (or known to some as Gay Liberation) is a social and political movement that urged lesbians and gay men to engage in radical direct action, and to counter societal shame with gay pride. In the feminist spirit of the personal being political, the most basic form of activism was an emphasis on coming out to family, friends and colleagues, and living life as an openly lesbian or gay person (4).
This movement has the backing it needs to further its cause as celebrities became vocal about it and media covered it even more. In just ten years or so, in phase two, romantic love that should have been fixed between men and women, were now given new form.
“Transgender” Ideology (1990s – Present)
Having Gender Roles refused and reversed, the focus now shifts to the claims that Gender Identity, in its original and correct sense, is fluid. It is now a social construct that can change or evolve. “Man trapped in a woman’s body” for example, gives credence that our identity does not necessarily match our body. From making the two genders – male and female, to go against each other, to making male can assume the opposite (as female is now empowered), to its next phase. In phase three, the body itself as an essential part of our being, is given a new form. There exists a warning sign that tells us that the new way to approach the body is to see it as an art project, a canvass as a means of self-expression.
Looking at current events today, we are witnessing the start of the next phase of the sexual revolution as it now incorporates color. We must be wary that the movement known as Back Lives Matter (or BLM for short) has the whole breadth of LGBT agenda (and some more) in its creed (5). BLM is not just three short and simple words but we should see that the whole ideology, concocted from phase one is being advanced to the next gear as it flexes its muscles on distinctions that it would try to bridge and cross.
How Should We View the Body?
“I call this mindset Narcissistic Optimistic Deism – “I can do whatever I want and God exists to make all my dreams come true.” It (body) is a blank slate upon which we may draw any identity, any self-expression, we choose. Use it, abuse it, do whatever you want with it.”
Owen Strachan, Risky Gospel: Abandon Fear and Building Something Awesome
Our manhood or womanhood is not incidental (being likely as a chance or minor consequence). Common sense shows men and women are different anatomically. Only the man can provide the raw material by which to procreate and only the woman can bear children and nurse them. Even non-Christian scientists have observed such key anatomical differences for both genders.
There Is No Pride in Shame
Let us beware of the denial of the distinctiveness of the divine design in creation. It tears down the uniqueness of both genders and the wisdom of God is rejected. This is in very essence rebellion of the creature against their Creator and the response of the creature – this is something to be proud for and shame should not even characterize these actions. The creature’s pride is exalted and the Creator’s prerogative is shunned and viewed as shameful.
Biblical Presentation on Gender Expression and Identity
Transgender is a big social, cultural issue that has come to dominate our headlines, TV channels and social media feeds. How should Christians think about sex and gender in a world that celebrates our freedom to choose (6)?
Genesis 1:27 reads, “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.” Creation is where the Bible begins and it is where a Christian’s thinking about transgender must begin. The Bible tells us that we did not emerge, by accident, from the cosmic ingredients. That means that, as we think about transgender, we need to remember that we are not simply talking about “issues” here, but people: precious individuals, each created and loved by God, and who, like all of us, are lost without Christ.
From the Creation account we can draw several observations (7):
1. The way in which the woman was created indicates that she is the man’s divinely designed complement. Adam delights that the woman is not another animal and not another man. She is exactly what the man needs: suitable helper.
2. The nature of the one-flesh union presupposes two persons of the opposite sex. Mere physical contact does not unite two people in an organic union, nor does it bring them together as a single subject to fulfill a biological function.
3. Only two persons of the opposite sex can fulfill the procreative purposes of marriage. God created the man and the woman deliberately so that they could be fruitful and multiply (Genesis 1:28).
4. Jesus himself reinforces the normativity of the Genesis account. In a question regarding divorce (Matthew 19:4 – 6; Mark 10:6 – 9), Jesus first reminds them that God “from the beginning made them male and female” and then quotes Genesis 2:24.
5. The Redemptive-Historical significance of marriage as a divine symbol only works if the marital couple is a complementary pair. Think about the complementary nature of creation itself (heavens and the earth, sun and moon, day and night, sea and dry land, plants and animals, etc). In every pairing, each part belongs with the other but not interchangeable. The coming together of heaven and earth in Revelation 21 – 22 is preceded by the marriage supper of the Lamb in Revelation 19.
“If God wanted us to conclude that man and woman were interchangeable in the marriage relationship, He not only gave us the wrong creation narrative; He gave us the wrong metanarrative.”
Kevin DeYoung, What Does the Bible Teach About Homosexuality?
The whole spectrum of Sexual Revolution (Feminism, Homosexual Movement, Transgender Ideology) simply does not fit with the created order of Genesis 1 and 2. And with these two chapters as the foundation upon which the rest of the redemptive-historical story is built, we’ll see that feminism, homosexuality, and any form of trans behavior does not fit in with the rest of the Bible either.
Biblical Presentation on Sexual Orientation
The prevailing language about “sexual orientation” that needs correcting. It is usually meant to express the belief that sexuality is an essential element of one’s personal identity that cannot be changed because it is bound up in every biology of the individual. As they claim, “It is a matter of being, and as such, is beyond the control of individual.”
A unique case happened in the Iowa Supreme Court (8). In its ruling to legalize same-sex marriage, the Iowa Supreme Court stated that sexuality is to be considered as an immutable trait and therefore a matter to be protected by law. Interestingly, the court gave a historic definition of immutability as a trait that “exists solely by the accident of birth” (like one’s color, gender, or birth abnormality) or as a trait that cannot be changed (like a permanent disability). However, in order to accommodate sexuality under the legal umbrella of immutability, the court redefined the historic definition of immutability to the new definition that when changing a trait, it may result in “significant damage to the individual’s sense of self.” We can and should read the new definition again.
The point is this, the historic definition of immutability is objective and can be verified. It is based on standards that can be established through hard science. Now, it is wholly subjective and cannot be verified by scientific means. It opens the door for virtually any interpretation. Consider this absurdity: someone who is tempted by homosexual sins may now find justification for the belief that he or she is and always will be that way because sexuality is immutable. In the new definition of immutability, it should be therefore protected by law.
There Is No Shame in the Gospel
The way the term “sexual orientation” is used in popular conversation is packed with baggage that essentially denies the power of grace. Grace can and does redefine people and can and does give them strength over the temptations they face. A logical conclusion could be drawn that: if it is immutable, then God is the author of sin, because individuals are helpless against their own biology (9).
Romans 1:16 reads, “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.” Paul emphatically pronounces that there is no shame in proclaiming the Gospel for it is the only way for people to be saved. Going back to the new definition of immutability as per the Iowa Supreme Court, our sin, while being part of our human nature after the Fall, is not immutable. That is, it is something that can be changed and altered without damaging our inner self.
Rebellion to our Creator warrants cosmic treason and thus, justice should be served and our sentencing would only pronounce to us death. However, this pronouncement of condemnation is not immutable, saved sinners are no longer guilty before the judgment seat of God. Romans 8:1 says, “There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.” In fact, all sinners must depend on Christ to overcome what we are born as, and create a new heart, an undivided heart, within us that frees our true selves.
Through the life of perfect obedience, Jesus Christ satisfied the requirements of the Law. He never sinned unlike all of us. Through the death of Jesus Christ on the cross, He suffered the penalty demand of the Law on our behalf. The death of Christ demonstrates the justice of God (Romans 3:24 – 26). The death of Christ was His suffering of the wrath of God to satisfy it. The Cross can never be appreciated apart from the concept of God’s Law and God’s wrath. ‘Christ died for sinners’ is only meaningful in relation to justice, law, and wrath. There can be no meaning of the cross unless we put it in the lens of the problem of man against the Holy God.
So, in spite of our sinful nature and our identity in Adam as the account of Creation shows us and reminds us, only by the mercy and grace of God through the Gospel, changes the core of a person’s being and redirect that person’s lives to Christ, or there is no hope of salvation. Our sin-state is the most important mutable “trait” that must be changed!
Conclusion
Proclaiming the Gospel to those caught in sexual sins demands that believers should challenge these common secular views even if they are codified by human law. Not all that is legal is morally right. We must always keep in mind that the eternity of souls is at stake and there is the higher court room that we would all soon face.
To those who are into the Sexual Revolution, the very symbol that they misuse and abuse – the rainbow, in its true and liberating sense, reminds us of the love of God that shows no pride in sin, more so it underscores to us the shame in the celebration of sin. Proverbs 11:2 describes this kind of pride as it says, “When pride comes, then comes disgrace, but with the humble is wisdom.”
Pride is what is celebrated worldwide during the month of June, in a couple of hours, earth would slowly but continue to rotate on its axis eastward such that the dawn of a new day gleams to us all and the calendar turn to July all around the world. Pride month would soon be over. But there would come a day, that outside of Christ would be a very dreadful day when this kind of pride would also be judged, sentenced, and condemned. Giving an end to all sins and sinfulness such as this kind of pride. If you are found in Christ, that is a day of rejoicing where all sins and sinfulness would be no more, and true and biblical love will be forevermore. Love is the cause and ground of God’s saving activity (Ephesians 1:5).
There is no shame in the Gospel because it is the power of God for salvation. It is our prayer that the mercy and grace of God reach the darkest depths of your soul and pull you from darkness to light just as how God in His mercy and grace made known to us our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in a saving and redeeming manner.
References
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_pride#LGBT_Pride_Month
2. Terminologies: Eighteenth Congress, First Regular Session, House Bill No. 95 introduced by Ma. Lourdes Acosta-Alba (First District, Bukidnon). www.congress.gov.ph
3. https://www.britannica.com/event/womens-movement
4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_liberation
5. https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2020/06/65132/
6. https://www.bethinking.org/human-life/gender-identity-and-the-body
7. The Five Observations comes from: What Does the Bible Teach About Homosexuality by Kevin DeYoung
8. Varnum v. Brien, No. 07-1499, IA, 42 (April 2009)
9. Sexual Morality in a Christless World by Matthew Reuger
Shivan Blogon 