God Created Them Male and Female
I never dreamed just a few years ago that I would have to write, preach and teach on this subject, but never underestimate the sheer lunacy of mankind: “Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man …” (Rom 1:22-23).
This passage, somewhat embellished, might read, “Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of man and woman into the shameful images of homosexuals, transgenders, cross-dressers, non-binaries and other degenerate classifications of complete fantasy.”
Most balanced and rational people may think these flights of fancy don’t deserve a second thought, and we all likely hoped it would go away after the initial euphoria. But this is a powerful movement that is already affecting the media, schools/universities, businesses and governmental policy. The Obama Administration tried to force doctors to do sex-reassignment surgery against the Hippocratic oath and their own conscience, but that was overturned. However, insurance companies are paying for elective pharmaceutical and surgical procedures because they have been so classified as to fall under mandated coverage.
What is going on? How can something so patently unbiological, not to mention unscriptural and ungodly, take such a deep hold on a society that was built upon logic, reason and factuality?
Here are some random thoughts on what is happening:
1) “So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them” (Gn 1:27). Scripture knows nothing of the sexual nature of mankind other than male and female. The chromosomal composition of every normal male is xy and the chromosomal makeup of every normal female is xx. These genetic components uniquely craft a male or a female body, and while there are ranges of variation in each sex, the physical and chemical components develop distinctively male and female characteristics.
2) “Then God blessed them, and God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it …’” (Gn 1:28). Foundational to the creation of male and female is the ability to reproduce. Each is half of a reproductive equation: “they shall become one flesh” (Gn 2:24). In the sexual union they become a reproductive whole, thus propagating life. Two females or two males cannot accomplish this fundamental purpose.
3) The term “gender” was historically linguistic; i.e., masculine or feminine nouns. In the mid-1900s, as an outgrowth of pioneering studies in transsexualism (as it was then known), a now-discredited researcher named John Money applied the term “gender” to the “social expression of internal sexuality” (Dr. Michelle Cretella, President of the American College of Pediatrics). By linguistic leverage, sexuality was changed from something genetic and physical to something social and psychological; i.e., a male “self-identifies” as a female or vice versa.
4) Gender is now defined as a “social construct,” a conglomeration of genetics; nurture; how one chooses to identify and present themselves; a “fluid” self-definition that can change over time and according to circumstances. Sexual progressives now downplay the genetic, hormonal role and think that by drugs, psychotherapy and surgery – Voila! – a woman can become a man.
5) The only criteria for determining a child to be gender dysphoric is how they feel or what they say about themselves. That is, there is no scientific, objective test to determine such. Practically, this has opened the door to confused parents projecting their own sexual confusion onto their children and seeking psychological/medical professionals to “fix” them. This is being done at increasingly younger ages, and the legal system is complicit as “conversion therapies” for minors are banned; schools act on behalf of the children without parental knowledge or consent; and insured hormonal and surgical treatments are provided regardless of the parents’ wishes.
6) Reputable studies demonstrate that most children (80-98%), if allowed to progress through puberty, will identify with their natal sex. In other words, if not pressured by confused parents or LGBTQ activists, the natural maturing process resolves most feelings of confusion (sometimes called “watchful waiting”). This is what happened for centuries until the sexual extremists began their militant campaigns in the mid-1900s, advocating barbaric, non-reversible mutilation and drug therapy.
7) There is no factual, biological evidence of being “born in the wrong body.” In fact, this poses an interesting question: If we take physiology off the table (which LGBTQ activists insist on), then what does it mean for a male to feel female, or a female to feel male? What is an “internal sense of gender”? How does one explain such feelings without at some point appealing to the physical expressions of sexuality?
8) Why do feelings about sexuality create “reality” when they do not do so in other contexts? Rachel Dolezal, a “15-minute famer,” “self-identified” as a black woman though she had no African ancestry. Her claim was ridiculed and rejected. Why? Because feelings don’t create racial reality. Similarly, if someone “feels” that they are an amputee, yet have all their appendages, should a healthy limb be removed to validate their “reality”? No, you say? Then why is it being done in the context of transgenderism?
9) This phenomenon has become a highly politicized issue. It is being used as a lever by special interest groups to change society’s norms. A recent news item told of a teacher who refused to call a student by an alternate pronouns. After complaining to the principal, the teacher was immediately ordered to counseling to be “reeducated” in the politically correct language/attitudes of LGBTQ ideology. This is just another way of deconstructing our culture so that it can be remade in the image of evil.
As distasteful as it may be, we need to inform ourselves on how to respond to these challenges.