General Commentary


7
Mar 10

Churches On The Side of Equality

It is easy to characterize all of Christianity as opposed to LGBT issues and the gay civil rights movement, but this would be both inaccurate and hurtful to the many people of faith who work, sometimes quietly and sometimes more blatantly from within various church traditions. One of the most recent to be cast into a spot light is the United Methodist congregation at Dunbarton UMC in Washington DC. I have been to Dunbarton, but it has been years and years ago, and one of my best friends is someone I met because of Dunbarton. I also remember another Methodist minister, the Rev Jimmy Creech, who the Methodist denomination robbed him of his ministry because he had the courage to do what he felt was right and marry a same-sex couple.

So often, we see the issue of same-sex marriage, as being a civil issue, and the DC Marriage ordinance is a prime example of that. However, it is also a spiritual matter, and the debate exists within the church as well as within the civil society. And that brings us to Dunbarton United Methodist Church in DC.

Clergy at Dumbarton United Methodist Church in Georgetown said they will conduct same-sex weddings despite the denomination’s ban against the practice. ”As a pastor, I am called to extend care and grace to all people even as Jesus did,” said Rev. Mary Kay Totty, pastor of Dumbarton, in a statement Wednesday. “We celebrate love and loyalty wherever it is found.” Dumbarton’s Church Council had voted last month to “honor and celebrate the wedding of any couple, licensed in the District of Columbia, who seek to commit their lives to one another in marriage.” No other Methodist congregation in Washington is sanctioning gay and lesbian weddings, according to Dumbarton.

This is a very big deal because the United Methodist Church does not allow same-sex marriage and forbids its pastors from performing these ceremonies. Will the paster, like Jimmy Creech and others before, be let go, and removed from the ministry, or will the congregation, which feels it is acting on the right side of Faith prevail?

Without much difficulty, it is possible to find people who fall on either side of that issue. John Meunier sees the congregation’s actions from the perspective of ethics, and deems them acting in relation to a conflict of error:

Error – We have a duty to teach what the church teaches, but our conscience – after much painful trial – is convinced the church is wrong. Here we have a case of error. Either the church or the individual is wrong. Both cannot be right.

By “church” here, he means the denomination, and by individual, he means the congregation.

However, Ray McDonald takes a very different approach. He sees the Hebrew Scripture story of Daniel as offering the answer, and summerizes:

I believe that the law of God is far superior to the law of the state…

For McDonald, no distinction is drawn for Church Law as if it has any potential to be different than God’s Law. Like many Christians, McDonald is too caught up in the Old Testament to remember that the followers of Jesus are not bound to the Laws of Moses, but he likes the easiness of condemnation of homosexuals. I believe that the congregation at Dunbarton believe they are aligned with God’s Law as well as the Law of the government, and see the Church law as unaligned with the Will of God. McDonald concludes:

Those who call themselves after Christ will face persecution from within and from outside the church.  We will be held in contempt in the courts of the land for standing up for Jesus and Biblical truth.

And while I don’t agree with him on much, I do agree that the real issue here is Biblical truth.

From the time, about 30 years after the death of Jesus, the point of it all has been Faith in Christ, but for today’s fundamentalists, Faith is not enough, and they are holding out and pushing for a “Biblical truth” that does not and can not exist. Truth is a product of Science and the evaluation of facts. Where as the very notion of the Christian Faith is Faith and belief where no facts exist or matter, and thus, there can be no single truth. Biblical truth is the position that the Bible is factual as written, a position that can not hold up to any real investigation.

So , this is the discussion or debate that Dunbarton has entered in a bigger way than ever before.

Peace and Love to this brave congregation.

Read more:

http://www.christianpost.com/article/20100303/high-court-denies-request-to-block-d-c-gay-marriage/print.html

http://www.umaffirm.org/cornews/dumbart.html

http://johnmeunier.wordpress.com/2010/03/05/duty-and-dumbarton/

http://blog.georgetownvoice.com/2010/03/04/setting-itself-apart-georgetown-church-will-celebrate-same-sex-marriages/

http://www.religiondispatches.org/blog/2325/religious_conservatives_fight_rash_of_gay_marriages/


6
Mar 10

Religion has Failed: Insanity of Christianity

I can not begin to put into0 words, how my views of Faith, Religion and religious expression have been shifting since I started this blog. Well, long before actually, but given that I started this blog with a purpose, it us a useful marker for those changes.
A very long time friend, Janet Edwards has begun writing op-eds for the Washington Post on Religion and associated things, and so it was with gladness that I saw that she was writing about the Ugandan effort to criminalize gays and even execute them. She was writing about this, in relation to the Christian evangelism of Africa, where she draws distinctions between an evangelism of humility and call to the teachings of Jesus, and an evangelism of coercion and manipulation. It is a great read, and like any good opinion editorial, prompts the reader to consider the issues.
Here is a link to her op-ed:
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/janet_edwards/2010/03/the_fine_line_between_persuasion_and_manipulation.html

Like some of her other pieces, I wasn’t originally going to write about it. I enthusiastically, take her text in and ponder it, allowing it to ferment and give rise to thoughts and ideas. But then, I started reading the comments. A number of them, are the standard, evangelical defensiveness and victim posturing, as if fundamentalists are the poor abused minorities. They wonder what they have done to deserve such scorn, whereas Janet’s op-ed doesn’t attack evangelicals in general at all, at least in my opinion. And there were the comments made by Bible thumpers, who characteristically pull out a few Bible passages, and offer them as if they are the answer to everything. Frighteningly, these seemed to be placed there as if they support the Ugandan move towards the execution of gays. But one caught my eye, and propelled me into this post:

Clearly, the idiots like Janet Edwards are spreading lies. I don’t think you understand that you are doing the work of the devil by spreading LIES. Jesus Christ was crucified because of lies. I hope you understand the punishment of God for liars.
Now, Janet is an adult and I’m sure has been called far worse before and will again, so no comment from me about the personal attack against her. But the quote I want to emphasize is this: “Jesus was crucified because of lies.”  What a theologically insane thing to say! Especially when followed with a statement about God and liars, and preceded with the claim that Janet is a liar. This person can if they like, equate Janet’s option with a lie, and align her with other liars, and claim that God hates liars, but the assertion that Jesus was crucified because of lies can not be substantiated  theologically.
Depending upon how you read the Bible, Jesus was crucified and raised from the dead because it was God’s plan. It was ordained to be that way, even before his birth. It was a required element of the narrative, for without it, the resurrection would mean nothing.
So, one has to wonder who is the one lying and what does it mean to suggest that God is unhappy with Janet’s ideas, but God has no problem that His greatest gift to humanity, the sacrifice of his Son is so misunderstood?
My favorite character in the Bible is the apostle Paul, who can be quoted to support or condemn just about anything imaginable. He lived and wrote at a time, when he, and others were struggling to comprehend the experience of Jesus in the context of the Hebrew Faith in which it had occurred. It troubled Paul deeply, and his attempt to figure out the relationship between Jesus, the death and resurrection, and God’s promise to the Jews is an underlying theme through out all of his letters. What was the role of the Law of Moses and now, God’s covenant through Christ- how to reconcile these things? How many of today’s far-right Christian fanatics seem to have no sense of this issue or theological problem!  They are stuck at the math equation of “2+2″ but seem oblivious to the fact that the result is “5″ and the equation and result can not be aligned.
What’s wrong with Fundamentalism, and the evangelicalism that grows from it, is that it has no basis in a sound theology. It is a bastardization of Christian Faith and lacks realistic, meaningful, and thoughtful theological basis. The truly faithful ought to be outraged, and alarmed by this. Real Faith, Real theology, and Real religion lose when this insanity reigns. Those who label themselves as the unfaithful or non-believers are not killing God or the opportunity for Faith. It is the insane within the Fundamentalist movement who are destroying the value of Faith and religion in real life.

19
Feb 10

Ugandan Church Service Watches Gay Porn

Going to church with my Grandmother- these are very fond memories from my childhood. But church services that I remember weren’t like the Christian services in Uganda where Martin Ssempa is the pastor.

A Ugandan pastor is showing gay pornography at church to try to garner support for a proposed law that would impose the death penalty for some gays.

Martin Ssempa showed the videos to some 100 adults during a church service Wednesday in Uganda’s capital.

He says he plans to show the films regularly to educate churchgoers on gay sex and also plans to show the videos to parliamentarians. He says some churchgoers cried after watching the videos, which he said he downloaded from the Internet.

This seems so outlandish, it is hard to fathom that it is for real. but it is. Ssempa goal is to “educate” his captive audience in what he says is “Gay.” without any care if that is true or not. Personally, I’m not a big fan of porn, but without a doubt, it isn’t hard to find on the web. That said, I’m sure I could find porn out there that turned my stomach. but this guy has a mission: he wants to show only that which will upset and shock. I’m sure it is not too difficult to find straight porn that his church goes would see as equally offensive.

And for him, this is Church.

Makes you wonder, is he following God, or some other god (or personal demon)…

via Ugandan anti-gay pastor airs gay porn in church :: EDGE on the Net.


14
Feb 10

Christian Revisionist History

I saw the first mention of this on the Daily Kos, but they are referencing a New York Times Sunday Magazine article. In a nutshell:

Conservative activists on the Texas Board of Education say that the authors of the Constitution intended the United States to be a Christian nation. And they want America’s history textbooks to say so.

It is withouth a doubt, one of the most frightening things I’ve read in a while.


22
Jan 10

Dangerous Bible Thumpers

Maybe, I’m in denial, but generally speaking, I don’t think I often characterize devout Christians as “dangerous,” although it truly fits in this case.  I heard this story first on MSNBC’s Rachael Maddow, although the linked article names ABC as breaking the story.  Here it is in a nutshell. Some US manufacturer of sights that go on rifles has been inscribing the sights with specifically Christian Bible passages. This is at odds with the Military’s rules and guidelines, but the manufacturer really doesn’t care. To that company prostelizing Jesus is more important than anything else. This has been going on for a while too, but only recently has a watchdog group brought this to light.

Our real enemies in the world tend to be ultra religious crazies willing to blow themselves up over what they believe is a holy war of US Christians trying to kill their religion. Our government doesn’t see it that way. To us, we are trying to make ourselves safe from these extremists. So what is a little Bible verse have to do with that? What it does is give the message that this really is a religious battle of Christians trying to kill them. All that can do is add fuel to the fire, and make the crazies feel justified in their craziness. And who loses? Our soldiers and their loved ones.

The linked story is from a far right web site, and I chose it specifically so that you can read the comments left by these far right Christians. Truly insane.

Now, not all Christians feel this way (Thank Heavens) but we have to start to name things as they are. We all have to wake up and recognize that while faith can be a powerful tool of much help to many, religious zealotry isn’t good for anyone.

Christianity has failed when it makes us into the exact enemy that other religious zealots are claiming that we are. Where are the real Christians to save Faith from the destruction being caused by the fringe?

CNSNews.com – Group That Alerted Media to Biblical Markings on Rifle Sights Wants Congress to Investigate ‘Military Religious Extremism’.


24
Dec 09

A Holiday Message

My friend, Wolf Martinez, posted this to Facebook, and I thought it was a wonderful sentiment for this holiday season:

“The first peace, which is the most important, is that which comes within the souls of people when they realize their relationship, their oneness with the universe and all its Gifts, and when they realize that at the center of the universe dwells the Great Spirit, and that this center is really everywhere, it is within each of us.”

– Black Elk (1863-1950)


26
Oct 09

God’s Last Gasps for Air

The premise of this post has been on my mind for some time, as I have thinking about how to frame the ideas I’m about to set out there for all to read. A number of different ideas have resided in my mind, but none have appeared to offer the desired frame. Even this one may seem a stretch, but I’d rather start my dialogue on it, than continue the inner discussion within my mind. A letter to the editor and book review are linked below, that I believe spell out “the case” superbly. So, I wish to label them as exhibit A, B, and C, and request you read them before continuing. Since you may not, these excerpts may help set the stage:

Exhibit A, Book Review by Nicolas Wade:

Dawkins invites the reader to share the frustration of an imaginary history teacher, some of whose students refuse to accept that the Roman Empire ever existed, or that Latin is the mother tongue from which the Romance languages evolved. Instead of concentrating on how Western culture emerged from the institutions of the Roman state, the teacher must spend time combating a school board that insists he give equal time to their alternative view that French has been spoken from time immemorial and that Caesar never came or saw or conquered. This is exactly analogous to the plight of the biology teacher trying to acquaint students with the richness of modern biology in states where fundamentalist opponents of evolution hold sway.

From exhibit B, letter by Daniel Dennett:

What is going on at The New York Times? Why is it so bizarrely respectful of those who doubt evolution? In recent years The Times has published three preposterous Op-Ed articles by evolution-doubters (Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, Michael J. Behe and Senator Sam Brownback). These no more deserved space in The Times than the opinions of flat-earthers or trance- channelers. In the wake of Judge John E. Jones III’s decision in the Dover, Pa., case that intelligent design is a religious viewpoint that may not be taught in public schools, one would think The Times would finally recognize that the intelligent design campaign is a hoax and dishonest to the core, and stop giving it respectability in its pages.

from Exhibit C, Letter by Alex Rosenberg:

Evolution is a fact, natural selection is a process and Darwin’s theory is that the fact is explained by the process. The facts of evolution are as evident as any facts about the past can be. So is the fact that blind variation and natural selection can produce a lot of adaptational change. Darwin’s theory about how it does so is indeed a work in progress, but one whose basic correctness is no more open to doubt that General Relativity. In “The Greatest Show on Earth,” and in a couple of other books, including “The Ancestor’s Tale” and “The Blind Watchmaker,” Dawkins has shown us how this process, which is entirely free from purpose, goal, intention or design, results in the overwhelming appearance of all four. Processes, of course, are facts. No twist in Dawkins’s knickers.

from Exhibit C, Letter by Eric Delson:

In his otherwise excellent review, Nicholas Wade draws a distinction among theory, law and fact in science. He notes that Dawkins, in reaction to “creationists, who like to dismiss evolution as ‘just a theory,’ ” insists that evolution is a fact. Wade correctly recognizes that in science a theory is more than a supposition, as does Dawkins, but while criticizing Dawkins for calling evolution a fact, Wade falls back on using the term “theory,” which surely connotes uncertainty to the nonscientist. Both authors ignore the third option, to refer to evolution as a “law” in the same sense that most people speak of the “law of gravity.”

Yes, this may appear to be simply all about evolution and creationism, but my purposes are different, so bear with me. This debate about evolution, is simply an illustration of the line drawn in the sand. And, if I’m honest from the start, my premise and ideas have nothing to do with God, except I thought the title sounded catchy. God is not gasping for air, or dying, or fading from relevancy. However, I believe it true to say that those humans who refuse to accept Science and the fact of Evolution are afraid that this is the case. To them, Science is an attempt to kill God. Their insistence to hold so tightly to a disproved myth, and develop ideas like Intelligent Design, at all costs, suggests that without it, they have no ability to believe in God.

How else can you explain the construction of a Museum of Creationism, where robotronic dinosaurs frolic with humans, in a way that scientifically could never exist, but must be constructed and sold as undeniably true so that the myth of the great flood can be aligned with scientific fact? Why else work so hard to hold the Bible as ultimate history, except that without it, they are afraid that God will cease to exist, or more accurately, never had existed in the first place. Personally, I don’t think the existence of God is up for grabs, and any discussion of it, is a red herring, designed to shift focus away from the bigger question: what is the validity of Religion, or more specifically- what is the validity of seeing a Judeo-Christian perspective as the only accurate and true expression of Religion. The Christian religion (lower-case “r”) is what is at stake of being disproved.

My intentional splitting of Christianity from the whole Judeo-Christian branch of history should not be minimized. Philosophers and theologians within the Hebrew tradition have, since the dawn of their faith tradition and ancestral beginnings, seen the value of interpretation. Volumes upon volumes exist as different individuals have chosen to explore sometimes subtle, and sometimes drastic explanations for scripture, practice, and belief. It has only been the comparatively recent Christians who seek to mold an understanding of fact into something that might fit within their locked-down scriptural words. In other words, only the Christian Church works so to declare the fact of the Holy Bible as more important and above all other fact, and even above the importance of Faith.

So, what the heck does this have to do with anything Queer, or Gay, or whatever words you choose? Can you believe I just wrote 1000 words as a set up to what I really want to say? Yes, I guess I did.

Virtually all of the backlash and opposition to full equality for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgenders, is rooted in a religious objection to homosexuality. While Christianity isn’t the only faith tradition to oppose homosexuality, it does hold a singular spot as the predominant religion of the advanced Western Culture. The attack on homosexuality from the Christian extremists is completely an effort to support their fallacy of the Holy Bible as Fact, and plays the same role in the perpetuation of this fallacious fact, as the attack on evolution. While in practical terms, the opposition to full equality for LGBT’s is the oppression of actual people, the goal of any of the Christian Far Right isn’t to harm people, but rather to defend their stronghold on the Fact of the Holy Bible, and thus, their own sole connection to God. This is partly how these Christians can claim to love the sinner but hate the sin, because to them, it isn’t about real people, but about actions and behaviors. They don’t set out to cause harm, even if for them, the ends justify the means. Not all Christians operate that way. Even some denominations articulate that Faith and Experience play key roles in understanding God’s plan. But in moments of fear, even the most moderate Christians can fall into the trap of the Bible as Fact.

The issues of the Fact of Evolution and the Fact of Homosexuality are both, at the core, issues of biology and science. The war raging between the Christian extremists and Science concerning evolution has been going on for some time, so it is easier to see and analyze a history for that struggle. It follows other similar battles with Science such as the struggle of the Church to condemn Galileo because his astrologic observations did not match their literal Biblical reading. The Battle against the science of homosexuality is relatively new. Previously the Church used only a moral argument against homosexuality, but in reality, it didn’t care if homosexuality was going on, as long as it was secret and hidden. However, as Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender people have become more visible, and want the rights that everyone else has, as out visible and happy people, this acceptance of secrets no longer functions, and the Church has lost most if not all of it’s moral authority.

So, The Christian extremists have nowhere else to turn except to their Holy Bible as fact.

The Holy Bible’s Last Gasps for Air

Therefore, the battle against Homosexuality is really the battle to save the authority of the Holy Bible. If they give in on this one, they have nothing left that they can see to justify the need for their religion. The rest of the things that they could possibly grab hold of as justification for Christianity have long since passed away. Greed and Coveting rule- look at how the Banking industry or the Health Care industry work to shore up their profits over the well being of our society as a whole. Gambling is everywhere; Divorce is prevalent; Lying almost the default behavior. The Golden Rule is tarnished and appears to look more like plastic that a precious gem.

Unlike the fact of evolution, the Science of Homosexuality isn’t as well understood. Not yet. Still so much that we don’t understand about genes, and proteins and hormones, and all of the various things that play into the biology of it. And we understand far more of the Biology, than we do of the sociology of Homosexuality- how culture and environment affect the Biology as well. In time these too will be well understood. But for now, we must accept that there is still much that we do not yet know as fact in the same way as we know about the fact of evolution.  This isn’t really any different than the process by which the fact of Astronomy and the solar system came about. It just takes time.

If I am right however, that this is the last big stand that the Far Right Christians have to support their Holy Bible as fact, then, the fact of homosexuality is likely to be even more dismissed than the fact of evolution. This last attack on the fallacy will be fought with greater blindness and zeal. So we have a real battle to look forward to.

Letters – The Fact of Evolution – NYTimes.com.


19
Sep 09

Experience God

One of the people I follow on Twitter is Deepak Chopra, and this morning I found this:

@Deepak_Chopra Our experience of God evolves as we evolve.

This is so true. It isn’t that God evolves, God may not. God may be exactly the same today as 10,000 years ago, but what changes is our experience of God, and thus our understanding of God. In fact for us to have a healthy relationship with God, with ourselves and with others, our experience of God must evolve. Otherwise we stay stuck, and immobilized.

Creation, but it’s very nature is a dynamic process of destruction and construction. When we attempt to force God, and our experience of God to be the same, we fail to acknowledge the greatest aspect of God, which is creation. God isn’t stifled, creation continues, but we loose sync with it, we become ignorant of it. It is like being in a beautiful flower garden. We may know that there are beautiful flowers all around us, but we refuse to inhale and experience their fragrance, so we miss experiencing the fullness of our experience of God.

The greatest example of a failure for our collective experience of God, is the forced adherence by some, to a purely Biblical experience of God. The Bible describes the experience of God by others in another time, space and set of circumstances. Not only does this fail to acknowledge our own experience of God, either collectively or individually, but it refuses to accept or acknowledge the reality of creation that is being human. It reduces God to a concrete set of attributes, expressions, behaviors and meanings- the exact opposite of creation.


9
Sep 09

Texas Church Sponsors Pro-Gay Christian Billboards

Saw this on Twitter and had to write about it! Thanks to @QueerJohnPA and @lgbtlife for posting.

WouldJesusDiscriminate.com

WouldJesusDiscriminate.com

Please read the article linked, I’m not going to show any quotes from it, but it is a good read. I’m more interested to share my own reactions to these billboards.

First, I’d like to say that they are really gutzy, and I really give them credit for putting themselves out there like that. The message- that Jesus and the Bible is more welcoming and inclusive than some think it is- is a valuable message to share. But if their goal is to get people, especially Christian believers to rethink their negative judgements of gays and lesbians, I’m not sure how successful this is going to be.

If I have any real beef about the project, is the way it uses scripture. Consider Matthew 19: 10-12, (displayed here from the NIV)

10The disciples said to him, “If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry.”

11Jesus replied, “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given.

12For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage[a]because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”

Now, this is a very interesting passage, especially following the earlier passages of Matthew 19, but how can anyone interpret it to say that “Jesus said some are born Gay.” Jesus didn’t say that unless the Greek for Eunuch(????????) is exactly the same as Greek for Gay (????????????), which it isn’t. And frankly as a gay man, I’m not sure how I feel about being called a Eunuch.

WouldJesusDiscriminate.com

WouldJesusDiscriminate.com

Genesis 2:24 and Ruth 1:14 (NIV)

24 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.

14 At this they wept again. Then Orpah kissed her mother-in-law good-by, but Ruth clung to her.

There is a wonderfully beautiful story to be told about the love between these two women, although I’m hard pressed to say that they became one flesh. Here’s the same problem as the Matthew example. By trying to distill it down to a few passages, and then claim this is what it means, can’t possible provide any real teaching. It can only set the stage for a dispute about does it mean this or not. The tactic of pulling individual verses and claiming to know exactly what it means, that is the problem, not the solution to the problem.

WouldJesusDiscriminate.com

WouldJesusDiscriminate.com

The last billboard is probably the saddest example, for this is truly a rich and meaningful story.

Matthew 8:5-13 (NIV)

5When Jesus had entered Capernaum, a centurion came to him, asking for help. 6″Lord,” he said, “my servant lies at home paralyzed and in terrible suffering.”

7Jesus said to him, “I will go and heal him.”

8The centurion replied, “Lord, I do not deserve to have you come under my roof. But just say the word, and my servant will be healed. 9For I myself am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. I tell this one, ‘Go,’ and he goes; and that one, ‘Come,’ and he comes. I say to my servant, ‘Do this,’ and he does it.”

10When Jesus heard this, he was astonished and said to those following him, “I tell you the truth, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith. 11I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. 12But the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”

13Then Jesus said to the centurion, “Go! It will be done just as you believed it would.” And his servant was healed at that very hour.

How they get from “a centurion and a servant” to “a gay couple” is truly remarkable, if not deplorable. If you go to the web site there is a full explanation of each passage.

The reality is that there may have been men who loved men and women who loved women in that time and place, but our contemporary understanding of Gay simply does not apply. There were no gay couples, where a couple is understood as an equal partnering of 2 men or two women.

Faith and tradition are things that many will defend and protect even beyond reason. To mess around with someone’s understanding, especially when they feel pretty sure they know what it means, is to invite a defensiveness and promote an unwillingness to be open to other interpretations. To place contemporary constructs (ex: born gay, gay couple) into a biblical era is just as bad as those who go the other way.


1
Aug 09

Thoughts on God and Sex-Changes

I decided to post this here on Queer Look at the Bible because of the potentially theologic implications and scriptural basis of the underlying argument.

First, I’d encourage anyone to read both Earl’s post, and then all of the comments, for this is a really rich discussion. and then, after reading that, read through my comments. and then lastly, post a reply here or on Earl’s blog or both.

It is easy to think of Christian Thought as an oxymoron when you read any number of far right religious blogs, and then I find something like Earl’s blog and I fall in love, all over again with Religion, Theology, and all that comes with it. I think one of the reasons I have struggled getting my podcast going again is that I have lost some of the passion and curiosity that first stole my heart as I dug into religious issues, images and meaning more than a dozen years ago. So, to me this is such a gift for me!

Earl tears apart a basic religious justification against transgenders and the process of sex-changes, and succintly articulates a number of the issues involved in sorting this through. As he put it:

After all, if God has specifically and omnipotently designed each person then changing one’s divinely-designated gender may be understood as, ultimately, one’s dissatisfaction with God.

While some of his commenters don’t like his use of the idea of birth defects to illustrate his reasoning, it made perfect sense to me. He writes:

If birth defects exist as a part of nature, why then is gender a non-negotiable?

In other words, those who claim that each person is created exactly as God intended, and therefore, no alteration should be needed- that argument falls apart when you think of birth defects. Birth defects are natural occurring as part of nature.

I’m with Earl, but there is a scriptural basis for the non-negotiation of gender. Genesis:

26 Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, [a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.

28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”

A strict adherence to scripture suggests that everyone falls into one of these 2 categories, even though we know that there are individuals born with both male and female sex organs, as well as individuals whose bodies are clearly one or the other, but for whom their sense of their gender does not align with their body. Frankly, I’ve always been suspicious of this passage where it says: “…man in our image, in our likenes” I never understood where the “our” came from.

Aside from that, however, this issue revolves on the purpose and connection of gender, and sex. What we are learning about these from Science suggests they are more complex than once thought.

One of the things this brings up for me, is the connection between exploring what it means for God to be the creator who creates in God’s own image, and what it means for us as human beings, to understand God based upon how we see ourselves.

The Wanderings of a Theological Vagabond » Blog Archive » Thoughts on God and Sex-Changes .

Resources:

Straight Guys Guide to Gender Identity