Thoughts on Transgenderism

My friend, Lucas Necessary, wrote the following.

======

I shared the following article about a male-to-female transgender athlete. I consider this to be a part of the war on women, but in a much newer way, and starkly more deleterious. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jun/3/cece-telfer-franklin-pierce-transgender-hurdler-wi

Below are my thoughts. These represent a mere fraction of what informs my view, and I hope that I present them not stridently, but with some gentleness, and in a way that, should you disagree even most emphatically, is not angering. I also hope that it might be understood that I detest injustice; I will go to bat for anyone who is being oppressed, as I am able, because I highly value the human life, and have been helped in the past by those whom I have only hurt. 

Transgenderism is a troubling and, as Dawkins would say, seemingly "memetic" thing. That is, once it entered into the public consciousness, it spread in a manner that is almost viral. It is also associated with a high-rate of co-morbidities. According to the Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center,

"30 percent of transgender youth report a history of at least one suicide attempt, and nearly 42 percent report a history of self-injury, such as cutting. The study also discovered a higher frequency of suicide attempts among transgender youth who are dissatisfied with their weight." ["Suicidality, Self-Harm, and Body Dissatisfaction in Transgender Adolescents and Emerging Adults with Gender Dysphoria. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior" (19 AUG 2016)]

So, before I mention anything else, I need to be up-front and say that being vicious, cruel, and unloving is simply not needed, nor is it profitable. There is a tendency to simply lose perspective, and to become human steamrollers, covered in spiked words and fueled by bile. This is not what any of us are called to do, nor should we behave so unbecomingly. Every life should be regarded as having amazing potential, no matter how much we disagree with its current state. That said, examining ideas carefully and with charity can be helpful in considering a portion of the population that is seemingly statistically worse-off. We must always be vigilant to tear down ideas, but not people.

At the most fundamental level, I think that encouraging gender transition is not only damaging, but also represents a profoundly troubling view of the human body and mind. Under this view, the body may become a persistent and seemingly damaging impediment to the mind, as one sees the two as entirely disconnected. Broadly speaking, there are three views of the mind-body interaction in this regard. They can be construed as,

A. The body provides guidance as to who one (the mind) is and how one lives one's life.
B. The body is disconnected from the mind and provides no guidance, but may act as an impediment to the mind/spirit.
C. There is no such thing as the will or mind, and such is an illusion. (This is the terminus of atheistic thought, as I've noted before.)

Transgenderism seems to fall along the lines of view "B" above. The body has no guiding force in one's life; it is a mere collection of cells; an allocation of atoms that, in some cases, are seen as having given one a collection of 50% of the wrong chromosomes. It causes a person to ask,

"Why should my body, my identity as male or female, have any voice in my moral choices, what I do sexually? Why should my chromosomes determine in any way who I am?” More specifically, Jessica Savano, a male-to-female model, commented,  “Why are you even looking at my penis anyway? I am a woman!” Jessica remarks on Kickstarter,

"Jessica's mission lies in helping people love themselves and break free from dogma and mediocrity and to live a life of true fulfillment and Joy."

Yet it seems that with the memetic spread of transgenderism, true fulfillment does not result. How can it? At the most basic level, it's a view that is thoroughly disrespectful to the human body, which says, "No, my body is not my authentic self."  And so, the implication is that all that counts really is my mind, feelings, and desires.

But consider the desires. A person wishing to transition to a different gender often attempts to model the exterior, classic appearance of the other sex as well. That is, one denies that gender is based on exterior genitalia or chromosomes, but, when transitioning, still desires to mimic the exterior of the other sex (upon, which, remember, we are saying that gender is not based).

How can one have true fulfillment when one knows that, no matter the external change, one's external genitalia have been altered? That, no matter what, one's skeletal structure is different than that of what one wishes to be? That one's entire chromosomal makeup is 50% "incorrect." It is a creeping thorn in the flesh that one can deny, but of which one can never truly be rid.

It seems to me that we have a number of different options. We can encourage people to take atheism to its terminus, in which there are no actual choices or free will, and in which case, none of this matters. We can teach people that their DNA—the information that makes them, them—is not only faulty, but that their bodies are not their authentic selves, and that this must be challenged, altered, and trod upon.

Or we can teach people to embrace and love the bodies they have been given; to align the mind and body in harmony. A memetic spread that appreciates the body of the authentic self might perhaps have a population wherein the following is not true:

"30 percent of transgender youth report a history of at least one suicide attempt, and nearly 42 percent report a history of self-injury, such as cutting. The study also discovered a higher frequency of suicide attempts among transgender youth who are dissatisfied with their weight."

There is much more that we should all examine, and ultimately, it is my firm conviction that we need to decide if there is anything such as the mind/spirit, or if determinism is fully sound.

With love,

Luke

Grace/Faith vs Law-Keeping

Paul never contrasts Law-of-Moses law-keeping with Law-of-Christ law-keeping; he contrasts law-(albeit usually of Moses)-keeping with grace/faith.

IOW, the contrast is never between two legal systems; it's between a legal system and a grace/faith system.
 
When Paul wrote Gal 2:21, he specifically had in mind the Law of Moses, as that's what was poking him in the face over and over. But I think the *context* of Gal 2:21 makes it clear that he wasn't *just* talking about the Law of Moses; as he writes in the next chapter (3:21b), if any legal system could make alive, it would be the law of Moses.

In addition, Paul thrice, and James once, outlines the principle that if you're going to be justified by keeping law, you have to keep ALL of that law. It doesn't matter what law it is:

WEB Gal 3:10b For it is written, “Cursed is everyone who doesn’t continue in all things that are written in the book of the law, to do them.”

Gal 3:12 The law is not of faith, but, “The man who does them will live by them."

Rom 9:5 For Moses writes about the righteousness of the law, “The one who does them will live by them.”

James 2:10 For whoever keeps the whole law, and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all.

So if you seek to be justified by keeping some system of law, any system of law, you have to keep every jot and tittle. And if that's the route you choose, then you are no longer on the path of grace, the path of Christ, but rather you're on the path of law-keeping (at which you'll fail):

Gal 5:4 You are alienated from Christ, you who desire to be justified by the law. You have fallen away from grace.

The true law-keepers now are not those who are circumcised (or not), or who keep certain holy days (or not), or refuse to eat certain meats (or who do), or sing without instruments (or do), or keep the Lord's Supper every Sunday morning (or Saturday night), or (dare I suggest it?) who has been properly immersed (or not); the true law-keepers are those who fulfill the law, not in letter, but in spirit:

Gal 5:14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word, in this: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.

Rom 10:4 For Christ is the fulfillment of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.

James 2:8 However, if you fulfill the royal law, according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you do well.
 
This contrast between grace/faith and any sort of legal system is the entire thrust of Paul's letter to the Galatians. The "different gospel" of which he speaks in chapter one is not a different name on the sign out in front of our assembly building, or a different understanding of what is a "pastor", or how many cups we can have in the Lord's Supper, or whether women must be 100% silent in the assembly, or 90%, or the same percent as anyone, according to decorum and propriety and submission to one-another; it's the seeking salvation by keeping a set of rules. This is Paul's theme throughout.

Paul has nothing against keeping the law, even the law of Moses (he himself walked according to the law of Moses, even to the point of animal sacrifice in the Jewish temple after having undergone Temple purification rituals, to end his Jewish Nazirite vow - Acts 21ff - a law which he "upheld" - Rom 3:21). What he objects to is *justification* via that law-keeping - *any* law-keeping. That's the "other gospel which is not another".

This is why he is able to say, "don't worry about holy days and eating this and touching that; these things look like good religion, but they're useless in ascertaining what your heart is doing. These things are just external elements of our world, shadows, not the real thing" (Col 2:16ff). It's why he's able to say, "It's okay to come to different conclusions on all these external things; just get along!" (Rom 14). It's why he's able to say, "Jewish believers can be Jewish, and Gentile believers can be non-Jewish - the two are now one, despite the external differences, because in Christ, the wall has been torn down, and now there's one body, not two, so be eager to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace, regardless of your differences" (Eph 3-4).

The specific law spoken of in Gal 2:21 was indeed the law of Moses, but the principle, as seen by both the immediate context, and the context of much of Paul's writing, is of *any* legal system, as opposed to grace/faith.

Originally published at:
https://kentwest.blogspot.com/2019/06/gracefaith-vs-law-keeping.html