GENDER. What is it? Is it just another word for biological sex, or is it a word that has assumed a more modern and relativistic meaning? This seems to be the great debate. Personally, I affirm the former. While some may attempt to argue my position, they would first have to take on the historical use of the term before they could ever attack me for using it that way. That said, I acknowledge not all opt to use it the same way. After all, words do change their meaning over time. I’d be foolish to ignore that. It’s the same reason that, though I may be happy, believe in evangelism, and hold to a Complementarian position of headship/submission (i.e. male headship), I will never refer to myself as a gay, evangelical patriarch. I say this in jest, but I also say it to acknowledge the fact that words can take on different meanings through time and culture. All this said, I can’t ignore there is still firm ground to refer to gender as being in line with biological sex.
For those who say trans-men are real men and trans-women are real women, all because gender is allegedly a purely relative societal construct, stop and think about this for a moment. If gender is truly fluid, able to change at any point and be whatever you identify as, it can never actually BE anything. It becomes a “no thing.” At that point, it’s nothing more than the whirling of a thought in the mind. Thus, you can never actually BE your gender identity. You can only think about it. At best, your gender identity may align with your biological sex, in which case you coincidentally are your identity. But if your fluid identity (a no thing) is anything other than your biological sex (a thing), you’re rejecting logic, reasoning, and science in favor of postmodern fantasy. Therefore, if one chooses to call you by what you are biologically, you can’t get upset that he/she failed to refer to you by your personal preference. This is because a “no thing” doesn’t actually exist and can never be created. Thus, you can never be it. Essentially, if gender is anything you want it to be, it can never actually be anything. It would be a desire, not an existence. Thus, you would never be able to be misgendered.
If it is a concept of relativity, it really does boil down to being the equivalent of a mood. I can say I’m angry. If someone tells me I’m not actually angry, I might then be angered at that claim. However, it’s not wrong. I can feel angry, but I can never actually BE angry. This is because “angry” doesn’t exist in the ontological sense. It is nothing more than a mood. Sure, there may be true chemicals behind the mood, but the mood itself has no ontological existence. Just as one can never truly be angry (ontologically), one can never actually be their gender identity. It is a no thing.
By now, some of you may be nodding your heads in agreement, while some of you may be frothing at the mouth in search of some way to cancel me for having a spark of an idea that differs from the preprogrammed line of tolerant compliance. Why does it matter? Why do Christians get all up in arms over how others want to live their lives? Why am I so bothered about things that don’t impact me? These are all questions I’m sure we’ve been asked or heard others asked. Thankfully, I love easy questions that don’t require much thought to answer. First, this does impact all of us. I, for one, would like to have my children grow up in a better world. I think this is a desire for most parents. So long as this illogical nonsense continues to be pumped out from the highest levels of worldly positions of authority, it will only normalize irrational thought. Second, and most importantly, it concerns all of us because God is the ultimate authority. He alone sets the standard, and it would behoove all of us to pay careful attention as we seek to heed His decrees.
So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. -- Genesis 1:27, NASB
13 For You created my innermost parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb. 14 I will give thanks to You, because I am awesomely and wonderfully made; Wonderful are Your works, And my soul knows it very well. -- Psalm 139:13-14, NASB
Simply put, God does not make mistakes. He created us as He sees fit, and we can rest secure knowing that we do not exist by accident. This reality should serve as loving comfort for the one who might feel restless and confused with his/her existence. God has a purpose, and we are all made, male and female, exactly as God sees fit. The concept that we must all accept transgenderism as being something of substance really is a worldview in line with atheism more than anything. It’s a worldview that says there is no God, so we now make our own standards of what is right or wrong as we seek to redefine love and kindness as well as gender. But there is another problem with this line of thinking. Why do people who openly deny the existence of God still claim we should be kind to others and practice good morals?
While I don’t disagree with the practical action of demonstrating love and kindness, I fail to see how one who rejects God could possibly come to the conclusion that this is good and right. In a world without God, what standard are we to use to determine morality or that which is good? Why is one standard better than another which may proclaim we should fall into murderous anarchy? You may reply that the one that tells us to not harm others is the best, but why is that? How can advanced forms of primordial sludge be capable of determining right from wrong or, furthermore, making a definitive declaration of morality? Beyond that, if God doesn’t exist and we’re all advanced/evolved sludge, why does it matter what happens to us in this purposeless existence where nobody has any authority to call the other wrong or immoral?
In the Christian worldview, God is the absolute Standard upon whom all other standards are measured against. Without God, morality, logic, standards, and reasoning cease to exist in any absolute sense, and it all becomes inconsistent relativity subject to our own ever-changing whims.
“Oh, but the feelings are real, and we must live in accordance with them,” you may say. If this is your rebuttal, have you ever challenged your position for consistency? I honestly don’t think anybody can understand it because it violates laws of logic. You may say we feel, but why are my feelings any more accurate/valuable/meaningful/viable than yours (or vice versa)? If you agree that neither of those four terms would apply, that leaves things to pure emotion and subjectivity. Once again, we’re at the same place we were before where nobody has the right to tell another they’re wrong or immoral as such terms of standards simply don’t exist. Everything would have to be relative, and, in the end, there is no spoon (name the movie reference for bonus points).
However, I don’t believe many actually live in this manner. Based on my interactions, it appears the multitudes of godless ones (it’s funny how this term often offends those who don’t believe in God) do value feelings as well as the well being of others. If that is a true statement, it does necessitate the secular worldview borrowing from the Christian worldview (which I hold is the only consistent worldview that has reason to ascribe value to anything at all). The bottom line is the atheist ascribes valueless value as put forth by themselves, while the Christian subscribes to absolute value as put forth by God.
After reading all of that, my hope is that you can now see exactly why it matters. We live in an age of great debauchery and vileness. My own experience tells me we need to preach the gospel now more than ever, but I know this isn’t the case. Men and women everywhere have always needed a Savior ever since eating the forbidden fruit in the garden. There is nothing new under the sun (Ecclesiastes 1:9). Thankfully, God has provided the answer in the Person of the Son. He sent His Son to live a sinless life of perfect righteousness, only to die on the cross for all who were His. In this act, those who believe receive His perfect righteousness as He takes on our sin. This is known as The Great Exchange, and we receive the benefits by faith alone in the risen Christ. Believe in Jesus and be saved but believe not and be damned (Mark 16:16).
I don’t say any of this to pick a fight. I say it because it is what actual love requires. There is nothing loving about embracing ungodly behavior and a wicked worldview, all under the false pretense of unity and tolerance. In fact, to do so is to display the epitome of hatred toward our fellow man. No, my friends, I choose love!
~ Travis W. Rogers