In the context of current culture, ‘woke’ means “alert to racial prejudice and discrimination.” Beginning in the 2010s, it came to encompass a broader awareness of social inequalities such as sexism, and has also been used as shorthand for left-wing ideas involving identity politics and social justice.i The following section of this paper (up to, but not including Roman numeral one) expresses how the political left views Biblical Christianity’s convictions on gender and sexuality. What Scripture teaches about gender and sexuality is viewed by the progressives as a form of discrimination known as sexism. Sexism is composed of three subcomponents:
1) paternalism, 2) gender differentiation, and 3) heterosexuality. The term, 1) Paternalism relates to sexism in that stereotyped attitudes that stem out of the idea that women are inferior and weaker than men and need to be protected from other men, society, and themselves. Sexism emphasizes that gender stereotypes lead to ‘sexist attitudes’. By way of contrast, ‘Complementary gender differentiation’ (the Biblical view) places importance on traditional gender roles for women (e.g., mother & wife) and assumes that men rely on women to fulfill these gender roles. Sexism describes 2) Gender differentiation as the process of assigning social significance to biological differences between the sexes. Woke ideology stresses that gender differentiation often results in gender inequality, with one gender being regarded as inferior to the other with regard to certain activities (i.e. sports, military service, leadership in religion, etc.). 3) Heterosexuality (in the context of sexism) is also known as heterosexism. According to woke ideology, heterosexism is a system of attitudes, bias, and discrimination in favor of male-female (binary) sexuality and relationships. Heterosexism is defined in the online editions of the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language and the Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary as anti-gay discrimination or prejudice “by heterosexual people.” Heterosexism denotes the “system of ideological thought that makes heterosexuality the sole norm to follow for sexual practices.”
The political left claims that the main effect of heterosexism is the marginalization of gay men, lesbians, and bisexuals and has led to stigmatization and persecution of not only these people but also those of other sexual diversity such as transgender, and transsexual people. Woke sentiment insists that heterosexism continues to be a significant social reality that compels people to conceal their homosexual or bisexual orientation, or metaphorically, to remain ‘in the closet’ in an effort to pass for heterosexual. This marginalization also occurs when marriage rights are heterosexist (i.e. exclusive to male-female couples). Same-sex couples, be they gay, lesbian, straight or mixed, are prevented from ‘enjoying’ marriage’s corresponding legal privileges, especially those regarding property rights, health benefits, and child custody. The woke view asserts that such limitation prevents same-sex couples from receiving the inherent social respect of marriage and its cultural symbolism.
Dear reader, this ‘woke’ view of gender and sexuality described above has thrived in the philosophical soil of identity politics. Let me explain, by assigning personal identity to a perverse sexual behavior (homosexuality), the progressive elites have successfully convinced a substantial portion of the Western world that sexual deviancy is not merely a behavior, but is actually a personal identity worthy of advocacy by the public. And, since those practicing sexual deviancy are now regarded by the left as an aggrieved group deprived of recognition, representation, and opportunity—caring citizens ought to advocate for them as well as celebrate their ‘identity’. The effect downstream of this ‘woke’ view of gender and sexuality is going to be the persecution of Christ’s church. And, the initial form of opposition to God’s people will likely be first be felt economically. Enter stage left, a rapidly rising phenomenon known a woke capitalism. And, according to ‘woke capitalism’, business practices ought to be aimed at affirming and ‘raising up’ the status of those in LBGTQ and transgender communities. “When the head of the world’s largest money manager BlackRock issued his annual letter to CEOs, his latest and strongest push for business leaders to embrace social purpose beyond profits, he continued to turn more than a few heads.” What he has embraced is the emerging ideology of “Conscious Capitalism.”ii
By conscious capitalism, we mean that corporations now aggressively seek, or at least profess to seek, change in the world. This quest for change almost always involves embracing the progressive or ‘woke’ side of an issue. We are seeing the politicization of commerce. Asserts author Vivek Ramaswamy, ‘woke capitalism is a scam meant to help companies seek profit.’ In this case, the wokeness is a cynical cover by executives to attract customers and employees by signaling that the corporation shares their values and is part of their [woke] tribe. This is truly breathtaking, for day to day business has become a forum for virtue signaling. Some companies are even using the threat of economic sanctions and termination against employees or localities that do not follow progressive norms—and, as one fellow quipped, “tyranny is what happens when ‘good ideas’ become mandatory.” Are there solutions to this tacit oppression? ‘There are’ suggests Vivek Ramaswamy. In his book, Woke Inc., he proposes the following: “have wokeness classified as a religion because woke beliefs are sincerely held and make claims about ‘ultimate ideas,’ (that’s the current standard under federal law for whether something is a religious belief).” Woke ideology has all the earmarks of what is rapidly becoming a state-sponsored ‘religion’ or more appropriately, the reigning ‘corporate cult’.iii
During the final weeks of the Trump administration, the federal Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) issued an important regulation that would have required financial institutions to base their rules governing access to banking services on financial concerns, rather than political views. According to the Trump-era OCC. “The rule codifies more than a decade of OCC guidance stating that banks should conduct risk assessment of individual customers, rather than make broad-based decisions affecting whole categories or classes of customers, when provisioning access to services, capital, and credit.”iv The Trump administration’s rule would have provided an important safeguard against large banks—defined by the OCC as those “with more than $100 billion in assets that may exert significant pricing power or influence over sectors of the national economy”—using their vast wealth and financial power to impose their ideological views on Americans.v
Although it seemed like the rule ought to have drawn significant bipartisan support—do liberals really want big banks punishing people who don't agree with them?—soon after taking office, President Biden put the rule on a 60-day hold. The Biden administration's move was a clear signal that was intended to kill the regulation before it went into effect on April 1, 2022. One might be tempted to think big banks would support the Trump-era rule because it would allow them to take politics completely out of their financial decision-making process. The regulation would have provided them an excuse when special-interest groups on the Left or Right demand they get involved in controversial debates. That, unfortunately, could not be further from reality. Large banks are some of the rule’s biggest opponents, and many financial institutions have already started to roll out plans for using this opportunity to promote liberal ideology—and to earn a profit while doing so. Many of the elected officials which make up congress have aligned themselves with large financial institutions seeking to eliminate the rule, because they want to allow banks to impose liberalism on the American people. Many on the left want to allow banks to discriminate on the basis of political ideology—a number of large banks have already used their power to promote a variety of causes favored by political progressives. vi
In view of this attack upon democratic values, one bank president who is a strong Christian said the following: “we’re headed toward a kind of ‘woke mark of the beast’; you won’t be able to buy or sell without the ‘woke mark’.” The ‘woke mark’ that may someday be required in order to grant permission to engage in commerce is known as a DEI statement; a statement of Diversity, Equality, and Inclusion. According to woke ideology, diversity is expressed in many different ways, including through different races, ethnicities, languages, religions, ages, disabilities, sexual orientations, genders, gender identities, socioeconomic statuses, and more. Equity involves trying to understand and give each person what they need in order for them to achieve an equal footing in life. Equity focuses on helping people obtain what they need in order to get to a place where equality is possible. Inclusion focuses on involving everyone and making sure no one is excluded for reasons like their race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, any disability they may have, or anything else that makes them different. DEI as the putative ‘moral high ground’ is especially prevalent with younger generations who have made diversity and inclusion their cause, and regard themselves as shaping the future of the country. They believe that by celebrating diversity, promoting equity, and creating an inclusive society, the lives of millions who have been overlooked for too long can be improved.
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation’s DEI Commitment Statement claims to be working toward a future that is more diverse, equitable, and inclusive for all. A spokesperson for the organization talks about working toward that goal, “we are not there yet, . . .racism, sexism, and other forms of bias show up in every corner and every aspect of our global society, including in the philanthropic sector. Only through greater diversity, equity, and inclusion—of voices, ideas, and approaches—will we be able to help all people improve their lives.” Notice that ‘sexism’ is cited as a barrier to DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion).vii Consider that DEI statements are being proudly worn by corporations as if they were merit badges. This chest-puffing trend, parading virtue has been noticed; for web-based companies are assisting businesses with the strategic task of writing DEI statements. But, what is truly chilling is that having a DEI statement (which often includes the advocacy of homosexuality and transgenderism) is rapidly becoming the test of whether or not a company is considered equitable and forward thinking. Consequently, corporations are racing at breakneck speed to compose their own DEI statements, in part to prevent lawsuits.
Businesses that offer help in writing DEI statements (diversity & inclusion) stress that a company’s statement ought to guide hiring, customer service, and workplace culture. States Julie Kratz, CEO of Next Pivot Point, “Small business owners should have a DEI statement to show how they plan to represent their community and how they view equality. . .” The DEI statement can be part of your employees’ buy-in, or enrollment process. And, by reviewing the statement with employees at least once a year, you will not only reiterate your commitment, but also make sure employees are aligned with it. If that ideological compliance were not egregious enough, one DEI statement writing service suggests bringing in a coach who can help uncover unconscious bias and thus create ‘neutrality’. If this present writer is not mistaken, that looks a wee bit like Chairman Mao’s use of propaganda in China’s historic cultural revolution.
It would be surprising if you the reader do not find portions of the following DEI statements to be disturbing. Diversity Statement from Aon Company: We believe identifying ourselves as visible and voluntary allies is vital amidst the challenges we face, as it signifies an environment where all colleagues feel supported to bring their whole selves to work. In support of this allyship, we encourage our leaders and colleagues to pledge ‘I’m in.’ This inclusion commitment gives each individual the opportunity to demonstrate their personal dedication to an inclusive culture, while visibly identifying their allyship to others.
Hubspot’s Diversity Statement: We’re passionate about creating an inclusive workplace that promotes and values diversity. Companies that are diverse in age, gender identity, race, sexual orientation, physical or mental ability, ethnicity, and perspective are proven to be better companies. viii
Tesco’s Diversity Statement: As part of our values, we are committed to supporting inclusion and diversity at Tesco. We actively celebrate colleagues’ different abilities, sexual orientation, ethnicity, faith, and gender. Everyone is welcome and supported in their development at all stages in their journey with us.
These statements contain ‘positive’ language, but subtle intent. In Aon’s statement, employees are to ‘pledge, I’m in’. And, in Hubspot’s statement, companies with diverse sexual orientations are ‘proven to be better companies.’ And, in Tesco’s statement, ‘colleagues with different sexual orientations are to be celebrated.’ Can faithful believers be in hearty agreement with these statements? This present author does not believe so.
What we have learned in these first four pages is that the woke narrative regards God’s plan for gender and sexuality to be antiquated, bigoted, and discriminatory. Thus, from the woke perspective, the Biblical pattern for man and woman is to be held in contempt and derision. The truths of Scripture regarding gender and sexuality are placed under the disdainful heading of sexism. The woke narrative views hetero-normality as narrowminded, even hateful. What we are witnessing is the paganization of our culture, resulting in the desacralization of the body. A culture that has embraced a form of Gnostic dualism that exalts the ‘humanitarian spiritual self’, while defiling the body through sexual immorality.ix The incalculable weight of bearing the image of God has been lost, and with it, the sanctity of the body. People are basing their identities on their sexual practices, on arbitrary categories of personhood. The abandonment of the truth of the image of God as the ontological source of intrinsic worth and meaning has been replaced with sexual behavior as the foundation of one’s core identity. This can only end in dystopia when a culture enshrines arbitrary properties such as sexual orientation as the ground of personhood. “And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a reprobate mind to do those things which are not proper” (Rom 1:28-32).
I. The big five culture-shapers today are: 1) Corporate America, 2) Big government, 3) The media, 4) Journalism, and, 5) The academy. Each of these five culture-shapers is pushing for the advocacy of ‘woke’ ideology/theology including the ‘fallacy’ of same sex marriage. We rightly call it a ‘fallacy’ because you really can’t marry someone of your own gender. And, in addition to pushing the same-sex marriage narrative, these big five culture-shapers are also attacking the sanctity of life by making abortion on demand ever easier through subsidies. x Just to document how much this has changed, our culture has moved from the sacredness of sex to the safety or consent of sex. We live in a culture that is at war with God’s blueprint, and the big five culture-shaping agents are putting more and more pressure on us to capitulate in the name of diversity, equity, and inclusion. Large corporations are fully in favor of these distortions of God’s morals. They are hoping that you will be quiet about your Christianity, or that you will be part of the capitulation to their woke narrative. xi
When we think about the fact that our culture has moved into a society of sexual immorality and lethality (lethal to the unborn), it behooves us to consider that historically every culture that has advocated sexual immorality has also devalued life. xii We are certainly seeing that. Our culture has found a way to ‘legally’ kill babies. How can that culture stand? We can be certain from Scripture that God is going to severely judge that kind of society. Author John O. Anderson has documented this nihilistic reduction of the value of human life in his book, The Cry of the Innocents. He draws upon Israel’s history recorded in the O.T. As the Hebrew nation embraced the Canaanite fertility cults with their worship of sex, at the same time they began to sacrifice their infants to idols. The covenant nation abandoned the Law of God, and became enslaved to sin and the horror of infanticide (Hos 4:6-5:15). The Western world is following suit.
When Israel was originally freed from Egyptian bondage, the Lord sat them down and said in effect, ‘Here are my laws. You must obey these laws. It is the only way to stay free (Ex 20:1-2ff.; Deut 5:6). ‘Here’s what the pagan cultures around you are doing, and you must not drift into these practices.’ In Leviticus chapters 18-20, God is saying, now that you are free from being slaves in Egypt, do not let this happen. Do not imitate the cultures around you! You will be destroyed if you do. For those cultures practice sexual perversion and murder, even sacrificing their infants to horrid idols (Jer 7:30-31). God’s blueprint was, here’s how to fear and revere Me, here is how to stay free before Me. I am directing you on the sanctity of life, the sanctity of gender, the sanctity of marriage, the sanctity of work, the sanctity of worship, and the sanctity of rest (the sabbath).’xiii Idolatry destroys sanctity by profaning what God has designated ‘sacred’.
II. Our culture is waging war against the knowledge of God by warring against the sacred distinctions God has made (2 Cor 10:3-5). In fact, the big five culture-shapers are prosecuting a war against God (the infallible distinction-maker) by waging war on the binaries and distinctions He has created. They are defying the Creator Himself by defying the distinctions He has made! That is no proxy war, it is direct aggression which opposes the character and governance of Almighty God. If we are going to confront this rebellion, and educate the rising generation, we need to know the book of Genesis quite well, especially chapters 1-3. For, the book of Genesis informs us on how to address, ethically, the issue today of gender and sexuality.
Our mission as Bible-believing Christians is to make disciples of Christ Jesus by teaching those disciples everything that our Lord has commanded, including all the ethical sanctities that the Lord has established. xiv They are initially spelled out of course in the first five books of the Bible. God wants us to know Him as our Rescuer from our innate love of darkness (Jn 3:19-21). One of the ways He rescues us is by giving us His blueprint for living free under His ordered world, honoring what He has established as sacred. He has a blueprint for gender and marriage that is indispensable to building a thriving culture made up of flourishing families.
God’s commandments on gender and marriage are not a religious imposition on men and women. Rather, His commandments are fixed creation structures as real as the sun, moon and stars—‘cosmological DNA’ if you will. His commands are a sovereign act in which He creates, and then blesses—pronouncing a benediction on man and woman and heterosexual marriage. Their unity (as one flesh) in the marriage covenant is the result of God creating them male and female, possessing different natures and distinct genders. In other words, their gender differences form the basis of their complementarity—their perfect fitted-ness of one for the other. Their gender distinction makes their intimacy and oneness possible, to the glory of their Creator.xv Christians have been slow to recognize and articulate this foundational truth in Genesis 1-3. And, as a consequence, have been far too mute in the face of the woke agenda that is seeking to an advance a pagan understanding of gender and sexuality by promoting the lie of ‘gender fluidity’.
As we talk about worldview, we must start with the Scriptures and not with our own mind. If we start with our own mind and not the infallible Word of God, we are bound to drift into speculation and trust our opinions and sinful impulses rather than God.
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened (Rom 1:18-21).
The Lord wants us to approach knowledge by ‘thinking His thoughts after Him’, and that means we must understand God’s relationship to the world. Paul summarizes this relationship in Acts 17.
The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands; nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all people life and breath and all things; and He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation, (Acts 17:24-27).
Biblical theism teaches us that the foundational binary for all existence is the Creator creature distinction. God is self-existent. We are utterly dependent. Thus, there are two types of existence in our cosmos: 1) self-existence (God alone), and 2) utterly dependent existence (all of creation). God has given testimony about the source and sustenance of all of life: He is the Ruler, the Owner, the Director, and the Definer of a wholly dependent creation (Job 34:10-15; Is 40:12-26; Dan 4:34-35; Amos 5:8-9). He is the One who by His sovereign act of creating ex nihilo (out of nothing) (Heb 11:3) brought all things into existence (Ps 33:6-9ff.).
But, our anti-God culture today is striking back at the primary binary; the Creator-creature distinction. They are attacking God by targeting the binaries and the distinctions that He has made, but, they often conceal that hostility. They won’t usually say, ‘we are at war with God the Originator, God the Owner, God the Definer, and God the Director.’ They’re not quite so overt about it, but they’ll openly attack the distinctions and binaries that He has established. That is how they frame their attack against Him. They make super statements (sweeping claims) about human existence, liberty, and about gender and sexuality, as if they were the architects of reality and the omnipotent designers of a just society. But, to summarize, God is the Author, Upholder, and Focal point of reality. “For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever. Amen” (Rom 11:36). We must confront an anti-God culture by declaring God’s sovereignty. Be willing to proclaim, ‘Look, ethics do not originate from the supreme court, or from a cultural trend.’ ‘The moral standard to which we are accountable originates from God Himself, from His unchanging character, and from His laws set forth in His infallible Word’. ‘Life is found in God and in the redemption that is through His Son’ (1 Jn 5:11-13). ‘Life is obedience to His commands.’ ‘The whole creation is witness to the ordered freedom that God has set forth’:
I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants, by loving the Lord your God, by obeying His voice, and by holding fast to Him; for this is your life and the length of your days. . . (Deut 30:19-20a).
III. Heterosexuality and monogamous marriage is by divine decree. It is a sovereign action that is blessed and sanctified by God. It is the only good, holy, shameless, God-honoring, sexuality. It is originated by God by decree. Therefore, it has a sanctity associated with it. Now both male and female bear God’s divine image, but in heterosexual monogamous marriage, husband and wife together have a more full expression of who God is— both male and female together in marriage expressing God and imaging him (Gen 1:27). By divine design, there is God-honoring beauty in the gender differences of male and female.
For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man; for indeed man was not created for the woman’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake. Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. However, in the Lord, neither is woman independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as the woman originates from the man, so also the man has his birth through the woman; and all things originate from God (1 Cor 11:7-12).
This present evil world system is animated by Satan, “We know that we are of God, and that the whole world lies in the power of the evil one” (1 Jn 5:19). The demonically energized world system is striking out at the primary binary, the Creator-creature distinction. And that primary binary, or distinction, expresses itself within the creation itself as male and female in marriage. But, as it says in Psalm 2:1-3, the attitude of the rulers and authorities of this age is, ‘We will not have God rule over us.’ ‘We will make the definitions.’ ‘We will determine what constitutes a flourishing society.’ The rebellious ‘we’ here includes the big five culture-shapers mentioned earlier.
Why are the nations in an uproar
And the peoples devising a vain thing?
The kings of the earth take their stand
And the rulers take counsel together
Against the Lord and against His Anointed, saying, “Let us tear their fetters apart
And cast away their cords from us!”
Our culture has bought into a false definition of freedom, even casting the distorted definitions of gender and sexuality as the pathway to a utopian existence (2 Pet 2:19). That demonic definition of freedom is their entry point into how our culture seeks to justify these things, ‘Why, you Christians don’t believe in freedom of opportunity or in equality!’ Thus, to summarize, our culture views the erasure of divinely ordained distinctions (binaries) as progress for humanity, as the net gain of additional liberties. That narrative of ever-increasing democratic rights is being used to oppose Bible-believing Christians. Genuine believers (in their support of the Biblical binaries), are cast by woke culture as bitter opponents of progress and freedom. Thus, Christians, in taking a stand for the sacred distinctions God has made, are frequently labeled absolutists (totalitarians), or exclusionists (discriminatory). Whereas, the progressives, the ‘high priests of secularism’, style themselves as defenders of liberty and inclusion because they have declared war on divine distinctions which (from their vantage point) discriminate, or ‘exclude’ certain lifestyles.
By contrast, Christians champion a freedom that is ordered and structured by God. By divine design we are lovingly bounded creatures, bounded by His good and wise and holy laws. Thus, to fight against His laws (breaking from our ‘boundedness’) is to dishonor God and to harm ourselves and others in the process. What we are witnessing in our culture is a massive revolt against the fixity, and authority of God’s laws. We now live in a culture of immorality, insanity, absurdity, and lethality (as in deadly).xvi These are the effects of choosing to live by sensual and lustful impulses, rather than by the commandments of God which comprise the true safeguard of love. In diagnosing the rampant sexual and gender anarchy we are witnessing today, we can assert from Scripture that monosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, and transsexuality are distortions invented by sinful men and women (see Romans 1:24-27).
We must not forget the fact that each of these distortions of God’s plan tends to have financial, or profit-driven motives associated with them. There is a certain industry behind each one of these sexual distortions. Monosexuality is associated with the use of pornography which is a multibillion-dollar industry. Transsexuality has billions of dollars associated with it in the form of gender reassignment surgery as well as the countless physicians who are willing to prescribe hormones in an attempt to prevent the normal sexual development of one’s particular biological gender. In addition, there is a huge taxpayer-driven financial industry associated with abortion. Children are destroyed because they are inconvenient, and/or imperfect. The drugs behind all of these aberrations also are associated with an industry of profit.
IV. How aware are you that the world with its ‘woke’ agenda is coming after your children? Are you raising children? Are you homeschooling your children? Are you catechizing your children in the Scriptures? Albert Mohler notes in his program, “The Briefing” that the public schools are the way of gaining control of children. “. . . in some circles, they're bold about saying that right out loud. . . [states Mohler] “Let's go back to a statement that was written in 1909. This is by Ellwood Cubberley, ‘Each year, the child is coming to belong more and more to the state and less and less to the parent.’ . . .The man who wrote that was writing it with the confidence that the public schools were going to be the engine to accomplish that. Ellwood Cubberley was a professor of education at Stanford University. He represented a generation that identified as progressive, and they believed that the government needed to move in and seize control of children and the minds of children on behalf of the state to seize those children from their parents in one way or another.”xvii Mohler states that Harvard historian, Jill Lepore observes that even back then parents were often considered by the progressives to be the enemy of the interests of the state. Lepore continues, “Parenthood as an identity and even as a class of rights bearers is a product, both of progressive reform and of those who resisted it.” She continues, “The magazine, Parents, began publishing in 1926.” Here's a quote she offers from the magazine, “Devoted, but unenlightened parenthood is a dangerous factor in the lives of children,” that’s by the editor of Parents Magazine! And as the editor maintained, “. . .Parents weren't to be trusted to know how to raise children. They had to be taught by experts.” xviii
Speaking of so-called experts, the world is now quite happy if your child has any expression of gender dysphoria whatsoever, that is, any question marks about their gender. xix ‘Experts’ (who claim to know what is best for your child) are now saying, ‘We are ready in an instant to give you the hormones or whatever is needed to follow your [gender] confusion.’ But historically, those who have examined this particular area of life, can say in regard to careful research that 3-5% of adolescents go through a stage in which they have some questions about being comfortable with their gender. But, most of these individuals in that 3-5% group find that it is only a stage they are passing through, and once they complete adolescence and move into adulthood, 98% of those with some doubts about their gender discover that the issue is reconciled just through maturing into adulthood. So that 2% of the 3% to 5% is a very miniscule percent, and historically that has been rectified by personal counseling not by mutilation or not by delayed adolescence through hormones, or not through that awful, proposed procedure of reassignment surgery.xx As one pastor said, “Even if someone did receive reassignment surgery, if that person died and they were dug up 100 years later, the DNA would be very clearly either male or female. Reassignment surgery did not produce a different gender.”xxi
V. Monosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, and transsexuality are all inventions of sinful men, by those at war with what God has deemed sacred. xxii These activities are condemned in Leviticus chapters 18-20. God warned us against them, but the Western world now assumes these behaviors comprise new areas of freedom and inclusion, and that we have been prudish for far too long. New legislation is coming out all the time to protect this particular type of perversion. Never mind the fact that the Western world has been liberated from pagan sexuality for over 800 years, and now they are walking back into pagan sexuality and advocating it even from the White House: xxiii
Today, the Biden-Harris Administration recognizes Transgender Day of Visibility, an annual celebration of the resilience, achievements, and joy of transgender people in the United States and around the world. Every American deserves the freedom to be themselves. But far too many transgender Americans still face systemic barriers, discrimination, and acts of violence. Today, the Administration once again condemns the proliferation of dangerous anti-transgender legislative attacks that have been introduced and passed in state legislatures around the country. The evidence is clear that these types of bills stigmatize and worsen the well-being and mental health of transgender kids, and they put loving and supportive families across the country at risk of discrimination and harassment. As the President has said, these bills are government overreach at its worst, they are un-American, and they must stop. xxiv
Though the content of the quote above poses as occupying the ‘moral high ground’, Bible-believing Christians will not be buffaloed by this clever language. We have a Christian message that definitely needs to be heard. Our God is sovereign. He is the source of life. He is Creator. He has a perfect all-wise ‘blueprint for humanity, He is Holy Redeemer. He will bring every act into account (Eccl 12:14; Mt 10:26; Rom 2:16). We can only know Him through His self-revelation in His infallible Word. God has created heterosexuality to be expressed in monogamous marriage. There is a sanctity associated with heterosexual monogamous marriage. It says in Hebrews 13:4, “The marriage bed is honorable above all.” The institution of marriage is not just for Bible-believing Christians, it is the very unit which makes up an organized healthy flourishing civilization. Marriage is to be a conjugal, heterosexual, monogamous covenant according to God’s Word. Marriage is not simply a partnership of convenience. It involves a 100% commitment from the man and from the woman. It is a covenant before God. It is designed to protect us because all sexuality outside of marriage comes with particular kinds of consequences.xxv “Fornicators and adulterers God will judge” (Heb 13:4). “For this is the will of God, your sanctification; that is, that you abstain from sexual immorality; that each of you know how to possess his own vessel in sanctification and honor, not in lustful passion, like the Gentiles who do not know God; and that no man transgress and defraud his brother in the matter because the Lord is the avenger in all these things, just as we also told you before and solemnly warned you” (1 Thess 4:4-6).
VI. Marital sexuality alone is honorable, without shame, and good. And it does take both male and female to truly testify to God’s image (to wholly manifest His image). When we think about these very pivotal chapters in the book of Genesis, the dominion mandate given to Adam is the central feature. He was given a helpmate in order to provide support in fulfilling the dominion mandate. In God giving dominion to Adam, he was to rule over, and bring order and bounty to what God had created (Gen 1:28). God gave him a helpmate to complete him, and to assist him in that process of fulfilling the dominion mandate (Gen 2:18-22). God did not give another man, He gave Adam a wife, a woman taken from his own side (Gen 2:21-23). Together the male and female are able to subdue, rule over, and exercise dominion and multiply on the face of the earth. So God made marriage not only to complete the man, but to fulfill what God designed the man to do, and that is exercise rule and stewardship of the earth. The complementarity inherent in heterosexuality initiates the marriage (and causes the process of dominion) allowing this man and woman to initiate, recreate, procreate, celebrate, and fulfill the great commission. xxvi As Vishal Mangalwadi observes, heterosexual, monogamous marriage is a culture-making covenant. xxvii In making one woman for one man, God intends that the man’s fidelity to his wife manifest itself in responsible moral stability. From that commitment, a man’s energies can be devoted to the dominion mandate, no matter the husband’s vocational calling.
Fewer people are marrying today; they are living together in cohabitation or simply engaging in fornication. The gospel is the only answer to this, for the gospel is the double cure. It delivers from sin’s guilt and shame, and delivers from sin’s bondage and controlling power (Rom 6:17-23). We have a message to the world that has walked away from God’s commandments, that even if you have lived a lifestyle advocating sexual immorality, you can be washed, you can be purified, forgiven, and sanctified according to 1 Corinthians 6:11. God will give you a new record in heaven, a new life, a new home, a new family of fellow believers and a new mind that you might live through Christ and live for Christ (2 Cor 5:17ff.). xxviii
Countless Christian churches are unprepared for the onslaught of opposition that is coming from the woke narrative. We may not be able to hold back our culture’s avalanche of evil, but we can equip ourselves to give every man an answer of the hope that is within us.
But even if you should suffer for the sake of righteousness, you are blessed. And do not fear their intimidation, and do not be troubled, but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence; and keep a good conscience so that in the thing in which you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ will be put to shame (1 Pet 3:14-16).
Notice the command, ‘sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts’. That means we are to affirm our submission to His control, instruction, and guidance. And in doing so, we are declaring His sovereign majesty over all. To ‘sanctify’ is to set apart Christ as the sole object of our love, reverence, loyalty and obedience—thereby extolling His preeminence, and submitting ourselves to His will—even when it involves suffering.xxix This reverent, submissive, worshipful posture before Christ is our most essential preparation before we attempt to ‘give every man an answer’. For, at the second advent when Christ returns in blazing glory (2 Thess 1:5-12), there will be a mighty vindication of the Lord of Glory for His suffering and humiliation (Phil 2:9-11).
When Christ returns as rightful Lord of the cosmos, the Father’s purpose that His Son have first place in everything will be fully realized (Col 1:18). The sight of Christ coming in glory will instantaneously produce a cosmic appraisal, or assize—exposing, and reducing to vanity the paltry nature of all lesser pursuits other than the glory of God in the face of Christ. But even more, when Christ returns, His glorious preeminence as the Logos will fill the creation as the waters cover the seafloor. “For the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea” (Hab 2:14). The Son of God is the Creator of cosmology (the beautifully ordered cosmos with its ‘creation structures’). At the heart of those creation structures which He has formed, reside male and female as the image of God. The distortion of God’s good gifts, and the shame our culture celebrates will be swept away in an instant. When Christ returns, He will set all things in order. Perversity, deviancy, and immorality will not be found in His Kingdom. Thus, the coming Kingdom age will be witness to the fact that everything will occupy its intended design and purpose (i.e. the pattern ordered by Christ, the Logos). The true believer eagerly waits for his Savior’s return (Rom 8:23).
Christ is honored and glorified now when we adhere to the blueprint He has established for mankind. When Christians honor the distinctions which Logos created: male and female, heterosexual monogamous marriage, parent and child, etc., they are honoring the Lord who created those distinctions. As such, faithful obedient believers constitute a kind of stake-holding, as placeholders who are eagerly awaiting their Champion’s return. Our obedience now, in a world looking more and more like the days of Noah, is our preparation for the coming perfect order in the Kingdom of God.xxx In the age to come, the Kingdom of God will be made up of those who love the Lord and who are found doing the Father’s will. But, those who love the world will pass away with it (1 Jn 2:15-17). Although the woke narrative appears to be gaining ground, it is temporal phenomenon, as fragile as a house of cards. Christian be heartened, for an age of cosmological holiness is nearing, in which each and every creation structure that Logos has made will fulfill its teleological goal as a perfect glory pointer—that God might be praised by His entire creation forever (Is 65:17-25).
End Notes:
i Def. of ‘woke’ from Wikipedia
ii Brett Hurt, “’Woke capitalism’ is a new ideology for a digital economy,” www.data.world, 2.9.22
iii Brian Knight, “The Danger of Woke Capitalism,” Discourse Magazine, 12.14.21
iv Justin Haskins, “Under Joe Biden, Woke Banks run Wild,” Newsweek, Opinion, 3.25.21
v Ibid.
vi Ibid.
vii Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Diversity, Equity, Inclusion (DEI) Statement
viii www.blog/ongig
ix “Standing up to Corruption with A. J. Hurley,” Director at Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust
x Harry Reeder, “Gender and Sexuality,” Ligonier Ministries, March 25, 2022
xi Ibid.
xii John O. Anderson, The Cry of the Innocents, and the Race toward Judgment, Bridge-Logos, Inc. 1984
xiii Harry Reeder, “Gender and Sexuality”
xiv Ibid.
xv Peter Jones, One or Two?
xvi Harry Reeder
xvii Albert Mohler, “The Briefing,” April 13, 2022
xviiiJill Lepore in Mohler, “The Briefing,” April 13, 2022
xix Harry Reeder
xx Ibid.
xxi Ibid.
xxii Ibid.
xxiii Ibid.
xxiv The White House, “Statements and Releases,” March 31, 2022
xxv Harry Reeder
xxvi Ibid.
xxvii Vishal Mangalwadi, “Must the Sun set on the West?”
xxviii Harry Reeder
xxix The MacArthur New Testament Commentary, 1 Peter, Moody Press, pp. 200-201
xxx Peter Jones, One or Two?