How Adventists Get Sex and Gender Wrong

If we use the earliest manuscripts that we now have, the take on Genesis isn’t what it is in modern English translations. With that in mind I don’t think you will find good scholarship that holds the view that we have derived in modernity. The author’s of the article that is the basis of the discussion aptly points out that our conceptions today are very very recent, the past 200 years or so when it come to the science that we now know.

Again I think we are asking the wrong questions of a very very old text and story, that it is not prepared to answer, nor even conceived of when it was passed via verbal tradition or even written down. Again I would suggest that God, as an integral part of creation, whether via evolution or other means, put within that system the process that create variation, and part of variation is what we see in the two pairs of chromosome that we are focused on. Further we should realize that it is not just these two chromosomes that do the work of gender differentiation, and beyond that it is not just chromosomes.

And before you ask, none of this is a result of sin, as people often like to suggest, it is just part of the system as it was designed and implemented.

1 Like

When a 6’3" formerly identified male shows up at the pool competing with women, it doesn’t matter what he thinks he is. Physically he will overpower any biological female. My understanding is that unless puberty is interrupted for a male, he will develop muscle mass and height as a male. This is why there’s been an emphasis to reassign gender before puberty. That’s unfortunate, to make those decisions for young children.

By the way - help me out. I’m trying to find some written indication that there was no female gender back in the OT times. The OT, itself, certainly makes a distinction right from the get go. In fact, women were considered property. Of course, in a male dominated society everything refers back to men as in English for words like “mankind”, man-made, etc. That’s not biological issue, but social and cultural.

the earliest manuscripts, from what i’ve seen, confirm that God created male and female genders for humanity, and throughout many other living forms, at Creation…we don’t see trans, intersex, or bigender variants interspersed among living forms for which male and female genders were spoken into existence…why are these variants missing…even at the time of Noah’s flood, at least two thousand yrs later, gender variants in human and all saved animal species appear to be missing…

if we have any doubts about the Genesis story, and what it’s saying on the gender front for humans, we have Christ’s own words in Mk 10:6, that from the beginning, at Creation, humanity was created as male and female…he’s not saying that from the beginning, at Creation, God designed a spectrum of genders for humanity, which he could have, if it were true…and if it were true, his audience would have known that Christ’s stark binary take was false…

The fact that you willfully refer to Lia Thomas with male pronouns and address is offensive, period!

Second, the reality is that SHE didn’t and doesn’t overpower every other woman in the pool. Lia holds no national or international records as evidence. In fact she won only one event, in all of the swimming events that take place at the NCAA meet, and her time was well off the world record, just for the record.

A look at the science cuts both way for transgender women who transition after puberty by the way. Although they loose a significant amount of aerobic capacity, and a fair bit of muscle mass, they loose virtually no skeletal mass. The reality is that the science is less than definitive about what advantages a transgender woman athlete has and what that might mean in the wide variety of sports that there are.

As for your search, the OT as with all of the Bible clearly delineates gender roles, and position within society. the Bible does nothing to help us out with the biology of the genetic and human development of people with the exception that Jesus talks about eunuchs that were born that way, what ever that inference means. Looking at other Jewish writing we can find that they clearly recognized intersex people existed…

4 Likes

@vandieman Jesus was a first century person/man, addressing a 1st century world. Again the Bible just isn’t a biology text and doesn’t do anything to inform us about this. I expect we see the Bible very differently.

3 Likes

i don’t think this fact gives the kind of room for plausible ambiguity i think you’re looking for…even in our world, terms like male and female have a clear meaning…

i agree with you here…

Probably with cause, but you do seem to have a large chip on your shoulder. I wasn’t trying to be offensive. I tend to call people by how they present themselves visually, without being privy to their chromosome configuration.

1 Like

Intersex and transgenderism do not overlap.

@interestedreader either it is intersexism and transgenderism or intersex and transgender…

I wouldn’t be as certain as you seem to be… the evidence is not clear one way or the other when you look at causation. We just don’t have that answer at this point in time.

Correction. Sorry : Intersex and Transexual rarely ever ovelap… (That would be history not epistemology).
Or Intersex and Transexualism. I don’t do non words.
Intersex is linked to hard science.
The modern take on gender is about essence, by definition you cannot get to science this way…

I find this text anachronistic. Very simply put: the debate that we are having today about gender and sex was not relevant in 1998. The social discourse has moved on and the stakes are different. In the same vein, God was never “binary” and it never was a problem. It’s not news.
I believe that the world view of Genesis 1 and 2 differs vastly from the greco-roman worldview. The “cut” between the sexes (ie genders) is complex, internal and yet duality does exist. It’s different from the one sex greco-roman way of thinking.
Interestingly, Paul is opening up the vir category in the New Testament to all the subcategories of non-vir : Galatians 3:28. This is mind blowing when we understand the context.
He is revisiting the gender dichotomy of his time and offering a christian blueprint that is actually still valid.
He does a second layer : the picture of every believer as bride of Christ. Christ/God the vir, the only true vir. We (men and women) the brides, This is also Paul participating in a wider debate with the rabbis of his time giving a positive spin to what “women” meant at that time.
The parable of the 10 virgins has the same idea.
What makes us tick is perhaps that though we know that something is amiss we have not as a church made the necessary intellectual and structural adjustments needed to be in better adequation with the word of God, and thus we remain entangled in a worldly discussion that is actually beyond obsolete.

2 Likes

Ah, I agree with this and the SDA church along with a much wider swath of Christendom has not make the shift you speak of. Well stated!

One thing I do know is I that at this point in time we disagree at least partially, yet I am still opened to dialogue. Happy thanksgiving.

1 Like