No One Fits The Pattern
Of God’s Original Design
When people argue over gay and transgender issues, the arguments are often taken from two different sources: The Bible and science.
Between the two, Bible arguments are the ones that vary the most and those differences come from the way people view it.
- Some don’t believe the Bible at all and dismiss it entirely.
- Some accept the Bible as significant and take a vigorous approach to interpretation.
- Others take the Bible so fanatically, every word is taken literally, no interpretive effort required. This third type is usually referred to as Fundamentalist.
Those who don’t believe the Bible usually avoid any conversations involving the Bible. But there is a very important idea that non-believers need to consider.
The Bible is an ancient document, and we study ancient documents to understand how cultures of the past handled social, cultural issues.
And since the Bible factors largely in discussions about moral and even political issues today, it is imperative that everyone join the discussion, not so much to bash the Bible but to understand the what and why of Bible content.
So even if you don’t believe the Bible, it’s important to be mindful of what it says.
That’s reason for any person, even non-believers, to engage the discussion.
But whatever the case, there’s no question that the biggest problem is interpretation. The Bible is a book. It conveys a message, but what the Bible literally states is not always what the Bible intends to teach and everyone believes that even when they say they don’t.
The answer to this dilemma is for everyone to consider relevant cultural and historical issues for the time period in which laws were given before trying to apply those laws. That is the interpretive process and it should be exercised every time we approach any passage in the Bible.
For example, Leviticus 18:22 (and 20:13) prohibits sex between men. The prohibition also included the penalty, execution. If two men had sex, they were to be executed.
Many today accept that prohibition in principle but they don’t obey the law to the letter. Generally homosexuality and same-sex marriage are opposed, looked down on, shamed and even disallowed in some cases but we stop short at executions.
If you’re following my train of thought, then you realize that what the Bible says – execute gays – is not what people really do. We fail to comply with that extreme and the reason for that may be because we sense that there’s something else to this, that what the Bible is saying in the immediate text may not be what it is teaching.
If we don’t follow through with execution for gays, then we must also question the usual revulsion to same-sex relations.
There are, of course, some who lobby for the execution of gays, not so much in the US but in third world countries. Executions for male to male sexual contact is the law in a few African states but where did that idea come from? How did it become a law in any government?
According to Open Democracy, an investigative journalism site, US Christian organizations have spent over $50M in Africa. That money was aimed at legistlation against LGBT rights and access to safe abortions and contraceptives.
In other words, missionary groups from western countries have inserted their influence in the legislative process.
That isn’t the aim of missionary work but it is the undesirable tendency in missions. When influence can’t be fostered at home, we take it to the streets in developing countries.
Since no one in Western countries obeys these commands, it is fair to ask what it is that motivated this Old Testament law before we jump to conclusions. That’s the most important element of interpretation.
And the Bible does give us a clue.
Since the only Old Testament example of same-sex relations was rape (gang rape – Sodom and Gomorrah), and the participants were only male, then we have to assume the prohibition was aimed at eliminating abuse and excess, not consensual relationships.
In fact, no prohibition was made on female to female relations and, when we investigate, we also have no examples of same sex relations among females. It may have happened but it wasn’t prohibited.
When you consider biblical passages in this light, a principle begins to emerge. Maybe the idea of eliminating abuse was the primary motivation behind all Old Testament laws.
No One Follows The Bible Exactly
In truth, no one takes the Bible literally, word for word. The Bible records instructions given to specific communities in very different eras. Commands given to Israelites during the Exodus, all of which were important and taught principles not obvious in the literal text, can’t be followed to the letter by us today.
We use toilets and indoor plumbing. Holes outside the camp wouldn’t apply.
And the response by those who dismiss portions of the Bible without qualification make the argument, quite rightly, that those who say they accept the Bible completely still dismiss the portions they don’t like and the only difference between the two is which portions they tend to ignore.
There’s a lot of truth in that.
The Fundamentalists ignore huge swaths of Old Testament writ.
- They don’t grow their sideburns long.
- They wear clothes made from blended materials.
- They allow tattoos.
- They don’t observe the Sabbath.
- They eat unclean food.
- They disallow divorce.
There are, of course, long-winded arguments as to why those laws no longer apply, and fundamentalist reasoning tends to divide those laws neatly into safe categories: ceremonial, dietary and moral.
Legal Divisions Are Misplaced
It’s generally agreed that ceremonially laws were only symbolic. Everything involving the Temple service represented God’s desire to save and relate to humanity. The sacrifices, all of them, pictured the sacrifice Jesus would eventually make on the cross.
But we don’t all agree on that. For some, Catholics in particular, personal sacrifices are still necessary for salvation.
The same is true for dietary laws. Many of the prohibited foods were unclean, meaning ingesting them, especially if not cooked properly, could cause disease and even death. Science has helped us understand why those foods were dangerous, and even how to safely prepared and eat those foods.
But we don’t all agree on that either. Some people still refuse to eat pork, even though it is a great source of nutrition when the animals are raised in the right conditions and prepared carefully. It’s also quite tasty.
Most people reserve the last category, moral laws, for special treatment. Any person breaking any of the laws perceived as moral become outcasts. In New England, the Puritans made adulterers wear a large “A” on their outward clothing. For those who drank too much, a large “D” was sewn on their clothes.
We say very little about tattoos and we say nothing about blended clothes or sideburns. We aren’t even certain why those rules were important.
On the surface, present day teachings seem sensible but we still argue over the reason behind most of those laws.
The laws that get most of our attention are the ones we’ve categorized as moral but the reality is all the laws were moral issues. There was no sacrifice to cover intentional sins of any kind (Numbers 15:30-31), even breaking the Sabbath.
Only grace and mercy could atone for willfully breaking the law, meaning they were all moral.
And, of course, there is the argument that Jesus answered the law when He died on the cross so the law no longer applies. That is true but there is still the problem of deciding which laws we ignore because He died and which ones we continue to apply in spite of His death.
Did He die for all of them or just the ones we see as inconsequential?
Where I Am
For the record, I fit in the Bible believing category. I grew up in fundamnentalist surroundings and I take the approach that the Bible is completely correct.
Where I depart from the Fundies is not in believing the Bible but in how it’s interpreted. The Fundies, I believe, are wrong in how they divide the text to explain away what they don’t like but, like them, I believe the Bible in whole.
But once you say you believe the Bible, you have another problem: explaining what it means and how to apply it.
I believe Fundies are obsessive in insisting everyone follow the pattern of the Fundamentalist belief system, although that would, in practice, be impossible since there are so many different interpretations, even among Fundies. I’ve written about that in other posts so I won’t labor the idea here.
Be that as it may, I believe the Bible completely and think Fundies have failed in the area of interpretation. The Bible can be interpreted differently especially regarding sexual issues.
Science Matters
One topic Fundies engage but also choose to reshape to fit their ideas is science. Science has been a large factor in helping us understand many teachings in the Bible and has saved us from obsessive fundamentalist thinking.
The book, None of These Diseases, is a good example. The authors, S. I. McMillen and David Stern, both doctors, go through many Bible references showing the scientific implications of many Old Testament laws. It’s revealing. It helps modern day folks understand the benefits those laws afforded even when people didn’t understand the scientific issues.
Washing hands is a good example. This hygienic practice was referenced for both symbolism and sanitation. Symbolically it represented the removal of guilt (Psalm 51:7), but it was also used to decontaminate those exposed to potential disease (Lev. 15:11).
But with the Pharisees (the fundamentalists of the New Testament) it became an obsession. It was turned into a ritual and the ritual became the rule. For them, hand washing was a way of pleasing God and being like God, and because Jesus didn’t wash according to their rule, He was judged severely.
But hand washing is no more effective at removing guilt than mules are at siring offspring. And washing too much can lead to skin infections. That’s an unhealthy condition, the very thing we’re trying to avoid in the first place.
The Pharisees approach to hand washing was an unnecessary add-on.
What that means is science really does matter. We should take it into consideration every time we try to understand the laws of the Old Testament. Old Testament folks obeyed those laws blindly. We don’t have to do that. Science affords us a vision they didn’t have.
Let’s Talk About Genetics
Genetic modifications are a fact. The evidence is overwhelming.
The Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man (OMIM) reports there are over 7,400 known disorders caused by pathogenic variants in 4,800 genes.
I say “known” because the list is expanding all the time. We have little knowledge of how quickly things are changing or how far they will eventually go. It’s a concern.
The ones we do know about represent a large number of genes restructured in non-normal ways producing unexpected effects.
The United Nations reports that 1.7% of the world’s population is born intersex, all of which are classified as genetic variations.
The aging process alone, which effects all of us, is caused by and causes genetic malfunctions according to the National Library of Medicine.
In other words, we are all effected.
We weren’t supposed to die. Since we all die, without exception, no one gets a pass on the gene issue.
The most important takeaway from that fact, though, is those changes prevent us from fitting neatly into God’s original design for humanity.
The only perfect specimens were Adam and Eve and even they experienced the ill affects after the fall.
The truth is we’ve all been genetically rearranged to some degree. Even something as apparently insignificant as a deviated septum can be caused by gene maladaptations and that’s just one issue.
Doctors and hospitals are ever present reminders that no one aligns perfectly with God’s original design, the one where no one gets sick or dies from disease. Originally, there was no death.
What About Traditional Norms
The fact that all of us are genetically affected is an important point because those who argue for standardized, traditional norms based on biblical models, especially when it comes to sexual issues, will often refer to God’s original design as the pattern to follow.
That’s an interesting idea. God’s design was perfect and generally wonderful but we no longer replicate the original.
Everything has changed and adjustments are needed. The original pattern no longer applies. We can learn from the original and hold it up as the ideal but only if we have the grace to be supportive when things don’t fall into place like they once did.
We’ve moved a long way from the original. In fact, if the original plan was for all of us to live endlessly in these bodies on earth (what the Bible suggests and fundamental theology actually teaches), then it’s not a stretch to conclude we’ve all been genetically rewired.
No one reflects God’s original design anymore and genetics proves that everyday. We’re all affected. This isn’t a problem for just an unlucky few and that understanding should change our perspective on the issue.
One person’s problem may be more severe but everyone is out of sync.
God Didn’t Do This
When genetic problems arise, we go to a couple of extremes.
One, we assume God wanted it that way. If you’re born without a limb or sight, or with biological maladies, some advocate that we accept that as God’s will. In other words, we think He created the problem. He’s somehow using the problem to teach us something.
Not true. God created the laws by which human biology works, He doesn’t engineer problems or micro manage genetic details.
His grace provides the strength and wisdom to manage these issues but He never plans the problems. He knows they will exist ahead of time but that knowledge is not causative.
The second extreme we take, is we deny the problem really exists or try to fix it. Genetic problems cannot be entirely fixed. We live with them. We manage them. We work around them. We figure out ways to make it better but we cannot change the fact.
If you’re born without a leg, you can use a prosthesis but that won’t change the underlying condition. A prosthesis can make things better but it won’t make things normal or equal.
This second extreme is the one adopted when someone is born with unacceptable sexual orientations. They try to fix it.
Both responses are extreme and miss the point.
Genetic Modifications Vary Widely
Some genetic problems are obvious and others not. Variations can be more or less extreme and can differ widely.
Some genetic conditions are life threatening like Cystic Fibrosis or Huntingtons disease.
Some are life limiting like limb reduction defects.
Most are completely invisible to the naked eye meaning any person can have problems which others don’t accept merely because there’s no external, visible evidence.
The studies to determine the exact causes for these genetic variations are inconclusive. Rather than just one, the causes are myriad. There’s plenty of evidence to prove our genetic adaptations are affected by a combination of biology, environment and psychological factors.
But the exact causes aside, there is no question that genetic variations exist.
Obviously, many “conditions” affect lifestyle with little threat to life otherwise. The biggest threat in such cases comes from peers who don’t understand it and don’t have the patience to investigate the matter empathetically or the security to accept what cannot be changed.
And the problem is everywhere.
Only a small percentage of the global population is affected by the more obvious genetic changes, meaning there is no visible evidence for a large number of variants.
Approximately 2,000 children are born each year with limb reduction defects in the US alone but that accounts for only one type of genetic condition in only one country.
Even worse, the numbers are increasing all the time.
The Technical University of Munich discovered 34 new genetic diseases in July of 2024.
Genetics And Demonology
The Middle Ages (5th to 15th centuries) was not a good time for medicine or the mentally vulnerable.
During that time, mental illness, which is highly complex and not so easy to diagnose, was explained away as the result of demon activity. In other words, if you had mental problems, you were possessed.
It is also true that classical medicine, which did recognize mental illness as a problem to be treated rather than exorcised, had been supplanted by religion (namely the Catholic Church), which focused on demons as the cause.
Psychology Town says of the Middle Ages:
The understanding of mental illness took a dramatic step backward from the relatively progressive views of ancient Greece and Rome. The collapse of the classical world led to the loss of much medical knowledge, including the more naturalistic approaches to mental illness advocated by physicians like Hippocrates and Galen.
In this intellectual vacuum, supernatural explanations for mental illness flourished. The Christian church became the primary authority on health and illness, and religious interpretations replaced medical ones. Mental disorders were increasingly viewed through the lens of demonology — the belief that demons or evil spirits could possess humans and cause abnormal behaviors.
Those conditions were life threatening not because of the condition but because of the religious response. Wikipedia has a long list of people executed for witchcraft. Most of those executions occurred during the Middle Ages or shortly after.
If demons aren’t the cause of these problems, what is?
Causes of Genetic Variations
The real issue isn’t the fact of genetic variations but the cause. Why are genes being affected so badly? What is causing them to go haywire?
The common understanding is mutations occur from exposure to chemicals and radiation. Chemical exposure is easy to understand. We’re exposed to these all the time and it’s no surprise there are genetic consequences. We weren’t designed for the kind of exposure we experience on a daily basis.
Just washing clothes exposes us to solvents that don’t mix well with humans.
The interesting truth is exposure by one person may not lead to disease in the exposed person but it could change their DNA sufficiently to lead to disease in future generations.
Dr. Skinner, a leading researcher at Washington State University said:
Your great-grandmother’s exposures (to chemicals) during pregnancy may cause disease in you while you had no exposure.
He also referred to this as:
A non-genetic form of inheritance not involving DNA sequence, but environmental impacts on DNA chemical modifications.
The blame for chemical exposure can easily be placed on the human tendency to find chemical solutions for every day problems. And, of course, there’s the greed factor. If chemicals enable us to increase production and turn a greater profit, that is what is done despite the effects on the humans who produce it and use it.
But what about radiation?
Radiation is a very interesting issue. It comes from different sources.
Some is human-made: X-rays, CT scans, etc., but the greatest amount of exposure comes from natural sources: soil, air, cosmic rays.
The Bible’s Contribution
Interestingly, the Bible has something to say about cosmic rays.
Genesis 7-8 are two chapters that record a world-wide flood. It’s a harrowing thought. The entire world being destroyed by a flood is ominous reading. Some reject it outright. Others look at it more allegorically but let’s think about it in literal terms for a moment.
The understanding is the earth before the flood was surrounded by a canopy of moisture.
Maybe it was a fine mist, I don’t know. I wasn’t there at the time, but this canopy collapsed during the flood.
In fact, the moisture from the canopy became the flood waters that covered the earth.
What that means is the earth before the flood was protected from exposure to the Sun’s radiation by this canopy. It filtered the sunlight, reducing the amount of radiation exposure.
That may be one reason people lived much longer before the flood.
After the flood, however, the filter was gone and we are now exposed more directly to the Sun’s radiation.
We now know that exposure to UV rays can cause premature aging and even cancer. And in an effort to avoid that damage, we smear chemicals on our skin for protection but that may not be a good trade. Those chemicals also cause damage in other ways.
It’s a no win situation. Your exposed either way.
Whatever preventive measures we take, we are still exposed and the radiation is doing it’s work at changing human DNA from what it was originally to what we now have.
And, again, it’s widespread.
Since the entire human population is exposed to the sun’s radiation and at least 1% is affected to a detectable degree by the genetic conditions it spawns, how should we respond to this? Should we reject people so effected? Should we bar them from society? Should we tell them to ignore it and it will go away?
Obviously, the answer is no and most would agree.
What happens, however, is some genetic issues are treated with grace, understanding and acceptance while other conditions are denied a hearing.
Measuring Our Responses
The natural response to genetic problems depends on the problem. Obviously, it would be nice if we could fix everything, but is that really possible.
Some things can be solved. A club foot can be corrected with surgery. Dyslexia can be overcome through training. Artificial limbs can make an acceptable difference but there are still limitations.
These issues are relatively easy to see and diagnose. If not visible, as in the case of dyslexia, it is at least easily detected.
But what about people who report same-sex attraction or those with gender dysphoria. On the surface, it may not be easy for us to understand. It definitely affronts our traditional sense of morality but this isn’t about sex.
It’s more about who you are as a person.
Sexual attraction is not intrinsically sinful. We all experience it.
Acting on it isn’t sinful either. Otherwise any interest shown by one person to another would be a tainting offense.
And there is a genetic factor here. Genes are the natural determinants of inclinations. Acting on the inclinations is neither a crime nor a cause for concern.
Drawing The Line Between Acceptable and Unacceptable
Some genetic problems we work hard to fix. We try to cure those born with cancer. We help those with dyslexia.
Others we respond to graciously. Autism and Downes can’t be corrected but the affected individuals can develop useful lives with support and encouragement. When that happens, we’re happy.
But what about gays and transgenders. Gay people are generally harmless. They have a sexual attraction that departs from the traditional models but how does that hurt. Traditional ideas are based on the original. Genetically, the original no longer exists.
In these situations, we must find a way to coexist without damage.
Genetics And Gender
While research hasn’t singled out one single gene that determines sexual orientation, it is clear that genes, chromosomes and hormones play an important role.
Nurses Revision provides an extensive explanation of the causes, effects and types of intersex conditions.
The National Library of Medicine identifies endocrine disrupting chemicals as a major cause of intersex variations in newborns.
GLAAD reports that the number of intersex individuals is estimated to be as high as 1.7% of the population.
GLAAD also reports that some intersex traits are not visible to the naked eye. It’s more a matter of hormone balances than physical traits.
We can treat genetic conditions. We can’t make them go away.
Genetics And DEI Issues
And that brings us to an interesting question about DEI.
When discussing human motivations and inclinations, you can’t discount genetics. It effects so many that it has to be a primary consideration in any discussion on sociology and morality.
You may not agree with me on these issues but you can be thoughtful.
THINK!AboutIt
Leave a Reply