The ongoing madness engulfing the western world in relation to matters of gender has begun to infect the church, and the Evangelical Alliance has apparently made a concession to this ungodly movement.
In a document called ‘Transformed’, which was written by Peter Lynas, he writes that “providing toilets that are clearly accessible to trans people will be an important part of the welcome provided by churches and charities”.
This would certainly seem to be a recommendation that churches make moves to tolerate the so-called gender choices made by people who make up what is known as the “trans community”.
And this recommendation would fly in the face of what the Bible has to say regarding gender, which is a foundational feature of the world.
Genesis 1:27: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.”
Jesus reaffirmed this in Matthew 19:4 when speaking to the Pharisees. He said: “And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female”.
Sadly, this suggestion from Peter Lynas and the Evangelical Alliance would appear to be a winking at sin, a toleration of that which is condemned by God and indeed to do it within the church, thus compounding the matter further.
2 John 1:11 speaks of false teachers by saying that “he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds”.
This can apply to various aspects of our lives and, while it may be claimed those pushing a transgender ideology are not being wished “God speed”, there is certainly an enabling to live an alternative lifestyle inside the church which is nowhere accepted as being proper in the Bible.
This is demonstrated in a practical manner within the church in the letter to the church in Ephesus in Revelation 2:2.
It says: “I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars”.
God commended the Ephesians for “not bear[ing] them which are evil”.
God also says this in Deuteronomy 22:5: “The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God.”
This can clearly be applied to the notion of transgenderism, and the word “abomination” can also be translated as “detestable”, showing how God views such.
And this helps demonstrate why making changes to your church, conforming it to the world, is a grave error and something the Evangelical Alliance ought not to be promoting.
The document by the Evangelical Alliance appears to be a pastoral guide to churches dealing with those experiencing what they term “gender dysphoria”, where people believe their physical sex doesn’t match up with the gender with which they identify.
It strives to tread a middle line between very softly saying that the Bible is opposed to the notion of transgenderism, but without ever outright condemning such notions as sinful.
The document instead uses very general terms such as this, in the conclusions section: “The church must seek out clarity in this difficult area. Whilst we seek to support those struggling with gender dysphoria, we can resist and oppose forms of transgender ideology which offer alternative, radically secular ideas about what it means to be human.
“The Bible has much to say about what it is to be human, about sex and gender, about the body and about life in a fallen world. Redemption, through life in Christ, brings hope for our hearts, mind and bodies, all of which have been affected by the fall and by ongoing sin. But, the church must be careful to respond pastorally to individuals, whilst recognising the challenges and complexities surrounding transgender.”
The first sentence, which says the church “must seek out clarity” really doesn’t mean anything. Clarity about what?
Then it says about opposing “forms of transgender ideology, which offer different, radically secular ideas”. Does this mean some forms of transgender ideology which are perhaps not classified as “radically secular” are permissible, or can be worked alongside or with?
There is far from a clear message given out here.
Then the generality comes in, talking about how the entire world is fallen, which tends to create an air of equivocation.
Of course, the whole world is fallen, we are all wretched sinners fit only for hell (Jeremiah 17:9), but this does not mean a softer view can be had of any particular sin because of this.
James 4:17 says: “Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.”
Because we know something is a sin, but also accept we are sinners ourselves, does not mean we should try to ignore or minimise sin or compare one sin with another.
Everyone obviously commits sin and all sin must be condemned but when a particular way of identifying your being is something which contradicts God’s Word and His natural order, this demonstrates a clear decision to live in a manner contrary to God’s Word.
We would call on Peter Lynas and the Evangelical Alliance to rip up their paper and start again, instead outlining why the Bible condemns variance from God’s established order and explaining the means of salvation which will deliver from such sin.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with striving to be compassionate, in fact we ought to be – look at the compassion of Jesus when he looked out at the crowds who were in need of salvation or when he wept over the condemnation of Jerusalem – but we cannot surrender or play down God’s Word in order to prevent someone from being angered by having their sin placed in the light of the Bible.
Jude 1:22-23: “And of some have compassion, making a difference: And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.”