Clarification of biblical interpretation needed

TO THE EDITOR:

In the time-honored tradition of using one’s own opening statement against the author, maybe Angel Collie should have done a bit of research on the Bible before writing that it supports transgenderism as a lifestyle sanctioned by God (“Christianity more inclusive than Street asserts in letter,” Sept. 28)

Collie uses only the middle third of Genesis 1:27 to build his “image of God” argument, ignoring the immediate follow-up clause: “Male and female he created them.” These two comments are inseparable — “the image of God” is expressed, from page one of the Bible, as the union of male and female in two humans, not in one. “For this reason a man leaves his father and mother and clings to his wife, and the two become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24).

The story of Philip and the eunuch, and the comment about eunuchs castrating themselves for the kingdom, have nothing to do with imposing androgyny or transgenderism on oneself to more closely approach the divine.

They have everything to do with subordinating one’s sexuality and one’s own physical desires to God and to one’s spiritual needs.

So Paul says that the single, celibate life is ideal for any Christian, though marriage is certainly no sin (1 Corinthians 7:26-27).

And the comment about there being no male or female among the followers of Christ refers to discrimination based on hierarchy and authority, not based on sex or gender.

Now I’m not putting forth my own opinions about LGBT concerns in the church; this debate is over what the Bible says about those concerns, and personal belief has no place in such a textual-critical discussion. I’m simply trying to correct some common misinterpretations of God’s word, so that each reader may be able to make a more informed decision.


Ross M. Twele
Graduate Student
History