Skip to main content

Russell Moore: What Should the Church Say to Bruce Jenner? | Moore to the Point

Russell Moore:What Should the Church Say to Bruce Jenner?

What Should the Church Say to Bruce Jenner?
In the 1970s Bruce Jenner seemed to have it all—fame, wealth, admiration. He was an Olympic star, so popular in American culture that he was reputedly considered for both the roles of Superman and James Bond. That’s changed. Now, Jenner is best known as the step-father on reality television’s Keeping Up with the Kardashians. Jenner is now ready for one more change. He says he knows what he’s been missing: his identity as a woman.
Jenner has reportedly undergone surgery to make himself appear more like a woman and has been photographed wearing dresses. Now, in a highly publicized interview with with Diane Sawyer, he says that his “whole life has been leading up to this.”
Bruce Jenner, of course, is a symbol, a celebrity spokesperson for an entire mentality that sees gender as separate from biological identity. So is there a word from God to the transgender community? How should the church address the Bruce Jenner in your neighborhood, who doesn’t have the star power or the Malibu mansions but who has the same alienation of self?
First of all, we should avoid the temptation to laugh at these suffering souls. We do not see our transgendered neighbors as freaks to be despised. They feel alienated from their identities as men or women and are seeking a solution to that in self-display or in surgery or in pumping their bodies with the other sex’s hormones. In a fallen universe, all of us are alienated, in some way, from who were designed to be. That alienation manifests itself in different ways in different people.
But neither should we fall for the cultural narrative behind the transgender turn. This narrative is rooted in the ancient heresy of Gnosticism, with the idea that the “real” self is separate from who one is as an embodied, material being. Body parts and chromosomal patterns are dispensable since the self is radically disconnected from the body, the psychic from the material.
The old Gnostic heresy is joined with contemporary expressive individualism—the idea that I must be true to whomever I perceive my “real me” to be on the inside in order to be “authentic.” This is what leads, in other news of the week, some parents to “transition” the gender identity of their child at ages as early as four years old.




You can read the rest here- What Should the Church Say to Bruce Jenner? | Moore to the Point




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

John Stott on the "old man" and the "body ruled by sin" in Rom 6 v 6

  There are, in fact, two quite distinct ways in which the New Testament speaks of crucifixion in relation to holiness. The first is our death to sin through identification with Christ; the second is our death to self through imitation of Christ.  On the one hand, we have been crucified with Christ. But on the other we have crucified (decisively repudiated) our sinful nature with all its desires, so that every day we renew this attitude by taking up our cross and following Christ to crucifixion.  The first is a legal death, a death to the penalty of sin; the second is a moral death, a death to the power of sin.  The first belongs to the past, and is unique and unrepeatable; the second belongs to the present, and is repeatable, even continuous. I died to sin (in Christ) once; I die to self (like Christ) daily. It is with the first of these two deaths that Romans 6 is chiefly concerned, although the first is with a view to the second, and the second cannot take place w...

Boice: “... the federal way of dealing with us was actually the fairest and kindest of all the ways God could have operated. ”

  Adam had been appointed by God to be the representative of the race so that if he stood, we too would stand, and if he fell, we would fall with him. Adam did fall, as we know.  So death passed upon everyone. “But isn’t that terribly unfair?” someone protests. “Isn’t it cruel for God to act in this fashion?” ... the federal way of dealing with us was actually the fairest and kindest of all the ways God could have operated.  Besides, it was the only way it would later be possible for God to save us once we had sinned. In other words, federalism is actually a proof of God’s grace, which is the point the passage comes to (vv. 15 ff.). It was gracious to Adam first of all. Why? Because it was a deterrent to his sin. God must have explained to Adam that he was to represent his posterity. That might have restrained him from sinning. A father who might be tempted to steal his employer’s funds (and would if only he himself were involved), might well decide not to do it if he kne...

Repackaging the gospel? It's more like obscuring the gospel!

Preface : I recognize this post may make me unpopular with some, but I think it is an important issue to blog about here.  I’ve had time to reflect on this video and in my opinion, I think what is in this video raises some questions.  This gentleman featured below is slotted to speak at the SBC's 2020 Pastors' Conference and it prompted me to think more about this illustration.  I want to note that I don't know him and I have no personal issue with him.   I assume he is a brother in the LORD.  Having said that, I see some significant issues here that relate to this type of preaching being clear on the gospel of Jesus Christ. In fact, it appears to be obscuring it in my observation. Concern:  Should the SBC or churches, in general, be in the habit of holding this up as a  good and healthy example?  Let's think about it some together.  (Watch this clip below here first.) Context:  The clip was posted to stand on its own a...