If you decide to accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior, and you decide you need to start studying the Bible to understand God and the faith, you’re going to find yourself very confused very quickly. Why? Because the way that our societal institutions (schools, political parties, businesses, etc.) describe and explain the world are incompatible with the Christian worldview.

I’ve already explained in the Bible series how the entire secular approach to science and history is fundamentally in conflict with the straightforward teachings of Scripture. But there’s plenty more to it. In fact, concepts you use to describe who you are as a person are incorrect, according to the Bible. I will therefore offer you a quick crash course to understand how God deals with each of the major categories of identity that underline the modern identity politics movement that is so common nowadays, even Christians use its language without realizing it. 

To accomplish this, I will use the five categories of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, plus two that are not explicitly included in the law but have been effectively added in by judicial rulings in the years since.

Race, Color, and National Origin

These three categories are not identical, but they are interrelated.

According to the Bible, the human race started with Adam and Eve, then spread through their descendants. However, there was a great reset in the days of Noah, when all of mankind was reduced to eight survivors: Noah, his wife, Noah’s three sons, and his sons’ wives. They were all that remained of what Peter refers to as “the ancient world” (2 Peter 2:5), which was destroyed by the Flood (2 Peter 3:5-6).

Shem, Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, became the fathers of the nations of Genesis 10, from which all the people of the world today are descended. Now, morally speaking, Shem and Japheth were blessed by Noah (Genesis 9:26-27). Ham, however, sinned against Noah, which caused Noah to cursed Ham’s son Canaan, while staying silent on Ham’s other sons. This led to the attempted wiping out of the Canaanites by the Israelites during their conquest of the Promised Land of Canaan (a task they failed at, despite God’s command to do so).

Interestingly, though, even the cursed Canaanites could be saved. The inhabitants of Gibeon surrendered to the Lord’s will, not resisting the Israelite invasion, and so they avoided death (Joshua 9). Similarly, by betraying the people of Jericho, Rahab was able to become an ancestor of Jesus Himself (Matthew 1:5). The stories of David contain several mentions of faithful Canaanites, such as Uriah the Hittite and Araunah the Jebusite. A woman of Canaan was even able to obtain healing from Jesus when she acknowledged her own low stature (Matthew 15:25-28). Therefore, from a moral standpoint, it does not appear that anyone is beyond salvation, since no one gets a worse standing in terms of national origin in the Bible than the Canaanites (except the Amalekites, but they no longer exist).

In Acts 10:34-35, Peter says, “In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality. But in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him.” Therefore, national origin is of no moral consequence, since whoever is accepted by God should be accepted by all who love God.

Now, it appears that at some point between the Tower of Babel and the later parts of the Bible, microevolutions of skin color adaptation occurred amongst Noah’s descendants. Depending on where they scattered after the judgment on Babel, their skin color changed. However, nowhere in the Bible that I am aware of does God or a righteous man ever make a moral judgment on anyone based on skin color.

In fact, skin color, race, and national origin would be pretty much synonymous if it weren’t for intermarriage between people of different national origins. Only because of the mixing of people of different backgrounds do racial and skin tone variations occur within a nation.

However, this intermarriage is not immoral. The only restriction on marriage for a Christian (marriage defined according to the Bible, that is) is that a Christian must marry other Christians (1 Corinthians 7:39; 2 Corinthians 6:14). Nothing is said about racial intermarriage being forbidden. The only racial boundary that ever really existed in God’s mind (curse of Canaan aside) was the distinction between Jew and Gentile, and Christ removed that (Ephesians 2:11-18).

All these facts taken together show that in the modern day, all races, nationalities, and colors are of equal value. No distinction is made between any, except that all are called to repent and serve Christ (Acts 17:24-31). Racism is therefore antithetical to the Christian faith and the Bible.

Note: According to the Bible, it is possible for some people groups to be of a different character than others. For example, the Jews of Berea were nobler than the Jews of Thessalonica (Acts 17:10-11). And Paul himself called Cretans liars, evil beasts, and lazy gluttons (Titus 1:12-13). However, he followed that by noting that this simply made discipleship more challenging, not by writing off the Cretans as unworthy or incapable of attaining to the gospel. Neither must we write off or treat any person as of less worth based on his race, color, or national origin.

Religion

Modern American society is largely universalistic, preaching an “all roads lead to Rome” faith, whereby members of any religion can be saved. However, this is so contrary to the Biblical worldview as to be almost trivial to demonstrate, but I will still reference a few key Scriptures:

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.” (John 14:6).

Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved. (Acts 4:12)

For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus. (1 Timothy 2:5)

He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him. (John 3:36)

There is therefore only one “right” religion, and that is any faith system that preaches belief in Jesus (1 John 4:15). This is morally acceptable because, as discussed in How the Gospel Works, while Christianity is very exclusive in the sense that one has to be a Christian to be saved, it is very inclusive in that literally anybody, regardless of race or sex or socioeconomic status, can become a Christian, with no material cost at all.

As Christians, we do not look down on people of other religions, but rather we seek to show them that Jesus is indeed the one and only way to salvation, meaning both right standing with God and access to the shalom God seeks in the lives of all His people.

Sex

In discussing the issue of “sex,” the Bible runs contrary to modern ideologies almost immediately. The foundational verse on sex in the Bible comes in the very first chapter of the very first book:

So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. (Genesis 1:27)

All human beings are born either male or female (intersex people are born with some combination of characteristics of each, not a unique third sex that is distinct from the binary options of male and female). This identity is present in every cell in our bodies and in almost every aspect of our anatomy. The Bible is very clear that men and women are different, although equal in dignity:

Husbands, likewise, dwell with [your wives] with understanding, giving honor to the wife, as to the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life, that your prayers may not be hindered. (1 Peter 3:7)

At the time, Peter’s words were very radical. After all, man’s natural impulse is to judge a person by his power level. Women and children are naturally weaker than men, so human beings by default see it as acceptable to mistreat them. The same is true for orphans, widows, the disabled, the elderly, the poor, immigrants, and all others who are not naturally “strong.” The Nazis, possibly the most “naturally minded” group of all time, simply exterminated all different types of weak people to strengthen their society.

Peter, however, preached that human beings are to look beyond the natural state of affairs, in which women are physically weaker than men (an undeniable reality), and see that they are in fact co-equal in dignity and worth, with men and women being “heirs together of the grace of life.” Therefore, sexism is antithetical to the Christian faith and the Bible.

Now, the Bible does talk about men being the “head” of women (1 Corinthians 11:3) and wives “submitting” to husbands (Colossians 3:18), but these are statements of responsibility for men, not authorizations for abuse or subjugation of women. I will discuss this more thoroughly in the Family series.

Sexual Orientation

The issue of homosexuality in Christianity is highly charged, but from a doctrinal perspective it is not controversial. Christians who adhere to a literal interpretation of the Bible have always categorized homosexual acts or relationships as sinful, because the Bible is very clear about this:

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination. (Leviticus 18:22)

If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them. (Leviticus 20:13)

For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. (Romans 1:26-27)

Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. (1 Corinthians 6:9-10)

But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully, knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine, according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God which was committed to my trust. (1 Timothy 1:8-11)

Beyond these very clear statements in Scripture, there is not a single depiction of homosexual love, romance, or sex that is portrayed positively anywhere in the Bible. The few times it is directly depicted (as with Sodom in Genesis 18-19 or the men of Gibeah in Judges 19), it is portrayed as the end state of a complete descent into wickedness.

Thus, the Bible is very clear about what homosexuality represents. In fact, I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the two verses that precede the Romans passage I quoted are: For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “The just shall live by faith.”

Too many “Christians” are ashamed of this part of Scripture and seek to be accepted by the world. But the world never accepts the true Christian (John 17:14). This teaching on homosexuality is as much a part of the gospel as anything about Jesus loving people.

But how does that jive with God’s obvious love for all mankind and the need to love and witness to nonbelievers? The answer is very simple: as explained in How the Gospel Works, God’s commandments are always for our good. It is the deception of the devil that tricks us into believing that any good thing (good for us or good for others) can be obtained by violating God’s law. Therefore, it follows necessarily that embracing homosexuality leads to suffering, on both an individual and a collective level.

If this is not true, the Bible is not true. Period. Now, it is not enough to simply ask the homosexual nonbeliever if he is happier living as a homosexual. After all, the world is full of people who haven’t repented because they haven’t yet accepted that their sin is bad for them. But for the homosexual who comes to know and love God, if the Bible is true, he will find his true happiness and fulfillment in pursuing sanctification and obedience to God’s laws.

In this way, homosexuality is no different than drug abuse or gluttony or pornography use or any other sin. It is a source of either (a) comfort that people embrace to avoid dealing with overwhelming challenges in life or (b) pleasure for those who live hedonistically. Therefore, the same benefits that come to those who overcome any addiction or pattern of dysfunction should accrue to the homosexual pursuing holiness.

Also, like any other sin, it can represent spiritual bondage (when it is used for comfort rather than hedonistic pleasure), in which case it cannot be overcome by willpower. Shaming or attacking homosexuals for their sin patterns is not productive. Rather, they must use the tools I provided in Overcoming Spiritual Bondage to find true freedom from their spiritual bondage, which will result in peace and happiness, not deprivation and misery.

Two notes on this:

First, the very concept of “homosexuality” is flawed. People base their notion of whether they’re gay, straight, bisexual, etc., on what they notice in their personal history of whom they’re attracted to. But how can anyone “straight” be sure they will never be attracted to someone of the same sex? How can they be sure they’ll never feel that attraction at any point in their lives, with any one of the four billion members of the same sex living on the earth at any given point in time?

Furthermore, don’t some people find themselves attracted to members of the same sex later in life, after never feeling it before? Does this mean they switched from straight to bisexual, or were they always bisexual underneath? Either way, this means the idea of being “straight” is either unfixed or indeterminable.

Likewise, no one who is “gay” can be sure they’ll never feel attracted to a member of the opposite sex. Someone who has always only been same sex attracted will never be attracted to every member of the opposite sex, but so what? Even the straightest men and women in existence will not be attracted to certain members of the opposite sex, no matter how widely viewed as attractive by others those people are. Everyone has their individual tastes. A gay person only needs to be attracted to a single member of the opposite sex to be married, which is a far lower bar than “switching a sexual orientation.”

At any rate, by now it’s become pretty clear in modern society that sexuality is very fluid and malleable, especially when a person is raised with no moral guardrails around sexuality whatsoever, so it’s not unreasonable to expect that many so-called “gay” people could find just a single member of the opposite sex they would be able to marry and build a life with.

Second, even if a gay person never experiences attraction to any member of the opposite sex, the idea that it is somehow “unfair” to ask him or her to forgo sex altogether is based on an animalistic view of sex. I will discuss this more in the Family section of Reconstructing Faith, but sex was designed by God as something to be given, not gotten. Sexual gratification is inherently bad, even if you are gratifying yourself while having sex with your spouse. Sex is designed for men and women to give to one another in a marriage, not as an end in and of itself.

In other words, sex is a pleasurable way for married couples of opposite sexes to bond, but if a person is not in a heterosexual marriage, no good comes of pursuing sex in any form (whether sex with self, prostitution, pornography, etc.). Our society has become deceived into believing that we will find enlightenment and self-actualization through maximizing sexual pleasure and freedom. But the Bible speaks firmly against this. On the contrary, the Bible only speaks positively of sex as a form of intimacy to be shared in marriage (see the entire Song of Solomon), where it is a very good thing. But outside of that context, it will only sap and dissipate your energy and lead to cravings that require ever greater depths of depravity to satisfy.

Jesus and Paul both chose to forgo sex altogether because neither man was called to marry a human woman, and they both ended up with a level of connection to God and sense of deep fulfillment and satisfaction of purpose in life that few have come close to. Sex is not the highest good in life. If a homosexual pursuing Christ cannot find a member of the opposite sex to build a marriage with, he or she will find good things in pursuing closeness to God that will far outweigh the sexual pleasure he or she leaves behind.

If this is not the case, the Bible is false. 

Gender Identity

As mentioned previously, a person’s biological sex is built into every cell of their body by God and therefore has a significant developmental effect on almost every aspect of a person’s physiology and psychology.

Medically speaking, a person having a disconnect between their biological sex and their perceived inner sexual identity constitutes a disorder, i.e., a condition in which the various components of a system are not naturally aligned (“in order”). Now, generally, when an objective reality conflicts with a psychological state of mind, the objective reality is given the higher ground.

For example, if a person has a Christ complex and believes himself to be the Messiah, we do not love that person by treating him like the savior of mankind. We instead side with the objective reality that he is not Jesus Christ and attempt to treat the psychological disturbance. Similarly, if a person has asomatognosia, a condition in which someone does not psychologically recognize that a part of their body actually belongs to them, we do not love that person by surgically removing, for example, their left arm. Instead, we attempt to treat the psychological disturbance.

Thus, from a medical ethics standpoint, the proper approach to the psychological disorder known as transgenderism is to attempt to treat the disconnect and bring the psychological state of the patient closer to objective reality, thereby minimizing or removing the sense of disconnect and the resultant suffering. It is unethical to “treat” the disorder by rejecting the objective reality and encouraging the psychological miscalibration rather than seeking to heal it.

Transgenderism is therefore not even strictly speaking a sin, but rather a psychological disorder. However, as discussed in Epistemology, Ethics, and Evangelism, humans have a powerful capability to subconsciously embrace falsehoods, even obvious ones, in order to protect their sin. In the debate over transgenderism, the idea that a person’s inner reality can override objective exterior reality has been co-opted by factions of sinful men to protect tangentially related sins. In this way, it is no different than the idea that a person’s internal sense of morality can override God’s objective law and commandments (i.e., moral relativism).

Thus, embracing a conservative view of sex and sexual identity is the most compassionate and loving approach to transgenderism, in accordance with the Bible’s worldview. The world’s alternative approach of embracing a person’s subjective sexual identity and mutilating the body accordingly, even the bodies of children, no matter how well intentioned, can only result in increased suffering and societal disintegration.