The redefinition of humanity
By Tom Quiner
The world is easy to understand if one understands a single sentence in the bible:
“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.”
Readers of the bible are confronted with this sentence on the first page, in Genesis 1:27.
God made us. Even more, we’re made in his image, he endorses us, and he loves us, because He made us. He didn’t have to make us. But He did.
Thank-you, God, for this gift of our life.
We are valuable to God, since He made us. He created man in two genders, male and female, so clearly our genders, our sexual identities, so to speak, have meaning.
If God made us, everything about us must have meaning. Why else would a loving God create us in His image? Dr. Peter Kreeft puts it this way:
“But we are objects to God (though we are subjects to this world); we too, therefore, are true only when we conform to God’s knowledge of us, God’s artistic plan for our identity. Since our highest freedom means freedom to be ourselves, we are most free when we are most obedient to God’s will, which expresses His idea of us.”
We are fully alive, truly liberated, when we conform our lives to His image.
Modern man seems confused by this sentence from Genesis. He thinks that we should conform
The redefinition of humanity
our lives to our urges and our desires, not God’s image. Modern man thinks that marriage should be reconfigured based on these urges, instead of on the fruit of creation when a man and woman become one flesh.
The redefinition of humanity
Gender confusion seems epidemic.
Even more, it seems like a whole lot of folks don’t like the image in which they were made. They’re having surgeries in an attempt to reorient their genders.
They’re having their faces and bodies remade to look like something that isn’t human.
Photographer Phillip Toledano captured the faces (and more) of people who have had their faces and bodies transfigured and transgendered. He explained the implications:
“In 50 or 100 years time, I think humanity won’t look like it does today because of technology. … We will be able to redefine what it means to look human and I think these people are the vanguard of that type of evolution.”
In other words, Mr. Toledano thinks the natural progression of civilization is for man to reject
The redefinition of humanity
God’s image and remake himself in the image of something alien. I don’t mean to be unkind to the folks in these photographs, but they look like aliens from a Star Trek episode.
What do you think?
Should we be content to look like God? Or is the alien look the wave of the future?
I think God might invoke an old Billy Joel song at this point:
“I love you just the way you are.”
Since gays are people, by your definition God created them. I can’t believe a loving God would create someone and then force them to live unhappy lives. People get married all the time and either choose or just can’t have kids.
Technology may expand how people can modify their bodies, but it seems people have always experimented. Tattoos go back thousands of years. There are also body piercings which includes ear rings – very common even today. Who came up with the idea of making a hole in their ear so they can attach ornaments?
“We are fully alive, truly liberated, when we conform our lives to His image.”
I can’t even BEGIN to explain how much I disagree with this. We are fully alive and living the life God wants us to live, when do what makes us HAPPY.
God doesn’t want us to conform, conformity is a human, ignorant construction. There is no “normal”, we are all unique, and yet all in his image. Even gays, for the above commenter. Gays weren’t always outcasts like they are now, in ancient Greece and the Mesopotamian world they were dead normal (most likely other cultures too).
In fact, they were deemed so normal, that many families had slaves just for that, and daddy of the household could consume his love for men on the side, and have children with his wife. Since it was socially and culturally accepted, nobody suffered from this. Hell, wives had their own female slaves to have lesbian escapades with. Some couples were heterosexual, and loved each other only, others had preferences for the same sex and came up with a solution.
The big difference is that the Greek culture was one of inclusion, openness and humility. True humility, is to accept everyone just the way they come to you, and to not judge them.
It’s only because Greeks and Egyptians made so many drawings and wrote so extensively, that we know that there was even actual love between these same sex relationships. Just like there are today.
It’s only our society that responds so incredibly self righteously and intolerantly to homosexuality. Who put you in charge to judge whether their lives are “too harsh to be made by God”?
The life of homosexuals today is difficult only because some environments treat them like they’re “wrong” for being the way they are. They are martyrs, they are a true mirror to the biggest sensitivities of our self conscious society. Imperfection, anything out-of-the-norm, anything we don’t understand, anything that isn’t what we want it to be, is rejected, outcast. And we don’t even flinch when we do it, as if we are entitled to judge of any other human being, ever.
The things that gay people have to endure, makes them children of God, even more so than anyone who’s giving them a hard time. Remember who nailed Jesus to the cross? They were the simple, good and civil people, who had jobs and nice little homes. They were you. You, who judges, who rejects and who denies, you nailed Jesus to the cross.
Think about it.
First of all, thank-you for writing. I have a few reactions to your response. Regarding your last sentence, I HAVE thought extensively about Christ’s crucifixion. You ARE correct, I DID nail Jesus to the Cross. Each of us sinners were, and are, responsible. That is why He came, to save a sinner like me. And you.
I admit, I need saving. And Christ has done it through the ultimate expression of God’s agape’ (sacrificial) love.
I guess where we diverge is: what exactly is a sin? Since you have invoked Christ, I presume we’re on the same page that sinning is bad. Christ was forgiving of the woman caught in adultery. He forgave her for her urges, upon which she acted. But then He told her to go and sin no more.
In other words, He told her to cease and desist letting her unhealthy desires rule her life, since it was a path to destruction.
So, are homosexual urges sinful? Not unless one acts on them. I don’t know of a single person that doesn’t have sinful urges of some sort at some point. Do we want to be defined by those urges? I hope not.
I am sympathetic to my friends and family who have same-sex attractions. My Catholic faith suggests that acting on such attractions separates us from God, because those actions are sinful. What kind of person would any Christian be if they encouraged a lifestyle that threatened their salvation? You clearly disagree with me. Fair enough. I want everyone I encounter to end up in heaven, including you. I converted to the Catholic faith some 32 years ago, seduced by her beauty and timeless Truth.
The Church suggests that true liberation comes from following Christ, not our urges, and submitting our lives to the Holy Trinity.
Again, I thank-you for your thoughtful, well-expressed response, especially knowing how much you disagree with me.
Peace.
Actually, my reply was especially oriented towards the other commenter on this post. Now that I see your ideas about homosexuality are similar, I’m a bit taken aback. My response was fairly aggressive, but I must confess I feel very strongly about this.
The concept of sin, for me, is contradictory to a loving, forgiving and accepting God. Of course there are “things that we do that aren’t nice for others”, which could be tagged as sin, I suppose.
But two people who love each other? Two men who truly, irrevocably and undeniably love each other for their personality? Who can be against that?
Growing up, everyone knows that homosexuality is not very popular. Everyone knows it’s less common than heterosexuality, that many people think it’s weird, that it’s less accepted by society (not rightfully so, but it’s the truth). Who would choose that? Who would consciously decide to turn away from family, from friends, by showing a side that they know might get them rejected altogether?
The answer is; nobody chooses it. It is not a choice. It is the way they were born, the way God made them.
God gave us a body, nerves that sense a loving touch. When my fiance touches me, I have goosebumps, after 2 years of faithful devotion to each other. That’s what God intended for us, that’s why Adam asked for Eve. He wanted a counterpart that he could touch, and by whom he could be touched.
People like to disapprove of sex, it can’t be enjoyed, it can’t be seen separate from love, it’s a sin when you do it just for fun. I think sex is the apex of loving each other, it’s where you become one. And, believe it or not, when you’ve had several partners to experiment with, and when you do it very often with the same person, you get better at it. Through experimentation, albeit safely, you learn what you like, what you don’t like, and you learn to communicate. Once you meet the right person, your love, respect and lust all blend into one big blob of fuzzy and warm feelings.
Lust isn’t a sin, it’s not separate from love. Lust is more than love alone, and when both are experienced together, they are incomparable to any promiscuous, void act of consumption.
Homosexuals experience those same things. They love each other so much, they feel the same excitement over each other, and they consume their love. This isn’t “acting on a sinful thought”, this is LOVE. The way God made it, intended it and wants it for us.
God wants us to be happy, the way we are born, with no restrictions, no boundaries, no rules. Tolerate your neighbor, love your neighbor, accept your neighbor for who and what he is. Communicate with each other and find the best way to compromise when you disagree. Don’t chastise, don’t pass judgment on what they do or why.
Also, thanks for letting me talk on here, I really like the exchange of different opinions!
[…] writing this in response to an article I bumped into. The article in and of itself didn’t bother me very much, although I […]
I hope that Quiner’s Diner stays open despite the throngs who prefer the fast-food of moral relativism! — Tony
Love it! Great endorsement. Thank-you!