Lazy Religion: Harmful to the Transgender Community; Harmful Throughout History

Tags

1st Samuel 21, Acts 10, Acts 15, anything goes, Bible, Bible Study, Blacks, Boaz, Christ, Christian, church, circumcision, condemnation, Cornelius, dead orthodoxy, death, faith, flesh, gender confirming surgery, Gentiles, God, good works, Gospel of Matthew, grace, healing, Holy Spirit, hormones, hypocrisy, Israelites, Jericho, Jesus, Jew, Jewish, Jewish leaders, King David, lazy religion, legalism, letter of the law, life, literal interpretation, loveless legalism, mercy, Messiah, messianic identity, miracles, Mosaic Law, New Testament, Peter, Pharisees, Promised Land, prophets, Rahab, Ruth, Sabbath, Sadducees, salvation, saved, scribes, Scripture, segregation, showbread, silly sentimentality, spirit, spirit of the law, Testimony, Transgender, truth

I sometimes hear negative comments about Christians who interpret the Bible literally.  My reply takes them by surprise at first until I explain.  The problem is not belief that the Bible is literally true.  It’s that those Christians who disparage the transgender community don’t read the Bible carefully enough and apply all of it as it is written.

Jesus never rebuked anyone for using too much scripture or taking it literally. He did accuse the Sadducees of not knowing the scriptures (or the power of God) when they asked Him about the woman who was widowed in succession by each one of seven brothers (Matthew 22:23-32).  He challenged the Jewish leadership by comparing scripture verses that would point to His identity as the Son of God (e.g. that the Messiah is the Son of David, but David calls Him Lord: Matthew 22:42-45 referring to Psalm 110).  He accuses the scribes and Pharisees of hypocrisy for being preoccupied with minutiae and ignoring more important matters: judgment, mercy and faith (Matthew 23, especially verses 23 and 24).

He accused them of ignoring the judgment of the prophet Hosea on their forefathers: For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings. – Hosea 6:6.  He accused them of not understanding the message in the story of David and his starving soldiers when the priests fed them the hallowed showbread that only the priests were permitted to eat under the Law.  (1^st Samuel 21:1-6; Jesus’ teaching reported in Matthew 12, Mark 2 and Luke 6).

Jesus was grieved that the religious leaders in His time did not understand that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath: that His disciples did not deserve condemnation for plucking and eating a few grains from stalks in the field on the Sabbath; nor did He deserve condemnation for doing good works on the Sabbath, such as His healing of the sick or infirmed and casting out demons (often by only speaking a word and using no physical activity at all).  Most grievous of all was the fact that the ministry and messianic identity of Jesus was confirmed by far greater miracles than displayed by Elijah and Elisha.  Yet the scribes, Pharisees and teachers of the Law, who venerated those prophets from centuries earlier, did not accept the message of Jesus for the sake of His good works.

What if legalism had stopped Boaz from marrying a foreign woman?  Then he would have never married Ruth, the Moabitess, the great-grandmother of King David.  Fortunately, the testimony about Ruth, her goodness towards her mother-in-law, her love of God and her faith and trust in the Lord, was more important to Boaz.

What if legalism had stopped the two men sent by Joshua to spy on Jericho from lodging with a prostitute.  Then those men would not have received protection from Rahab, they would have been captured by the people of that land and another generation of the children of Israel probably would have been discouraged from entering the Promised Land.  Fortunately for the Israelites, those two men were more concerned with their mission, and they also believed it when Rahab testified her belief that the God of Israel is the only God in heaven and earth.  Both the faith (Hebrews 11:31) and works (James 2:25) of this common harlot are praised in the New Testament.

For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. – John 1:17.  Human nature makes it difficult to have both grace and truth in our hearts. We tend to tilt towards one or the other since at first glance they seem incompatible.  But what is impossible for man is made possible by God.  So our Christian walk requires us to do what God enables us to do: that we so walk as to keep the two in balance at all times.  For if we heavily emphasize grace, the result is silly sentimentality and an attitude that anything goes.  But if we heavily emphasize truth, the result is dead orthodoxy and loveless legalism, driving away people from God by beating them over the head with scripture.

But don’t ever think that grace is weaker than truth.  (Thou therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. – 2^nd Timothy 2:1.)  Now that’s even stronger than Ajax!

So why do I call legalism ”lazy religion”?  Because it is much easier to justify one’s position by pointing to cold, hard facts in scripture, especially the “thou shalt not(s)”.  It takes more work to temper truth with grace, to practice speaking grace seasoned with salt instead of the other way around, and to understand the spirit of the law in addition to the letter of the law.

Those Christians who pursue legalism and the letter of the law need to heed these verses:

But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. – Romans 2:29 (In the same chapter, Paul warns the Church to leave condemning judgment to God because we will all be judged by Him.)

But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter. – Romans 7:6

Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. – 2^nd Corinthians 3:6

That sure grabs my attention.  I can minister life to people by the spirit of the law, but death to people by the letter.  Why would I want to minister death to people?  Jesus came to save the world, not condemn it (John 3:17).  He came so that we would not only have life, but abundant life. (John 10:10)

In my Christian walk, I have the same choice that God told Moses to proclaim to the children of Israel: I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live: – Deuteronomy 30:19

Therefore, it is a joy when I find another scripture passage that illuminates both the letter and spirit of the word; both the grace and truth of Christ: especially as relates to God’s mercy towards those people who are transgender; those of us who were born that way.

I recently came across some passages in Acts (which I have read dozens of times) during the Women’s Bible Study that I attend at my church.  The topic was the importance of evidence of the presence of the Holy Spirit in the first Gentile converts so that they would be welcomed into the body of Christ.  It starts in Acts 10 when the Lord sent visions to the centurion Cornelius and the Apostle Peter to bring them together.  Peter was the one who needed convincing.  Had he been stuck in legalism, he would have refused to go to the house of a Gentile (Acts 10:28).  But once there, Peter preached the Gospel to Cornelius, his family and close friends who eagerly desired to hear about God.  And to the surprise of the Jewish followers of Christ who accompanied Peter, they saw strong evidence of the Holy Spirit being poured out on those who had gathered to hear Peter, similar to what had happened a decade earlier at Pentecost to Christ’s disciples.

But that didn’t end the matter.  Now Peter had to go back to Jerusalem and defend his actions to those who want to know why he visited these Gentiles (and even ate with them!) contrary to the Law.  Fortunately, Peter was able to recount the whole story and convinced those who originally opposed what he had done that they would also be opposing God if they did not accept that the Lord had chosen Gentiles to be part of the body of believers in Christ.

Then people like Paul and Barnabas journeyed to preach the Gospel in the synagogues in more distant cities where Jews have settled and also to the Gentiles there.  From both groups, some believed and some did not.  And with these new Christians, both Jew and Gentile, new churches were planted.

But as reported in Acts 15, a new dispute arose.  Some legalistic Jewish Christians (mostly Pharisees) came behind the evangelistic work being done and told the new Gentile believers that they could not be saved unless they were circumcised according to Mosaic Law.  So now the early Church had to deal with legalism in relation to the Gentiles once again.  Those who were bound in the dead letter of the law instead of the living spirit of the law refused to believe that these Gentiles were already saved.

So now a new meeting of the early Church leaders was convened.  From the Bible’s “minutes” of that meeting:

And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they. – Acts 15:7-11

The bottom line is that because of the words of Peter, Barnabas, Paul and James, it was recognized that circumcision was not required for a Gentile to be considered saved and part of the Church.  They realized that they were requiring something (circumcision as adults) that they would not have been able to handle themselves.  They saw that the presence of the Holy Spirit in a person was what counted, not the particulars of their body.  For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love. – Galatians 5:6

But if legalists had their way, Gentiles would have been barred from becoming part of the Church; at the very least, they would have been required to be circumcised and even then they still might have been made to remain separated from the Jewish Christians.  This is very similar to how legalist preachers, misinterpreting scripture, tried to justify the continuance of enslaving Blacks.  Fortunately, they also did not prevail; nor did those who tried to justify segregation of the races in all walks of life.  And yet, many Christians today, almost all of whom would be considered Gentiles (and more than a few of whom are Black), misuse scripture and ignore mounting evidence, thereby forbidding transgender people the right to be something that they could not bear: denying their own identity.

Can someone get a nose job, or breast reconstruction after a mastectomy, or a cleft palate repaired and still be saved?  Yes!  Can someone take hormones to treat menopause or prostate cancer and still be saved?  Yes!  Can someone have gender confirming surgery or take hormones to treat transgender issues and still be saved?  Yes!  It’s what’s in your heart, your mind and your spirit that matters, not your flesh.  And if it applies to one’s standing as a Christian, it certainly applies to one’s standing in the human race.

God bless,

Lois

Advertisements

Special Types of Witnesses

Tags

1st Corinthians 15, Apostle John, Apostle Paul, ascension of Jesus, baptism of Jesus, beloved Son, book of Acts, Christ, Christianity, Christians, empty tomb, evidence, eyewitness, followers, Gospels, hostile witness, Jerusalem, Jesus, Jews, John the Baptist, Josh McDowell, martyr, Messiah, persecution, Peter, resurrection, road to Damascus, Roman Empire, Roman guard, statement against interest, transfiguration

In a future post, I will be describing some of my favorite sports moments. But I am going to include one of them in this post because it fits the topic.  It was actually an accomplishment that I did.  It happened in basketball, which is ironic because it is probably my worst sport.  I am short (about 5’4½”), don’t handle the ball particularly well, and I don’t have a sense of the field of play the way I do in football or soccer.  But there is one very important fact about this event: I didn’t see it happen.

My friends must have been desperate for an extra player when they asked me to join them for a half court pickup game in the Teagle gym.  During the game, one of my teammates was the last person to touch the ball as it was heading out of bounds in the corner to the left of the basket.  I was the closest to the ball and unchallenged for it.

I have the quick reflexes of a hockey goalie, and they kicked in as I closed in on the ball.  At the last possible second before it or I would be out of bounds, I dove and got my hands under the ball.  The only way I could save it was to fling it upwards in the general direction of the court, hoping one of my taller and stronger teammates could get to it first.  Then I hit the floor and skidded, coming to rest out of bounds against the curtain that separated our court from the next one.

As I shook off the impact of hitting the floor and got to my feet, it was strangely quiet.  The first thing I saw was that everyone was standing around.  I assumed the ball went out of bounds again, and they were waiting for me to get back onto the court before the inbounds play.  They stood there with dumbfounded expressions.  One of my teammates told me, “You swished it.”

I accused them of kidding me, but they all insisted it was true.  Even the guys on the other team agreed that it went in.  And the game resumed with us having one more basket than before.

I eventually believed them for three reasons.  First, they didn’t have enough time to get their stories straight.  Second, a group of guys that age are not good enough actors to keep a straight face under those circumstances.  But the most important was that the guys on the other team were hostile witnesses.  And they were making statements against interest.  Confirming that it went in hurt their chances of winning.  So I am firmly convinced it happened, even if I didn’t see it.

Now we will go to a different kind of court, one where witnesses are examined and evidence is weighed.

Here is a summary of the story of Jesus’s resurrection and the empty tomb He left behind.  First, Joseph of Arimathaea persuades Pilate to release His body to him.  He wraps His body in linen cloth and puts it in a new tomb he had recently created by hollowing out a cave into rock.  Nicodemus put certain spices on the linen cloths according to their burial customs.  They are followed to the tomb by some of the women who had been ministering to Jesus and His disciples.

The disciples of Jesus are disheartened, fearful and in hiding.  They are supposed to stay in Jerusalem for the Passover.  But they expect the authorities to find them and arrest them at any time.

Meanwhile, the Jewish authorities remember (far better than His disciples did) that Jesus had said He would rise from the dead.  They go to Pilate and ask him to give them a Roman guard.  A Roman military guard was made up of 4 to 16 men, deployed in a square formation, and were known for their ability to hold off a far larger force.  Pilate grants their request.  The guard goes to the tomb, puts a Roman seal on it and position themselves in front of it.

The day after the Sabbath, some of the women go to the tomb to anoint the body of Jesus with more spices.  As they walk there they wonder who will be able to roll the large stone away from the tomb so they can do this work.  When they arrive, they find that the stone has been moved away and they encounter an angel who tells them that Jesus is risen and is not there.  Eventually Peter and John arrive and find that there is no body in the cave, but the linen burial cloths have been left there.

Then Jesus appears to many people during this time.  The Apostle Paul, in his first letter to the church in Corinth, gives an excellent summary of these events.

For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.  After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.  And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time. – 1^st Corinthians 15:3-8  [Note: Cephas is the Greek name for the Apostle Peter.]

At this point a number of questions might come to mind.  For instance, what revived the spirits of a disheartened group of disciples who had good reason to believe their cause was defeated with the death of their leader?  When He was arrested and crucified, they were still struggling to understand much of His teaching, especially His purpose and objective.  What enabled them to turn a movement in a small area of a conquered region, into a force that swept through the whole world, despite its initial leaders being a small group of men with relatively little education (except for Paul), influence, power or funds?  Furthermore, how do we know that Paul’s statements are true?

If we recall the evidence regarding my amazing basketball shot, some of it applies here as well.  The followers of Christ, in spreading their witness about Jesus, were speaking statements against their own personal interest.  While many Jews became added to the number of followers in the early years after the ascension of Jesus, the Jewish leadership never accepted that Jesus was the Messiah.  They vigorously persecuted their Jewish brothers and sisters who followed Jesus.  Indeed, it was as part of that mission that Paul (at that time called Saul of Tarsus) was heading to Damascus.  Until the vision and message from Christ on that road to Damascus led him to convert, Paul’s actions against the followers of Christ included imprisonment, voting for their death at trials, subjecting them to whatever punishments were allowed under the Law in synagogues throughout the region, even in areas distant from Jerusalem, and forcing some to recant their beliefs.

And while the Romans at first may have seen this situation as an internal dispute between the Jews which did not concern them unless it threatened the peace, that changed as the number of followers continued to grow, especially when non-Jews, even Romans, began to convert in significant numbers.  Teaching and witnessing about a king named Jesus who is the son of the one true God, threatened the religious customs of the Roman Empire and the authority of Caesar.

Thus the persecution of Christ’s followers multiplied greatly.  The book of Acts records the martyrdom of Stephan and the Apostle James.  The historical record shows that all of the Apostles except John (who died of old age in exile) died a martyr’s death.  That record further shows that Christians were routinely sent to death in the Coliseum and that Nero blamed the Christians for the fire he set that burned Rome.  It took three centuries before Christianity was officially accepted by Roman authorities.  Until then, it wasn’t very safe to be found proclaiming the Gospel.

The following is a link to an article by Josh McDowell that gives an extensive list of evidence, facts, proofs, counter-arguments to the claims of skeptics, and evaluations by historians on the validity of the testimony which supports the existence of Jesus and His historical resurrection after His crucifixion.  Historical accounts by Jews and Romans who opposed Christianity (i.e., hostile witnesses) are included in the article with explanation why it is strong evidence.  There is also archeological evidence that shows that Paul’s letter quoted above was circulated at a time when it can be expected that many of the people who saw Christ after His resurrection were indeed alive.  And many other points are made, and made better than I could hope to do.  And yes, at the end of his article, a challenge is made as to what you believe.

http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/josh2.html

Why is all of this so important?  A little further in 1^st Corinthians, Paul explains it: And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.  (1^st Corinthians 15:14)

Jews and Christians agree that God has promised a Messiah for His people.  The disagreement that divides is over the identity of the Messiah.  Paul, a most learned Pharisee before following Christ, has stated it clearly: if Jesus is not risen from the dead, then He is not the Messiah; He is not the Christ.  He is just another false claimant to the title.  There would be no need to continue to follow His teachings. Instead, all should pray that the Messiah would come soon.

Confronted by such an important spiritual question, I must conclude based on all that has been set forth in this series of posts, that we have reliable eyewitness accounts of people who have seen God.  In times of His choosing, God reveals Himself in physical form to people.  At other times, the effects of God’s presence in the world are evident.

I have left the most important witness for last: God Himself on two occasions.  In three of the four Gospels, Jesus takes only Peter, James and John with Him to a hilltop where His appearance is transfigured and He converses with Moses and Elijah.  At the end of that event, a voice comes out of a cloud and calls Jesus His “beloved Son”.  Also, those same three Gospels testify that when Jesus is baptized, a voice comes out of heaven with that same description of Jesus, and the Holy Spirit also comes upon Jesus at that time.  (In John’s Gospel, it is also mentioned that the Holy Spirit descended upon Jesus when He was baptized.  This Gospel quotes John the Baptist bearing witness at this time that Jesus is the Son of God.)

On the first occasion, three people witnessed.  On the second occasion, an untold number of witnesses were there, whoever had come to be baptized at that time.  And many people from all around were coming to be baptized.  They heard a disembodied voice that could not be manufactured with the technology of that time.

Will you follow God?  If so, then understand that to truly follow, it matters little that God is on your side; it is far more important that you endeavor to be on God’s side.  What other way is there to follow?

God bless,

Lois

Related articles

• God Demands a Response to Jesus

How does God see people? (2 Scripture passages especially for the Christian who denigrates transsexuals)

Tags

1st Samuel 16:7, Acts 10, Bible, Bible interpretation, Christian, clean and unclean animals, Cornelius, Gender Identity, Gentile, God, Gospel, Holy Spirit, Jew, Jewish Christians, Life verse, magnifying God, New Testament, no respecter of persons, persona, Peter, public identity, salvation, Scripture, Seeing as God sees, Transsexual

Surely we have time for one more Christmas song:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00Z6ZKJaW5Q

“Said the night wind to the little lamb, ‘Do you see what I see …’”

It is important to see things the way God sees them.  A key question in the consideration of how God sees transsexuals is how does God see people in general?

Many Christians have what we call a life verse.  My life verse (But the LORD said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart. – 1^st Samuel 16:7) was chosen long before my transition, and when I was not expecting that I would ever transition.  A significant reason for choosing it was that I longed for people to see the real me inside, not who I appeared to be on the outside.  I was not a hunk or a fine dresser.  I dressed the part for business, especially when jacket and day was part of the required uniform for a stock broker.  But otherwise, I was not especially concerned with my appearance.

I spend much more time on appearance now.  I discovered I have a knack for women’s clothing when I was in my mid-30’s.  I enjoy putting together outfits for the occasion: meeting a client, going to church, attending a support group meeting or party and so on.  On the other hand, men’s clothes are boring, and I made it worse in male mode because I avoided wearing anything that might reveal my inner secret.  In retrospect, it is easy to see my conflict in this area: wanting people to see the real me while desperately hiding it at the same time.

The most important thing is that God always sees the real me, sees who all of us are inside, no matter what we look like on the outside.  Deep down, that was always very comforting to me and that was also a part of choosing my life verse.  Nothing about me is hidden from God, including all my faults and imperfections.  Yet, He still loves me anyway, and He also knows that my love for Him is genuine.  Being genuine, being authentic, is an extremely important motivation for me, more now than ever before.

I was under no illusion that all of the Christians in my life would accept my decision to transition.  The only thing that took me aback was their accusations that I was twisting the meaning of Scripture when I included verses like 1^st Samuel 16:7 to provide a Biblical basis for my position that my transition was acceptable in God’s sight.  I shake my head when I think of this verse and many other verses in the Bible that indicate that God says the unseen spiritual things are more important as a basis for judgment and a warning from Him about our tendency to not see things the way He does.  On top of that, their responses had so little in the way of Scripture to back their position.

I have posted responses to various objections that Christians raise and will continue to do so from time to time.  But what the Lord says is more important to me and that is what this post will focus on.  Scripture interprets Scripture.  So let’s look at other verses that give further evidence of how God sees us in terms of identity.  Are they in agreement with 1^st Samuel 16:7?

There are two primary actors in Acts 10: the Apostle Peter and Cornelius, a Roman centurion (a Gentile) who is highly regarded by the Jewish people and who fasts and prays to God.  When we first meet Cornelius, we are told that an angel visits him, telling him that God accepts his prayers and good works.  The angel instructs Cornelius to send messengers from Caesarea to Joppa and ask Peter to come to him.

Shortly before the messengers complete their long journey, Peter is waiting for his midday meal.  He has a vision in which God, three times, tells him to take and eat of the animals that God presents to him, even though they are unclean under the Mosaic Law.  God tells him (verse 15), “What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.”  God is setting the stage by which Jew will no longer be separated from Gentile and the parts of the Mosaic Law that symbolized separateness (such as clean and unclean animals) would no longer apply.

While Peter is still pondering this vision, the Holy Spirit tells him that the messengers are looking for him and he should go with them to meet Cornelius.  Arriving, he finds that Cornelius has gathered many other Gentiles to hear Peter’s message.  Peter is starting to get it: These Gentiles want to hear the Gospel and God wants them to receive it.  Here is Peter’s reaction at this point (verse 28):

“And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.”

Peter understood.  God is opening the gates of Heaven to all the nations of the earth, as was foretold.  It is the last part of his statement that is most significant for the purpose of our discussion.  Peter realizes that with the walls of separation having been taken down, it is no longer his responsibility or right to judge any other people based on their identity.  By extension, if it is true for an Apostle of Christ, it is true for all.  We are still called upon to examine the actions of other people, but their identity is not important.

At this point, Peter asks Cornelius why he was summoned.  Cornelius explains the vision he received a few days earlier.  Then he tells Peter that he and the people he has gathered have submitted themselves to God so they can hear the message that God is commanding Peter to tell them.

This clinches it for Peter.  His response is even more emphatic in verses 34 and 35:

Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

At this point, Peter begins to preach the Gospel message, and before he finishes, God confirms that He is accepting these Gentiles who have assembled to hear Peter.  The Holy Spirit descends upon them, similar to what happened a decade earlier to Christ’s disciples at Pentecost.  To the astonishment of the Jewish Christians who accompanied Peter to Caesarea, a large group of Gentiles have been saved in their midst.  They cannot deny that these Gentiles have been brought into spiritual fellowship with them and they have the right to water baptism.  The course of Christianity had forever been changed.

Let’s take a closer look at the phrase “respecter of persons”.  The fact that God is not one is important in understanding how God sees us.  If He is not a “respecter of persons”, then what is He?

This key phrase is translated from a single Greek word: prosopoleptes.  This is the only time it is used in the New Testament.  According to my Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon, it means someone who discriminates.  God does not discriminate.  But He doesn’t discriminate based on what?

Not all discrimination is bad.  A person with discriminating taste knows that a filet mignon prepared by a master chef at his best is superior to a Big Mac.  A teacher who can discriminate between ordinary and superior work by the students and grades accordingly deserves praise; a teacher who discriminates on the basis of skin color or some other type of identity needs to be retrained or fired.  Which type of anti-discrimination applies to God?

The word “person” is derived from the Latin word “persona”, which means “mask”.  A mask conveys an identity to others, whether true or a disguise.  Therefore, we can interpret this phrase that God does not discriminate, He does not show partiality, based on external identity.

In the Old Testament, the children of Israel started with a spiritual advantage.  But God still punished the wicked among His chosen people, while Gentiles who loved Him and followed Him (like Ruth) found favor with Him.  Once the Messiah came to the world for all nations, the slate is wiped clean and everyone from every nation starts at the same spiritual place.  No nation, race or gender is favored over another.

No wonder those assembled Gentiles responded to Peter by magnifying God (verse 46).  Can you imagine what it felt like to know that something precious you longed for but thought was impossible was now given to you, too?  I don’t have to imagine it.  I know: twice, in fact.  My Christian identity is now secure and my female identity is now very public.

Because of the length of the post and the time it was taking to complete it, I will close the post here, with more verses to be examined in the next post (coming soon).

God bless,

Lois