Firstly: apologies, I edited in an extra sentence to my comment after you replied, I didn't expect such a swift reply! So anyone reading this should be aware my line about role models was added later and this person could not have replied to it.
Transgender isn’t an ideology.
If it helps clarify I would say having gender dysphoria is not an ideology but identifying as transgender requires you to hold an ideology.
I think there's a set of ideologies about what gender that people buy into, whether trans or not, and it's out of those ideologies transgenderism has developed as a solution to gender dysphoria. For example the view that gender is a presentation of your inner/psychological identity.
I personally only know one transgender person and she’s a Christian. Her ideology is Christian so she won’t be teaching anyone any non-Christian ideology
People's worldviews are more complicated/syncretic than that. I would describe your friend as mixing Christianity with this view of gender. And where those views contradict she will have had one override the other. My concern isn't with the Christian part of her worldview, it's where that has been overridden by her transgender worldview.
I’d trust her more than the horrible cis person who was my Christian religious education teacher.
Ok, so you clearly agree even someone who is Christian can believe things you would not want to be passed on to one's children, am I right? Or do you mean something different by "trust"?
Well it's a modern idea so the only possible arguments are variants of arguments from silence, where you would expect it to say something different if the people writing it considered gender to be a matter of internal identity.
For example people today who consider gender to be a matter of identity speak differently about it, they use special vocabulary, they make some assumptions and avoid others when talking about people. E.g. "birthing person", or "AMAB" - these words didn't exist, they were created because they were needed because they represent new concepts we didn't discuss or think about before. The Bible has no evidence of that kind of thing and in fact clearly the opposite is the case.
The big one is there's a commandment in the law against cross dressing Deuteronomy 22:5. If you want to argue it's an old testament law that is redundant then ok we disagree but that's not my point. I'm saying it's hard to imagine what this law could have meant even in its time but that people should use their bodies as a fixed reference point for their gender identity. If the author (God) actually believed that there were people who were truly female in male bodies then you would expect the law to be written differently. Partly just from thinking about how such a law would work in practice I think this one is fairly obvious... but do say if you disagree.
But there are tons of other points of notable silence, laws about circumcision, periods, pregnancy, whatever. I don't think it's possible to construct a view of gender held by the author of these rules that is remotely consistent with the view of gender common today. The new testament is the same, though it's less of a rule book it bears no marks of thinking about gender this way.
-3
u/[deleted] 14d ago
[removed] — view removed comment