[PERMANENTLY CLOSED] my Gender

AGTG said:

God assigns gender as He assigns sexual function. Of course, in our fallen state we often rebel against God's ways. I do it all the time when I am in my flesh.

But if we are truly born again, we are a new creation. That means we don't live by the flesh, but by the Spirit.

You may not want to come to terms with how God views your perspective because it is contrary to His will and you feel like there's nothing you can do to change that.

But I want you to know God loves you so much He made a way for you to overcome this flesh and these ideas about gender that are contrary to His ways. He made His Holy Spirit available and if we go to Him on His terms, His way, we can see His power manifest over sinful, unbiblical ideas about how we should live.

The word "grace" is used multiple ways in the New Testament. Sometimes it means unmerited favor even when we are falling short of His standards. That means we can go to Father God's throne through Jesus' Spirit and be received to be washed clean of our sin.

Other times, Paul used the term "grace" to mean an enabling power to overcome anything, including sinful, unbiblical ways of living.

Jesus said, "You receive not because you ask not." All you need is to want to change your ideas about gender and trade them in for God's ways and He will grant you the power to walk in that understanding and not struggle with the kinds of thoughts you are having.

This will bring you into closer communion with Christ, and transform you more into His likeness, and bring a greater revelation of His love, His holiness, and His power to save and transform you.

I hope this blesses you and anyone else reading it. In Jesus' mighty name!

Click to expand...

Your entire post is predicated on a mistaken assumption that transsexualism is sinful. It is not. And any apologetically sound argument to the contrary is impossible.

Fish and Bread said:

Actually, some studies have shown that people who are genetically men, but feel that they are women trapped in a man's body, have brains that more closely resemble typical genetic females than genetic males in some respects. So, there is potentially a strong biological basis for transsexualism. It is not an entirely psychological phenomena. It could be in some cases, but not all. Knowing that there is this physical difference in the structure of the brain for some people with this identification should lead people to think twice about telling people that God has assigned them a gender purely based on their genitalia or having XX or XY chromosome pairings. After all, if God made some people male on the outside but with physically more female brains, then he didn't make them as purely male, did he? We also know that some people are naturally born with both male and female sexual organs.

I only think there is something to be said for simply giving people the benefit of a doubt. No one wakes up one morning and decides that they want to switch genders or identify as somewhere in between or something. This is something that has probably caused people a lot of pain through their lives struggling with the identity that society has given them versus what they feel to be true inside (and which may even have some biological basis). It's their lives. They aren't hurting anyone. If this is what some people need to be happy, given that it doesn't hurt anyone, then I feel like we should be supportive of them, or at least non-judgmental.

Obviously, people should disclose this information to potential romantic partners before they get involved, in the interests of honesty and not inadvertently forcing someone into a relationship against his or her orientation, but apart from that, who are we to judge?

Moreover, I see nothing in the New Testament about this issue in particular. Am I missing a verse?

Click to expand...

Yes, you are. It can be demonstrated historically that God has preserved the culture of the Jews in a remarkable way through untold attempts to eradicate it. Culture entails many things. One of the most important elements of culture is a unified way of looking at and interpreting everything around us. In other words, how we define things. I have seen numerous instances in modern times of which words are used to describe transsexuals. It may surprise people to realize that, in Israel, the common term is "eunuch". If a culture that has seen little to no change over the centuries recognizes transsexuals as "eunuchs", then it is logical to assume that they would have also been referred to as "eunuchs" in Biblical times, especially in the time of Christ. Christ spoke quite eloquently about eunuchs. He even differentiated about several kinds of eunuchs. One of which are those "born" that way. I don't remember Him condemning them.

One other passage that is not readily recognized is quite possibly an account which includes a transsexual. When the disciples asked their Master where He wanted them to prepare for the upcoming Passover Feast, He instructed them to go into the next village and there they would see a man carrying a waterpot. He told them to follow that man and speak to the man's master and he would show them a large upper room, furnished and ready. Something specific about the culture of that day needs to be inserted here. It is obvious that the man with the waterpot was a slave to the owner of the upper room. However, we need to recognize that slavery in those times was very much unlike the slavery that existed in this country in the past. Slaves were not demeaned. They were not abused. They were more like what we would call an employee today. It should also be further pointed out that men NEVER carried water! That was a woman's task, and no man was ever forced into the role. The fact that this man WAS carryng water demonstrates that he didn't feel demeaned or put upon by doing so. Apparently, he gladly fulfilled the role of a woman. I wouldn't go so far as to assert definitely that this man was a transsexual, but it makes perfect sense. This man wasn't condemned either.

StephanieSomer said:

I have seen numerous instances in modern times of which words are used to describe transsexuals. It may surprise people to realize that, in Israel, the common term is "eunuch". If a culture that has seen little to no change over the centuries recognizes transsexuals as "eunuchs", then it is logical to assume that they would have also been referred to as "eunuchs" in Biblical times, especially in the time of Christ. Christ spoke quite eloquently about eunuchs. He even differentiated about several kinds of eunuchs.

Click to expand...

I agree with your general premise that transsexuals should be accepted for who they are and allowed to participate fully in the life of religious communities. However, I have always understood the term "eunuch" to refer to someone who is castrated or had male genitalia removed, most often forcibly, to serve such functions as guarding harems for a ruler in some cultures (To ensure they aren't sleeping with the princesses), or in young men to preserve their high pitched voices for choirs (A sin of the Catholic Church that sadly did not stop until a century or two ago in some places in Europe.). These would not be people born with male external attributes who thought they were women and underwent surgical procedures to more closely resemble women, or cross-dressed. I think it's a different subject.

Having said that, translations are simply that- translations. So, I am open to the idea that maybe the word eunuch in the bible in places is a situation where the Hebrew or Greek languages had no word for transsexuals and chose the ones that they thought was the closest, or that they did have such terms and used them, but that Latin or English translations chose to translate them as eunuch or a similar term instead of transsexual or some other term. I'd want to see some evidence that that was the case, though.

I'd hate to see people accept people based on some sort of argument like this, and then find out that eunuch really did mean eunuch and then have them tell people they aren't welcome. To me the simpler and more likely explanation is that we understand psychology better today, and we have evidence of physical differences in the brains themselves, and we also are growing to be a society and a faith that hopefully is increasingly inclusive, and that we should welcome people regardless of their personal choices or predispositions so long as they are not doing things that harm others.

This is I think the last or one of the last survivors out of the people who were forcibly castrated as young men to preserve high-pitched singing voices in Europe, singing "Ave Maria" in 1904 as an old man. It may be the only recording that exists because the practice I think ended before the age of recording and thus there likely wasn't an opportunity to record them, other than this:


That these people were forcibly castrated is a horror and a crime against them and humanity. However, this gentleman's life was his music and since we can not go back and save him from his fate, we can pay our respects to him by honoring his music even while condemning what was done to him.

Fish and Bread said:

I agree with your general premise that transsexuals should be accepted for who they are and allowed to participate fully in the life of religious communities. However, I have always understood the term "eunuch" to refer to someone who is castrated or had male genitalia removed, most often forcibly, to serve such functions as guarding harems for a ruler in some cultures (To ensure they aren't sleeping with the princesses), or in young men to preserve their high pitched voices for choirs (A sin of the Catholic Church that sadly did not stop until a century or two ago in some places in Europe.). These would not be people born with male external attributes who thought they were women and underwent surgical procedures to more closely resemble women, or cross-dressed. I think it's a different subject.

Having said that, translations are simply that- translations. So, I am open to the idea that maybe the word eunuch in the bible in places is a situation where the Hebrew or Greek languages had no word for transsexuals and chose the ones that they thought was the closest, or that they did have such terms and used them, but that Latin or English translations chose to translate them as eunuch or a similar term instead of transsexual or some other term. I'd want to see some evidence that that was the case, though.

I'd hate to see people accept people based on some sort of argument like this, and then find out that eunuch really did mean eunuch and then have them tell people they aren't welcome. To me the simpler and more likely explanation is that we understand psychology better today, and we have evidence of physical differences in the brains themselves, and we also are growing to be a society and a faith that hopefully is increasingly inclusive, and that we should welcome people regardless of their personal choices or predispositions so long as they are not doing things that harm others.

Click to expand...

One thing which Christ stated in His teaching on eunuchs makes little sense unless He was referring to transsexuals when He said that some are born that way. He prefaced His statements with the phrase, "If you can accept it....". Given that most people cannot fathom what transsexuals go through and therefore cannot accept it, His preface makes a great deal of sense taken in that light.

Also your characterization of transsexuals as, "people born with male external attributes who thought they were women and underwent surgical procedures to more closely resemble women, or cross-dressed.", demonstrates a misunderstanding of the issue. I am a transsexual, and I know quite a few others, personally. We don't "think" we are women. Physically, and genetically we ARE male. There is no controversy there. What does differ is our brain wiring, which clinical studies have identified as being caused by gender-specific brain structures which are structured as the other physical gender. So, it is quite a bit MORE than simply "think" we are the other gender. It's not a mental or emotional phenomenon. It is physical in nature with associated mental and emotional states which are normal for the opposite gender. Further, while I do understand your using of the phrase "cross-dressed" in reference to transsexuals, I'd like to point out that given the nature of our brains and it's gender wiring, we actually feel cross-dressed when we appear as our birth sex. In other words, I always felt cross-dressed when presenting as male. I don't feel cross-dressed at all, now that I am in transition. It needs to be understood that the phenomenon of "cross-dressing" is much more a sexual stimulation for those who practice it. It's not for transsexuals. It's just clothes. Nothing more. I do recognize that to outsiders it appears to be identical. I assure you, it isn't.

Having said all that, I feel obligated to express my appreciation for your willingness to accept those of us who are different, as you expressed in your 1st paragraph.

ILoveJesus said:

My gender has always been confusing for me
Most of the time am female but there are times when am both
I am Gender Queer ( Transexual) most of the time i wear slacks because that was am most comfortable in
I do wear dresses with trousers and some times i just wear trousers

none of my family knows apart from my husband
He says he loves me not matter what gender i am

Click to expand...

I'm glad your husband supports you.

However, I also want to reinforce Stephanie's clarification. Gender Queer is not transsexual. Transsexual is a term that only covers those who identify with the gender opposite of their birth and are, intend to or sincerely want to transition from their birth sex to match their gender. Gender Queer is a completely separate term, but, as Stephanie noted, does fall under the broader general term of transgender (which means you identify outside of the gender binary or not fully with your birth sex).

I don't fully understand what being gender queer is like, but I have met many wonderful gender queer people.

No worries. I'm just cautious because of a lot of conversations I have had both here and in real life with people who do not understand what either term means

Tink and Steph have already giving you great information. I just want to join the rest and saying that I am happy you have some people who support you.

ILoveJesus,

On a related note, let me just say I noticed how some posters have treated you & others on another thread in another forum - & even though it doesn't involve me, I just want wanted to tell you I'm sorry some people have said some unkind things.

Blessings to you.

ILoveJesus said:

thank you both GenetoJean and graceandpeace
may God bless you all

Click to expand...

Your welcome.

StephanieSomer said:

Your entire post is predicated on a mistaken assumption that transsexualism is sinful. It is not. And any apologetically sound argument to the contrary is impossible.

Click to expand...

You cannot back up your opinion that transexualism isn't sinful with scripture. If your religion is not based upon the teachings within the Bible, it's not based upon God's truth, but on the opinion of man.

AGTG said:

You cannot back up your opinion that transexualism isn't sinful with scripture. If your religion is not based upon the teachings within the Bible, it's not based upon God's truth, but on the opinion of man.

Click to expand...

Now people have to prove that something *isn't* sinful using scripture isn't of the impetus being proving that it *is*? What a sad restrictive harsh world you must live in, always looking over your shoulder wondering what a wrathful God is going to take vengeance on you for. You should choose to live in a world where God loves, respects, and includes everyone. That choice is yours.

AGTG said:

You cannot back up your opinion that transexualism isn't sinful with scripture. If your religion is not based upon the teachings within the Bible, it's not based upon God's truth, but on the opinion of man.

Click to expand...

Yes I can.

A bit of backstory.... having suffered with gender dysphoria for decades, from as early as I can remember, and praying with fasting earnestly for many years for relief, I turned to the Scripture to prove that it is indeed sinful, as I believed it was. I held that belief simply because that is what MOST Christians believe. I reasoned that if I could come before the Lord with His own Word, demonstrating that this "sin" was destroying my life, that I could finally either get free of it, or obtain the grace I needed to survive it. I spent over 4 years, went through the entire Bible twice, repeated several parts of it numerous times after that, and researched every commentary I could find on whatever verses I could locate that seemed to speak to the issue. What I found was that there are only two verses which "might" be construed to speak to this as a prohibition. The first is Deut 22:5. The second is 1 Cor 11:14. However, deep and detailed study of both of these demonstrated that the only way either of them could be interpreted as a prohibition was to take them out of context. Actually, I was disappointed. I desperately wanted relief from the torment. And now, even the Scripture couldn't help me in that regard.

I can post details beyond this if you require them. I have done so repeatedly in other threads over the last year or so.

But, more to the point of your comment.... It is you that cannot back up your opinion that transsexualism IS sinful. It is simply an assumption. It seems to be sinful. I thought so too for most of my life. So, most people just assume that what seems to be is for real. Proverbs explicitly warns against holding an opinion which "seems" to be right. And, since your position is NOT based upon the teachings of the Bible, it's NOT based on God's Truth, but on the opinions and assumptions of man.

And to this I might add that calling something "sin" which God does not is sin in itself. "Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil." God does NOT make any such declaration. Neither should you.

I challenge you to actually study the Scripture on this topic. Put in the time. Learn some of the principles of apologetics, and apply them to your study. Actually KNOW what you are saying. Googling to find an argument that agrees with you and quotes Scripture is NOT study. Neither is it necessarily Scriptural. Even Satan quotes Scripture. But, like many false teachers, he takes verses out of context or misapplies them to make them say what he wants it to say.

If I had the very slightest hint of doubt that transsexualism was sinful, I would not be in transition, because "whatsoever is not of faith is sin".

Hello!

I just wanted to say that it doesn't really matter a lot if you act like a girl or a guy. You are you, whether you conform to societal gender norms or not. So just enjoy expressing yourself. Wear what you feel like wearing. Do hobbies you like. Wear your favorite color. Gender norms really don't matter a lot to me either, although I consider myself female. Just... be you.

ILoveJesus said:

its feels good that i have came out but i have problems with my faith i was born Catholic am unsure how the church views transsexuals or gender issues
i feel i need to leave the Catholic church Am meant to be going to confession tomorrow and the mass but i go in as male as i dont want to disrespect the cathloic church and i dont feel comfortable going as female
my husband told me i dont need to go to confession ... but my OCD ( i have since been diagnosed with OCD )makes me feel like am sinning all the time
i want to look at other faith in Christianity that means i can praise Jesus and not feel like am a freak
be myself male , female or bi gendered
Than you for replying

Click to expand...

The Catholic church doesn't say you have to act girly... I think there's nothing wrong either being a genderqueer Catholic.

Also, you should try asking about this in the Liberal Catholics area, if you haven't already.

Just liking trousers doesn't really make you male or female... it's the 21st century its perfectly OK to not like dresses. Gender roles are a lot more fluid than they were in the past.

You might want to talk to a therapist if you have not done so.

graciesings said:

Hello!

I just wanted to say that it doesn't really matter a lot if you act like a girl or a guy. You are you, whether you conform to societal gender norms or not. So just enjoy expressing yourself. Wear what you feel like wearing. Do hobbies you like. Wear your favorite color. Gender norms really don't matter a lot to me either, although I consider myself female. Just... be you.



The Catholic church doesn't say you have to act girly... I think there's nothing wrong either being a genderqueer Catholic.

Also, you should try asking about this in the Liberal Catholics area, if you haven't already.

Click to expand...

FireDragon76 said:

Just liking trousers doesn't really make you male or female... it's the 21st century its perfectly OK to not like dresses. Gender roles are a lot more fluid than they were in the past.

You might want to talk to a therapist if you have not done so.

Click to expand...

Both of these posts seem to indicate a misunderstanding of transsexualism. It has almost nothing to do with clothing choice. In reality, the only real part of transsexuality that has anything to do with clothing is the great discomfort transsexuals feel from the societal insistence that we dress and appear as our genetic sex, rather than what we truly are within. It's NOT about gender roles, either. It's about identity. Who we are as individuals. And who we identify with. Gender roles, clothing, toys, and activities are nothing more than expressions of who and what a person is. The issue isn't those things. It's the "who and what" we are. Viewing transsexuals only in the light of those things is superficial and vague.

Don't make the personal political. Sometimes a suggestion has no other agenda.

My suggestion is to just talk to a therapist first before a person assigns a label that "others" themselves. A desire to just wear trousers (or pants as we call them over here) is a personal preference in western societies. A therapist will help you sort through your feelings and give you support.

FireDragon76 said:

Don't make the personal political. Sometimes a suggestion has no other agenda.

My suggestion is to just talk to a therapist first before a person assigns a label that "others" themselves. A desire to just wear trousers (or pants as we call them over here) is a personal preference in western societies. A therapist will help you sort through your feelings and give you support.

Click to expand...

If you took from my post that I was against your advice for therapy, then I have been unclear. That was not my intention at all. I FULLY endorse therapy as a prerequisite to transition. I have gone through it myself, and realize the help it provides. My only purpose in my post was to clarify for the benefit of the many others who are reading, but not posting. Often, people pick up on a phrase or an idea that is a bit off-course from the truth. I feel it necessary to clarify for people WHAT transsexuality REALLY is, since I AM a transsexual and often have to deal with people who are acting on a lack of knowledge that they have gotten through understanding an issue from internet posts that are not quite an accurate picture of the reality of transsexuality.