is it a sin to be a crossdresser

Nope, there's nothing wrong with expressing yourself with your clothes. If you're a feminine guy or a masculine girl, you should express yourself. Everyone's unique, and people shouldn't be forced to fit into gender stereotypes.

I don't think it's the clothing itself but more of what's the intended purpose of wearing the clothing.

A piece of clothing is nothing more than woven fabric. It's shaped according to the body of the intended wearer.

I think the debate comes in when men engage in wearing womens clothing to achieve some sexual gratification through pornography or homosexuality. I guess the same could be said for a women who wears male clothing for the same reason.

Would a man wearing tights for warmth or better circulation in the legs be sinning? No. But how about wearing tights as a fetish activity when viewing pornography? Yes. Same clothing, different situation.

LovesTruth said:

I agree. The Bible is clear. The sin is in the act of dressing in women's clothing. When a culture has a clearly male or female mode of dress, then the sin of cross dressing is easier to define.

The real issue is the sin of sexual immorality. God's Word address homosexuality, beatiality, and crossdressing. These are forgiveable sins for those who repent and forsake them. That is the good news!

Deep down inside a person knows what is sin. The reasons for crossdressing come from problems in early youth, but with good counsel (Christian evangelical Bible-believing counsellors) the problem can be cured.

Click to expand...

Where in the Bible does it condemn wearing clothes of another's gender? Besides the verse in Deuteronomy. I cant think of any. And the Deuteronomy verse was talking about advioid war or dressing like gods/godesses. I see people do this every day. My grandmother prefers mens t shirts rather then womans. Womans is cut diffrent to show of the boobs and hips. They are also made of stretchy material to cling to the body.

What is masculine and feminine dressing? Here we go, time for a fashion show!!! Is the kurta below masculine or feminine?

<--- This is a masculine Indian kurta.
<---This is a feminine Indian khameez.
Apart from the color, and the orna about the neck of the khameez there is no difference in cut or style between the two.



Consider also the sarong, worn by both men and women in the Islands, and the kilt, worn by men in Scotland (which I never understood, especially if worn commando. It's cold there!). Something defines feminine and masculine, and I think it's our culture. I wear my boyfriends kurtas all the time as they are comfortable. I don't think God cares really. It's clothing, and if anything all clothing is is a constant reminder that we need it because we're ashamed of our nakedness (another consequence of the fall) and because the elements are too harsh (yet another consequence of our folly).

Who defines which are men's or women's clothing?

Fashion trends occur constantly and society norms are changing as well. Something that were female clothing a while ago may be acceptable for men to wear today. E.g. women didn't wear jeans like men did earlier on to my knowledge.

rollo said:

9Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind... 1 Thessalonians 5:22:

22Abstain from all appearance of evil.


based on this if a man dresses like a woman he is putting on the apperance of being effeminate which men are not supposed to be and therefore is sinning.

Click to expand...

No, for it is just clothing. It would be the intent for doing so that mattered. (Children cross-dress for fun, but it does not mean anything. Actors also cross-dress, but it does not mean anthing other than entertainment). If you wanted to cross-dress but did not, then that could be a sin.

I don't see cross dressing as a sin. Tho I don't understand a person with those desires as I've never had them. But I've come to see a sign of maturity is when we can look beyond our own limitations and not call all our own yuckie feelings about something a sin.

dayhiker

It's not a yucky feeling only. Consider both the verse on the condemnation of the effeminate and the verse in Deuteronomy.

"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind..." 1 Thessalonians 5:22

"A woman must not wear men's clothing, nor a man wear women's clothing, for the LORD your God detests anyone who does this." Deuteronomy 22:5.

However, as I do believe God is not interested in legalism, it is, as others have said, a matter of the heart, and a matter of appearance to others. If a kilt is seen by society as a socially acceptable thing for men to wear, then that is fine. But if a bra is seen by society as an undergarment for women, and a man wears it in an attempt to LOOK like a woman, then it is sin.
I don't know if this would include stage plays or kids dress ups, but I don't think so.

If a man were however to wear say a 'manzeire' (haha seinfield) in an attempt to get more support, then that's ok.

Basically I think the only piece of clothing strictly unavailable for women to wear today should be boxers or trying to dress as a man.

But this is all nitty gritty. It comes down to the heart.

What makes it a sin, is that it is a manifestation of what is going on in the heart and mind of a person that causes them to desire to do it, which in most cases if not all, it is something lustful. Having lustful thoughts is not a sin, if the thoughts are rejected and not received. But once a person receives them, and begins meditating on them, seed is planted and if the seed continues to be fed, it will result in a deed. Once the deed is manifested, sin is complete.

James 1:14-15 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.

Calvin Tyer

Why would God give three fifths of a rat's as to what any individual person WEARS?

For crying out loud, aren't there some REAL issues you could be fixating on, rather than trying to nitpick utterly minute issues to find an opportunity to accuse others of sin???

DinosaursArentReal said:

A conservative gay soldier?

Do you even realise that without crazy LIBERAL rioters throwing bricks at law enforcement (yes soldiers are law enforcement!) at the Stonewall Riots, the White Night Riots, the Compton's Cafeteria Riots, and the Cooper's Donuts Riots, you couldn't even be openly gay right now without being arrested or sent to a psyche ward?

Now THAT is a real issue.

You're selling your people down the river!

Click to expand...

First of all, soldiers AREN'T law enforcement, at least, not in democratic nations.

Second, all the incidents you mention were some time ago. What, my sexuality somehow obligates me to a specific political point of view? Worse, it obligates me to continue fighting the battles of 40 years ago over and over again?

FYI, the Australian military isn't subject to US military rules and regs like "don't ask, don't tell".

From a quote in Deuteronomy, I believe the Bible can be interpreted as saying it (transgender) is wrong. 1 Corinthians 6:9 has some interesting parallel translations from &#8220;nor effeminate&#8221; to &#8220;male prostitutes&#8221;. The most widely accepted versions have &#8220;male prostitutes&#8221;, but not all. In practice, I&#8217;ve noticed at churches and when I attended &#8220;Trinity International&#8221; in Deerfield for an MDiv, there does not appear to be any distinction between Gay and CD, TS, TG. This is in practice and application of accepted &#8220;Christian&#8221; behavior. If we look at this academically and not personally, I see the Bible lumping all of the above into one category, &#8220;Sensual sin.&#8221; For perspective, consider the &#8220;Women in the Church&#8221; thing. Here again the Bible is fairly clear. However, in practice the accurate goes out the window because in our culture this is very inconvenient. While the theologically inclined laypersons argued, most missed a fact. The majority of missionaries were women who were by default in leadership already. I&#8217;ve been on the mission field, semantics aside the female missionaries, ordained or not, are leaders, period!
How does this apply to CD, TS, TG, plus gay Christian&#8217;s? Once again the Church is left playing catch-up. At its height the debate over women leaders was a non-issue in the world. The same is happening here. Already there are semantic games: &#8220;love the homosexual, but hate homosexuality&#8221; Because the transgendered in general are lumped in with gays this is by default likewise applied. I give it 20-25 years till the compromises used to justify women leaders today are applied to GLBT&#8217;s It will start with fully transitioned MTF and FTM&#8217;s, anatomy makes this easier. Then the long, long, debate over is it Biblical. We already has GLBT&#8217;s in government so catch up it is.
The reality in the church has a percentage of those considered especially spiritual and conveniently compared Paul, that are GLBT&#8217;s. THEY STILL MAY BE SPIRITUAL. Practical theology authors and instructors deal with this specific issue, though you will not find this topic openly advertised. I knew of many tortured souls who despised themselves for their sin and more so after the promise of being &#8220;cured&#8221; seems to happen only to disappear after a short time. David Brainerd, while having a relationship with Jonathan Edwards&#8217;s daughter made curious reference to having an interest in her brother (?). He drove himself to death with obsession about something. Edwards even noted the guilt being excessive perhaps driving David to his extreme dedication in God&#8217;s work in unhealthy ways. In my mind, as a great fan of Edwards, I can see no way David could not have confessed his lack to Edwards. I further believe Edwards, the greatest native born thinker ever, could not have understanding, and compassion. Edwards thought of David as one of the best. However, David was a tortured soul in some way, and just maybe in the same ways of those I&#8217;ve known.
I&#8217;m transgendered, felt the cure go away, and faced the ever mounting guilt. I have a strong faith in God, but the church does not have much to offer me beyond giving me solid research into the theoretical and often grossly inaccurate why and how of what is. More helpful is &#8220;we will pray for you&#8221;. Prayer is powerful and answers are real. I&#8217;m straight acting and prefer women only. I&#8217;m very happily married and not to a Christian girl. The Christian girls I know were not very kind to boy&#8217;s issues let alone issues like mine. Their interest was in finding a &#8220;spiritual husband&#8221;. Somehow spiritual and hot looking are equated, don&#8217;t ask me why. My wife is not at all like that and we are in love, period.
The church in general defines me as immoral and for many years I agreed. I&#8217;ve been immoral since age 3. In church I had panic attacks when the subject got to freaks and perverts, and homos. I knew I was in that general group. I and my love of God are not confined to what the church defines as one who truly loves God. After accepting myself as not a pervert, but just a creation of my Lord and my God, I liked myself. I am a person with faults, but know this: I am transgendered and this is not a fault it is just who I am.
Kimberly Ellen Sedala

No, being a homosexual isn't a sin. Acting on it is.

KimberlyEllenSedala said:

From a quote in Deuteronomy, I believe the Bible can be interpreted as saying it (transgender) is wrong. 1 Corinthians 6:9 has some interesting parallel translations from “nor effeminate” to “male prostitutes”. The most widely accepted versions have “male prostitutes”, but not all. In practice, I’ve noticed at churches and when I attended “Trinity International” in Deerfield for an MDiv, there does not appear to be any distinction between Gay and CD, TS, TG. This is in practice and application of accepted “Christian” behavior. If we look at this academically and not personally, I see the Bible lumping all of the above into one category, “Sensual sin.” For perspective, consider the “Women in the Church” thing. Here again the Bible is fairly clear. However, in practice the accurate goes out the window because in our culture this is very inconvenient. While the theologically inclined laypersons argued, most missed a fact. The majority of missionaries were women who were by default in leadership already. I’ve been on the mission field, semantics aside the female missionaries, ordained or not, are leaders, period!
How does this apply to CD, TS, TG, plus gay Christian’s? Once again the Church is left playing catch-up. At its height the debate over women leaders was a non-issue in the world. The same is happening here. Already there are semantic games: “love the homosexual, but hate homosexuality” Because the transgendered in general are lumped in with gays this is by default likewise applied. I give it 20-25 years till the compromises used to justify women leaders today are applied to GLBT’s It will start with fully transitioned MTF and FTM’s, anatomy makes this easier. Then the long, long, debate over is it Biblical. We already has GLBT’s in government so catch up it is.
The reality in the church has a percentage of those considered especially spiritual and conveniently compared Paul, that are GLBT’s. THEY STILL MAY BE SPIRITUAL. Practical theology authors and instructors deal with this specific issue, though you will not find this topic openly advertised. I knew of many tortured souls who despised themselves for their sin and more so after the promise of being “cured” seems to happen only to disappear after a short time. David Brainerd, while having a relationship with Jonathan Edwards’s daughter made curious reference to having an interest in her brother (?). He drove himself to death with obsession about something. Edwards even noted the guilt being excessive perhaps driving David to his extreme dedication in God’s work in unhealthy ways. In my mind, as a great fan of Edwards, I can see no way David could not have confessed his lack to Edwards. I further believe Edwards, the greatest native born thinker ever, could not have understanding, and compassion. Edwards thought of David as one of the best. However, David was a tortured soul in some way, and just maybe in the same ways of those I’ve known.
I’m transgendered, felt the cure go away, and faced the ever mounting guilt. I have a strong faith in God, but the church does not have much to offer me beyond giving me solid research into the theoretical and often grossly inaccurate why and how of what is. More helpful is “we will pray for you”. Prayer is powerful and answers are real. I’m straight acting and prefer women only. I’m very happily married and not to a Christian girl. The Christian girls I know were not very kind to boy’s issues let alone issues like mine. Their interest was in finding a “spiritual husband”. Somehow spiritual and hot looking are equated, don’t ask me why. My wife is not at all like that and we are in love, period.
The church in general defines me as immoral and for many years I agreed. I’ve been immoral since age 3. In church I had panic attacks when the subject got to freaks and perverts, and homos. I knew I was in that general group. I and my love of God are not confined to what the church defines as one who truly loves God. After accepting myself as not a pervert, but just a creation of my Lord and my God, I liked myself. I am a person with faults, but know this: I am transgendered and this is not a fault it is just who I am.
Kimberly Ellen Sedala

Click to expand...

I too have had a sexual fascination with womens clothing since very early childhood. I was always ashamed of it (tried to keep it hidden) even before I knew any Bible teaching on the subject.

After a lifetime of struggle to understand this behavior, and to get free of it; I have finally gotten to a place where it is no longer a part of my life, and the guilt is gone. The guilt is gone because the practice of dressing as a woman for sexual arousal/role playing/masturbation etc. is over for me.

I see the causes for this behavior as follows.

1) General licence granted by God to perverse spirits to influence society in general (as a societal punishment if you will), because of modern society's general refusal of God. God "giving them over" to do such things that are "not convenient". See book of Romans for that.

2) Absent male role models in early childhood years.

3) Possible inappropriate sexual contact between mothers and sons in very early childhood years.

4) Excessive sexual stimuli in our modern culture.

5) Genetic predisposition of certain boys to passivity, fearing the male role.

6) Strong sexual interest trying to act itself out in a confused manner, mistaking the clothing, for contact with women themselves.

For a young Christian boy fearing the sin of fornication with a female partner, and badly confused about what he finds so arousing about women and their clothing in the first place, this is bound to happen in many many instances. It is IMO a lesser evil than fornication with an unmarried partner. Such a young man should look to marriage as the real answer to his problem.

In marriage however, the crossdressing PROBLEM will have to become an unlearned behavior. That is the insidious curse of this secret sin. Best never to start down this road if it can be avoided at all.

I shall conclude with this. Some interpretations of the Corinthian passage cited earlier, raise some very grave questions about whether a "catamite" or as the KJV renders it "effeminate" will ever inherit the kingdom of God. This very real fear led me to pursue deliverance until God finally set me free. I advise all cross dressers to do the same. Never give up. Deliverance will be given in the end.

Here's the last piece of the puzzle that helped me get free. Cross dressing is best understood IMO as a twisted kind of whoredom. It is a sin where you act out both the role of harlot and whoremonger in one single confused identity destroying act, again and again and again. If harlots and whoremongers are welcome in heaven, then I can see no reason why crossdressers would not be accepted as well. There is room in heaven for harlots/whoremongers who repent. There is also room for cross dressers who repent.

1st Corinthians 6

9Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

10Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

11And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

Love in Christ

Truthhound

Deuteronomy 22:5
The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.

BloodyRachel said:

No, being a homosexual isn't a sin. Acting on it is.

Click to expand...

One is not a homosexual if one does not act on the behavior.

I personally feel that cross dressing is a sin.

paul1953 said:

can any one tell me is it a sin to be a crossdresser?

Click to expand...

No, crossdressing in it of itself is not a sin. For from out of the heart comes sin. Not clothes.

Is denying a gift that was given to you by God, disrespectful, and or dishonorable? Does the Bible not say, "Honor the Lord thy God with all your heart all your mind and all your strength"?