Often Discriminated, Transgender People Are Accepted by God | Controversy eXtraordinary
By: MrControversyX
Note: I found this article just 'now,' November 1, 2022 after an ongoing discussion with a fellow NT member. I find this article 'opens' up some issues we were discussing prior.
And, it also touches on several other items I had not considered and may even not agree to be the case, nevertheless!
So it can be a 'hot topic' piece. One in which I will trade back and forth accordingly.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
7/25/2020
A certain transgender told me that by regularly watching our television program, he was able to develop an understanding of the teachings of God and the Lord Jesus Christ. And then the time came that he felt a fervent desire in his heart to serve God and to be a part of the Church of God because, like most of us, he also wants to be saved .
But because of his gender identity, he had questions; he was asking if a transgender like him would still be accepted by God and if he could have a place in the Church of God.
It turns out that these negative thoughts were brought about by the harsh and disparaging statements that he has heard from other religious leaders and pastors about those who are transgender, and about the members of the LGBTQ community as a whole, such as that they are of the devil and that they can never be saved unless they become "straight" men and women. Hearing such pronouncements directly from the very mouths of preachers who claim to be of God made him think of himself as someone who is unworthy and undeserving of salvation.
But I told him that those were just mere words of preachers who hardly have any understanding of the words of God because if they do, they would not have said such words at all — for such statements are against the will of God.
According to the Bible, what God wants is for all men to be saved.
As it is written in 1 TIMOTHY 2:4 (KJV),
Who will have all men to be saved , and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
The verse says "all men" therefore, it encompasses the whole of mankind. It is not exclusive to the "straight" men and women but it includes the LGBTQ (lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgender, and queer) community and other gender identities.
God is giving all people, including those who are transgender, a chance to salvation — even if a transgender person happens to have undergone surgery or whatever medical procedure in the past. Primarily, this is because he had committed that thing when he had not known the Christian doctrines yet, when he had no knowledge of the truth yet. And people like him have a place in the Church of God.
Actually, one member of the Church had once confessed to me that he is transgender. He was born male but years before he became a member of the Church, he underwent an operation which made his genitalia match his gender identity or the gender that he feels inside. Hence, his male genitalia had been removed and had been replaced by a female's.
But upon accepting the doctrines of the Lord Jesus Christ and after submitting himself to holy baptism, wherein all his past transgressions had been forgiven, he obtained God's mercy. And from then on, he started anew. He turned his back from his former way of life and he started spending his life in faithful service to God and the Lord Jesus Christ, without pretending to be a "straight" man, but strictly observing the Christian moral standards that he has understood. And with God's help, until now, he remains steadfast in faith.
God is considerate, just, and merciful. He will not hold anyone accountable for an act which he did ignorantly. And no less than the Apostle Paul experienced His mercy and consideration.
1 TIMOTHY 1:13 (KJV)
Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.
The Apostle Paul committed grievous sins in the past. He used to be a blasphemer and a persecutor of the early Christians. Nevertheless, he obtained mercy from God; he was forgiven because he did all those things "ignorantly in unbelief."
A transgender person who submitted himself to a medical procedure, which offered him the gender identity that corresponds with the gender that he feels inside, can also obtain God's mercy if it was committed prior to his understanding of the word of God and while he was still outside the jurisdiction of the Church of God. He may still be forgiven the same way that the Apostle Paul was forgiven.
Definitely, if he has undergone an operation, he cannot undo the modifications that doctors have done to his physical body anymore, and neither can he restore what has been removed from it. But that does not outrightly disqualify him from being saved because, like the Apostle Paul, he did them "ignorantly in unbelief."
We just can't help that many religious organizations today are full of pretenses and hypocrisies, as though they are all blameless and sinless, and as if all of them have no gender identity issues. A pastor and pretended song, for instance, do not accept gays or homosexuals in their organization because, according to him, people who belong to the third sex were created, not by God but by the devil.
Such a cruel pronouncement only shows his ignorance about the will of God; it is without any biblical basis. Actually, it is even contrary to what the Bible says because according to the verse cited earlier, God wants all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
The Bible tells us that the moment a person submits himself to the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ, regardless of his gender identity, he becomes a new person.
He just has to see to it that after learning and accepting the teachings of God and the Lord Jesus Christ, and upon submitting himself to the jurisdiction of the Church of God, he should no longer do the things that he used to do.
Meaning, he should no longer engage in same sex relationship s ,
he should not wear make-up anymore, he should not dress-up gaudily, and he should no longer spend his life in worldly pleasure. Instead, he should start to live a life that is in accordance with the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Anybody who is in Christ is now considered to be a new creature.
2 CORINTHIANS 5:17 (KJV)
Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
. . . .
So, if a transgender person is now in Christ, he automatically becomes a new creature. He is considered a new creature in the sense that there are now noticeable positive changes in him, not necessarily in his physical appearance nor in his gender identity, but more on his way of life. He does not smoke and drink alcoholic beverages anymore, he no longer goes to bars and casinos, and he no longer speaks and behaves roughly. His way of life has changed as it is now disciplined by the teachings of Christ, and his whole person is now being molded after the person of the Lord Jesus Christ. Only fools would dare say that this "new creature," although a transgender person, would not be accepted by God.
God is welcoming all of those who would return to Him, including those who are transgender and the rest of the LGBTQ community. That being the case, they are also welcome in the Church of God, where they can be happy and gay Christians .
Tags
Who is online
458 visitors
I will open this article with something from it that I consider to be a contradiction in statements:
It is an interesting query as to whether this church and this content author while being open to transpeople receiving salvation is insisting that homosexuals have to end their marriages and other relationships.
I found it confusing as well. Well, most of the article, really. I can't tell how much I agree with and how much I don't because I can't quite get a sense of just where he stands. For instance:
So, I believe most non-progressive churches believe that not only can unrepentant LGBTQ members not be saved (because they aren't repenting from the sorts of things they need to be saved from), but anyone who lives an unrepentant lifestyle of any kind can't be saved, because, hello? That's what you need to be saved from. And they wouldn't say that in order to repent you have to become straight or whatever. It just means to repent. That is, if one is a practicing homosexual, stop being a practicing homosexual. You may still have homosexual desires and orientation (how you feel doesn't just disappear because you got baptized) but as long as you give that up for the sake of Christ and being with him, that's all God asks. He'll take care of the rest.
But there are those who also believe that, say you've done a certain thing, like actually transition, it's like receiving the mark of the Beast or something and you can't be saved. That's crap. He's right about that. And he's right that you don't have to be "straight". That isn't a switch you just flip and now your feelings are something else.
But then says:
So, I find this confusing because he seems to agree with those pastors that say you have to repent in order to get saved but at the same time, makes it seem as if he doesn't.
In any case, I do agree that anyone can be saved if they want it. And he seems to agree that if one is saved, they have to leave their old life behind for the one God gives them.
Other than that, I'm confused about the person he's talking about. Yes, they should no longer engage in same sex relationships but I can't quite tell if he's saying it's okay for the individual, who he refers to as a 'he', to keep presenting as female. If he does, then I would disagree with him. If the individual keeps presenting as a woman then that's deceiving and doesn't seem to be actual repentance.
What is that person supposed to do? Have another surgery? That’s a hell of an ask. Surgery isn’t like returning a suit you don’t like.
Yes, it is a tad confusing as the author conflates homosexual relations and transsexual relations into-one. Perhaps he knows something about trans-people shifting back and forth between sexual 'partners'? More on that may be later.
As to the "presenting as female" any male who has medically transformed into a female (genitalia and all, or planned surgery) upon being 'saved' can continue on in her new reality, because she is in the process of 'becoming.'
"Old things have become new." Pun not intended.
Of course not. I meant don't dress like one.
Do you have chapter and verse for that?
The article does a (somewhat interesting job of mentioning) that a transgender person can be saved, through the doctrine of becoming a new creature (2 Corinthians 5:17). It would be ridiculous, cruel, and nonsensical for Godhead to require a he converted to being a she to medically revert back.
Keep in mind, and this is important, when a person is saved they are saved in the state they are CALLED. In the transgendered person's case, they are 'trans' already at the point of salvation. Thus, as a trans-person God sees that person's condition and they are "the Lord's freed person."
Unless you wish to consider that the simple state of being 'trans, per se' is a sin to be 'let go.'
Now if you suggest that a transsexual person should live a celibate lifestyle after conversion to the faith; where do you see that in scripture?
First, there's no conversion from 'he' to 'she'. There's only a physical alteration in an attempt to make something impossible.
Second, becoming a new creature has nothing whatsoever to do with our physical bodies and your attempt to justify it with this verse is a gross misuse of it. We are new creations because we now have Christ in us, whereas we did not before.
It most certainly is and your use of 1 Corinthians 7 is even worse than the first verse. The way you use it, everyone should keep on doing what they were doing before they got saved. For instance, are you a drug dealer? Keep dealing drugs. Do you embezzle from your company? You should keep doing it. Run a stable for prostitution? That's okay. Just treat the product better. Are you a homosexual? No problem.
Do you not understand that belonging to Christ means to no longer to live in the world? Do you not know we are to be holy because God is holy? You don't seem to. Your version of salvation seems to be "God loves you so everything you do is A-okay."
We are called to a whole new life. A whole new set of goals. We cannot keep the old ones and think God will be okay with that. It would be us telling God " Yes! Save me! But I'm keeping all these old things I want. Not going to give them up because they're important to me. They're what I want most ." There is no sacrifice for such. You either want God or you want to be your own god.
And, physical alterations account for nothing? Impossible? Tell that to anyone who has ever had surgery!
The new creature is of mind, body, and spirit. Wholesomeness. And what of the physical body? Shall you 'cripple' it farther in some vain attempt to please God? How much; what degree of genitalia mutilation is 'justified'?
When is it sufficient to leave well enough alone, in your estimation, Drakk? Your answer will be 'telling.'
My answer was given in 1.1.3 . So, what you are doing is deceiving. This is what you always do. Invite me to discuss our shared "faith" and then when I do, you discuss crap that just comes from human thinking and desires, further proving that whatever it is you have faith in isn't what I have faith in.
I am going to avoid the 'easy' snark that could come in at this point. I am going to make every attempt to dignify your comments and give them the consideration they deserve.
Now then, surely you know by now that transsexual transformation is not something done outside of the body, but is done within/to the body. What is your ideal 'outcome' for the transsexual person who is in this faith. Can you speak it clearly?
Second, this understanding of what it means to be a believer seems to value appearances, what someone shows to the world more than what an individual is in heart, mind, and faithfulness. Explain this heavy emphasis on appearances to the person and the Faith. After-all, God does not look at appearance does God?
God looks at the heart, no?
God can make use of the 'imperfect' but faithful, no? Demonstrate the view of your Lord in your comments by writing something heartfelt.
What 'world' do you live in, Drakk? A religious convent? A segregated compound? Do you agree holiness is internal and not based on others around you?
"God loves you so everything you do is A-okay."
'Everything' encompasses an immeasurable about of 'things,' no? Where do you observe me doing and agreeing to do 'everything' (that I desire)? Point it out if you can and I will reconsider what I am thinking! Or, give you a reason for the 'things' I do one by one.
[King] David killed his 'tens of thousands.' David and his men cut off 200 foreskins from 'unwilling' men I am pretty sure you will agree. Surely you have read this. So remember it here and now. And your God and my God loved David. And the Lord, who could have come through any other lineage chose to come down through the line of King David.
The fact is this: God defines what holiness is and what is acceptable. And the faithful are 'left' to understand. What other choice do you, we have available to us?
One trait David always exampled before God: Boldness. And God rewarded David the life, times, and death as a king for it.
You step away from the point of this discussion: Transsexuals who have transformed themselves medically can not "magically" or "prayerfully" reconstitute their former physical bodies. Such a 'prescription' is impossible.
As an alternative: you would ask transsexuals to live a celibate lifestyle, no?
Is that the 'will' of God or the 'judgement' -opinion- of Drakk (Man)?
To add a new layer of complexity: What if a transsexual individual is married when 'called' to a proper mate? What is the 'prescription' for this situation?
Again, I will write with tenderness when dealing with a fellow believer, even one who doubts my sincerity for as long as it is possible.
You addressed Tacos! above in your comment. I am not under any obligation to remember everything 'statement' written on any comment board or even in a thread. Possibly, I can do it-but is it fair to criticize someone for what can be restated to clarify or pointed out even without being suspect. These comments we offer serve a purpose; they are not sacrosanct, nevertheless.
In practical terms, how ought a trans-person dress after becoming saved? Give me a fashion 'concept' if you can.
Even a thing like that is highly variable and changes from place to place and year to year. Are these men pretending to be women?
Is this boy dressing like a girl? (No. It’s actually Franklin Roosevelt as a child and that’s how parents - especially wealthy parents - dressed their boys in those days)
The gendering of dress is highly fluid and there really aren’t any rules. In any case, it’s not as if trans people are in disguise so that they can trick someone into sex or marriage, so who cares?
I mean it’s possible, of course, that some person might do that, but I hope we can agree that would be rare and extreme, no one is endorsing that, and it is not the kind of situation we are thinking of.
So having said all that, where is the harm? We can imagine ideal behaviors for people in all sorts of circumstances, but the various forms of transition - from changes in hair or dress all the way to hormone therapy and surgery - are how these people deal with a difficult situation.
The alternative prescription - tough it out and either live in chastity or mate with someone you can’t stand - is a cruel and unreasonable suggestion. It’s a standard to which straight, cis people would never hold themselves. Suggesting it is base hypocrisy.
Jesus famously talks about Moses permitting divorce even though when we get married, we promise not to part until death. He did this because people found themselves in difficult circumstances with no better alternative. Men disposed of wives they didn’t like through abandonment, abuse, or murder.
We have seen that the suffering people endure - through disease, physical or mental handicap, or injury - can inspire others to compassion and charity, both for their benefit and the glory of God. Trans people present a similar opportunity.
Remember when Jesus cured a blind man by smearing mud on his eyes? People assumed there was sin attached to his condition. He or his parents must have offended God somehow, they thought. But Jesus admonished them and told them that was not the case.
We should not assume that there is sin attached to being trans or to how people cope with it. We should assume the best in people and give all the love, compassion, support, and affirmation that we can. There may be contradictions in scripture, but “Love each other” is pretty consistent throughout.
I do not know how anyone is supposed to process this 'complaint' of yours, as you do not qualify it in any way. Are we something other than human? Can you actually live a 'literal' life out of the Bible? Would your 'works' be anything more than 'filthy rags' before God as spoken by Isaiah at the end of the day?
Of course, there is a spiritual component to the belief and daily 'walk' of the Faithful. Without denial or disagreement. Also, there should be a realization that you, we, will fail and have need of many "mercies" from God! Because telling ourselves self-righteously hat we can surmount every 'gray area' of understanding we encounter on any given day properly without fail would be lying to ourselves.
Best to get up off one's knees and get on with the business of service to God and TRUST God's Spirit to manage this 'business' of guiding, forgiving, and saving!
“Are we something other than human?”
The one and only thing we can share, but too often forgotten.
Peace to all in remembering and celebrating our commonality, even if for just one moment.
Hmm mm.
That is not the point of the discussion. The article you posted dealt with the erroneous claim that a trans person could not be saved. I made a comment, to which you replied:
To which I basically responded was in no way true. A member of one sex cannot be medically transformed into the opposite sex. You can make them look like the opposite sex, but that doesn't make them the opposite sex.
More importantly, you insist that a trans person can continue being trans, which is perpetuating a lie, and still claim to be saved. The Biblical evidence you provide are verses that contain words, such as:
and try to sell the idea that this justifies remaining in sin. Not by the context of the verse but because of the lack of it. That is, you apply "the old has gone, the new is here" as justification continuing the trans person's rebellion against God simply because of the words "old" and "new".
As far as I can tell, you have no fear of the Lord. As far as I can tell, you use the Bible to justify the fleshly desires of your heart and living in the world you want to see come to fruition. And when you invite me to debate you on this issue, you speak of talking from the heart and all that nonsense, when any Christian should know the human heart cannot be trusted.
But rather than take this seriously, or try to justify anything you say with scripture taken in context, you waste my time and insult my intelligence with questions about surgeries and what sort of clothing should be worn.
I would advise you to go back and read your Bible. Don't look for what you want it to say, Look at what it says in context.
I'm done here. I have much better things to do.
finally, thanks
What happened to you, Tacos! Is it just this subject or what? I recall tons of stuff on other topics and you always replied intelligently.
To answer this silly question, the cultural context of the clothing in the photo has always been male. Therefor it is a male style of clothing. It would be entirely different if these guys were dressed in evening gowns because the cultural context for such clothing has always been female. You know this as well as I do so why do you think there's some sort of point being made here?
Have you forgotten what the seed is about?
Actually, it's already happened. It probably is rare, though. But this is not the point, anyway. That is, it isn't that there are raving hordes of trans people trying to trick straight people into sex. When I mentioned it, a guy considering approaching a woman who he didn't know was trans, you went off the rails about how I just wanted to screw her or something. That wasn't what I was referring to and I wonder why you keep ending up there?
In actuality, what I was referring to is men approaching a woman, or vise versa, because they are possibly interested in pursuing a relationship. I don't mean some stranger, although that's possible. It could also be someone they know. Whatever. Thing is, people like to get to know someone they may be interested in for a permanent relationship. Not all men, or women, are looking to just get laid. And that's the problem.
I obviously don't believe people can change their sex. Only their appearance. But that doesn't mean I don't have sympathy for these people. Some of them are probably just as pervy as some straight people are but most probably want love as much as any other person does, yet most heterosexual people would not date a trans person. One survey I saw said less than 2% of females and less than 4% of males would date one. That leaves a pretty small pool of available candidates. And of those candidates, how many are interested in the person vs the trans?
Then there are the trans people themselves. It's probably not as bad for women who present as men, now, but I wonder what it must be like for the men who present as women? I wonder if they are sometimes hanging with their female friends how some of the conversations might go. One of the actual women announces she's pregnant. Or one talks about how bad her period is at the moment. What happened at the gynecologists. Or any other female only subject. How does the trans person feel knowing none of that is ever going to happen to them? Never produce a child for the man who marries "her". And add that to the small pool of men who would actually be interested in "her". I honestly can't see anything but eventual heartbreak and that makes me very sad.
And then take what it does to society as a whole. In my view, it doesn't make it stronger. It makes it worse. I don't know how old you are but in the course of my life, I've watched the solid ground on which we used to stand erode away. And all of it can be filed under the heading "loss of truth". We are, apparently, more racist than we've ever been before. News media is just propaganda outlets, now. Strangers have the right to indoctrinate your children in a place where they are supposed to learn how to read, write and do math. And now, we're being told that gender is a social construct rather than the scientific fact that it is. You can find thousands of vids on YouTube of young kids trying their damnedest to come up with a new gender that someone hasn't already thought of or thinking of some original pronoun.
I would suggest Jesus Christ as the answer. And that isn't an attempt at being funny. I'm dead serious. This world isn't what people think it is. I'm sure you think I'm a fanatic and, in a way, I am. When you have something beyond price, you tend to get that way. Turning to Christ is literally taking the red pill.
Yes. Jesus said it was because their hearts were hard, though, not because of difficult circumstances. Moses recognized that divorce was better than subjecting a woman to such a man. Interestingly, did you know that Jesus attracted more women followers than men? Still does, but in the beginning we see Jesus treating women like no man treated them in their culture.. I don't mean romantically, but the one thing that Christian women most desire in their husbands is for them to be as Christlike as possible.
I don't disagree. However, following Christ means living to a set of different rules for a different goal than most people in the world live for.
You mentioned the Glory of God. Do you ever wonder how mere humans can give glory to God? Especially when He doesn't need it? That is, it doesn't actually add anything to His "supply" of glory or something. Glorifying God isn't simply saying "God! We glorify your name!" Glorifying God is actually recognizing that His way is right and that He has the right to our obedience. It is believing Him and doing what He says. It's when God tells us "This is the path" and we believe it. So, really, it's recognizing the glory He has because He's right.
Correct. However, there's a difference between something that is just a physical reality that was not due to any action on one's part and things one chooses to do. God is all about relationships. It is the whole shooting match. The point behind everything He does. The red pill (God's word) allows us to see the consequences of our choices and the actual value of the things we want.
You may consider me a heartless jerk but there's a sin attached to it. It is taking control of one's own life, ignoring God or claiming He made a mistake. And please don't say they were born that way. There's no proof. And even if there was, you now have to include everything as being born that way. Being a violent person. A career criminal. A pedophile. A narcissist. You name it. So, even if we are born the way we are, that doesn't mean we have no choice. And those who make the right one don't regret it. For instance, the idea that one can't stop being gay is wrong and there are ex gays that will tell you so.
Point being, God said we would not regret trusting Him. We would never be let down. That doesn't mean we will get what our sinful hearts desire. It means we will one day become something we can't imagine in this life. Real, true human beings in the image of Christ. Forever. And, yeah, I know how that sounds. But, even though I am only just beginning to understand it myself, I would gladly die before letting go of it. (and no, I don't mean in some religious jihad or some such nonsense)
Funny you should mention this. Remember when I said the LTBTQ were depraved? Well, from the Christian point of view, everyone is. Including us. But it doesn't have the same meaning as the secular world gives it. Or, rather, the standard that says we're depraved is different than the secular world is different. That's the red pill, again. It lets you see just what you really are in God's eyes or, perhaps it would be better to say, see how we measure up to His standards.
It's pretty bad, let me tell you. And I've just barely scratched the surface of that, too. Sound's depressing, doesn't it? It is, but it's sooooo outweighed by the good news of Jesus. There's just no words to describe it.
But it's because of this that I can give love and compassion to others. But that doesn't mean I also have to support and affirm what I know is hurting them because of the reality I see and they don't. God wants us to join Him but most people just want the best this world has to offer. Then they die and none of it goes with them. All that is waiting for them is God's judgment. I don't know what that will be like, really, but in my minds eye, I wonder if they will see what they could have had and how worthless what they had was. Or will they stand before Him and still deny it? Dunno.
Anyway, thank you for the tone of your post. I took it for what it was and gave you my honest reply in return. If anything sounded snarky, I truly did not intend it to be. Have a good night, or day.
Why? Was someone forcing you to read what I posted?
Drakk, a biblical ideologue you might be; but you can't please God by striving to live a perfect or even near perfect life. The scriptures make that clear, by the pool of humanity God draws from continually of 'shady' humanity who fail 'daily' in their service. For instance, Moses murdered and hid an Egyptian before his service to God was initiated. God made Moses 'god' for his chosen people to lead them out of Egypt.
—I won't dignify your 'rant' "As far as you can tell. . . ."
Suffice it to say it's none of your business what I do in reality or don't do in reality. That is properly reviewed between God and me.
You do 'labor' to keep in the forefront of your mind, one eye on my 'person,' to speak to me, as though you know me and my Christian-walk; you know little about it really, if anything at all. And then, only what you can glean from what I write about myself.
I have given you practical considerations as an opening to this discussion from the Bible and real people living real lives we presume, because as in my example of King David, we find a man was not an ideologue, but a man who cherished the affections and devotions of many wives and concubines, despite what you would term a 'whorishness' of having more than the 'modern' conservative ascribed 'vie' of one man-one woman marriage .
And, we have not begin to compare this good king who could not build the worship place for his God because of how much blood he shed:
You wish to gloss over practical issues of day to day 'on the ground-living' in ancient Israel, and situations and difficulties, highs and the lows that span sixty, seventy, years and varying lifetimes. All for some 'misery' and yes miserable service to God (who has not demanded it of humans incapable of fulfilling of being perfected or near perfect ).
But go on, back away. I won't be offended. It is to be expected. You have your worldview and I have mine obviously. And only God will take the measure of both views—if only to extend grace to both!
Come and go here as you will. It's all the same to me.
The old 'sliding scale' with no off-ramp, eh? Actually, you need to refine your point here. Are you speaking about transsexuals who come to salvation ahead of medical intervention, or;
transsexuals who have partial (taking hormones and acquired breasts) or completed surgeries (breasts and sexual organ removal/replacement?
It is 'rich' that you choose to talk down to me and deny me any semblance of doubt, while complimenting Tacos! on the 'tone' of his postings-one who does not recognize your God. No offense meant to (you) Tacos!
I will say this, Drakk' - what a piece of work you 'present' to us. You address us from an 'ivory tower' about high concepts of what it means (or not mean) to live as men with breasts and made-made vaginas, women without breasts and man-made penises, about what is it to be homosexual, about living hetero-sexually (though you once labeled yourself a long-term celibate individual), and all the while you refuse to 'dispense' compassion or understanding of the 'human condition' in your ponderous writings—though God clearly has provided considerable provisions for mankind to be near to God's 'heart.'
Drakk', you are as much a 'study' as you consider me to be. Here's to observing each other.
Still wrong. This isn't about your personal life. This is about your misrepresentation of God's word. You are not telling people the truth concerning His word. You use salvation as an excuse not to turn all of one's life over to God. You talk about how I don't live in the real world but in doing so you discount God's work in our lives and His faithfulness in doing what He said He would do. Instead, your preaching that trans and other LGTBQ people can find their salvation in their "becoming" that you always talk about. That's it. What you do with your personal life is your affair.
It is because he isn't a Christian, or hasn't claimed to be one. I don't expect him to be accountable for what he says about God because of that.
Ok, well I’m glad that you think cultural context matters. When the Bible, in Deuteronomy, forbids the sexes from wearing the clothes of the other, there is context. The scriptures aren’t talking about every day clothing. They can’t be, because men and women in that part of the world - and especially in those times - wore the same types of garments. The only time they wore something different was in religious ceremonies. Really, whenever the Bible is discussing mens clothing in detail, it’s in that context. So the idea that the Bible (or God) is somehow opposed to men dressing “like women” day to day is just not something that is covered.
I’m not the one who spends so much of their time literally worrying about the sexual biology of other people. That’s you. That’s today’s conservative Christians. That’s today’s Republican Party. When you put that much energy into a topic, it’s reasonable to explore “why?”
No one is “choosing” gender dysphoria. What they choose is how they respond to it. We currently have limited options. One of which is - and the one most conservatives seem to want people to choose - suffer. Just do nothing and endure it. That is too cruel.
There actually is ample proof. First, of all, there are intersex people who are born with atypical chromosomes and/or ambiguous or unusually developed genitalia. Then, there are people who appear typically male or female physically, but their brains develop more in line with the opposite sex. This brain development is a thing that can be observed and measured.
Typically male brains have different mounts of different types of brain tissue (gray vs. white) and that tissue is also organized differently. Additionally, electrical activity in the brain can be seen to be typically correlated with sex. In trans people, though, their brains are organized and functioning in a way that is more like the opposite sex.
So, what defines what a person is? How they should live their lives? Their genitals or their mind? The Bible cannot help us here, but unless you’re a newlywed or a sex worker, having sex and procreating is such a small part of our daily lives. So people choose their minds over their genitals. For their own sanity.
No you don’t. That is not logical. In no way is that required. But even if it were, we should find the best ways to respond to it.
Could you stop being straight? I know I couldn’t. I never chose to be straight. I just am. I would fight very hard against gay sex. Most gay people I know feel the same way about straight sex. I don’t discount that some number of people who have identified as gay no longer do. I myself know people who once identified as gay but no longer do. But that doesn’t tell me all homosexuality is a choice. It tells me sexual orientation can be fluid for some people.
I also know people who lived for years as straight and came to accept in their 50s or 60s that they were actually gay. And they’re devout Christians.
This is not to say that people can’t choose to engage in various sex acts. They obviously do. Prison rape is a clear example of nominally straight men having sex with each other. It has also been a common historical practice that conquering soldiers raped the men they defeat. That doesn’t mean all homosexual behavior is a choice and not an innate desire.
You don’t know what is hurting them. Not really. You’re not them and you’re not God. Fortunately, working out whether or not someone else is right with God is above your pay grade.
But I’ll tell you what: If you spent significant time around gay people, and genuinely loving them, you would see that supporting and affirming them is the most Christ-like thing you could possibly do. And not supporting and affirming them is the most cruel thing you could do.
You're wrong. But only time will clear it up for you. We can continue to discuss or you can stop and just read, it's all the same to me. Perhaps, if you stop wasting time with 'digs' about my faithfulness (which you know not enough about) you can ask better questions and get better answers. I keep having to correct your 'alien' concerns and it sets back moving forward.
You don't get to question my faithfulness in any case.
As a matter of fact, yes, it's part of my duty to the web site.
I am reminded of the movie about Bill Porter, "Door to Door" played by William H Macy.
Bill Porter was born with cerebral palsy but worked and walked 8 to ten miles a day as a door to door sales person to the age of 69.
Bill Porter
Bill Porter
This would be an overstatement. They wore the same general clothes but there were distinctions between the male and female versions. How they were adorned, for one and, generally, men's garments stopped at the knees while women's went to the ankle. Head coverings were different as well.
Ummm... except for the verse you mentioned, which does not single out ceremonial clothing.
The 'why' is pretty simple. We have to live in this society, too. We believe the farther our society gets from God, the worse things will get. We have to live in this society as well, you know, and we should be able to try and shape what our society is as much as anyone else.
Seriously? You think we want people to suffer? I don't think you put much thought into that.
Nope. There isn't, except for your first example. The brain difference isn't even evidence, let alone proof, because studies have shown that what you occupy your mind with can change the structure of the brain. For instance, if one who seldom uses math suddenly starts intensively learning math, a before and after image of the brain will show a difference. In other words, you can't tell if their brains are making them the way they are or whether what they are interested in is developing their brains correspondingly.
Our answer, of course, would be that God defines us and we should live our lives for Him. From our point of view, the Bible is immensely helpful. And, again, our view is people choose what is the desires of their corrupted hearts over God. That is why they suffer the way they do.
Incidentally, I don't understand why so many people think the LGTBQ community has some sort of special access to suffering that only they can experience. The fact is its common to everyone. It's just the details that are different. Everyone suffers in one way or another.
You'll have to explain why it isn't, then. Because to me it seems ludicrous to suggest only gay people are born the way they are.
That isn't how I think of such things. While I can't imagine having a desire to have sex with some other guy I can imagine myself looking at straight porn. And in God's eyes, that's just as bad. That is, I'm not against gay sex because it's gay sex or that I find it revolting, but because it is against God's desire for our lives. That goes for anything in life, so it isn't as if gay sex is some special category.
I note that you didn't respond to any of the religious comments that I made and that's fine. Not asking you to, but I do so to reveal how I see the world. Everyone wants to live a fulfilling life. Because I'm just like everyone else, I spent most of my life trying to be fulfilled with what the world offers. It never satisfied and most of my life was lived in a low-grade depression. I turned to Christ and now things are different. I see the world differently, and that is the point. You wouldn't believe how different the sort of thing we're talking about looks to me than it does you. So, again, no. That isn't how I see such things.
If you mean practicing homosexuals, I rather doubt it. I make no claim as to whether they're saved or not, that's for God to decide, but I certainly know beyond doubt they aren't submitting to God's will in this.
Yes, I am aware of all that, but you're just making excuses for something that isn't right. Rationalizing it, if you will. But don't we do that with everything? We know we shouldn't do (some thing) but we want to, so we make a reasoned excuse to do so. We talk ourselves into it, even though on some level we continue to know we shouldn't.
That is totally wrong. Everyone has had their heart broken by something. Everyone longs for something. Everyone experiences pain and suffering. They do not have some emotion that isn't common to us all.
Yes, and no. Since CB claims to serve the same God I do, I have the duty to correct him when he errs or oppose him if he refuses to repent. That doesn't mean I can determine whether he's saved or not. That isn't up to me, although I have an opinion. I would not do the same with you because you do not claim my God as your God. As far as I can tell, you do not accept God's rule over your life so the standards that apply to me do not apply to you. Why, then, should I expect you to follow what I do? i wouldn't.
I used to work in an industry that I was told was 80% gay. It was the gays themselves that told me. In any case, I could no more support them or affirm them than I could a child who wanted to eat nothing but cake and sweets for every meal. That is, I can love them but not support what is harming them. As would Christ. Jesus came to call us out of the world's way and into his. A life you don't understand and one I am only beginning to.
That probably sounds like I'm being all superior and crap but, honestly, I'm not. If we could see our own souls, they'd look like filth clothed rags in comparison to Jesus. Because I am saved doesn't change that. The only difference between you and I on that score is I accepted Christ as savior and repented of my life. Now I can see what he has in store for me, or a tiny piece of it anyway, and that is what I want. Jesus took his royal robe and draped it over my rags, so to speak, and now that's the way my Father sees me. As if I were Jesus, or have his righteousness. It is something that will one day be a reality. Not in this life, though. So I am in no way superior to anyone.
This illustrates a key problem with believing the Bible divine. You, and many others, interpret the words of ancient men who knowingly or not penned their mores & values into scripture. You and many others interpret the results as certain knowledge of God's will. You actually believe that you know beyond doubt that you understand the will of the grandest possible entity based merely on ancient books which have no supporting evidence that they are anything more than the product of human minds.
Thus you, with certainty (beyond doubt), will declare (and act accordingly) that homosexuals et.al. are at odds with the supreme entity (and thus morally wrong / sinful).
That whole section is about separating the Hebrews and their practices from the heathens that surrounded them. It wasn’t about God and all of human kind. Even a cursory study of Jesus’ ministry should tell you that those kind of regulations aren’t some kind of magic rule book for getting into Heaven. Too much concern over traditional BS like sacrifices, clothing, and food was the main beef (no pun intended) that Jesus had with the Pharisees.
Unless you’re one of those people who think women can’t be saved if they wear pants, or something. Then, I don’t know what to tell you. You’re just going to believe what you believe.
Right, but you don’t have to have sex with - or perform medicine on - LGBTQ people, so it doesn’t affect you or society. Therefore, it’s not your business to worry about whether their sex “matches” their clothes.
Yes, I absolutely do. I have spent time in an Evangelical church. They literally teach that such suffering is a good thing. It’s also all they - or you - have to offer.
OK, again, if you’re one of those people who doesn’t want to hear about science, I can’t help you. Only therapy can do that.
No, I’m sorry. That’s not close to the same thing. You are genuinely not well educated on this topic.
Yes, I know! Lack of true empathy makes it easier to be cruel. You definitely need to learn more about people you clearly - by your own admission - don’t understand.
Doesn’t it seem more ludicrous to suggest that being straight or gay could be a choice? Considering all they go through, would you choose to be gay in this world? Even worse, would you choose to be trans?
Why would you choose to be in a group that has a smaller pool of romantic options to choose from? Why would you choose to be in a group that is over-represented as victims of violent crime? Why would you choose to be in a group that is over-represented in suicides? Why would you choose to be in a group where conservatives are always telling you that you can’t go to Heaven?
Why would anyone choose any of that?
It might help you to know that scientists have even observed homosexuality in the animal kingdom. It appears to be a perfectly natural variation, but the truth is we don’t precisely know why anyone - human or animal - is gay. There appears to be some genetic component, but there is no specific “gay gene” that scientists can identify. Of course, even interacting with straight people, it should be obvious that there is more to attraction than just genetics.
I don’t see how you can know that. I believe in God, but I don’t claim to have that kind of knowledge. I do believe, though, that God makes us the way we are, or allows us to be this way, and I trust him not to condemn someone for living life the best they can according to the way they were made - especially when they aren’t hurting anyone by doing it.
I don’t think you appreciate how much you hold yourself up as judge of others. I am a Christian, but I don’t need to prove it to you.
This is why I'm not engaging you, TiG. You speak as if we are in agreement on this. We're not. Since we are not, there's no point in going further. You are welcome to keep trying, though.
Odd that you would interpret my words as implying you agree with me that there is no evidence which indicates the Bible is divine and overwhelming evidence that it is merely the work of articulate and gifted yet nonetheless mere ancient human beings.
I am making a point for general consumption; not limited to you. I am aware that you will never agree with my position and that you lack a persuasive answer.
It could simply be a matter of being on the spectrum: In order to have a sex drive in humans - opens up sex spans in all directions on the spectrum. The good, the bad, the ugly (of sex) without calling out any one type, fetish, or form at this point.
My apologies for presuming to have read that you were not a religious person. A "great" many times we read so many volumes of "fast and furious" comments on articles and in threads that "speakers" can cross lines in our minds as to who wrote what and when. It's just one of those things, that probably happens more as we age too. But, I can't prove that!
If I ever speak out of term or wrongly about your faith/belief/God or Jesus or Christianity (if that is the one) gently remind me and I will correct myself!
That isn't quite correct. Israel wasn't chosen because they were special. They were just people. They were the instrument God intended to use to show the rest of mankind what God was like and what He wanted from us. That is, it was intended, on paper anyway, as the gateway to showing Himself to the world. Perhaps you are familiar with all the passages of God speaking of glorifying His name among the nations, for example.
Agreed.
It wasn't that there was too much concern, per se but that it was the wrong kind. They were only superficially obeying the physical aspects of the law without comprehending the spiritual aspects of why they were there. What was behind them. For instance, the idea that one is righteous because they don't eat shellfish would have been the attitude of the Pharisee when it should have been " God asked me not to, and for love of Him I will not ."
No, I'm not one of those people. However, in keeping with the comments you made in this paragraph, what is actually important is why one chooses to wear what they do. That is, the spiritual aspect of it. God made us the gender we are. What could be more rebellious than trying to change that?
You really need to realize there's more to life than just sex. It does in fact affect me and the society I live in. For instance, even speaking against trans as real women or men can get you fired from your job. Our kids are being indoctrinated with values we do not share. Imagine if your kids were forced to be indoctrinated in Christian theology, for instance. It gets harder and harder to find programming in media where it isn't being shoved in your face, and so on. So, please, quit with the sex crap.
Sorry you think that.
Neuroplasticity can be viewed as a general umbrella term that refers to the brain’s ability to modify, change, and adapt both structure and function throughout life and in response to experience.
Alternatively, you are well versed in propaganda?
Look, if you're just going to play this sort of game, that's cool. I don't have to do this.
This is not responding to what I said. If gay people are born that way, there's no rational basis for believing that only they are born whatever a person's proclivities are. Hence, one can say a violent person was born that way, and I've seen papers suggesting such. Same goes with pedophiles. If there is any validity to the question "who would choose to be homosexual", it has to be ten times more valid for a pedophile.
So, if people are born that way, is that reason enough to justify it? Pretty sure we all know the answer to that when it comes to pedophiles. How about zoophiles? How about someone who's been violent all their life? How about a sociopath?
In the end, whether someone was born that way or not is irrelevant. The question is, is it right? Is it okay or something one should suppress in themselves? Of course, you will arrive at a different answer than I will concerning homosexuality and the rest of the alphabet, but that isn't the point. The point is, being born that way isn't a valid defense without validating all the other proclivities out there.
Again, it doesn't matter whether having homosexual feelings is a choice or not. What matters is what you do with them. Thus far, you have spoken as if that were the most important thing about them. For those that are not concerned with God, it probably is and conservatives telling them they can't go to Heaven probably doesn't concern them overmuch other than the implied judgmental attitude.
But for someone who is concerned with God, homosexuality or even heterosexuality isn't the most important thing about a person. There's nothing special that has to be given up that others who seek God don't have their own version to give up as well. Jesus said that those who try to keep their life will lose it, but those who lose it for his sake will keep it. It means, if you want to keep the life our own dark hearts desire, the one the world offers, we will ultimately lose everything, even our souls. Losing our life for his sake means to forsake all our heart desires and have it replaced with his own personal desires. So, yeah, I know the pain of denying yourself very well. It hurts. It hurts a lot, sometimes.
Perhaps because the explanation can't be given by science?
How do you know it doesn't hurt anyone? Because it doesn't violate your standards of what constitutes hurt?
Yes, I know people think that. Can't be helped when you believe there's a standard.
Not asking you to. However, you think me cruel and insensitive because I don't support or affirm people in the LGTBQ community. Am I to take that as your judgment of me? Or are you simply telling me what you believe about the situation and what you think God wants? If it is the latter, perhaps you could afford me the same courtesy I do you. That is, I accept that you are trying to do right by what you understand and so I don't take it personally, even if it is judgmental. And there's nothing wrong with making judgments. Pretty hard to go through life without making them.
How? How does that work? I'll tell you - you don't know. You don't know where gender is. The genes? The genitalia? The brain? The clothing? You don't know. You judge . . . but you don't know.
None of that is explained in the Bible. Scripture does not tell us "if you have gender dysphoria, just ignore it." There are lots of rules in the Bible, and they often have a narrow context that people conveniently ignore (or we are just ignorant of) - especially when they're in the mood to condemn someone else.
For example: Gay sex bad. Straight sex good. Right?
No. Not right. We have context for straight sex. Straight rape? Not ok. With exceptions! Sometimes God actually orders rape in the scriptures. Sex with underage? Bad - sometimes. Sex with unmarried? Bad - sometimes. Sex outside of marriage? Bad - sometimes. Marriage to more than one woman? Super common, actually, but in the 21st century we are told God's plan is "one man to one woman."
My point is there is a lot of sex and sexual lifestyles in the Bible. A lot of which we would consider illegal now, but were sanctioned by God at the time. Supposedly. And it's all straight sex.
But the Bible is a lot more silent on gay sex. Only a handful of passages are even arguably about it. But none of them presented with the context of adults in a consensual, monogamous relationship akin to marriage.
(Unless you want to talk about David and Jonathan. Hmmm)
Context matters a ton with straight sex, but not at all if we are in the mood to condemn gay sex. Same with trans. Interesting.
Gosh. Lots of things.
You want to speak against someone and then you're surprised when you get fired? What makes you think you have the right to disrespect people in your job?
How do you know? Someone told you? You heard it somewhere?
Do you teach? Do you volunteer in a school? On the PTA?
As a parent with kids in schools, I call bullshit on claims of indoctrination.
Indoctrination: the process of teaching a person or group to accept a set of beliefs uncritically
What values are in schools that are so powerful they would overcome the simple ability of a parent to talk with their own kids? If you are a parent who is that afraid of what your kids hear in school, you need to have a long, serious think about your relationship with your kids, and how little they trust you for the truth.
This fear of indoctrination is hysterical, irrational, and entirely political. The political organizations in this country are getting people panicked over nothing so they will go out and vote the way they want.
Nobody's kids are being forced to be indoctrinated. There's more indoctrination in your average church than there is in a public school. Kids in school mouth off at their teachers all the time. They are little agents of chaos. Problems with discipline in schools are well known. You ever see that in church? Not like you do in schools, you don't.
Literally no one is forcing you - or even trying to force you - to consume media programming.
Again, it's not me. It's you. You're the one obsessed with the sex and sexual behavior of other people. I'm content to let them live their lives with nothing but love from me.
I don't think it. I have experienced it.
You are the one who said you didn't understand them. You need to face the reality of your words and what they reveal. Otherwise, why would you ever learn anything about yourself?
Why equate the sex life of someone who engages in a loving, consensual relationship with someone who victimizes people? I'll tell you why. It comes from the bigotry that has been perpetrated for decades about LGBT people - i.e. that they are immoral, promiscuous, and pedophilic.
I notice you haven't given up computers.
Not right this minute. Maybe in the future. Maybe not. Either way, that doesn't make it a choice or a sin.
Because it literally doesn't hurt anyone.
Again, if you can't be helped, you can't grow. I don't know what your standard is, but mine is that Jesus loved people unconditionally. As a parent, I love my kids unconditionally. As a human being, if I love someone, it's unconditional. And telling people to conform to your limited, ignorant vision of what they should be - or you'll condemn them as bad people or something - is not love. Equating a person's loving behavior to criminal behavior is not love, either.
Interjecting on one point. Drakk has made it clear to me in the past that his apparent judgment of people is not him personally making a judgment but rather reflecting (what he believes is) God's judgment.
Thus Drakk, if I have read him correctly, does not hold that he is in a position to judge homosexuals, trans, etc. and would be against our system discriminating against people based on sexual orientation, etc. He holds that God is the only entity that can pass judgment and that the Bible has, to some degree, communicated God's judgment.
( This is my understanding of Drakk's position, but Drakk tends to disagree with almost every takeaway I have on his positions so ... who knows? )
Yeah, I’ve heard that line before. The thing is, you never hear these people say that they can’t see anything intrinsically wrong with being gay or trans, but they go along with it being evil because “God said so.” Or that they really want to love and affirm LGBTQ people, but that “God’s will” is preventing them. Instead, they magically are in lock step with “what God wants.” Very convenient.
Convenient? Faith can be hard, as I'm sure you're aware as a Christian.
What makes faith hard in your view? My view is that it would be hard to keep dealing with the contradictions between what one is supposed to believe 'on faith alone' and what one concludes through critical thinking and modern knowledge (and evidence).
Well, I guess this has devolved rather badly. I'm here to talk about issues, not piss you off so I think I'll just say good luck.
It's accurate enough to be getting on with. I don't think it matters, though. I haven't judged anyone. I haven't said anyone was going to Hell or even that anyone was a bad person. It never matters. It's always the same. As long as you agree with them you're a good person. If you don't...
How about you judge me on what I say rather than your perceived view of a general category?
That implies that Tacos! does not generally engage in honest debate. Personally, I think the site would be substantially improved if more Tacos!-like members were here.
You know, that is just an unfair assessment.
Tacos! and I don't always agree, but I always find his answers informed and interesting. He takes the time to actually write out his thoughts and I truly appreciate that given some of the "I know what you are, but what am I?" discussions here.
Drakk', why are you appropriating the word "indoctrinated" into this discussion? Any and all values and principles are not shared by someone. Thus, conservative 'kids' have just as many problems, sorrows, dilemmas, joys, and yes-sins as the next child who is experiencing trans-tendencies and questions at an early age.This is according to your expressed worldview.
If they all weigh the same, equity demands all be given a fair shot at solving their individual circumstance, not being told to listen to a, the, conservative 'voice' which will instruct them in how to live and take no account to their feelings (as if that is even possible to do) alone.
All things being equal-they are not-it is the responsibility of the state and civil authorities to make 'a way' possible for the success of all its citizens, and to allow all religious organizations to express themselves in manners suitable to their beliefs, respectively. Getting back to the word, "indoctrination" of course you would say that your church makes an effort to expeditiously get out in front of your children with your thoughts, doctrines, and conservative principles. . . that would be called religious expression. And you would not identify what is done within the structure and home of conservatives you approve pejoratively indoctrination.
However, where your 'membership' and children are compelled to enter civil society and public education. . . you evidently are suggesting that religious society should 'hover' over your 'kids' heads and envelope them while out and about society.
It is incredibly selfish to demand churches and religion hold to religious freedoms and civil society should feel nothing against it, while looking about civil society and detesting what it does to equip civil society to succeed as a 'unit' in the world you write relentlessly that you care little about its existing.
The flipside is this: You really OUGHT to realize there is more to life than just religion. Speaking AGAINST trans-people who desperately need to eat, sleep, and prosper in this country like their religious 'brethren' do without being PERSECUTED by religious freedom and expression fails to acknowledge or respect there are other worldviews in the world!
And no, the best case scenario is not to cancel each other voices or worldviews out. It is for the religiously free and expressive folks to accept a multiplicity of other voices and social expressions exist out the doors of places of worship. Religious expression is only one of the many voices and forms of expression in our country.
In fact, religious expression ought not be the dominant voice. As it is not granted such power or elevation anywhere in the constitution. For all of us should be equally able to be heard and seen in the marketplace and other places of this society.
Religious institutions are stretching their constitutional prerogatives stealthily outward and encroaching on the constitutional rights of civil society. This is wrong. Ironically, it is conservatives who should be supporting proper constitutional treatment of others, because when you do so it under-girds conservatives religious expression when it is under attack from outsiders.
Actually, this is a specious argument. To extend sexual expression to adults (born to a sexual attraction/appetite/fetish - born this way) in a manner they are comfortable with between themselves has a ---- wide gulf---- between such activities and any and all inclusion of a child/children or animals (neither with consent in our culture or license) recognized by rule of law.
Furthermore, the actions that trans-youth are taking upon themselves to put forward into the culture have a natural sounding board in the courts as well. Courts are where 'sound and fury' go to die by actionable decisions. Some of those decisions go one way and others go another.
Finally, there have always been unamenable, untenable, and offensive activities which are 'beyond the pail' - because those activities can demonstratably and evidentially be shown to have no redeemable value/s.
It is offensive that you would try to lump everything that you find objectionable as fitting in the category: Irredeemable.
Most indigenous people of the world have accepted as fact and part of life that there are gay people. It is nothing that upsets them and in fact, they are considered gifted by many of the indigenous people.
Sadly the Christian right can't come to terms with something that has always been part of the human experience.
I find the idea of indigenous peoples, a strong people indeed, accepting homosexual and trans-people most interesting. Because of my upbringing, raised in the church, departing from it at 18, and returning later in life, I have 'conflicting interests' on how to navigate my own sexuality. I bring this up because this may have all been. . .different somehow. . . had I been born into a 'nation' and culture where same-sex relationship is part of the status quo.
Alas! For me, I may 'forever' be held in this suspense (caught between heaven and hell) about faith and same sex relations.
True. Most shamans are healers, some physical, some spiritual, some both. Many were gay or celibate, others were artists.
Like Old time Catholic priests, the priesthood suited gay men. They too provided healing services and were the preferred abortionist until almost the year 1600
A gay couple were the engineers for the great pyramids,
many British and French Kings were gay.
That's interesting and I did not know any of it!
Here is an article that will help you understand how we indigenous people view this. Most all tribes at the time of contact with Europeans had five genders, male, female, two spirt male, two spirt female, and trangender. To the Ojibwe they are known as Two Spirit or berdache.
Two of our most famous Chiefs were berdache.
.
It will show you how backward the European were which has been continued today with Christian religions.
Thank you, Kavika! I will check it out.
I am touched by the article and its depths of information. So much sadness. It does give me pause when I think just how much two-spirit people and homosexuals have endured. Have endured. . . . Have endured. . . . So much remembered. So much suffering. So much loss.
And some want to 'vomit' up this pain and heartache all over again after not even one single generation of national 'relief' from the stigma, the shame, and the fight for justice!
We've been through a lot.
if god created all living things, acceptance of LGBTQ people is the litmus test of true christians versus the fake xtians. it's important to note that the existence of LGBTQ people predates christianity by many millennia.
So true.
We know for a fact that lgtbq humans exist and have for thousands of years. So far, that's a lot more evidence than we have for any God's.
If humans have created God's, then Christians can claim the God they created and worship hates lgtbq humans. They can claim anything they want just like anyone can claim that Santa really wears a blue suit, not red.
So, considering no God has ever been confirmed to have weighed in on the subject, it's really up to the believers to determine what their brand of deity likes or hates. So while some Christians believe their God accepts transgender humans, others who have a different vision of that God in their heads and hearts may vehemently reject such notions.
Until any God is actually proven to exist, claiming God's do or do not accept lgtbq humans is rather pointless. However, the circumstantial evidence would seem to indicate that if there is a God, then it has no problems with creatures on this planet being gay, otherwise there wouldn't be the over 1500 different species who are known to display gay behavior.
Starting with my open and frank reply to Kavika's comment; a direction I had not planned to go in by the way, I find myself in 'listening mode' as much as 'speaking mode.'
I was using the thumper's own dogma to illustrate their hypocrisy.
I had gay friends in the 80's while working in the restaurant industry. back then was a very dangerous time for them to be gay. our common bond was pranksterism and those guys were the greatest at it. we respectfully accepted each other at face value. they often invited me to join them on some hilarious adventures few heterosexual males would experience in that time. those guys were hysterical. sadly they have both passed but their memories endure. I miss them both very much.
Well, when the headline states, "Transgender People Are Accepted By God" that does invite the question "Which God?" which in turn invites the question "Is there really a God?". And if there is a God, how do we determine which is the 'true' God when there is exactly the same evidence for Quetzalcoatl as there is of the Hebrew God or the Hindu Gods.
Once someone has proven their God exists, and proven that they, a human, are somehow entrusted to define and express their proven Gods wishes, then they can start telling people who their God accepts.
You have shared that you once was in the church, and I wonder if this brings back a memory:
As it is dropped in my spirit as a reply to your comment as though you may be someone who can connect with it. Let's see how it goes over.
Dismayed, you are looking at it from a white person's viewpoint. To us, the Ojibwe the term Gitchi Manidoo is translated by whites to ''great spirit'' when in reality in our language it translates to the ''great mystery''....We assign no color or gender to it, nor do we build churches and idols or pray to it, it is simply part of the universe that we cannot fully explain.
So our view of religion or a god is very different than the white Christian view of it and of course since Two Spirits have been in our society since the beginning of time we believe that, unlike the Christians, it is not only acceptable but a living part of our society with benefits we would not otherwise have.
I was really just trying to point out that human Gods essentially mirror the culture of the humans who invented them which is why the pantheon of Gods is as diverse as the humans that gave them life and power. In the prudish white European Christian culture their God apparently hates gays, transgender persons and pretty much anyone who views sex as something to enjoy instead of a stiff sacred duty to be performed in the dark missionary style and last two and a half minutes at most. That's why I raised the question of "Which God?" accepts transgender persons. The answer seems to be "The God's of the people who accept transgender persons".
There are Christians who accept transgender persons and treat them with respect, and I would say they believe their God is also accepting of the same, whereas other Christians essentially worship a different God that hates transgender persons even though they both identify as Christians. Just like in politics there is apparently a liberal God and a conservative God and people usually gravitate towards the version their parents and peers worshiped so you find a wide divide between the millions of liberal Christians who believe God loves all of his creations even our gay and transgender brothers and sisters, and on the other side you have millions of conservative Christians who believe their God is going to annihilate gay and transgender persons and torture them for eternity in a pit of fire which is why these Christians treat them like infectious leppers.
I also noticed in this seed the plea to the lgtbq community to "return to Him" and they will be welcomed and "become a new creature" which seems to be saying that being lgtbq means you're 'away' from God and you need to change to get close to "Him".
Isn't that just another stereotype of those many Christians consider "Godless liberals"? While the authors of the seed are clearly trying to appeal to lgtbq persons and tell them they are welcome, it also seems that they aren't welcome the way they are but will need to "become a new creature" to be accepted.
Essentially this seed is just a marketing pitch to the lgtbq community from "The Church of God".
You are correct on that, Dismayed.
Hi DP, if we substitute 2 Corinthians 5:16 - 17:
We get context and a window into what this author is saying about the new creature (born in Christ Jesus). That is, there will be, by definition and repentance, notable changes in the life an individual models to others which SIGNIFY a different outlook and relationship with the surrounding world.
The 'event' has a name: Sanctification ; or being 'set apart' (for service to another; where 'the world" is abandoned and and personal characteristics of spiritual wholesomeness is added to (or expected of) any and all new converts. Another way to look at sanctification would be a RESET.
That said, I am still mulling over some of the points made in this article!
Humans are tribal creatures and they fear the unknown. I believe the approach has been a fatal mistake regarding transgenderism. The science on biology is settled science, we are born with sex and gender. The science is settled however a small minority of people choose to identify as a gender that is indifferent to such. This is acceptable and the pursuit of acceptance should campaign for tolerance and nothing more. It's a difficult life and that lifestyle should not be promoted among the vulnerable.
Nice opening. . . feel free to elaborate. . . .
Ol' boy is all over the place with all sorts of bizarre ideas.
The Bible is very clear. EVERYONE is unrighteous. ANYONE can be saved. God loves us as we are, in spite of ourselves. If we accept that love, we should try to be more like Him.
It's really not that complicated.
I don’t see the justification for declaring this to be sinful. How is this different than getting a nose job or a boob job? Are all people who get plastic surgery condemned to Hell? Where is that written?
Our modern understanding (continually developing) of gender identity was unknown to ancient people. The Bible is not a science text, and even if it were, we couldn’t hope to look to it for guidance on this issue. The Bible does talk repeatedly, though, about charity, compassion, kindness, and gentleness. That should guide how we treat people - not our fear of people we think are “different.”
It is not up to anyone on Earth to decide what God’s position on gender dysphoria might be. I know this much, though: God made these people and they are doing the best they can to come to terms with how to best live their own lives.
Woah! I’m in a lot of trouble then, because for me, it’s whiskey and a cigar almost every night. But Jesus turned water into wine and then insisted it be served to everyone present, so I figure I’m good.
I, even I, will consume a beer or wine at cards-sparingly. And a little marijuana to aid in sleep. The concern for many people who are in church fellowship is sanctification. That is, they are concerned that imbibing and smoking will lower inhibitions and pollute the temple of their bodies, respectively. That is how I understand it, anyway.
Absolutely.
In fact, the people served were already very drunk. Probably in day three or four of a traditional week-long wedding binge.
I will be away for many hours today. You all take care with your efforts, and guard your comments!
How exactly can a mythical god approve of anyone? Invent a god, pretend he approves of what you approve of? This is nonsense.
This is you elaborating on your opening comment above? The voice of a skeptic, is allowed. I await your next 'puzzle piece.'
If you are a man, tuck, put on a dress and pray in a field for God to accept you. If he answers we will have much more to discuss I assure you.
Aren't you being a bit ridiculous to offer a tuck 'before' the presence of God? What purpose would any of that serve, really? And why do you presume God/Spirit is "he"?
I am being a bit indulgent, because your 'bits and spurts' do not inspire much more than that at this point.
I am not sure to what powers your god may have exactly. I suppose if he created you would be aware that that is a cock under that dress? I'll certainly concede to that point. As for the dress? I believe your god's mythical son wore a robe so it certainly may draw favor with his father for you to present yourself in a dress. He may just see it as a robe. You will have to ask him very specific questions regarding the acceptance of such to be clear.
Further more we must explore who you are going to sleep with if you are trans. Some trans date women, others men, others other trans. Having read the Bible it is clear how your god feels about homosexuality. If you were trans with a cock dating a woman you would likely have the best odds at receiving acceptance. The other options would be off the table according to your god.
And why do you presume God/Spirit is "he"?
This could go 'farther' should you declare a 'thing' for discussion purposes: "Some trans (do this or that). . . ." is quite vague as to who is doing what to whom.
What about married transsexuals? Thoughts?