Lois responds to reader: does transgender contradict the Bible?

Tags

1st Samuel 16:7, all-knowing, anatomy, ay’lonit, Bible, Bible teaching, birth, castration, celibacy, circumcision, classical Judaism, Code of Hammurabi, corruption, cross, curiously formed, David, death, Deuteronomy 10:16, equal footing, eternal soul, eunuch, familiar references, fearfully and wonderfully made, foreskin of the heart, Gender, genitalia, Gentiles, God, heart, Holy Spirit, immortal soul, imperfection, in utero, inner things of the heart, inspired inerrant infallible, Jeremiah 1:5, Jesus, Jesus' disciples, layers of meaning, Lord, lower parts of the earth, Matthew 19:12, mind, outer appearance, parable, Passover lamb, perfect, Psalm 139, Psalms, reconcile, Romans 2:28-29, sacrifice, salvation, saris, Scripture, sexual temptation, sin, six genders, soul, spirit, temporal body, Throne of Grace, Transgender, Transsexual, women

Hello,

I come to your blog seeking answers with respectful Christian curiosity […] Please respond to this query:

If God is perfect and all knowing; and the Bible is the Holy Spirit inspired instrument of his grace and peace. How can a contradiction in natural birth exist? 
How does the Transgender person of soul reconcile their spirit? 

Jeremiah 1:5: 
“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.”

Psalm 139:13-14:

For it was you who formed my inward parts; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; that I know very well.

Again, a respectful query on reconciliation.
Thanks

Hello,

To respectfully seek answers, to reconcile ideas and people, to arrive at truth: these are all honorable aims.  I am delighted to respond as best as God lays on my heart.

First, both for ourselves and any other readers, let’s make sure we understand what is meant by soul and spirit.  I took the following from the BibleHub website.  It is similar to what I found on some other sites as well as confirming my previous understanding.

[T]here is in man a spiritual, reasonable, and immortal soul, the seat of our thoughts, affections, and reasonings, which distinguishes us from the brute creation, and in which chiefly consists our resemblance to God, Genesis 1:26. This must be spiritual, because it thinks; it must be immortal, because it is spiritual. Scripture ascribes to man alone understanding, conscience, the knowledge of God, wisdom, immortality, and the hope of future everlasting happiness. It threatens men only with punishment in another life, and with the pains of hell. In some places the Bible seems to distinguish soul from spirit, 1 Thessalonians 5:23 [and] Hebrews 4:12: the organ of our sensations, appetites, and passions, allied to the body, form the nobler portion of our nature which most allies man to God. Yet we are to conceive of them as one indivisible and spiritual being, called also the mind and the heart, spoken of variously as living, feeling, understanding, reasoning, willing, etc. Its usual designation is the soul.

First, a quick explanation of 1^st Thessalonians 5:23 and Hebrews 4:12.  My sense is that the inclusion of both “soul” and “spirit” in these verses is meant as an amplification, not as distinguishing.  We can see that more easily in the Hebrews verse.  When the two-edged sword is described as dividing asunder soul and spirit, it means both, not dividing “soul from spirit”. 

So the simple answer is that if humankind, while we walk this earth as corporeal creatures, are not spirit, but have an eternal soul that has a spiritual nature and therefore includes spirit, then the soul and spirit, even for a Transgender, must be reconciled with each other.  Otherwise, you would be talking about some sort of split personality.  No one I know of, not even our worst detractors, claims that about us.

But let’s look at a broader question of contradiction.  Since God is all-knowing (there is no “if” about it) and the Bible is the inspired, inerrant and infallible Word of God, then is there some contradiction between people who claim to be born transgender and God’s Word? 

Let’s take Psalm 139:13-14 first, since that is an all-encompassing situation rather than a verse that applies to one particular person.  I considered this passage so important to discuss that I wrote a three-part blog post on it in the first month of this blog back in November 2013.  (The reader is reminded that I was using the older term, transsexual, at that time.) 

I will provide a link back to those posts so the reader can have further details.  But to summarize for the purpose of this answer, I point out how interesting it is that when these two verses are used as a proof text that transgender is not of God, verse 15 is never included to give the full context of these verses.  It is quite inconvenient to their claims of contradiction to call to mind that every one of us, transgender and cisgender alike, was curiously formed in the lower parts of the earth.

When sin entered into the world, death and corruption entered in with it.  So while the Lord God has final say over everyone how everyone is formed, no one is born perfectly whole and complete.  The imperfections are not sin in and of themselves (think of the passage when Jesus’ disciples ask who sinned, the blind man or his parents).  Furthermore, if someone had been born who was without spot or blemish, there would have been no reason for God to have sent His only begotten Son to shed His blood and nail our sins to the cross.  Only Jesus, born of the Holy Spirit, could have been the perfect Passover lamb to save us, one perfect sacrifice for all time. 

While we are in the Psalms, we ought not forget Psalm 51:5: Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.  It is another Biblical reminder of our humble origins.

https://ts4jc.wordpress.com/2013/11/18/i-am-fearfully-a…ully-made-part-1/

https://ts4jc.wordpress.com/2013/11/19/i-am-fearfully-a…ully-made-part-2/

https://ts4jc.wordpress.com/2013/11/20/i-am-fearfully-a…ully-made-part-3/

That brings us to the Jeremiah verse that you cited.  And guess what?  I cited that same verse in Part 3 of my blog post series “I am Fearfully and Wonderfully Made”.  Look closely at that verse again.  God is not just telling Jeremiah that He formed him in the womb.  He is also telling Jeremiah He knew what manner of person he would become.  This means God knows Jeremiah on the inside: his heart, soul and spirit, not just his skin color, bone structure and yes genitalia. 

Now here’s the question: based on which group of characteristics does God chose Jeremiah to be a prophet, the first group or the second?  Obviously the first group. This is how God identifies Jeremiah as a person. 

None of this is meant to say or imply that Jeremiah is transgender.  What I am saying is that God’s primary identification of us is based on what’s inside, not on what’s outside; the spiritual and eternal, not the physical and temporal.  Only a relatively small percentage of people are born transgender.  But we have been around since the earliest days of recorded history.  I’m not a scholar of ancient languages, but I’m told that the subject of transgender people was dealt with in the Code of Hammurabi.  And my learned Jewish friends (as well as Christians who have researched this topic) tell me that in the rabbinical writings of Classical Judaism, there is provision for six genders, not two.

There is one thing that neither you or anyone else I have discussed the topic with has ever been able to produce: a Bible verse that states that the inner spirit of a person must match the outer anatomy when it comes to gender identity.  I have been reading the Bible faithfully, daily most of the time, from cover to cover over and over again, for over 25 years.  This was always an important topic for me.  That verse would have leapt off the page for me.  Those Christians who naysay transgender would be raising it as a banner.  But they can’t because it doesn’t exist.

But is there scripture that suggests the opposite?  I believe so.  They are the very words of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in Matthew 19:12.  Jesus describes three categories of eunuchs: those who were born that way, those who were made that way by someone else and those who made themselves eunuchs.   

Now the lesson that Jesus is teaching to His disciples directly relates to the ability of a person to resist sexual temptation and therefore be able to remain single without falling into fornication (any sexual activity outside of marriage).  But there are two things to keep in mind.  First, that Bible teaching can have layers of meaning.  Second, when Jesus taught in parables, He used examples and situations that the people of His day were familiar with.  Therefore, even though scripture is eternal, Jesus never would have taught a parable that referred directly to computers or nuclear weapons. 

Of the three categories, the most familiar would have been those who had been made eunuchs by someone else.  Although the Jews did not practice it, it was a familiar practice for the rulers of the neighboring countries to castrate certain people, whether of their own nation or a defeated nation, for various purposes: watching over harems, becoming trusted advisors who would not be aggressive enough to become rivals, and so on.  Since these eunuchs were neither born that way nor did so of their own volition, the most familiar category is of no further interest.

The less familiar two categories are where we draw our attention.  Remember that Jesus and his disciples would have been familiar with the six genders of classical Judaism. 

The person born a eunuch could be someone born with male anatomy but is impotent and acts more feminine upon reaching puberty.  Such a person would likely be saris and would be considered male to female transgender today.  Or it could be someone identified as female at birth who displays a masculine personality at puberty.  That person would have been identified as ay’lonit in Jesus’s time and female to male today.

What of the person who makes “himself” a eunuch?  Yes, that could be someone seeking to live a celibate life and needing to take extraordinary means to accomplish that purpose.  It was not uncommon for men of the early Christian church to undergo castration to live a celibate life of service.  However, a saris could also fit this description: someone assigned male at birth but who now lacks male genitalia, in this case voluntarily ridding themselves of unwanted body parts to live as in the preferred female gender.

It should be noted that Jesus does not speak disparagingly of any of these eunuchs.  If He had reason to, He either would have used a different example or phrased the parable in a different way. 

We have one more example relating to genitalia (in particular male genitalia) where the spiritual is more important than the physical.  Deuteronomy 10:16 taught: Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked. 

Nor is this an isolated verse.  We see this theme repeated in Leviticus 26:41, Deuteronomy 30:6 and Jeremiah 4:4.  And that devout scripture student, the Apostle Paul, picks up this theme in Romans 2:28-29 and Colossians 2:11.  These teachings have import far beyond transgender.  It permits Jewish women to stand before the cross of Christ and the Throne of Grace on equal footing with Jewish men.  And it permits physically uncircumcised Gentiles to do the same.  Indeed, this was one of the first debates in the young Christian church when evidence of the Holy Spirit’s anointing of Gentiles was first reported. Would these Gentile men be required to undergo circumcision?  It was eventually deemed unnecessary.  God had already circumcised their hearts.

Apparently we haven’t come very far in 2000 years.  People are still focusing on the less important physical attributes, willing to limit ourselves to what we can see.  As God truly observed in 1^st Samuel 16:7, man judges by the outer appearance, but God judges by the inner things of the heart.  Are we not called upon to grow in spiritual maturity so that we see things as God sees them?

For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. – Romans 2:28-29

God bless,

Lois

Related articles

• Omnipresent God

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

Tags

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

God bless,

Lois

The Apostle Paul looks at identity – his own

Tags

Apostle Paul, Bible, Christ, Christian identity, Christianity, circumcision, David Reimer, Gender Identity, Gentile, God, Holy Spirit, immutable identity, innate identity, Jesus, Jew, Jewish Christians, Jewish Identity, John Money, Pharisee, Philippians 3, salvation, Transsexual

(If you have not done so, please read the previous two posts on this same topic before reading this post.)

I am stating right up front that this post on the Apostle Paul in no way questions his cisgender identity.  But on more than one occasion, he goes into detail about his identity in a way that can also shed some light on our discussion of how God see us and what is the source of various elements of our identity.  This passage requires much discernment, for it could be used to justify that transsexualism is not sin and also to justify that it is sin unless we add in other points we have seen either in the Bible or in scientific evidence.

The remarks of Paul that I will focus on are found in Philippians 3:3-7:

“For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.  Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more: Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless. But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.”

Paul starts off by stating his Jewish identity.  Gentile men and boys who had received the Holy Spirit and the gift of salvation, were not required to go through circumcision.  It had been made clear that this step was no longer necessary to receive the highest spiritual blessings of God.

He then goes on to add that he has no confidence in the flesh.  Why?  Because he understands from the word of the Lord that the flesh doesn’t profit anything.  And yet, if you look at his life, especially before his conversion experience on the road to Damascus, he had a great deal going for him when it came to identity based on earthly things.

Paul gives a partial list, the items that would be of greatest interest to the members of the church in Philippi (especially the Jewish Christians).  He is a child of Israel, circumcised on the eighth day; descended from the tribe of Benjamin; an exemplary Jew under the law as a Pharisee and blameless concerning righteousness.  In fact, so zealous was he for the law that he persecuted the followers of Christ.

Elsewhere in the Bible, Paul makes mention of the fact that he studied under a renowned teacher, Gamaliel, and that he was born a Roman citizen.  He did not know it before he was saved, but God was preparing him, someone with an extraordinary heritage and credentials, to be His ambassador to the Gentiles while being able to legally do things most Jews could not.

Once Paul’s eyes were opened to the true identity of Jesus, having received a new identity in Christ, all these other items of identity were unimportant and easily cast aside or downgraded.  No, his circumcision was not reversed, nor his birthright as a Jew and Benjamite, nor his Roman citizenship.  His training under the Law was not forgotten.  Indeed, his understanding of the Law and the Prophets would enable him to become the New Testament’s most prolific writer, building upon his prior training with the knowledge of the Gospel.

However, there is a major part of his identity that Paul never talks about at all.  He mentions that he was circumcised, so we know that physically he was a man with male genitalia.  But he never talks about his gender identity as a male (and there is no doubt that he was of the male gender).  It is not something he can count as loss.  Why?  Because it was a part of him that he was born with, one that cannot be changed.

Part of the identity he talks about involves things he was born into.  But they were only a part of him internally to the extent that he decided that they should be.  Citizenships could be renounced or revoked.  Heritages can be repudiated.  He could have chosen at some point in his life to stop following all of the Law instead of a select few items that were changed when God, through Christ, gave us a better covenant.

Identities based on behavior are changed when the behavior changes.  Consider a 13-year old kid with a reputation as a punk and wise guy.  It may take a while for others to notice that a true change has been made, but if maturity and life experience bring about positive changes, the 13-year old wise guy is now a 30-year old standup guy.  But gender identity goes far deeper.  It is innate, intrinsic and immutable.  Do you disagree or are not sure about that statement?  Then do this.  Go to a nearby shopping mall with a decent amount of adult traffic.  Ask 100 men when they decided to be male and 100 women when they decided to be female.  I would wager (no money, of course) that if 100% of the respondents didn’t give you an answer that in some way indicated that they never made such a decision, always knew their gender and never saw the need to change or question it, it will be very, very close to 100%.

I do not want to claim that Paul said or wrote things that are not part of the record.  He never talked about the source of gender (is it the mind or genitals?) or the immutability of gender.  But can we agree that it is highly likely, close to a 100% probability, that if asked that same question as the 200 people in the mall, Paul also would have said that he never decided to be male and he always knew that he was male?

From the statistics and charts I have seen, the same survey given to 100 MTF transsexuals and 100 FTM transsexuals would produce similar results as one given to cisgender men and women.  99+% are aware of their non-conforming gender identity by the early teen years with an average age of awareness at seven.  (Finally, something for which I am average!)

This is the very point I am making.  The vast majority of transsexuals do not decide their gender identity at some point in their life, exactly the same as what cisgender people experience in this regard.  The theory of gender identity being learned rather than innate is now widely discredited, with widespread failure of treatment of infants based on that theory at the forefront of the evidence.  For more information about that issue, do an internet search for Dr. John Money and David Reimer.

Of all people, Christians should be among the most understanding of transsexuals and immutable identity.  For most Christians believe in the immutability of their Christian identity.  It is the belief in eternal security: once saved, always saved.  Both gender identity and Christian identity come at birth.  For gender, it is physical birth, the delivery of a baby from the mother’s womb.  For Christianity, it is spiritual birth, i.e., being born again.  It is his Christian identity that Paul is emphasizing to be far more important than any other identity he possesses.

While we have no direct statement one way or the other in the Bible about how God views transsexuals, we have seen a number of verses that show that God focuses far more on what is inside of us: our spirit, our character, our heart for God and the other virtues that God prizes.  I am long past wondering how God views people.  Cognizant of God’s attributes and His character, the idea that He would focus on our physical body – and particularly our genitals – to define us has become downright creepy and repugnant to me.  That is not the God I have met in the pages of the Bible and grown to know and love.

In a post to be published soon, I will look at questions that every person who denigrates transsexuals should answer.  Some of those questions will apply more to Christians, others will apply to anyone who considers the Bible to have some level of authority, and some will be for anyone who is negative toward transsexuals.

My current plan is to post regarding New Year’s Day before returning to this theme.

God bless,

Lois

Related articles

• Apostle Paul – a deceitful missionary? (apologiachristian.wordpress.com)