Self-searching or God-searching?

[SarahM777]

One of the things that also gets left out is that the term abomination,outside of two places is NOT used in the new testament in the KJV. One where Jesus talks about the abomination of desolation that Daniel speaks of,which is used in conjunction with the temple.John then also refers to an abomination in Revelation. But the question that needs to be asked why didn't Paul who was taught as a Pharisee,knew the law,knew that that word was in the law,who wrote to the Gentiles never repeated it? The Gentiles were not under the Mosaic law to begin with,it was not given to the Gentiles. How would they know what would be an abomination according to the written law if they were not taught it?

In those days they didn't have the Bible printed as we do today. They had scrolls. Does anyone really believe that the Greek's when Paul first came to them,had scrolls of the Mosaic law in their possesion? Now he did go the Jews in those cities first and they may have had the written Mosaic law.

Now this is where you get into the problem in the early church and the Mosaic law. At that time you were having people that were trying to get the Gentiles to observe the dietary laws,circumcision and the Sabbaths. Those things were shelved at that point. The question then is why? Because they were using it as a form of salvation by works,not by grace through faith in Jesus alone. It's God's covenant to those who believe.

What happens far to often is other people want someone else to clean up their lives first before one can ever come to Jesus. The thief on the cross never had that chance,yet he was told he would be in paradise that very same day.

Does that mean God won't change us as He reveals those things that displease Him? He will work it in our hearts to change us into Christ's image. That comes afterwards not before.

[SarahM777]

Like it or not we do have an issue that almost every single one of us has been accused of. This has nothing to do if you believe that our issues are or are not sin. Almost all of us have at one time been accused of being liars. Like it or not can any of say that we are not at this time and were not in the past? And we handled it in the truth since the day we were born? Can any of us say that we haven't tried to hide it,bury it, and tried to fit in a "normal role model" ?  It is all to common for us. Try as we like we can not escape it,if we are being honest with ourselves.

[SarahM777]

Something else. We are so busy trying to get others to understand us,and wondering why they have a very hard time with us,do we ever put ourselves in their shoes? Do we ever ask the question How are they feeling and thinking about it? Do we deal with their feelings or do we try to ignore them because it's about us? Do we ever take the time to realize that they also to a degree are involved in this matter in some way,(Spouses of course being the most involved) Do we ever take the time to think it through? Do we deal with their feelings of betrayal? Do we deal with the fact that they feel like they can't trust us,because as they see us they see us as liars?It also causes them to start questioning themselves,but do we just ignore it?

Understanding is a two way street. Can we really expect them to understand us if we don't take the time to see it from their perspective?

Which leads right into another question. What is it that we are suppose to do? Are we to put our wants,needs,understanding,etc ahead and above the wants,needs,and understanding of other? Or are we to see them as valued and important as our own? Are we not suppose to love our neighbors as ourselves? And if so doesn't that mean that they are valued just as much as ourselves?

[Stephe]

Understanding is a two way street. Can we really expect them to understand us if we don't take the time to see it from their perspective?

The problem with this line of thinking is, they shouldn't be so concerned with how others live their lives when it has zero effect on their life in the first place. There is a big difference between curiosity and intolerance. Especially if these other people they are being mean/abusive to are kind loving people, just there is something different about how they chose to live. "Their perspective" seems to be IMHO, their need to control others and them not being accepting of different ways of living or believing. It's no different than intolerance of other religions.

Yes I'm a Christian but I firmly believe Gods main wish of any human being is to love your neighbor as yourself. If someone is doing this but believes in some other religion, like say they are a Buddhist or a Muslim, I'm could care less and I don't think God cares either. He just wants us to treat others with respect and love, the means that get you there is just another detail. Most of these people who are intolerant of GLBT are the same ones that say all Muslims are evil.

Too many Christians that I have seen believe they can simply profess their belief that Jesus is their Lord and savior and this gives them a "Get out of hell card" to treat others however they wish. If they really were following Jesus example and believed in spreading Gods love to everyone, they wouldn't be so concerned about how other people chose to live their lives.

All I can do is show them love and kindness, if they chose to be hostile and abusive in return, that isn't my fault or concern. They are the ones who will have to answer for this and it's not my job to change them, anymore than it is their job to change or "educate" me. If someone asks me a question about being trans, I have no problem giving honest answers. But I also don't think I should have to explain myself to people for them to be kind and loving to me.

[SarahM777]

I agree with that. But it does go two ways. I am not agree with where they are at,but if I respect them as a person,I will treat their position with respect. The question is why because on the surface it doesn't make sense. They also are human,and in their mind they see their position as be valid,important and meaningful to them. I may or may not agree with them on their position. They may NOT have the same understanding as I.

Why don't they understand it? Parts of the Bible will not be relevant to all people. If I am single and will remain single,does the passages about marriage pertain to me? Does the passages about parents pertain to me? If they do not pertain to me am I going to spend a whole lot of time trying to make it pertain to me? So for most are they going to even try to spend any amount of time to understand or even try to find out about this issue? If it doesn't affect them,can I truly expect them to understand? There is a limit to how far I can go to cut them some slack,I can try to explain as best as I can,listen to their side,agree to disagree in love. Not all who say they are Christian hate us. They just disagree. To them their views are just as valid to them as ours are to us. But on the other hand when it turns to name calling,not seeing each other as people made in the image of God who have value,spitting on them and throwing things at them is no different than them doing it to us.

Slice it,dice it,throw it,and throw it into the blender, as Christians,if we can't love others as our friends,love them as neighbors,love them as strangers,what are we suppose to do at the very last. WE ARE TO LOVE OUR ENEMIES. It leaves no room for hate at all in any way shape or form. Jesus closes that door and if we are truly following Him then we are to obey

[SarahM777]

Is it really hateful,if one believes as Jesus says He is the way the truth and the life and no one comes to the Father but by Him,to say so? Could it not be that for some they will bash,beat people over the head with the Bible, and just getting into name calling and other types of things that would be more of a hateful thing, and that for others doing so out of love because they are concerned about the eternal welfare of the individual enough to take their time,effort and energy to proclaim it? Is the second really hate? I can look at it two ways. I can view both as being hate or I can choose to view one group as being hateful and the other doing so out of love.
You may agree or disagree with either or both of the groups but that choice is yours to make.
To me I would much rather choose that one is being hateful and the other is doing so out of love,because they have the concern and love to tell me.

[SarahM777]

The worst part of hatred is that while it can be very bad for the one that is hated it will eat away at the one that does hate. It will kill the spirit,take away the joy,sap their strength,and just eat away at the one who is hating. It's just bad news all the way around and it does no one any good.

The one that is being hated has choices to make,one can choose to hate back,choosing the confrontational approach. But this often leads to violence. One can choose to say their peace and walk away,or one can just try to avoid the one that is hating.

I have come to realize that there are going to be those that hate me,if it just because of my beliefs,or because I am TG,it's their problem. They will never spend the time to find out what I am really like and they may just miss out on the best friend they will ever have. Their loss. I just can't see spending all the time and energy to hate someone. It's way to hard. (I can't even stay angry for more than 5 minutes)

There will be those that just avoid us. There will be those who will be neutral and don't care one way or another whether they are around us. There will be those who are a little closer kind of on the edge friends,then there will be the close friends who will hang around us and then there are the ones that are pure gold,the very,very few and very precious best friends that will stick by no matter what. I would rather focus on the very few and the close,and not spend a whole lot of time thinking about how the others feel about me.

[SarahM777]

Hope,

I do apologize for getting way off track. Something else for you to think about and that God is still working out in me. One of those that will be dealt with be some freedoms but also certain limitations. It goes into what Paul said about our freedoms in Christ.

1 Corinthians 8

8 Now as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth.

2 And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know.

3 But if any man love God, the same is known of him.

4 As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one.

5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)

6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

7 Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.

8 But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse.

9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak.

10 For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol's temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols;

11 And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died?

12 But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ.

13 Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.


So what is Paul saying? If God confirms to your heart that inside you are a woman, and in your case,remove the restrictions about clothing,we are still to think about how it will affect others.
If I am in a conservative church,and it will cause others to stumble because of it,I am not to get all decked out. Why? Because of the love I am suppose to have for them. Why? Because they may have a weak conscience. Why? Because it may cause them to sin. It goes back to loving our neighbor as ourselves.

[Incarnadine]

I appreciate both the advice and the rabbit trails!  My wife and I have been discussing this issue at great length (and the honesty and closeness have grown our relationship greatly); she's been doing a ton of research as well, specifically a website by "Dr. Jen", a post-op TS.  She and I are both committed to the promises and roles we agreed upon at marriage, but she's willing to find other "ways" to make things "work" if there is shrinkage from hormones or removal from surgery.

As far as changing anything that would be visible at church (or to my kids) - I'm too scared to right now.  There's still too many questions, such as whether or not this is my own creation (although why I would voluntarily pursue these feelings, especially after researching where these feelings lead is beyond me, other than for the "escape" value). 

Still questioning the validity of all this, but questioning and second- and third-guessing myself is par for the course. 

[SarahM777]

I appreciate both the advice and the rabbit trails!  My wife and I have been discussing this issue at great length (and the honesty and closeness have grown our relationship greatly); she's been doing a ton of research as well, specifically a website by "Dr. Jen", a post-op TS.  She and I are both committed to the promises and roles we agreed upon at marriage, but she's willing to find other "ways" to make things "work" if there is shrinkage from hormones or removal from surgery.

As far as changing anything that would be visible at church (or to my kids) - I'm too scared to right now.  There's still too many questions, such as whether or not this is my own creation (although why I would voluntarily pursue these feelings, especially after researching where these feelings lead is beyond me, other than for the "escape" value). 

Still questioning the validity of all this, but questioning and second- and third-guessing myself is par for the course.

My wife was not willing. So I had to try to shelf it as best as possible. I had to get rid of everything,quit consulling,and seek healing through the elders,the men's support groups and the whole nine yards. The Lord did bless my submitting to that and got me through it.  It was not easy by any means. She did realize something was wrong especially when she is saying living with me was like living with another woman. What hurt the most was coming to the fact that I could not give her what she needed and she could not give me what I needed. Our needs were very much alike and it's very hard to give that which you do not have. It was only by God's grace that somehow we were able to keep it together till she passed away.

Marriage is no longer an option for me at this point,celibacy is the path I am to take till one of two things happens. Either the Lord transforms my body or He opens the door that I can transition by human means,it means also that it may not happen in this lifetime but I can look forward to it when He takes me home,because this shell that I wear will be sloughed off and I will be what He intended me to be. For whatever reason He allowed it for His glory,and I am OK with that. This is my path yours may be far different then mine and that' OK.

Just a quick question Have you asked Him what your name is? He calls me Sarah. 

[SarahM777]

Hope,

Somehow you got me thinking about this,I think I finally have a bit of an answer as to why my first wife left me. Poor dear sweet woman,it had to be so frustrating for her to have to deal with a husband who's wiring was so screwed up that the plumbing didn't work right. Nothing ever felt right,and try as hard as she could it just did not work. We would spend hours and nothing came of it,on my end,on her end she would be OK not great. If that was the case I just wish she would of told me,but I think it may have been part of it.

[Incarnadine]

Long post - here goes...

I was doing a bit of reading on a site referenced by another member here, and read some material that caused me to re-think something that I had been taught and that I myself have preached.  Not by chance, a trusted evangelist friend of mine preached on the very same topic less than 24 hours after I had read that article.  He did a little better job explaining the concept, but I'm much closer to understanding and accepting a deviation in how I perceive the subject of law vs. grace.

As of a certain time frame growing up, I've always been critical - of myself and of other people.  Intensely critical.  Guess I fit in as a "fundy" then, eh?  But I think my critical spirit is sourced in my rejection of my own gender perception.  I've always wanted to live by a set of rules, and I've always been critical of those who stepped outside of my perception of the rules, especially myself.  If my person, my identity and feelings, did not conform to the rules of my biological gender, I was guilty of breaking God's rules somehow.  And since I could never force my identity and feelings to conform to those "rules," I could never truly feel forgiven.  Constant self-doubt, self-hatred, self-despising - and tending towards condemning others with a measure of that same self-condemnation!  What a mess!

Fast-forward to the present.  What I think I've been lacking is a true understanding of the Christian's position in regards to the OT Law in its entirety.  The perspective I'm tending towards now is different than that which I've grown up with.  As an individual who years ago trusted in Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior in a spirit of humility and repentance, I am saved from my sins.  I am no longer under the law - therefore what Paul says in I Cor. 10:23 (and 6:12) about all things being lawful for him applies to ME, too!  That means I am not bound lawfully to obey Deut. 22:5.  The OT Law no longer applies to me.

Does this open a can of worms?  No, because a different standard now applies to me.  While I am not bound to live by the OT Law (for every one who lives by any part of the law is bound to fulfill the ENTIRE law - hence the godhatesshrimp issue that tags along with Deut. 22:5), I am bound by the law of Christ.

What is this law of Christ?  Same passage in I Cor - expediency and edification.  Every thought or action must be put to the test - not a test of the law - but of whether or not this thought or action will draw me closer to Christ or will help me in pointing others to Christ (including spouse, children, church family, community, etc.).  The question must be asked whether this thought or action will encourage others in their walk with Christ. 

Application time.  What are my goals in relation to my walk with Christ, my family, my congregation, and where does my gender identity fit in?  Will transitioning edify, or will it confuse?  Ugh.  I think I know the answer to that question. 

Does that completely throw out the option of transition?  Full transition - yes, I think so.  Partial transition - is still an option.  For example, today I finishing shaving hideous man-hair off my now-femininely sleek legs; I'm wearing clothes that I know are feminine, but if someone stopped by to chat with me, they wouldn't realize.  While my gender frustration isn't gone, it's tempered slightly by me knowing that I've expressed my feminine core in a slight way.  But my conscience knows that even if my kids walk into my office, they will not be confused by what daddy's wearing.  How far I can go is yet to be determined by both me and my wife.

The Deuteronomy issue?  Not an issue for two reasons.  One, I'm not under the law so it does not apply.  Two, I have a man's body and a woman's mind, so I either walk around naked (not an option, unless I'm trying to scare someone away) or I can choose which gender's clothing to wear at whichever time, limited by expediency and edification.

Wall of text ended.  I've re-read this post several times to make sure I shared my heart clearly.  The conclusion I've come to at this point does not completely fix the problem, but it is the most balanced and workable conclusion that I can find (again, at this point).  If the dysphoria gets worse, I'm not sure what I'll do; but I don't have decide that yet.  Thanks again, Sarah, for your encouraging words.  If I lived closer to Wisconsin, I'd love to visit with you. 

[SarahM777]

Hope,

I am so glad you were able to come to a balance. (It is hard working through it from a "fundies" viewpoint)
Let God lead you. He knows you better than anyone else can ever begin to know you.

Please feel free to PM me any time you want. We will meet someday. (May not be in this lifetime) God will get you through this,it may not be easy but He will not leave you or forsake you.

[justmeinoz]

I am currently reading Karen Armstrong's "The Case for God."  I highly recommend it.

In this she points out that  the so called fundamentalists all date from the late 19th Century,  before then, doubt was always an integral part of religious faith, and the Bible was never taken literally.  Fundamentalism is a Modernist innovation that puts an either/or interpretation on things that were meant to be a mystery to humans.  Language has also changed a lot since the Gospels were first written as well.

Given that Jesus is not quoted anywhere saying anything about sexuality in any form.  His silence on the issue tells me it was an issue that did not interest him at all.  He did however come down hard on divorce.  The fact that there is no interest in opposing divorce illustrates the Fundamentalist's hypocrisy, and hypocrisy is another thing that Jesus opposed.

Need I say more?

[SarahM777]

I am currently reading Karen Armstrong's "The Case for God."  I highly recommend it.

In this she points out that  the so called fundamentalists all date from the late 19th Century,  before then, doubt was always an integral part of religious faith, and the Bible was never taken literally.  Fundamentalism is a Modernist innovation that puts an either/or interpretation on things that were meant to be a mystery to humans.  Language has also changed a lot since the Gospels were first written as well.

On the literal part I disagree because of one thing,Jesus implies when He speaks of Adam and Eve,Jonah,Moses,Abraham,Lot,and Sodom,that they were literal. If He takes them as being literal and I believe He is speaking the truth then I can do no else but to take them literally.

The rest is why we have all the different denominations. We spend way to much time trying to get everything set in concrete. What makes any of us somehow think that if the diciples who were under Jesus direct teaching didn't always get it,that somehow we are going to get it all figured out?

Don't even have to go that far back. How many people can read the KJV 1611 version and actually understand what is really being said in every place? I for one don't have an old English dictionary.