I am a spirtual person at heart.
I wear a platinium cross around my neck always and never take it off. This was a gift from a person whom I was dating during a time in my life which I hated everyone & everything. When she gave me this "unusual" gift out the blue she simply said "you need god in your life"
A few individuals I work with are devote christians and one of them asked me one day
"How can you do what you do and still wear that around your neck everyday?"
Now she was not trying to be offensive just in her religious beliefs I was an "abomination" & flaunt my sins in front of the lord.
My response to her rather open and honest question was:

"Baby girl, "we all have sinned and fall short of the grace and glory of God"..my "sin" of sleeping with men is no different or worse than any other sin you commit. The difference is I realize by leaving my cross sit on the dresser, while I do my "sin" is not leaving God on the dresser because no matter where we go or what we do he is always there..as for me living as a female... can you show me the verse in the Bible that states it's a sin to wear female clothes or get your hair or nails done if you are a male? the only one I can think of is "we are all naked in the eyes of the lord" so I guess it makes no difference what I am wearing I am still his child"


She looked stunned as if I just changed her whole view of religion.
and simply replied "your right!" and noded her head.

The diary of a Transexual
Chynna

Quote from: Chynna on June 07, 2006, 03:12:58 PM
"...can you show me the verse in the Bible that states it's a sin to wear female clothes or get your hair or nails done if you are a male?..."

Deuteronomy 22:5, the infamous crossdressing verse. 

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

However, the bible does not define what makes one a man or woman.

Melissa

... an if you want to dictate to me how I should live then you can go on and detest me.

Besides, it's not like I am going to pay any attention to a 3rd party source anyway...

...

^*sigh* Please do not mind me, I am very spiritual, but not the least bit religious.

Quote from: Melissa on June 07, 2006, 03:53:17 PM
Deuteronomy 22:5, the infamous crossdressing verse. 

Unfortunantly one could also take this in the context of a heterosexual women simply wearing pants.
but thanks for the post I stand corrected...funny she didn't know that

I guess we do fall down 7 times but stand up 8 

Chynna

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

Whoa... God "detests" his own children?

They say you can find verses to justify pretty much anything you want - it's a BIG book. I wonder if we could find passages that AFFIRM crossdressing and/or transsexualism? Not that anyone would listen...

First of all, Chynna,if you are an MtF who sleeps with men, I don't think in any way that makes you homosexual. Is that what your friend was referring to? Also, I'm not so sure homosexuality is a sin.
My mother would disagree. The Christians preach about Sodom and Gommorah(that's probably misspelled), but I think god was angry about the sexual violence of it's inhabitants. Rape is immoral whether it's a man assaulting a woman, or a man assaulting a man. And I really believe that's what the bible was referring to. Christians tend to believe what they're taught. Very few of them ever question 2000 year old beliefs. Forget about actually trying to interpret the real meanings of the bible. Even those who have read through it many times.
Maybe I'm getting a little opinionated here,but the bible and Christianity are the only things standing in the way when it comes to my mother's acceptance. Why does she have to be such a slave to her religion? Personally, I could care less what the bible says. If it specifically denounced transsexuality, it would make no difference to me. However, I don't believe it does.

The quote from the old testament about crossdressing most likely refers to the Hebrews' hatred for the pagans they had conquered. During their rituals, they often crossdressed, and because the pagans now lived among them, there was a real need to differentiate between them and god's "chosen" people. Therefore, anything related to the pagan gods was labeled evil.

Quote from Matthew 12:19 (correct me if I got the wrong address):

QuoteSome eunuchs are born so from their mother's womb, others are made eunuchs by men (it was a common practice to castrate slaves), and others become eunuchs for the glory of god.

Okay, some homosexuals twist this around to make it only about them, saying that "eunuch" means homosexual. As if the majority of homosexuals desire to be castrated! But the phrase "others were made eunuchs by men" disproves their theory.
One can rape a man, but cannot make him gay (unless he already has underlying homosexual tendencies).
One cannot make a man a transsexual either, but certainly could modify his genitals if one owned him.
I believe this to be the truest interpretation of said phrase.
As for the last part of the verse, I have no thoughts on it's meaning.

Just my humble non-religious opinions. Feel free to debate with me or prove me wrong.
Nero

As far as I know, there is nothing specifically mentioned about transsexualism in the bible.  There is also nothing that says a man has a penis, prostate or XY chromosomes or a woman has a vagina, uterus, breasts, or XX Chromosomes.  This is good, because then it doesn't classify intersexed people anymore.

Nowadays we classify a man or woman using a variety of factors including identity.  Thus, I am a woman and dressing in female clothes does not make this crossdressing and therefore this bible verse does not apply.  The problem is that many people who tend to look only a specific passages of the bible, also tend to look only at specific traits when defining a male or female, and thus by being selective, they can still see you as an abomination.

You need to realize that many of these bible verses are based upon a number of social variables such as current trends.  Since they were originally written, things have changed.  As Chynna said, a woman wearing pants now is socially acceptable and therefore people don't consider this to be a violation, whereas it would have been at the orginal time of writing.  But, these people also fail to look at ALL of the variables like the newer definition of men and women.

I believe this is a function of evolution, rather than a birth defect.  With the world so populated now, having the male and female so different is not as important anymore.  Not as much breeding is required for the survival of the human race and thus we start merging the sexes to being closer to the same.  We are an example of natural revolution.  I also think that's why a common trait among TS people is high intelligence.

If you want more information regarding bible verses and ->-bleeped-<-, there are some older threads on the subject and you can also check out http://www.tsroadmap.com/mental/spirit.html.

Melissa

Quote from: Melissa on June 07, 2006, 05:35:10 PM
As far as I know, there is nothing specifically mentioned about transsexualism in the bible.  There is also nothing that says a man has a penis, prostate or XY chromosomes or a woman has a vagina, uterus, breasts, or XX Chromosomes.  This is good, because then it doesn't classify intersexed people anymore.

Nowadays we classify a man or woman using a variety of factors including identity.  Thus, I am a woman and dressing in female clothes does not make this crossdressing and therefore this bible verse does not apply.  The problem is that many people who tend to look only a specific passages of the bible, also tend to look only at specific traits when defining a male or female, and thus by being selective, they can still see you as an abomination.

You need to realize that many of these bible verses are based upon a number of social variables such as current trends.  Since they were originally written, things have changed.  As Chynna said, a woman wearing pants now is socially acceptable and therefore people don't consider this to be a violation, whereas it would have been at the orginal time of writing.  But, these people also fail to look at ALL of the variables like the newer definition of men and women.

I believe this is a function of evolution, rather than a birth defect.  With the world so populated now, having the male and female so different is not as important anymore.  Not as much breeding is required for the survival of the human race and thus we start merging the sexes to being closer to the same.  We are an example of natural revolution.  I also think that's why a common trait among TS people is high intelligence.

If you want more information regarding bible verses and ->-bleeped-<-, there are some older threads on the subject and you can also check out http://www.tsroadmap.com/mental/spirit.html.

Melissa

I must respectfully disagree about the evolution part. The bible,yeah, it's open to interpretation. While transsexuality isn't mentioned specifically, it's eluded to. I wish there was a specific mention, so I might point to it,and my mother would know I'm not an abomination. If god was okay with eunuchs, then, he was okay with us too, in my opinion. Not that I give a f***, one way or the other.

While I like your evolution theory, it must be noted that there were transsexuals in ancient Rome (at least MTFs). It was an accepted practice and the transsexuals in question would sever their genitals and then have a "coming out" ceremony where they would be given female garments to wear.
Not to mention, I seem to recall something about "somebody" in Imperial Rome actually marrying a transsexual woman.
Sure the technology wasn't what it is today, but yesterday's transsexuals made do as best they could.

I don't need any more bible verses. If god hates me, so be it. If he doesn't ,fine. If it's a sin for me to lie with a woman, fine. If it's a sin for me to transition, fine.
It really has no bearing on my own perception of myself. If there is a hell, I'm sure a room has been reserved for me there.
Nero

"Eunuchs for the glory of God" is one of those MANY MANY MANY things in that particular book that is a metaphor.
= Gave up being sexual as a path to experience the spirit in some more pure fashion.

Quote from: Melissa on June 07, 2006, 05:35:10 PM

You need to realize that many of these bible verses are based upon a number of social variables such as current trends.  

TRUTH! isn't it glorious to behold.
thank you MELISSA. So dry too. pont sec.

Okay,okay, girls.

QuoteYou need to realize that many of these bible verses are based upon a number of social variables such as current trends.

I did not disagree with this. I said that the crossdressing verse (as well as many other verses) was based on current trends. Almost all of the laws in the old testament were about separation between "the one true god" of the Hebrews and the gods of the pagan peoples they had conquered.
Not just crossdressing stuff. Laws regarding food and its preparation, laws forbidding Hebrew men to marry outside their race, etc.
Geez.
Nero


Posted at: June 07, 2006, 09:39:38 PM

---

Well, I suppose it's best I quit trying to quote the bible or find meaning in any of its passages.
As someone who hasn't studied the bible, I'm less than qualified to comment.
Most Christians don't care what the bible says anyway. If there did happen to be a passage concerning acceptance of transsexuality, you can be sure the pope and every church leader would deny its existence.

I have had a person use Deuteronomy 22:5 as an argument against me then when I mentioned the same chapter advocating the forcible marriage of a girl to her rapist I was told that modern Christianity paid attention to the New Testament over the old.  Gaah!  Talk about talk about talk about double talk!

It's well known that anyone can quote biblical texts out of context to justify literally anything.

http://gendertree.com/Bible%20Verses.htm is a link from Susan's Christianity section that discusses a probable error in how this verse was translated.  Don't forget that translators bring their own P.O.V. to their work - by necessity for all practical purposes - otherwise they would get too bogged down in the double, triple or even quadruple meanigngs a particular word or phrase might have in the original language in different contexts.  Something the Christianists always seem to forget - They think God spoke English 2000+ years ago, and sounded just like Shakespeare!

helen

Quote from: Melissa on June 07, 2006, 03:53:17 PM
Deuteronomy 22:5, the infamous crossdressing verse. 
However, the bible does not define what makes one a man or woman.

Melissa

Since we are talking old testiment and part of what the Jewish people who wrote
that section consider the Torah lets see what a Rabbi has to say about the specific
verse most so called christians like to reference as an attack against transgender
individuals...

Quote from: Rabbi Tilsen...The Torah's concern in this verse, then, is not with creating or reinforcing gender
differences per se, but in preventing gender associations of clothing or possibly
body hair from being used to deceive others for purposes leading to sexual
immorality. The key here seems to be deception for illicit purposes. Indeed this law
appears in Deuteronomy in the context of laws against deceit.

In American society the fashion trend over the past decades seems to be toward a
larger body of "unisex" apparel. At the movie theatre the teenage women selling
popcorn are wearing suits and ties. Jeans are common to all genders as are sweaters
and jackets. It is much more common for genuine intentional transvestites to be
accepted publicly. A person's gender can less easily be judged by their clothing, and
many people like it that way.

While the legal interpretations of this verse from Deuteronomy have been diverse, most
of Jewish legal discussion has not taken the verse to suggest a blanket ban or
condemnation of what today we call "cross dressing."...

It's really a very well written piece, I encourage everyone to read the entire piece at
http://www.beki.org/crossdress.html. I liked it so much I made it a premium link on
the Spirituality/Christian section of the links from the front page.

Quote from: Nero on June 07, 2006, 07:37:39 PM
I must respectfully disagree about the evolution part. The bible,yeah, it's open to interpretation. While transsexuality isn't mentioned specifically, it's eluded to. I wish there was a specific mention, so I might point to it,and my mother would know I'm not an abomination. If god was okay with eunuchs, then, he was okay with us too, in my opinion. Not that I give a f***, one way or the other.

While I like your evolution theory, it must be noted that there were transsexuals in ancient Rome (at least MTFs). It was an accepted practice and the transsexuals in question would sever their genitals and then have a "coming out" ceremony where they would be given female garments to wear.
Not to mention, I seem to recall something about "somebody" in Imperial Rome actually marrying a transsexual woman.
Sure the technology wasn't what it is today, but yesterday's transsexuals made do as best they could.

While you make some good counter-arguments, evolution can take place over thousands and sometimes millions of years.

Susan, I agree it is well written and makes a lot of sense, however, I consider myself a woman and not a crossdresser, so I like my approach better.

Melissa

wow
"This same understanding is followed by Midrash Mishlei (Proverbs) which contends that the Biblical character Yael in the Book of Judges kills General Sisera with a tent pin instead of a sword in order to comply with this law. It would have been "unlady-like" for her to use a sword — worse, a violation of the law — because a sword is a man's tool and so the righteous woman of valor finds an alternate weapon.

While this interpretation does not prevail in later halakhic discussion, it does appear, and so it must be regarded as a viable albeit minority view as to the intent of the first clause. This interpretation has even been cited in the debate over exemption for women from military conscription in modern Israel."
(and how's that last part working out?)
LOL
I tried to read that stuff for like two whole minutes

Quote from: Nero on June 07, 2006, 09:57:50 PM
Okay,okay, girls.I did not disagree with this. I said that the crossdressing verse (as well as many other verses) was based on current trends. Almost all of the laws in the old testament were about separation between "the one true god" of the Hebrews and the gods of the pagan peoples they had conquered.
Not just crossdressing stuff. Laws regarding food and its preparation, laws forbidding Hebrew men to marry outside their race, etc.
Geez.
Nero

they sure got a lotta rules and regs on stuff when they want to huh?
Forbidden to do this here, but over here it sez...
man o man... I couldn't even get the gist, that's off the hook.

[uh sorry Nero, I wasn't even reading the whole posts, just random shots.]

Melissa sometimes has this DRY way of putting something

with a little turn ("a number of social variables...
based on current trends");
sounds like a Frank Zappa lyric or something

that I really find hilarious

cause it's true





Posted at: June 07, 2006, 10:36:14 PM

---

Old Testament is a book of laws
"Don't F up! God'll be hella pissed!"

New Testament is a book of stories
expounding on metaphors
"Jesus loves me this I know"

which gets 'interpreted' as if a book on natural science
and attempts made into treating it like part one, above

just seems like a problematic book to base your actions on to me.

Quote from: Nero on June 07, 2006, 05:13:14 PM
First of all, Chynna,if you are an MtF who sleeps with men, I don't think in any way that makes you homosexual. Is that what your friend was referring to? Also, I'm not so sure homosexuality is a sin.

Nero,
In my mind set I am many things
but first and foremost a woman however I am also a gay man or homosexual because I was that for 10+ years of my life and thats still a part of my psychie thus a part of me.
Damion (a gay male)
&
Chynna (a woman)
make up the person that I have become today. we are both a part of the same body and of one mind but with seperate ideals.
Also, I never stated I only date men...I date women, men, TS's Both FtM & MtF. So if I date another MtF TS or a woman for that manner then couldn't I be classified as a homosexual?
(I prefer Trisexual cause ill try anything sexual! )
In anycase in her eyes she saw a man in a dress has being homosexual ( her label not mines)....But then again whats in a label...I could care less because the only label you can truly give me is the one I've given myself......

CHYNNA

PS Nero I'm not argue or disagreeing with you, this is all just purely my opinion about myself but it's good to see you so passionate about a topic!

QuoteOkay,okay, girls.
Quote
You need to realize that many of these bible verses are based upon a number of social variables such as current trends.
I did not disagree with this. I said that the crossdressing verse (as well as many other verses) was based on current trends. Almost all of the laws in the old testament were about separation between "the one true god" of the Hebrews and the gods of the pagan peoples they had conquered.
Not just crossdressing stuff. Laws regarding food and its preparation, laws forbidding Hebrew men to marry outside their race, etc.
Geez.
Nero

But you know how we can get sometimes!!!
Woman's perogative

Everything if not nothing
CHYNNA

There are noble transgender figures throughtout the bible, the old testament as well as the new testament. People just hate transgender people out of ignorance and fear or even jealousy. Also, not only are the eunuchs(Matthew 19:12) transgender individuals, but the bible depicts angels(genderless or both genders) as being transgender or both women and men(Revelations 9:. Friends never rely on someone else interpretation of something, you must read and research it for yourself.