People Say the Bible Doesn’t Talk About Transgenderism. It Does.

Andrew T. Walker's new book explains what the Bible says about gender identity.

By Tom Gilson Published on August 15, 2017

Quick now: Where does the Bible say it say it’s wrong to change sex?

LGBT advocates will answer: Nowhere. They’ll say the Bible mentions the topic only once and that verse doesn’t apply. Deut. 22:5 says a man shouldn’t wear women’s clothes, and vice versa. That was Old Testament (they’ll say) and we’ve left Old Testament laws behind us.

We who believe in the Bible must be prepared to explain our convictions from the Bible.

Furthermore, it never says a man shouldn’t become a woman (or vice versa). And what if someone is only a man on the outside, but really a woman on the inside? Shouldn’t “she” be who “she” really is?

Can’t answer that? Enter Andrew T. Walker, author of the readable, compassionate, practical and biblical God and the Transgender Debate: What Does the Bible Actually Say About Gender Identity?

No Proof Text

LGBT advocates are partly right: The Bible has no single proof text clearly stating transgenderism is wrong, as there is for, say, stealing, murder or even homosexuality. Deut. 22:5 helps, but doesn’t clearly answer the other side’s objections, as we’ve seen.

That’s okay. The Bible doesn’t list every right and every wrong in a catalog. It teaches principles by which we can discern right and wrong. Walker finds just principles in God’s purpose and design for humans.

What is a man? Genesis tells us that a man is a human who can be united to a woman, a wife, with whom he can physically become “one flesh” (2:24). A person with male anatomy is reflecting physically the fact that he is] created a man. … Maleness isn’t only anatomy, but anatomy shows that there is maleness.

The same applies to femaleness of course. “Men and women are more than just their anatomy, but they are not less,” he explains. “To misunderstand, blur or reject the Creator’s categories for humanity doesn’t just put us in rebellion against the Creator and creation — it puts us at odds with how each of us was made.”

The Source of the Problem

There’s a problem with that, though. Not everyone feels their body’s sex fits their mind’s view of their gender. They suffer from the condition called gender dysphoria.

What’s going on here, Walker explains, is one more effect of humankind’s fallen condition (Gen. 3). This sex-and-gender mismatch isn’t a result of that person’s sin, any more than the man in John 9 was born blind because he had sinned. It’s another instance of the pain that comes with humanity’s brokenness.

What about the claim, “I was born this way”? There’s no way to be sure that’s true. We don’t know why some people come to feel their sex doesn’t fit their gender. Even if did, though, it would simply be one of many instances in which the fall has marred God’s design.

The solution isn’t to reject the design. The solution is to pursue the redemption and peace that comes through a relationship with Christ.

The Pain of Transgenderism

Gender dysphoria is suffering, Walker reminds us. The Church must deal compassionately with that pain.

The church’s response to those who identify as transgender, and to those who struggle with gender dysphoria but who are not actively identifying as transgender, must be — immediately and with integrity, “You are welcome here. You are loved here.”

Churches must be both “listening communities” and “convictional communities” committed to biblical truth. Only this combination, says Walkers, “allows us to offer a word of hope and reconciliation. We can only offer this message if we believe the message is true!”

Other Questions

So that answers a couple questions, very briefly. Walker clearly, sensitively and biblically many other tough questions, like:

  • Can someone be transgender and Christian?
  • Should parents keep kids in state-run schools if those schools promote transgenderism?
  • What should churches do if a member asks for their child to be identified as the opposite sex — or neither sex?
  • Shouldn’t we focus on sins that actually harm people (murder, adultery, etc.)? Transgenderism doesn’t hurt anyone, does it?
  • What pronouns should we use?

You will face at least one of those questions head-on before long. God and the Transgender Debate will equip you for these very real challenges — challenges none of us can avoid facing.

Print Friendly
Comments ()
The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.
  • Mensa Member

    It’s hard to imagine a credible Biblical historian saying that there are no trans people in the Bible.

    Eunuchs were biological men who lived as women. In a highly gender-segregated society, they moved back and forth between the to sexes. They were neither fully male nor female. They were kind of both and not really either.

    If this doesn’t meet the definition of “trans” I don’t know what would!

    And, importantly for us Evangelicals, the bible is positive about Eunuchs. Eunuchs were heroes of the Old Testament. One of the first Christian converts was a Eunuch. And, of course, Jesus said this about them:

    “For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others–and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”

    • Patmos

      “Eunuchs were biological men who lived as women. In a highly gender-segregated society, they moved back and forth between the to sexes. They were neither fully male nor female. They were kind of both and not really either.”

      Lies, but no big surprise considering you are a liar.

      I don’t think you’ve ever mentioned which organization you troll for, so which it? CAIR? Some LGBT advocacy group?

      • Paul

        Soros pays well

    • Patmos

      “importantly for us Evangelicals”

      And for anyone wondering, this is the proof Mensa Member is a lying troll. He got sloppy with his persona, and is now claiming to be Evangelical.

    • LgVt

      what?

      Eunuchs were men who were unable to have sex, in most cases because they had been castrated. They “moved back and forth” because it was safe for women to interact with them–because there was literally no chance of anything ever happening.

      That’s not even close to any conceivable definitoin of “trans.”

    • Mensa Member,

      Let’s suppose for the sake of argument that everything you said here was correct. Would there be any basis for thinking that these eunuchs’ background, their reasons for being eunuchs, was anything like today’s transgender persons’?

      I doubt it. So in fact they only meet the definition of “trans” if you expand that definition far beyond what it currently means. And that’s as much as I can agree with you even while granting you your point merely for the sake of argument.

      • It is sad that many Christians harden their hearts like Pharaoh. Perhaps for some, trans people are the test, in the way that lepers were the test for Francis of Assisi. For those who fail, what they do to the least of God’s people will be a surprise on the Day of Judgment, when they are numbered among the goats. The lake of eternal fire beckons.

        In any event, look past the bible and into cultural anthripology – and there are many cultures in ancient times and at present, that have niche roles for people who in modern Western culture would be classified as trans.

        • Dave_1958

          Hi Joann, I disagree with your conclusions but you clearly have studied both the current scientific theories as well as the Bible. It’s refreshing to read. Thanks for keeping it calm, it’s so easy when it’s something quite personal to fall into anger and nastiness. You have given me much to think about 🙂

          • Thank you – after getting mostly negative responses, I appreciate seeing something from someone who respectfully disagrees. (I did just get a little negative, but kept it biblical 🙂 )

            I did spend three years in seminary, but I do not have a degree. While I was thrown out of the Catholic Church (where I was a cantor and liturgist) over transition, I have still maintained an association with Christianity and have been invited to lay-preach at Methodist, Episcopal, UCC and UU churches.

            In parting, I have a link to a review of an article by Rabbi Mark Sameth (the original article is apparently now behind a paywall . . . ) – you will likely disagree with the Rabbi’s analysis and conclusions, but it is certainly worth some meditative time.

    • Chip Crawford

      MM: You fool no one, anywhere on the site, no matter the article’s followers. We’re onto you as a plant, trying to influence us, discredit, sow leftist, unGodly lies. You never get anywhere. Your cover is so thin … I’m sorry, but you really are wasting your time here. I notice you bring in some haters to help you out when you think you’re over your head on something, but actually, you are over your head here all the time. And they don’t get anywhere either. The problem is that someone whose foundation is sinking sand can never stand against or outlast those whose foundation is solid rock.

  • tether

    The eunuchs of the Bible were usually castrated males or those incapable of reproduction due to a birth defect. A eunuch could also be someone who performed work typical of eunuchs, although he remained perfectly capable of having sex—i.e., “eunuch” in some cases was simply a title. The purpose of intentional castration was to induce impotence and remove sexuality. It was a common practice in ancient times for rulers to castrate some of their servants and/or advisers in order to subdue and pacify them. It was especially common to castrate men who tended the royal harem. Queen Esther’s eunuchs are mentioned in Esther 4:4.

    In Matthew 19:12, Jesus mentions eunuchs in the context of whether it is good to marry. He says, “There are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.” Jesus identifies three types of “eunuchs” here: natural eunuchs (“born that way”), forced eunuchs (“made eunuchs by others”), and voluntary eunuchs (“those who choose”).

    Natural eunuchs include those who are born with a physical defect, but they also comprise those who are born with no real desire for marriage or sex. Forced eunuchs are those who have been castrated for whatever reason. Voluntary eunuchs are those who, in order to better serve the Lord in some capacity, choose to forego marriage. God calls some people to remain single (and therefore celibate). Paul speaks of those who serve the Lord in their unmarried state in 1 Corinthians 7:7—9.

    Some gay groups argue that Jesus was referring to homosexuals when He mentioned eunuchs who were “born that way.” However, the Bible never uses the words homosexual and eunuch interchangeably. Furthermore, eunuchs are never referred to in Scripture as being in sin, while homosexuality is universally condemned in both the Old and New Testaments.

  • Laura Ann Register

    What it all boils to is that we are created in God’s Image. Yes, God is both male and female. Eve was already with Adam when God created him, that’s why He put Adam to sleep so he could remove the rib which he was removing Eve from him. The only beings that are not both sex’s are the Angels. They are either male or female. That’s why Satan is running a big muck over this. He has taken what is supposed to beautiful and has made it UGLY. There is proof about all of this, you just need to do some research . The best way to check all of this out is on an Hebrew website, that reveals the true Bible, not in the one’s that have been written by men who had to translate from Greek. God does NOT approve of men and women wanting to change their sex, especially when it involves a teen or a child! I mean come on, really and then not putting your baby’s gender on their birth certificate. That’s just being REAL STUPID! We all have male and female hormones, and yes their are female demons as well.

    • tether

      Laura, I do spend some time reading and studying the Bible but do not claim to know nearly all of it. Please give an example from the Bible that states that there are male and female angels. I don’t recall ever reading in the Bible about a female angel.

  • Trilemma

    Deuteronomy 22:5 is not talking about transgenderism. It’s talking about cross dressing for a couple of possible reasons. It could be commanding that a woman not to put on armor and go into battle while a man stays with the women. Or it could be commanding the Israelites not to cross dress like pagans do as part of their worship of their deities. Using Genesis to answer the question, “What is a man?” is pointless since that was before the fall and transgenderism is supposedly a result of the fall. So no, the Bible doesn’t address transgenderism.

    Mr. Gilson says that this sex-and-gender mismatch isn’t a result of sin and that such a person may indeed be born that way. So, transgenderism is real and it’s not a sin. So what’s the problem here? Is it the desire to change the outward appearance of one’s body? Is it a sin to change one’s hair color; to have a mole removed, to get plastic surgery, to get breast implants? Where do we draw the line?

    Personally, I think efforts to medically change the outward appearance of the body of someone who is transgender should wait till after puberty.

    • Jerome Horwitz

      Deuteronomy is not relevant to Christianity. What is, is the perfection of God. He doesn’t make mistakes. And nowhere will you ever find anything said about “gender dysphoria” or anything related to it. As you are made in His image, you are the gender He meant for you to be.

      • Trilemma

        Is someone born unisex exactly the way God meant them to be and they should do nothing to change their gender?

        • Jerome Horwitz

          It’s called a birth defect. The dominant DNA and chromosomes determine the child’s gender.

          • Trilemma

            If it’s a defect, then that means God made a mistake. If the DNA indicates a male but there’s not enough tissue present to surgically make this person look like a male, then what should the doctors do?

          • Jerome Horwitz

            If it’s a defect, then that means God made a mistake.

            Wrong. It happened because it was supposed to happen.

          • Trilemma

            If a person is born transgender then that would also be a defect that was supposed to happen. God intended for a woman to be in a male body.

          • Jerome Horwitz

            No one is born transgender. Your argument is based on a false premise and therefore invalid.

          • Trilemma

            How do you know nobody is born transgender?

          • You have not been exposed to the science. And please don’t pass off the quackery of eating disorders specialist Paul McHugh as science – he thinks trans theory is based on John Money’s ideas of malleability and then, once he establishes the straw man, whacks at it like a pinata. Sadly, McHugh and the late Cardinal Navarrete have led serious error into the Roman Catholic teachings on trans people.

          • Jerome Horwitz

            1) “Science” always changes. God never does.

            2) Being a tranny yourself, your opinions are self-serving and therefore irrelevant.

            You are blocked.

          • If one reads the OT carefully, one can see the evolution of the God-concept among the Hebrews over time. That doesn’t imply that God changes, but that the understanding of God has changed.

            While many Christians interpret the plural Elohim as being a reference to the Trinity, it’s actually a vestige of very early Hebrew polytheism. For that matter, there are many references to “other gods” as being real, but less powerful than, the God of the Hebrews. (One of the reasons for that is that in many of the religions of the ancient Near East, the “god” was only the consort of a powerful goddess, and these were agricultural religions with “fertility rite” practices – the rejection of Cain’s sacrifice of his crops by the God of the Hebrews was a rejection of these religions, much like Paul’s condemnation of the popular mystery religions in Rome that involved wine and sex as sacramental practices in Romans 1.

          • Not the gross shape of chromosomes. Genes, gene expression, and ontological development all play a role. The brain is the primary sex organ, and the way the brain develops should be a major factor in determining sex. In the Western binary culture, that would be different in outcome than it would be in other cultures where people with a trans physiology have different cultural niches.

  • The Bible says a lot of things that we conveniently overlook. The guys who wrote the Bible knew nothing about gender dysphoria. Some of the social mores of ancient Israel are simply irrelevant in a more enlightened 21st century world.

    • Chip Crawford

      I hope you would agree that the social mores of Sharia law are simply irrelevant in a more enlightened 21st century world.

      • Sharia law is no more relevant to a more enlightened 21st century world than Levitican law.

    • Shaquille Harvey

      Again what is meant by a more “enlightened world” ?

      • a.Christian.for.Ron.Paul

        He means he thinks he’s smart that he thinks men can think themselves into becoming women. Next he’ll tell us that they can think themselves into becoming cats. Oh how the light is not so bright in our dear old Chuck.

    • Many Sparrows

      This is the biggest lie of (non-classical) liberalism/modernism: that we are more enlightened today than we once were. It’s simply untrue.

      • Faustina11

        But we have electricity!

    • Jerome Horwitz

      The guys who wrote the Bible knew nothing about gender dysphoria.

      Probably because it did not exist back then. This is a purely 20th century invention.

      • The priestesses of Cybele received their calling by being gender dysphoric, even if Catullus couldn’t grasp the concept. Many other cultures have social roles for people who would in modern Western culture identify as trans. Ee ha e always been around.

  • Jeremy L

    Sounds like a huge stretch made from nothing. Gender dysphoria was unknown or at least unrecognized when the Bible was written. No discussion or even mere mention of gender dysphoria or trans people is in the Bible. And if it were a supernatural book, it would be there. LGBT is currently one of the main things at the center of the tug-of-war between religion and secularism. Surely God (the alleged author of the Bible) would have foreseen this and given our modern world specific instructions on how to handle the T as well as the LGB (and perhaps would have also made it clearer whether there is a distinction between modern gay couples and temple prostitutes and pederasts). I suppose God works in “mysterious ways”, right?

    • a.Christian.for.Ron.Paul

      +Jeremy L

      The Bible does mention it and it’s in the very first chapter. Genesis 1:27, “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.”

      Furthermore, it’s completely self-evident at its core. It doesn’t matter if you feel that you’re trans-species, you’re still a human being. It doesn’t matter if you feel like you’re 118 foot 3 inches tall, you’re not.

      Join us in reality, Jeremy.

      • Jeremy L

        Like the Bible, you have no concept of gender dysphoria.

        • a.Christian.for.Ron.Paul

          How don’t I? It’s when a man thinks he’s a woman or vice-versa.

          • Jeremy L

            It is not simply “thinking”. It really is mind/body mismatch.

          • a.Christian.for.Ron.Paul

            +Jeremy L , I didn’t say it was simply thinking. I said “It’s when a man thinks he’s a woman or vice-versa.”

            When you say “mind” you’re alluding the the very thing that does the
            thinking. When you say “body”, you’re referring to the person’s biological
            composition (example, the person being a biological male).

            So when you’re saying, “It really is mind/body mismatch.” you’re stating something with the same equivalence as “It’s when a man thinks he’s a woman or vice-versa.”

          • Jeremy L

            It isn’t equivalent. You say they are delusional. I say their brains really were meant for a gender different than the one they were born into. The cure for that condition is a sex reassignment. Period.

          • a.Christian.for.Ron.Paul

            +Jeremy L , you should apply your reasoning to species dysphoria.

            “Their brains really were meant for a species different than the one they were born into. The cure for that condition is a species reassignment. Period.”

            Join us in reality, Jeremy.

          • Jeremy L

            There is no such thing as species dysphoria. People who want to be animals are clearly antisocial and delusional and sad. Join you in “reality”? You mean the “reality” where snakes can talk and a global flood is possible?

          • a.Christian.for.Ron.Paul

            I’m not making it up. Look it up.

          • There are scientific studiee establishing trans as real. The soecies analogy is a false equivalence.

          • a.Christian.for.Ron.Paul

            +Joann Pinzivalli

            There are exactly ZERO scientific studies establishing that a man can be a woman. ZERO. And there never will be (except in fabricated science) because it’s impossible.

            Just like there will never be a scientific study that says a 5 foot tall woman is a 118 foot tall woman because the woman thinks she is.

            A man is a man and a woman is a woman. End of story.

            And the species analogy is spot on. But, be sure to close your eyes and block your years. You wouldn’t want to be consistent in your reasoning. Keep going with your double standard.

          • I’m not suggesting that “a man can be a woman,” or that there are scientific studies that say that.

            What I am stating, is that there are studies that show that transgender women are not men in the first place, and trans men are not women in the first place – See:

            n 1995, in a peer-reviewed article in Nature, entitled A sex difference in the human brain and its relation to transsexuality [Nature 378, 68 – 70 (02 November 1995); doi:10.1038/378068a0] the researchers involved gave us a first glimmer into transsexual brain structures.

            This was confirmed in a follow-up study in 2000, entitled Male-to-Female Transsexuals Have Female Neuron Numbers in a Limbic Nucleus, published in The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 85, No. 5 2034-2041

            ..

            In 2008, two separate studies from Australia established separate genetic predispositions for different kinds of transgender development.

            In one study, the predisposition for those who develop with female-identified brains and male genital tracts was shown to involve a long androgen receptor gene:

            Lauren Hare, Pascal Bernard, Francisco J. Sanchez, Paul N. Baird, Eric Vilain, Trudy Kennedy and Vincent R. Harley. Androgen Receptor (AR) Repeat Length Polymorphism Associated with Male-to-female Transsexualism. Biological Psychiatry, Advance online publication date 27 Oct 2008, Jan 2009 print edition

            The other study,aimed at those who develop with male-identified brains and female genital tract development, was entitled A Polymorphism of the CYP17 Gene Related to Sex Steroid Metabolism is Associated With Female-to-Male But Not Male-to-Female Transsexualism by Bentz, Eva-Katrin; Hefler, Lukas A.; Kaufmann, Ulrike; Huber, Johannes C.; Kolbus, Andrea; Tempfer, Clemens B., published in Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey: December 2008 – Volume 63 – Issue 12 – pp 775-777
            doi: 10.1097/01.ogx.0000338093.21452.0b

            These studies, and the brain structure studies from 1995 and 2000, provide clues to the ontological developments that result in transgender people. While there is much additional study required, these studies make it possible to discredit the earlier understandings of transgender people that date back to 1965, in which transgender people were seen as merely delusional members of their initially-assigned sex, for whom any treatment is seen as merely palliative.

          • a.Christian.for.Ron.Paul

            No, there aren’t studies “that show that transgender women are not men in the first place, and trans men are not women in the first place”.

            The studies you pointed to don’t show that either.

            And there never will be. Just like there will never be a scientific study that says a 5 foot tall
            woman is a 7 foot tall woman because she has a similar brain pattern (for example, gray matter to white matter ratio) to 7 foot tall women that had MRI’s.

          • Matthew 23 is an apt response. Or if that is TL;DR, try Mt. 7:6.

            At this point, I should follow Jesus advice from Mt. 10:11-15. Dust has been shaken from feet . . .

          • Jerome Horwitz

            The actual cure is hospitalization in a Christian based mental health facility. Jesus does incredible things, including cure mental illness, which is what transgenderism is and always shall be. Period.

          • Jeremy L

            No one should go to a mental health facility based on any religion. Not if they want their problem solved. Not if they don’t want further damage.

          • Jerome Horwitz

            Diane Ehrensaft shows how corrupt the mental health profession has become. I would never leave my child in the care of someone that cares more about politics than their clients. So, yes, Christians.

          • The biology is different. There are scientific studies that show that trans people have brain structures that fall in the expectation for the other sex than the one implied by the genutal tract.

          • a.Christian.for.Ron.Paul

            @joannmp:disqus

            Because their brain is messed up. Ever heard of neuroplasticity? The brain can be rewired to repair damage (like thinking one is of a different gender than they actually are).

            If a person spends a large portion of their life acting like the opposite sex, the brain will wire itself so that it’s similar to the opposite sex. But, that doesn’t make a man a woman or vice versa.

            If I drive a taxi in London, I’m going to have an increase in grey matter in the hippocampus. The other taxi drivers are too.

            The brain adapts to experiences we go through. Taking an MRI of our brain isn’t the end-all of whether we’re men or women.

      • Male-and-female, not male or female. The initial Adam in the second creation story was male-and-female in one person in God’s image. And the word usually translated as rib actually means side. To make a companion, God took one side of Adam and made Eve. Who would limit God in how God might create each one of us? Those who are trans have brains that developed along one path, and genital tract that developed along the other. In Plato’s Symposium, Aristophanes provides a Greek version of the Adamic Androgynos, and includes Androandros and Gynegynos (Adam and Steve types, and Eve and Lilith types) – but the Greeks didn’t have an issue with gay people.

        • a.Christian.for.Ron.Paul

          @joannmp:disqus

          That’s a basic sentence and you can’t even interpret it right.

          The reason why it’s male AND female is because there were TWO of them and it’s referring to each of them respectively.

          No one says “They became President or Vice President” in reference to Mr. Trump and Mr. Pence. Instead, in English we would say “They became President and Vice President”. Note the use of “and”.

          Like I said to Jeremy, join us in reality. It’s really OK to see the world as it is.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Whatever his name is, Prinzivalli, is the epitome of the evil side of the internet. Whereas he would NEVER be allowed to speak and deceive in a Bible-believing church, he unfortunately gets a pulpit to speak from on the internet. Ergo, he comes to the Stream. He’s no different than Boris, Jeremy, or any of the other God-hating trolls who are doing Satan’s bidding as one of his minions. He just has a different wrapping. The inside is the same. Just as has been foretold.

            Prinzivalli is an outstanding example of why it is SO very important and vital that the Christian be in a Bible-believing church where they can submit to godly leaders as commanded and then couple that by being in the Word themselves.

            “Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God.” (John 8:47)

            “The unbeliever does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him. And he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.” (1st Cor. 2:14)

            “There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.” (2nd Peter 3:16)

            Not that the simplicity of God’s Creation is all that hard to understand. It’s really not but he certainly does fit the description of “unstable” and twisting the Word to his own destruction.

            The really ironic thing is Prinzivalli chooses to cite Matt. 23 to those who see him for what he is – a Deceiver doing his father, Satan’s, bidding. And yet, he doesn’t even see that is exactly what the Pharisees were doing.

            Jesus showed love, grace, mercy, and compassion for the Deceived but His harshest, most severe rebukes were for the Deceivers. I can’t be dogmatic about it but I tend to believe that the hottest place in the Lake Of Fire with the most severest punishment and where the greatest torment will be experienced is reserved for those who practice their sin and attempt to lead others into the fire with them in the name of God, using His Word, while claiming to be a follower of Christ.

      • Boris

        “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.”
        The Bible describes God as a transsexual and Jesus and Paul as gay men. The Christian superstition has always been gay and homophobic simultaneously. Not to mention the rampant pedophilia in the Christian superstition. It’s such a sick and twisted female hating collection dogmas and mind numbing doctrines.

        • a.Christian.for.Ron.Paul

          Oh no, is this the same unreasonable Boris from the homeschool article discussion? If so, sorry, but I don’t debate people who consistently make up “facts” and are unreasonable. It’s chasing the wind.

          • Boris

            You make up your own facts. Like the “fact”that you went to college. That was lie.

          • a.Christian.for.Ron.Paul

            LOL, this why I can’t take you seriously.

            OK, prove it then. Prove that I didn’t go to college. Good luck, since you have no clue who I am.

            You’re a person that is prone to making stuff up, because you’re intellectually lazy.

          • Boris

            You proved that all by yourself. What college did you go to? POOF. Liar.

          • a.Christian.for.Ron.Paul

            Evidently, you still haven’t learned who has the “burden of proof” when making a claim.

            YOU made a claim in this discussion that I made up that I went to college. Therefore, you have the burden of proof to prove it. It’s not other people’s burden, but rather yours.

            So…go ahead, Boris, prove it. Good luck, since you have no clue who I am.

            Furthermore, even if you knew who I was, you’d know I did indeed go to college. Googling would revel that.

            Not only did I go to college, but I graduated from college. But, hey, Boris from the internet thinks he can make stuff up and then require others to disprove his statements.

            You’re being intellectually lazzzyyyyyyy

          • Boris

            Your ignorance proved your lack of formal education. Now go kill yourself please

          • a.Christian.for.Ron.Paul

            LOL, there you go making up more stuff. What ignorance? I disproved your “points” in the other discussion. You even admitted to several them. The nice thing about the internet is there’s a paper trial (though you could delete your drivel).

            Plus, I know I went to college because I know who I am and what I’ve done. You have no clue who I am. That’s why you can’t even start to prove that I didn’t go to college.

            And you’ll never be able to prove your statement, because it’s a false statement. If you knew me, you’d know I went to college.

            You’re intellectually LAAAAAAAZZZZZZZYYYYYYY. You’d rather make up stuff and use red herrings and ad hominems. When some calls one of your “facts” into question, you can’t back it up.

            Nah, I’d rather annoy you than kill myself 😛 And I hope you have a great day! 🙂

          • Boris

            I went to Muhlenberg College. Where’d you go? ROFL! You don’t need a college degree to work in the fast food industry boy. Now I want fries with that! Hahahahahaha. Move it paper hat boy. LOL.

          • a.Christian.for.Ron.Paul

            LOL, you’re being intellectually LAAAAAZZZZZYYYYY yet again.

            1) You made a claim that I didn’t go to college. You have the burden of proof to back up your claim. And you can’t. You have to ask me, lol. What a joke. I thought you already knew? Where’s your evidence then?

            2) I’m not required to answer any of your questions. You made the claim prior to asking me whether or not I went to college. You used it as a red herring and as an ad hominem. I called you out on it and NOW you want to ask whether or not I did?

            3) It’s your job to prove your statement. You should ALREADY have sufficient evidence to prove a statement BEFORE making it. But, you don’t. You’re intellectually LAAAZZZZZZZY and make up stuff. Only after you’ve made something up and someone calls you out on it repeatedly, do you finally get the sense to ask whether or not I went to college. Too late. So sad.

            4) It’s none of your business where I went to college and this account is purposely anonymous for irrational people like yourself. Deal with it 😛

            Perhaps if you ever mature in your thinking, I’ll consider telling you where I went to college. The nice thing about being me is that I know where I went to college. You know neither me or what I’ve done in my life.

            5) Stating where you went to college is not evidence that I didn’t go to college.

            Furthermore, stating where you went to college is not infallible proof that you did actually go there. You could be lying. Just like me stating a college at this moment doesn’t infallibly prove to you that I did actually go there. You still wouldn’t believe me.

            6) And this is how irrelevant red herrings and ad hominems are to a discussion. You’ve wasted so much time with fallacies and at the end of the day a person can just lie about where they went to college. Does that solve any problems? Nope, you’d call them a liar and ask for the diploma. Once they supply that, you’d on to your next fallacy, with red herrings and ad hominems being some of the favorites.

            7) An ad hominem using a made up fact (i.e. that I work in the food industry) is not evidence that I didn’t go to college.
            LAAAAZZZZZYYYYYYY form of argumentation.

            Prove that I work in the food industry, Boris. Come on now. Burden of proof is on you to support your made-up NONSENSE that you’ll never be able to back up.

            8) Let me use your form of reasoning against you. This is how you act:
            “ROFL! You don’t need a college degree to work in the fast food industry girl. Now I want a Coke with that! Hahahahahaha. Move it paper hat girl. LOL. You’re a girl! I know you are, “Boris”. Prove that you’re not. hahahahaha”

            Do you see how the above is completely ridiculous? Yet, that’s exactly what you do.

    • Hildabeast

      You’re right Jeremy… God also forgot to put the Pythagorean theorem in the Bible even though it was true for all eternity. But because it’s not in the Bible, or rather, because you don’t see the truth of the Bible’s message, therefore it must be false. Right? Wonderful thinking you’ve got there Jeremy.

      • Jeremy L

        The Pythagorean theorem isn’t a topic of intense theological debate whose inclusion in the Bible would have settled a major modern disagreement. The Bible concerns itself with issues of its day. Sorry.

        • Hildabeast

          Way to miss the point Jeremy :). Yes, the Bible does concern with the very moral/eternal issues of the day, and not everything will be spelled out with familiar language. This is where we use discernment, experience, the Word and judgment with the aid of the Holy Spirit, to inform us on how to act… day in and day out.

          You mocking God on the other hand…. because He didn’t specifically address something that concerns you… that’s just not cool.

          • Jeremy L

            I still find it odd that we need discernment, judgment, and the “Holy Spirit” (which is likely just personal feelings and emotions) to interpret something that is supposed to clearly be “the Truth”

          • Hildabeast

            That’s understandable… You probably think God isn’t real and it is something we make up to cope with our fear of dying or bad childhood or whatever else you’ve been spoonfed…

            Can’t help you with your denial of the Holy Spirit. You either hear the Shepherd’ s voice or you don’t..

            It is very interesting that of all places, you chose to come here to tell us about how “fake” the Holy Spirit is…

          • Jeremy L

            I’m open to God and the Holy Spirit being real, actually. It’s just suspicious that they both seem to always agree with the personal opinions, emotions, and desires of those who most loudly and constantly assert their existence.

          • Hildabeast

            “Open to”.. that’s like the hooker on the street selling her services and claiming being open to an honest job. But I get it… “some day”, you will have it all worked out and “be ready” to surrender.

            No to the second one, on pretty much all counts. If I told you my opinions versus the Holy Spirit’s on most any topic, you’d think I was the devil himself…

            There’s a 100 light years long, diametric opposition between my opinions and the Holy Spirit’s. Knowing that contrast, is what keeps me humble and always knowing when to seek the Holy Spirit
            ‘s fill… given we/I sin daily.

            If God will grant you, and I hope He does, just a glimpse of the utter depravity we are under as human beings, my hunch is you will run and plea with Him to give you repentance a d faith… It’s what happened to me when I was at my wits’ end.

            What I’m not sure is why do we have to dig the hole so deep underneath us before we realize it’s too late… and start begging to be pulled out.

    • It is there. Is. 56, Mt 19:12 and Acts 8

      • Jeremy L

        Hmm. “A memorial and a name better than sons and daughters” in Isaiah is interesting. It will surely make fundamentalists upset. Or they’ll just explain it away per usual.

        • The promise to Abraham wasn’t “you will sit at my right hand in heaven.” It was that his descendants would be as numerous as the stars in the sky or the sands in the desert. The ancient Hebrews did not have a heaven-concept until after the Babylonian captivity when they were influenced by other beliefs.

          That’s actually what made the sin of Onan so bad – under the rules, since Onan’s older brother died without children, it was Onan’s job to get his brother’s widow pregnant. So his brother could have descendants and live through them.

          But if he got his sister-in-law pregnant, the child would inherit from Onan’s father as the first son of the first son, and Onan would have been out his inheritance.

          So because of his greed, he decided to deny progeny to his dead brother. (Traditional Christian and Roman Catholic teaching is that Onan’s “spilling his seed on the ground” is a prohibition against masturbation . . . while totally missing the point).

  • Andrew Mason

    Since transgenderism requires technology that’s only been invented in the last couple of decades how could the Bible reference it directly? What ancient Greek, or Hebrew or … word would mean trans? Even if the ancients had a term for a 21st century concept, is it likely that activists would accept a literal reading? Just look at the hassles over homosexuality where, despite the Bible saying it’s a sin in black and white, you have activists arguing homosexuality is simply another part of God’s diverse creation and must be supported.

    • Eunuchoi. It was a catchall term for those who did not quite fit into the sex/gender binary.

      • Andrew Mason

        That doesn’t follow. Being a eunuch doesn’t mean you’re not a man, it just means you’re non-functional in one respect. Would you suggest those men who’ve suffered prostrate cancer and been castrated as a result are now women? Would you want to tell their wives they’re now sapphics married to trans-women?

        • I wasn’t implying that all “eunuchoi” are trans, but only that trans folk are included in the catchall term. An eunuch castrated as punishment, or to guard the harem, or to sing soprano in the Schola Cantorum for that matter (as the Catholic Church did until the late 1800’s-early 1900’s), is not likely to be trans and will almost certainly still identify as male in a Western binary. As used in the ancient world, the classification of Eunuchoi did include a substantial subset of people who would in today’s society identify as trans. Until the time of Isaiah, post-Babylonian Captivity, the Hebrew law excluded those whose stones were crushed from the temple. Having interacted with eunuchs in Babylon, the post-Captivity Jewish people were more accepting. “My House is a House of Prayer for all people.”

          • Andrew Mason

            You’re imposing a rather novel interpretation of what strikes me as a messianic passage. Note the first couple of verses:
            1. Maintain justice and do what is right for my salvation is close at hand and my righteousness will soon be revealed.
            3. Let no foreigner who is bound to the Lord say, “The Lord will surely exclude me from his people.”And let no eunuch complain, “I am only a dry tree.”

            The issue is not whether the Jewish people were more accepting, something I would be highly skeptical of given you’re arguing post-Babylonian Jews rejected the Law, but whether a new covenant was being referenced.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God.” (John 8:47)

            “The unbeliever does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him. And he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.” (1st Cor. 2:14)

            “There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.” (2nd Peter 3:16)

            Show me just me one verse in the Bible where a God-mocking, rebellious sinner clung to their sin, celebrated and reveled in their sins and tried to lead others to Hell with them was ever given audience or even the time of day by Jesus?

            And ya wanna know why there is not more in the Bible about God speaking to the Haters, mockers, blasphemers, etc? Wanna know why there is not one verse in the Bible where a God-mocking, rebellious sinner clung to their sin, celebrated and reveled in their sins and tried to lead others to Hell with them where Jesus ever gave audience or even the time of day to them? The answer is because He didn’t.

            In fact, there are no recorded words from Jesus even on Judgment Day to them. But there are for you. The Posers. Albeit they are few as well. See Matt. 7:21-23. God does not waste His breath on the disobedient, rebellious fools who choose to remain sons of disobedience and children of wrath.

            Jesus showed love, grace, mercy, and compassion for the Deceived but His harshest, most severe rebukes were for the Deceivers. I can’t be dogmatic about it but I tend to believe that the hottest place in the Lake Of Fire with the most severest punishment and where the greatest torment will be experienced is reserved for those who practice their sin and attempt to lead others into the fire with them in the name of God, using His Word, while claiming to be a follower of Christ.

            And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. (John 3:19-20)

  • The word “eunuch” as used in the bible is inclusive of trans people. Three important and interconnected passages link the OT with the Gospels and NT. Isaiah 56:5-7, Matthew 19:12 and the encounter between Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8 all make it clear that people who are not the expected male or female are still loved by God. Jesus in His own words mentions that some are eunuchs from birth – and modern science recognizes that there are genetic and developmental differences between cis and trans folks. Jesus recognized surgical reassignment next. And then, referring back to Isaiah 56, Jesus makes it clear that eunuchs are special to God.

    That passage from Isaiah is the first that makes a reference to God’s house – heaven. And the eunuch in Acts had already gotten to Isaiah 53 by the time Philio came along, and it is permissible to infer that it wasabo until they started talking about the welcoming words of Isaiah 56 – my house is a house of prayer for all people, even the eunuch, even the foreigner, the stranger.

    Then there is Genesis 1:27 – the “image and likeness of God” is male-and-female, not one or the other – and trans folk, born with a brain of one sex and a genital tract of the other, are in some ways “male-and-female.” Perhaps that is why we are special. There is more, but this is a start. Deut. 22:5 is about costume, not identity.

    • Royce E. Van Blaricome

      “You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies. (John 8:44)

      Satan quoted Scripture to Jesus for his own purposes too.

      And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. (John 3:19-20)

      “But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and sexually immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.” (Rev. 21:8)

      • Matthew 23 is an apt response.

        • Royce E. Van Blaricome

          Yes, it is. Now take the Giant Sequoia Tree outta your eye socket and perhaps you’ll see this.

          So you also outwardly appear righteous to others, but within you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness. “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you build the tombs of the prophets and decorate the monuments of the righteous, saying, ‘If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ Thus you witness against yourselves that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers. You serpents, you brood of vipers, how are you to escape being sentenced to hell? (Mat 23:28-33)

          “But understand this, that in the last days there will come times of difficulty. For people will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, heartless, unappeasable, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not loving good, treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power. Avoid such people. For among them are those who creep into households and capture weak women, burdened with sins and led astray by various passions, always learning and never able to arrive at a knowledge of the truth. Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men corrupted in mind and disqualified regarding the faith. But they will not get very far, for their folly will be plain to all, as was that of those two men.” (2Tim 3:1-9)

          “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears” (2nd Tim. 4:3)

          But I have this against you, that you tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess and is teaching and seducing my servants to practice sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols. I gave her time to repent, but she refuses to repent of her sexual immorality. Behold, I will throw her onto a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her I will throw into great tribulation, unless they repent of her works, and I will strike her children dead. And all the churches will know that I am he who searches mind and heart, and I will give to each of you according to your works. (Rev 2:20-23)

          • So – what aspect of *being* transgender is supposed to be sinful? Aside from Original Sin.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Why do you ask? Are you wanting to know so that you can confess, repent, and surrender to Christ as your Lord? Or just looking to argue and debate? If the latter, see Matt. 7:6 and 10:14-15. You seem to know your way around the Bible.

          • I’d actually like to know. My background is Roman Catholic, and I am well aware of the errors in the Roman Catholic theology as it relates to transgender people as constructed by Paul McHugh and Urbano Cardinal Navarrete (the former being a psychiatrist who specializes in eating disorders, and the latter best known for invalidating baptisms that used gender-neutral terminology to reference the Persons of the Trinity instead of traditional male references (even “Holy Spirit in Latin is second declension “male” – Spiritus Sanctus). Being trans is as sinful as being Italian, black, or a woman, but you may have some insight into the nature of nature that may shed some light on the situation – I’m wondering if the source of error is in the underlying facts as to the nature of God’s Creation, in scriptural analysis, or on some other theological basis.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Paul McHugh isn’t the one in error. You are. And Gilson hits many of the salient points in this article as well. John MacArthur has a short 5min or so video where he addresses a young lady who asks what she should tell her brother who is supposedly “transgender”. There’s plenty out there for anyone who wants to know the Truth and it’s obvious you don’t. As evidenced by this latest post and your additional blasphemy of trying to paint the Trinity as “gender neutral”. All 3 Persons of the Trinity are always referred to in the masculine. And save your “mother hen” malarkey.

            Moreover, your “Being trans is as sinful as being Italian, black, or a woman” is about as insulting as one can get to all those born of a certain ethnicity, race, color, or sex. Those are inherently intrinsic qualities that are NOT based on a immoral and perverted behavior and can NOT be changed. There can be NO argument that is NOT the case with Trans as many have left the immoral lifestyle. THAT lie is the exact same lie that the Homosexuals have been using for years. And THAT is just what it is – a lie.

            ALL sexual immorality is a choice and when it comes to the perversion of Gender Dysphoria, Jesus said it best: “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE”.

            NOTE: “Have you not read” – THAT refers to the very Word of God”

            “that He who created” – THAT refers to God. The Creator. When one wants to know the make, model, & purpose of a creation it’s best to go to the Creator for details and instructions.

            “from the beginning” – THAT refers to the “beginning”. If you’re confused about what that means, try a Dictionary.

            “made them” – See “who created” above.

            “male and female” – THAT refers to the Creation. It’s specific and it’s definitive. No in-between, no confusion, no exceptions.

            Jesus said, “‘FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH’?”

            Note: Jesus was not confused, God is not confused, and the true Children of God are not confused by who a Father is, who a Mother is, who a Man is, who a Woman is, or what Marriage is!

            So-called Transgenderism may be due to psychological, psychiatric disorders, environmental influences (like the nutjob parents who are giving their 4yo Gender Reassignment Surgery), deception, delusion, denial, depravity (choosing to cling to their Sin instead of the Savior {Jn. 3:19-20}), or quite possibly something that many today choose to reject and that is demonic influence/possession.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Bottom Line: You choose to be your own God and surrender to the one who Created you as a man regardless of what you FEEL like.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            And btw, just in case you’re tempted to come back with the “Trans people aren’t ‘confused'”, you might wanna consider this first.

            “Transgender human beings know exactly who they are, it’s you people who want to define others by their genitalia that are confused.”

            “Our brother Robert, who became our brother Alexis, who became our sister Alexis, who became our brother Alexis, passed this morning September 11, at 12:32 am,” ~ Richmond Arquette

            Oh yeah, we’re the ones confused! LOL

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Anyone who chooses to lend any credence or validity to the so-called “Transgender”, if they’re intellectually honest, MUST support “Alien Boy” too. After all, like he said, he’s just trying to make his outside look like what he feels his inside has always been. They are one in the same and any clear thinking human being can see that. The same goes for Parrotman, Tigerman, Catwoman, those who wanna cut off their limbs because they don’t FEEL or think that’s the body they were supposed to have, the 52yo father of 7 who believes he’s a little 6yo girl now, and God only knows what else! THIS is what the spiritually dead trolls on here want people to accept as normal.

          • The “alien boy,” animal-wannabees, body dysmorphia people, and Rachel Dolezal (the woman who claims to be “trans-racial”), and adult baby situations are not based on genetic and ontological development differences the way transsexuality occurs.

            Back in 1965, the best available science DID conflate these things – at that time, a blue ribbon medical commission created by the NYC Health Department concluded that transsexual people are delusional members of their initially-assigned sex for whom any treatment is merely “palliative.”

            In a way, the current situation is much like the advances of the understanding of the nature of whales – in the 1770’s, most people believed that whales were large fish (as supported by the Bible). In 1818-19, a New York court even held, based on the testimony of sea captains and respected religious leaders, that whales were indeed fish, in the face of competent testimony from the leading naturalist (i.e. scientist) of the day. That case was a last sputter, though, as more people came to believe that whales are in fact mammals (and that bats are also mammals and not birds).

            It would have been reasonable in the 1770’s to believe that whales are fish, but not in the face of improvements in scientific understanding. Today, only a few people might cling to the idea that whales are fish and not mammals, and those who do might well be using a strict interpretation of the first creation story in Genesis.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            “The “alien boy,” animal-wannabees, body dysmorphia people, and Rachel Dolezal (the woman who claims to be “trans-racial”), and adult baby situations are not based on genetic and ontological development differences the way transsexuality occurs.”

            Nice try Deceiver but your faux-omniscience is easily seen right thru. You have NO basis for saying that. You have NO proof or evidence that they aren’t genetic anymore than yours is., And there is NO ontological evidence of ANY sort that support your “development differences” malarkey. It’s all part of your self-induced delusion to support your psychotic god-complex so you can cling to your sin.

            “In a way, the current situation is much like the advances of the understanding of the nature of whales – in the 1770’s, most people believed that whales were large fish (as supported by the Bible). ”

            And there it is folks!! The attack on the Word of God. Next this guy is gonna be telling us that he’s a Christian! LOL Do you see Satan in this now? It’s SO blatantly obvious.

            His fangs just came out and showed themselves.

          • If calling whales mammals is an attack on the Word of God, I guess a continuation of this discussion would be fruitless (I won’t extrapolate flat-earth-with-a-dome literal 6-day Creationism from that, though I wouldn’t be surprised if that were the case) – but if anyone is likely to be surprised at being numbered among the goats, I am sure that those who believe as you do might well be among them (And if I am also to be numbered among the goats, I assure you it won’t be because I’m trans, but more likely that I’ve failed from time to time to remember to take the lessons of Jesus to heart in the way that Gandhi and Dr. King did, though I do make the effort).

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Nice try. Thank you again for the outstanding example of how Satan’s minions work. Truly the sons of disobedience reflect their father. The “attack on the Word of God” is your continued blather stating the Word of God is not inerrant, infallible, timeless, and can’t be trusted. The FACT is the Bible makes NO such claim. YOU did.

            I’ve read the Bible from cover to cover many times and there is NOT ONE verse in the Bible that refers to whales as fish. And besides that, if you were to ask the average Joe on the street whether a whale is a fish they would likely tell you yes. So your attempt to discredit the Bible fails. AGAIN. Just as did you previously failed attempt to cite Scripture. And as you did with your bringing up the flat-earth & literal 6-day Creation. What you did succeed at is showing yourself to be just like your daddy, Satan, when he quoted Scripture to Jesus.. What you did succeed at is showing the modern day equivalent to “Did God really say…?”

            Perhaps you’ve been successful in the past at creating doubt in other Unbelievers minds or maybe even young, baby Christians who are just coming outta the World. Perhaps you’ve gotten some to doubt God and His Word as Satan did Eve but not me Bud. And not on here. At least not as long as I see it. When I see you spew your lies and attempt to deceive I am gonna shine the light of truth on them and show them for what they are.

            Oh, and there is NO chance that I’ll be surprised to find out I’m a goat. How do I know? Because the Bible which you so ardently attempt to discredit says so. And it also says there is NO chance that you are a sheep. There is NO “if” you are a goat. You ARE!! And your denying and rejecting who God created you as is only one of many reasons thus far that you’ve shown evidence of. So I can quite MOST CERTAINLY tell you that YES it IS BECAUSE you are “trans”.

            And thanks for the Gandhi/King line. Further evidence in Black & White that you are a Poser standing in the Matt. 7:21-23 line waiting to hear Jesus speak those words.

            “But for the cowardly and UNBELIEVING and ABOMINABLE and murderers and SEXUALLY IMMORAL persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all LIARS, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.” (Rev. 21:8)
            .
            .”Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and the SEXUALLY IMMORAL and murderers and IDOLATERS, and everyone who LOVES AND PRACTICES FALSEHOODS.” (Rev 22:15)

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            The American Psychiatric Association removed this condition (aka, “gender identity disorder”) from its list of disorders substituting “gender identity disorder” with “gender dysphoria”, therefore it’s not considered as mental disorder.

            Gender identity is determined by biological sex and not by one’s self-perception—a perception which is often influenced by fallen human nature in ways contrary to God’s design.

            All persons are created in God’s image and are made to glorify Him (Genesis 1:27; Isaiah 43:7)
            God’s design was the creation of two distinct and complementary sexes, male and female (Genesis 1:27; Matthew 19:4; Mark 10:6) which designate the fundamental distinction that God has embedded in the very biology of the human race.

            Distinctions in masculine and feminine roles as ordained by God are part of the created order and should find expression in every human heart (Genesis 2:18, 21-24; 1 Corinthians 11:7-9; Ephesians 5:22-33; 1 Timothy 2:12-14)
            .
            The Fall of man into sin and God’s subsequent curse have introduced brokenness and futility into God’s good creation (Genesis 3:1-24; Romans 8:20)

            The reality of human fallenness which can result in such biological manifestations as intersexuality or psychological manifestations as gender identity confusion and point all to the hope of the redemption of our bodies in Christ (Romans 8:23)

            I appeal to those whose sexual self-understanding is shaped by a distressing conflict between their biological sex and their gender identity to trust in Christ and to experience renewal in the Gospel (1 Timothy 1:15-16)

          • Thank you for sharing the basis for your conclusions. There is just so much here to unpack.

            Gender dysphoria is still in the DSM. it has only been renamed, and the appropriate treatment is hormonal and if necessary or possible, surgical.

            Biological sex is more complicated than you seem to understand. It is not just genital shape, not just the shape of the 23rd chromosome pair (which isn’t even always a “pair”). There are genetic and developmental factors that lead to a very small percentage of children being born with brains that “zig” while their genital tracts “zag” (transgender/transsexual), and other genetic and developmental factors that lead to various other intersex results.

            I suggest you read Romans 8 more carefully – the Spirit is the key, not the flesh – the soul is paramount. So if one has a female soul trapped in a male body, do you really think God would want that individual to suffer over something as trivial as that?

            How about Gal. 3:28 – we are all one in Christ Jesus, regardless of whether we are male or female.

            I’m going to leave you with that – I don’t think I am going to be able to convince you – but just imagine for a moment that God placed you (your soul) in a female body – can you imagine yourself being a woman? or would you feel the stress of being in the wrong body? It might be easy to say that you could manage to withstand the dysphoria, but are you sure of that?

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            “Gender dysphoria is still in the DSM. it has only been renamed, and the appropriate treatment is hormonal and if necessary or possible, surgical.”

            Yes, it was renamed and I quoted from the APA why. To conform to societal norms, PC, and make the mentally-unstable who are drowning in their sin feel comfortable with it.

            “Biological sex is more complicated than you seem to understand. It is not just genital shape, not just the shape of the 23rd chromosome pair (which isn’t even always a “pair”). There are genetic and developmental factors that lead to a very small percentage of children being born with brains that “zig” while their genital tracts “zag” (transgender/transsexual), and other genetic and developmental factors that lead to various other intersex results.”

            A bunch of word salad hogwash. Let me rephrase… “I want to excuse and confuse in an attempt to justify my own willful rebellion against God to be my own god and cling to my sin.”

            “I suggest you read Romans 8 more carefully – the Spirit is the key, not the flesh – the soul is paramount. So if one has a female soul trapped in a male body, do you really think God would want that individual to suffer over something as trivial as that?”

            False proposition. Delusion in your mind. “There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.” (2nd Peter 3:16) Although it’s really not all that hard to understand. You just refuse to. One does NOT have a female soul trapped in a man’s body. There’s that Satan in you coming out again. God is not the author of confusion. You are doing a good job at it though.

            “How about Gal. 3:28 – we are all one in Christ Jesus, regardless of whether we are male or female.”

            Ah yes, one of the oldest lies from Satan that’s been around for decades. Started with the female “pastors” and was then picked up by the Homosexuals. Not surprising that they other degenerates and reprobates would use it too. One doesn’t even have to have taken a class in Exegesis 101 to see what that verse is saying. That is truly a pathetic attempt to deceive. Not even a good attempt at all. SO easily seen thru.

            Again, you attempt to deceive by presenting your false analogy. NO such thing ever occurs. Now you just imagine the day when you stand before Christ and ALL your lies and deception are revealed for what they are. I’ll give ya this though, I think you may well be the best example of one turned over to a reprobate mind that I’ve encountered yet. There was one other that was pretty close but it’s obvious you’ve studied well to reinforce and support your delusion.

            I truly feel pity for you. I’d tell ya to be sure and pack an asbestos suit for where you’re headed but you can’t take anything with you.

            The LORD has made everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble. (Pro 16:4)

            “You will certainly carry out God’s purpose, however you act, but it makes a difference to you whether you serve like Judas or like John.” – C.S. Lewis

            For anyone else reading this, this guy is a great example of how the question of “Why does God put up with these people” is answered. Even those who He has turned over to a reprobate mind and hardened their heart to establish them in their condition, He uses to bring Him glory and accomplish His purposes. The that time comes to an end so will this guy and he will then take his place in Hell until he is hurled into the Lake Of Fire.

Inspiration
‘I Will Love Them Freely’
Charles Spurgeon
More from The Stream
Connect with Us