Transgendered Member?

Revmitchell,

You bring false accusations.

Such accusations are unwarranted and not consistent with what I have presented in this thread.

 

No no, I quoted your statement so that cannot be false. Neither is is false that support for someone continuing in that lifestyle (i.e. continuing to dress in a gender not born under) is supported by liberals.

 

You quoted my statement, but you assumed application that was not accurate.

Where in the NT Scriptures does it state that a redeemed one must dress in a gender specific manner?

Please cite that verse.

It isn't a matter of liberal or conservative, it is a matter of what does the Scripture teach concerning this matter.

Just because something is support by a group, even an evil group, does not present that the thing is evil.

I am all in on calling into account those who practice sin and are members of the assembly.

Modesty is violated by mixed swimming, does the assembly call that into account? Would that not be following Scriptures?

A man wearing long hair (length not given though think Oakridge Boys), does the assembly call that into account?

What about inappropriate language, gossip, spreading dissection, does the assembly call that into account?

Each of these are far more "overt" than what someone wears.

Yet, in most SBC these are excused.

If there is to be accounts for sinfulness in the assembly, then start with things the NT Scriptures actually attend, but to bring what one wears as some continued sinfulness, especially when the OP states that there is no sexuality associated, that is just not right.

 

This is the problem. THEY DO HAVE A SEX. That can never be changed. Not with surgery, not with therapy. If they continue as the gender they were not born they are effectively LYING and YES that is a SIN.

 

Not sure why that needs to be explained. Sad that it does.

 

That would be correct, IF the Scriptures held that view.

I am not saying that gender is unimportant, what I am saying is that eunuchs (natural, man made, or by self determination) removes gender from the equation.

The whole matter of eunuch makes this thread a completely different presentation.

If the person persisted in the sin by engaging in sexual activity, then that violates the Scriptures.

If the person persisted in the sin by declaring others should be like them and become eunuchs, then that violates Scriptures.

But what it comes down to is clothing. And at that point, the Scriptures present modesty not style, and not gender specific. The ancients carried a purse, I carry a wallet. If I see one carry a purse, is that a sin? Of course not.

Lastly,
The person is not lying to themself, nor are they lying to anyone.

They have determined that at this point displaying a different gender (even that which they were born) would be highly disruptive to both the assembly and the workplace. That is sowing discord - which is evil.

Therefore, as the person matures in the faith, as they gather experience in God providential strength, there will come a time when they will boldly in Christ stand before the people and express all their testimony.

It will be God glorifying, and bring unity to the assembly. It will also expose the deadly devastation that sin and the devil present in bringing gender confusion.

The work place will be split between those who admire or even can validate that this person has had a major God glorified change, and those who (as all controlled by the devil do) mock and try to bring her shame. This is why the personal history of reliance upon the strength of God is so very important.

This cannot be done without the assembly, and prior to the assembly being told by this person, it would present huge agenda driven conflicts - sort of like this thread.

 

Explain to me how the person in the OP who has determined to be a-sexual is going to have sex?

This is assuming that you understand the topics of gender reassignment, the surgery, the chemical issues, and all other issues involved. Am I to assume you do?

What of the reversals, that some posters would demand?
The complete damage done to the muscle layers, and the ultimate failures of control over body function discharge not to post about the continual urinary, bladder, and kidney infections that ravage. The chemical reversals, the emotional, hormonal (as Scarlet O posted about), and the severe body stresses?

This is assuming that you actually have knowledge of these matters, and not just presenting from your non-scriptures puffery, perhaps then you can explain.

If you cannot present from that person's perspective as presented in the OP, then as Paul states, you have forgotten from whence you came.

Better that person remain a eunuch, a-sexual by determination, eunuch by human contrivance (as was Daniel), then to attempt to reverse at this point.

Better to grow in the grace, knowledge and reliance upon God and His timing, then to allow the devil to create confusion and discord in the assembly.

 

How do you handle this verse?

Deut. 22:5 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.

 

Rev seems spot on to me.

 

I don't.

I am not conformed to the statements concerning the rules of living for the Jews. That was resolve when Paul traveled from Antioch to talk to the elders of the Jerusalem church. Three basic conditions are placed on the lap of Gentiles.

Do not eat that contaminated by idols, do not fornicate, and don't drink the blood. (Acts 15)

That doesn't mean that principles taught in the OT are not good, or that they should not be presented as a standard to consider.

But, like much concerning the OT ceremonial law, and societal law, the presentation to the gentiles is to help establish the concept of not trifling with God.

 

Eunuchs still have a gender. The removal of certain body parts doesn't remove your sex.

We aren't talkinga bout clothing. We are talking about presenting yourself as the opposite gender than what you are. (By the way, despite what the world says, sex and gender are the same thing).

It is absolutely lying if they continue to portray themselves as a woman if they are not a woman. Just because you had a body part removed and others enhanced does not make you a woman.

Gender reassignment is a farce. It doesn't change the DNA.

This is not a matter of a eunuch. The eunuch is IRRELEVANT to this case.

 

Why?

Why would anyone demand from someone who, being redeemed, has determined that "sex" will no longer play a controlling role be subjected to terms demanding acknowledgment of sex?

Why is it that no Scriptures can be presented, yet I have brought up multiple principles using the Scriptures?

Should the believer decide by the impress of the Holy Spirit to address first the assembly and then the workplace, it is their business.

It is not as if that person is living in sin as many SBC folks do.

It is not as if that person is causing confusion and division in the assembly as many SBC folks do.

It is not as if that person is immodest and as a silly person leading fools into sin as many SBC folks do.

It is not as if that person is not taking the things of God very seriously, and attempting to discern the wisdom of God on how to present themselves to the assembly and work.

That person is not out seeking a mate, as some do.
That person is not out pretending in order to deceive as predators do.

That person needs to grow in wisdom and knowledge of God.

Where?

The assembly.

The place folks, who WERE slaved in sin and the world views but are no longer, have refuge and can worship the Redeemer. (Ephesians 2)

 

I started to post to each section above and show how it is misaligned.

Rather, because you seem to be consumed about gender DNA identification, let me point you to this from the Mayo Clinic.

Ambiguous genitalia is a rare condition in which an infant's external genitals don't appear to be clearly either male or female. In a baby with ambiguous genitalia, the genitals may be incompletely developed or the baby may have characteristics of both sexes. The external sex organs may not match the internal sex organs or genetic sex.

Ambiguous genitalia isn't a disease, it's a disorder of sex development. Usually, ambiguous genitalia is obvious at or shortly after birth, and it can be very distressing for families.​

Therefore, it is not a matter of "DNA" as some would assign. DNA was discovered in my lifetime and it has its place, but not in this discussion. Frankly, as you point out, neither does being a eunuch other than because the person has no capacity to be a male, they have the choice of remaining a-sexual.

Let's focus for a bit on the lying part. That seems to be one of the highlight points made.

Is it in fact lying to not present yourself in a manner in which it reveals who you really are?

I would suggest yes, in most cases. But, no to a narrow focus.

We should be honest first to God - for how can one even pray if they harbor ungodliness in their heart.

We should be honest to the assembly in all matters of faith and practice, however, that does not include that related to my family.

The assembly has no business knowing the sex life of my wife and I. They have no business knowing what choices of clothing she may or may not wear, as long as it is modest.

That principle also applies to all individuals in the assembly.

If a man wants to wear silk suits that is his business.

If a man wants to wear a powdered wig, wear make up, carry a purse, wear lacy underwear, with tights and high top boots, that is his business.


Clothing does not conform a person to the image of Christ.

 

You have brought up irrelevant Scriptures. How about "Thou Shall Not Lie?"

Except if you take away the part "as predators do" (which is a red herring) that is EXACTLY what is going on.

You didn't post a link so I have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[/QUOTE]
Why would anyone demand from someone who, being redeemed, has determined that "sex" will no longer play a controlling role be subjected to terms demanding acknowledgment of sex?

Why is it that no Scriptures can be presented, yet I have brought up multiple principles using the Scriptures?

Should the believer decide by the impress of the Holy Spirit to address first the assembly and then the workplace, it is their business.

It is not as if that person is living in sin as many SBC folks do.

It is not as if that person is causing confusion and division in the assembly as many SBC folks do.

It is not as if that person is immodest and as a silly person leading fools into sin as many SBC folks do.

It is not as if that person is not taking the things of God very seriously, and attempting to discern the wisdom of God on how to present themselves to the assembly and work.

That person is not out seeking a mate, as some do.
That person is not out pretending in order to deceive as predators do.

That person needs to grow in wisdom and knowledge of God.

Where?

The assembly.

The place folks, who WERE slaved in sin and the world views but are no longer, have refuge and can worship the Redeemer. (Ephesians 2)[/QUOTE]
Born male = always male.
Born male and attending church in womens clothes = cross dressing. Cross dressing = sin. (that scripture is already posted) So, the man is living in continual state of sin and rebellion. Not too hard to figure out.

 

Your argument is becoming pitiful.

 

That person isn't baring any false witness. They are being honest with them self which is more than I have encountered with the vast number of SBC people - especially preachers.

Is that person telling any more of a lie than any other pew sitter?

I take it that the person is still somewhat young. What person that assumed age is truthful?

Now, I am not comparing people to people, but showing the inconsistency of the demands by some posters.

Before they start making demands upon this person telling a lie or living a lie, the rest of the assembly needs to come to terms with their own behavior, particularly if they are typical SBC pew sitters.

Sorry, I had to change computers, and on this one the return button will also activate the "post reply" icon if I am not careful.

Predators was one of the early claims made by posters to this thread.

It was one of the reasons I initially posted a response.

If anything, this person is testing the waters for how certain folks will react to the truth. Depending upon that level of vulnerability, that person will then either withdraw from the group, or will testify as to that which has happened in their life and hope for the best.

 

I think you are a bit to emotionally involved in this issue. Maybe you need a time out.

 

Why would anyone demand from someone who, being redeemed, has determined that "sex" will no longer play a controlling role be subjected to terms demanding acknowledgment of sex?

Why is it that no Scriptures can be presented, yet I have brought up multiple principles using the Scriptures?

Should the believer decide by the impress of the Holy Spirit to address first the assembly and then the workplace, it is their business.

It is not as if that person is living in sin as many SBC folks do.

It is not as if that person is causing confusion and division in the assembly as many SBC folks do.

It is not as if that person is immodest and as a silly person leading fools into sin as many SBC folks do.

It is not as if that person is not taking the things of God very seriously, and attempting to discern the wisdom of God on how to present themselves to the assembly and work.

That person is not out seeking a mate, as some do.
That person is not out pretending in order to deceive as predators do.

That person needs to grow in wisdom and knowledge of God.

Where?

The assembly.

The place folks, who WERE slaved in sin and the world views but are no longer, have refuge and can worship the Redeemer. (Ephesians 2)[/QUOTE]
Born male = always male.
Born male and attending church in womens clothes = cross dressing. Cross dressing = sin. (that scripture is already posted) So, the man is living in continual state of sin and rebellion. Not too hard to figure out.[/QUOTE]

Present one NT Scripture, please.

Remember, the OT conditions of living are NOT applicable to the NT gentiles. Such provide rich insight into various priciples, but no law.

Three things remain as stated above. Don't eat idol sacrifices, don't drink blood, don't fornicate.

Other than that, the Gentiles are to love God and their neighbor, and be witnesses.

What greater witness than one steeped in sin and being redeemed?

Paul spent three years in seclusion after his conversion. And even then to his dying day he was having to give testimony concerning his past.

Give this person time.

If they are redeemed, they will present, and when that is done as God obliges, there will be much glory brought to Him.

One other matter.

Not everyone is born male or female. Look at that which I posted from the Mayo Clinic.
(Ambiguous genitalia - Symptoms and causes)

 

You know nothing about his junk. And, your argument that it matters is junk.