22:5

A woman shall not wear that which pertaineth to a man, nor shall a man wear a woman’s garment: The Lord hates those who do such things.

That is Deuteronomy 22:5, quoted from memory. Most of the Bible texts are against the gays, but this one is just for the trannies. The Evangelical Alliance also thought “male and female God created them”, Genesis 1, was relevant.

The EA read the verse simply. Men and women are different, and a man who thinks he is a woman is plainly mentally ill. He should be given counselling until he accepts what sex he really is. However, such treatment does not work, and the only treatment to give us any equanimity is transition, so that we present as our true sex. Or gender, or whatever.

I look at it differently. Women are named first. At the time, priests soldiers and judges, male roles, had specific clothes, and they still do. Could the verse be saying that women should not take on these male roles?

Is context useful? This is a chapter which says that if a woman is not a virgin when she marries, she should be stoned to death for prostituting herself in her father’s house, and that if an Israelite sees his neighbour’s sheep straying, he should take them back to his owner. Parts of it enforce Neighbourliness, which is next to Love; and parts are obsolete and repellent.

As for “male and female God created them”, men and women are different, and of equal value, but that does not mean that God defines “woman” in such a way as to exclude me.

However, let us suppose that the meaning of the Bible can be precisely determined, and it means that no-one should be allowed to transition because it is morally wrong, as well as mentally ill; and that absolutely all homosexual acts are against God’s will. My answer, as a Christian, is I don’t care. Clearly we are born that way, so calling us “unnatural” is ridiculous.

The reason why I keep saying these things to my very small audience is to get it into my own skull. I grew up believing that my natural way of being was utterly Wrong, and that crippled me: unable to change, I was unable to be myself either. So, I keep saying, it is OK to be who I am. Whoever denies that, Princis, prelotis, and potestatis, on whatever authority, I contradict them.

And- There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. That is, there is no out-group, so we do not need to define who is or is not Jew or Female in order to exclude or include anyone.

In his one man show on transgender in the Bible, Peterson Toscano portrayed the man carrying water, the sign for the disciples to prepare for the Passover meal. But men never carried water, it was women’s work. He imagined that water-carrier, trans, coming out as female. The moment of carrying the water was a liberation for her- and for me.

8 thoughts on “22:5

  1. The truth I believe does not come from affirmation of those around me. I suspect affirmation of others is why you feel comfortable in your sexual confusion. The truth I believe comes from God’s written word. If something someone says or something that I feel does not line up with God’s revealed word, it is not truth.

    I know that I do not have an investment in your life, so my gentle rebuke of your theological error might be lost on you. God, speaking through the Apostle Paul, says in Romans 1 that those consumed in their sexual lusts introduced sexual confusion into their lives. In doing so they made gods of themselves, worshipping the creation rather than the Creator. God allows them to wallow in their sexual confusion because they refuse to acknowledge God. They may say they acknowledge God, but they distort his word to excuse their lusts. After repeatedly rejecting God’s loving voice to put off their lusts and worship Him, God gave them over to a reprobate mind.

    A reprobate mind is a fantasy world where sexual confusion is paraded as love and tolerance. A reprobate mind only believes truth it wants to believe, even believing lies to be truth. The reason why you don’t take me seriously, or God’s word seriously is because the truth exposes the lies of your sexual confusion and makes you uncomfortable again. After you made peace with your rebellion from God, you do not want to go back through those uncomfortable times of being unsure of your identity. Your desires told you to go one way, but your intellect told you “God does not want me to go after my lusts.” But going through that tough time of insecurity might be exactly where you need to go to find your identity in Jesus. You initially went the wrong way. Now Jesus is calling you back.

    Even after our mistakes lead to irreparable earthly consequences the blood of Jesus still has the power to cancel our sin and give us eternal life. That is the wonderful truth!

    Like

    • I do not believe people are “born that way.” But, I do believe that people may not be able to help the type of sin they enjoy. I have never been tempted to act homosexually. My temptations are towards adultery. I am a wretched man who has often lusted after women not my wife. That sin is condemned by Jesus. My sins condemned me to hell. I deserved it. I do not have the freedom to excuse my sin by saying “I was born an adulterer.” I didn’t make peace with my sins. I made peace with Jesus. Now I am no longer condemned because Jesus has paid the penalty for my sins by suffering and dying on the cross. No longer do I have to wallow in my sin. I am being sanctified to live a life without sin. I do not continue to live in sin even though I am no longer condemned. I demonstrate my love for Jesus by obeying his commandments.

      Jesus demonstrated his love for us in that while we were yet sinners, he died for us. Romans 8:5. We demonstrate our love for Jesus, not by “being who we are” but by obeying his commands. John 14.

      Like

  2. Oh – oh – where to start with this?

    God does not condemn anyone, nor wish to foist opinions or norms on anyone. And IF the bible is to be taken seriously as a 21st century authority on anything, it is not with the few words quoted out of context in an obscure portion of ambiguous and badly translated prurience; but only in the tidal wave of love that we are asked to show our neighbours and which is the core principle of religious belief across the world.

    What is love? Is it shown, in the regretful condemnation of those whose only wish is to be allowed to reveal themselves as they truly are, without judgement? In accepting me as I wish to be, you do not participate in moral degeneracy or open the door to immorality – I am not inviting you to engage in immoral acts, or insisting that you must think and believe as I do, only that you allow me the freedom to be as I am, in peace.

    Bless you, Clare. I always love your posts, as I love you.

    XXX 🙂

    Like

    • Ann,

      For those who claim to be believers in Christ, I am compelled to point out their error. I am called to show and teach others the commandments of Jesus and to judge their fruits (and be willing to have my fruits judged). Paul addressed your wrong understanding in Romans 8:

      “Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus,
      2 because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death.
      3 For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man,
      4 in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit.

      5 Those who live according to the sinful nature have their minds set on what that nature desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires.
      6 The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace;
      7 the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so.
      8 Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God.

      Those who live according to sinful nature make excuses and twist scripture out of context and impute meaning to words that they cannot bear in order to feel good about living in their sins. Their sins condemn them and God condemns sin. Those who are truly born of God do not continue to practice sin or make a habit out of it or excuse it.

      The principles I have shared are not “out of context” nor are they poor translations. You have no evidence that they are. You merely posit that so you do not have to deal with the truth.

      Love means not allowing someone to wallow in their sin without challenging them. Jesus told the woman caught in adultery to “Go and sin no more.” An encounter with Jesus should not leave us unchanged. Jesus doesn’t want people to wallow in sexual confusion. He came to set the captives free from their sinful natures and that they might have more abundant life.

      I don’t know who you are or where you stand in Christ. I am not trying to disturb your peace “in the freedom to be who you are.” But I pray that you find your identity in Jesus Christ first and then you can figure out who you are. None of us are good people. All of us are wicked and fall short of God’s standard. Those who are truly adopted sons and daughters of God are those who do not make excuses for their sins and love Jesus by keeping his commandments.

      Like

      • “I delight in the law of God in my inmost self”, Romans 7:22: there is an inmost self in conflict with the sinful nature, or more literally “flesh”. I have written on this recently.

        We disagree about which parts are “sinful nature” and which, “inmost self”. For me, finding my female self was finding my inmmost self, and I was led by God in discovering it.

        I am grateful to you for taking the time to comment, and I disagree entirely about Romans. The point on “taken out of context” is conflating modern gay lovemaking with the “shameful acts” of Romans 1:27, where in 1:23 this is clearly in the context of worshipping idols. Cybele is the one generally thought to be referred to, as it involved temple prostitution.

        Like

  3. You were probably present when Peter Toscano related that the word describing Joseph’s robe appears only one other place in the Hebrew Bible — II Samuel 13:18, where it is rendered as “a garment of divers colours … for with such robes were the king’s daughters that were virgins apparelled” (King James). This certainly casts a counter argument on Deuteronomy 22:5.

    Of course, one might argue that Jacob and Joseph came along before the laws of Moses but, really, did God hate either? Not that I see. Joseph’s brothers, on the other hand, were a different story.

    Like

    • I saw the whole thing, and had forgotten that bit. No, I do not believe God hates anything. Humanity- even, perhaps, a whole society- may hate something, but not God. That fits for me the “abominations”- something the whole society, then hated.

      Like

All comments welcome.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.