A biologically normal person who experiences transgender feelings is not the opposite gender trapped in the wrong body, but a person who is experiencing mental and emotional confusion (I’ve written some on gender issues here and here). They need therapy, not gender reassignment surgery. But what about a person who was born genetically male (Y chromosome), but with malformed or ambiguous genitalia?
There have been many cases where doctors and parents made the decision to surgically alter their genitals to appear female and then raise the child as a girl. But the child is a male, biologically, and the male hormones make them feel and act like a boy despite being told they are a girl and raised as a girl. Later in life, they discover their past. Now, as an adult, though they look like a girl, they want to be what they feel like and truly are: a man. They want to dress as a man and act like a man, and even undergo surgery to physically alter their genitals to look like a man again.
Question #1: If you were their pastor and they came to you seeking godly advice, what would you tell them?
Question #2a: If you approve of letting this biological male (but woman by all external appearances) undergo surgery and alter his external appearance to match his true male gender, would you also approve of him subsequently marrying a woman in your church? If yes, would you approve of that same marriage if he had not undergone the physical changes and still looked like a woman? If not, why not?
Let’s take this a step further. Let’s say this person was currently married to a man when he came to you for advice. He married a man when he thought he was a woman. By all appearances, their marriage was a normal marriage between a man and a woman. Now that he (and you) knows he is truly a man, what do you do with the relationship?
Question #3: If he wants out of it, do you allow them to divorce? Or conversely, if he wants to stay in the relationship, do you require that they legally divorce and separate on the grounds that they are living in a homosexual relationship?
Question #4: If you think they are living in a homosexual relationship and need to end the relationship, why do you think this? What makes a sexual relationship homosexual? Is it genes, genitals, or both?
If it’s genes that defines homosexuality, then they are clearly engaging in a homosexual relationship since they both have the Y chromosome.
Or, is homosexuality defined by sameness of genitals (and how one uses them)? Given this criterion, since one man has a penis and one has a vagina, and since they are using their opposite genitals to engage in normal sexual intercourse, then they are not engaging in homosex. But if you are inclined to conclude that their relationship is not of the homosexual kind on the grounds that they have distinct genitals and are using them in a heterosexual way (even though one of their parts was surgically altered to do so), wouldn’t that line of reasoning also require you to consider a sexual relationship between a transsexual woman (born a man, but as an adult he underwent surgery to look like a woman) and a biological male to be moral as well? After all, they also have opposing genitals and are using them in a way consistent with normal sexual intercourse. But I think most Christians would consider this second relationship to be a homosexual relationship and require that they divorce.
Question #5: So what’s the difference between the two?
Maybe what defines homosexuality is more than genes and genitals. Perhaps it also involves knowledge and intention. In the case of the man whose body was changed without his knowledge, we do not fault him for his past decisions to marry a man and engage in sexual intercourse with that man (although some would fault him if he remains married to him and continues to engage in sexual behavior after coming to the knowledge of his true biological identity). In the case of the transsexual who altered his body as an adult, we do fault him for his decision to marry a man and engage in sexual intercourse with that man because he knew that he was actually a man.
What is your take on all of this? As the pastor, how would you advise this man?
December 30, 2016 at 11:28 am
MY first observation is that: The term “Moral” should never have entered this commentary ?Maybe that’s why these questions confuse reasonable minds.
LikeLike
December 30, 2016 at 12:14 pm
TR
ONE CANNOT reasonably discuss this issue until you forget the genitalia as the seat of gender; you must start with the seat of gender in the brain and like I have said so many times before, the reason being is that the brain where consciousness exists not in the fingers, not in the eyes, not in the ears, nose, mouth or genitalia:
Again for example. Please try to understand. What I am saying and what you are missing: it is not the body that is the determinant of itself anymore than the keyboard is the determinant of the hard drive that processes the function of the keyboard. It’s the difference between the mechanical function of the ear and the intuitive, spiritual or conscious dispensation of the brain.
Hearing like sexuality, is a purely mechanical process. Body apparatuses are merely conduits to a central consciousness.
I use my thoracic and abdominal muscles so that I can use my thoracic cavity as a bellows to produce a draft of air that will pass across my larynx and by tautening or slackening the vocal chords, I’ll produce vibrations that are projected into the atmosphere and caught by two cup shaped appendages which you have on the side of your head and they’re focused on the outer membrane called the eardrum that begins to vibrate in harmony with the vibrations that I’m producing in my throat and you see, attached to that outer membrane, the eardrum, there’s a little bone called the hammer that’s in contact with another little bone called the anvil and it begins to strike it, motivated by the eardrum in harmony with the vibrations that I’m producing in my throat and that little bone, the anvil, is in touch with another little bone called the stirrup, so called, because it’s like what you might use if you were riding a horse and that, in its turn, is in contact with an inner membrane that contains fluid and the vibrations are communicated through the fluid to the nerve end that then convey an impulse to a certain area of your brain; and then, you know exactly what I’m talking about. You see, it’s purely a mechanical process. You don’t hear anything with your ear, you know that, vibrations are simply communicated, where you hear is in the brain.
And that’s exactly where the seat of sexuality resides as does the seat of hearing, vision, olfactory, taste, touch, reason, discretion, discernment, spirituality, emotion and the higher powers of heavenly virtues: love, compassion, humility, forgiveness, kindness, gentleness as well as the contra virtues: hate, anger, deceit, murder, lies, harm, mayhem and the hellish notions of ideological fallacies of ego, vain imaginings and selfish attitudes of the leech and twin daughters Give & Take. You give; they take.
And those are the forces that argue constantly about their good and your evil. Get over it; the universe does not revolve around any one of us. We are a humanity of quirks, freckles, constructs and differences but we are one humanity nevertheless that cannot be ruled over by the quirks, freckles, constructs and differences while forsaking any of the others we disagree with as anything less than human as well.
We cannot say. Eat this food! Speak this language! Dress this way! Act like us! Pray to our idea! Worship our understanding! Run our race! Live like this and live that! That is the way of nigglers not yet evolved to the higher understanding of things outside their box.
LikeLike
December 31, 2016 at 10:56 am
This is complicated …..
Jason, first off I would assume that we are talking about a born again believer here since you are referring to him asking his pastor for advice. If this were an unbeliever coming to ask a pastor or any other Christian for advise, I still think the advise would be the same, however, more importantly, the unbeliever would need to be told that his true identity according to the gospel is based on his spiritual identity, that being whether he is “in Christ” or “in Adam”. While biology is important, even the scriptures say that we are all one in Christ and that there is no special distinction made with regard to being male or female when a person is in Christ. I am not saying that being in Christ “erases” the biological distinction between a man and a woman only that men and woman share the same oneness with God because of the gospel.
Back to the conundrum …. assuming this person is a Christian.
As a pastor, I would exercise a tremendous amount of grace and compassion to this individual. Obviously there were things done out of his control and a life lived with all the right intentions. The thing I would not do is “legislate” or demand, based on false churchy pretenses, that he should do X or Y, or else God will be mad with him or worse yet he will be in jeopardy of his salvation. This approach is what the enemy would want and would only bring more anxiety and stress on this poor individual. The last thing this person needs is condemnation. As a pastor, I should first recognize and consider these basic truths about this person’s spiritual condition as I advise him on what to do :
1) He is a totally forgiven person and no sin, whether sexual or otherwise, can jeopardize his eternal standing with God or his identity as a child of God.
2) This person is united with Christ and I must trust the Holy Spirit to guide him in making decisions. At the same time as a pastor I must take the stance to guide him in making decisions that both he and I know would be what God desires for him.
3) If the decisions going forward are not clear, I must realize that this individual has a lot of freedom here and he must be given the opportunity to exercise that freedom keeping in mind that this person is a child of God.
In this particular scenario it appears that this person desires to be a man based on the fact that he learned his biological identity was male at birth. While that is the natural choice, that decision doesn’t come with serious ramifications regarding his/her relationship with the spouse. This person would need serious therapy and counseling regardless of which direction he/she chooses to go. While I would lean towards the decision on this person living as a man, because he was born biologically male, this is not so black and white as some would like to think.
It appears that the questions asked in this post are trying to decipher what is and what isn’t homosexuality. The Holy Spirit will never lead a person into sin of any kind. The question is, what if this individual gets it wrong ? Would he/she be shown any less mercy, compassion and understanding ? Is God’s grace big enough for this person who finds himself stuck between being a man or a woman ?
Instead of only trying to figure out the “right thing to do” using all sorts of mental gymnastics and reasoning, are we willing to love this person even if he/she makes what we think is the wrong choice ?
Happy New Year !
Naz
LikeLike
December 31, 2016 at 1:29 pm
Naz:
“…..both he and I know would be what God desires for him.” This is not sound. You cannot know what God desires for another person. Prophets and Preachers, Popes and Priests alike, think they do and try to make you believe they do, but they don’t.
Why? Because while you may know what God desires for you but not for others. You need only read how Jesus framed it for different people: ““Everyone to whom much was given, of him much will be required, and from him to whom they entrusted much, they will demand the more” You can only speak what to do regarding resources such as finances and time, talents such as culinary skills or musical ability, and spiritual gifts such as encouragement or teaching, when you know what you have. Paul put it another way: “We have different gifts, according to the grace given to each of us. If your gift is prophesying, then prophesy in accordance with your faith; if it is serving, then serve; if it is teaching, then teach; if it is to encourage, then give encouragement; if it is giving, then give generously; if it is to lead, do it diligently; if it is to show mercy, do it cheerfully” (Romans 12:6–8). This is simply responsible stewardship.
AND
“…….are we willing to love this person even if s/he makes what we think is the wrong choice?” This is right because now you speak of yourself…”if what we (I) think is the wrong choice….” the corollary of this is to say ….” If we (I) think is the right choice. This is sound reasoning.
Apart from that this minor and friendly critique your commentary is sensible.
By the way “Evolution” is God’s New Name because Creation is simply Evolution speeded up while Evolution is merely Creation slowed down. It’s the “Forces” at work and we must work within the parameters of those “Forces” for survival n’est ce pas?
Have a
“Happening New Year”
after the midnight stroke fresh out of the Leap Year 2016. What was Jesus doing during the 16 CE Leap Year? Do you know? I think he and his cousin John the Baptist were graduating from the Sons of the Prophets Academy and discussing their plans for their respective Campaigns.
LikeLike
January 1, 2017 at 11:36 am
The overarching question is, what’s sacred to God?:
God’s Design for Human Sexual Behavior – Dr. Robert Gagnon – Pt 1
David Kyle Foster
Published on Sep 30, 2015
A masterful exposition of the biblical texts concerning human sexuality (and homosexuality in particular) by the world’s foremost scholar on the subject.
LikeLike
January 1, 2017 at 9:49 pm
Leo, assertions, assertions, assertions. Please tell me why “moral” should not enter the conversation? Says who? Why? Please tell me why we should give deference to the mind over the body when it comes to gender? Why should the subjective be preferred to the objective?
LikeLike
January 1, 2017 at 9:49 pm
Hi Naz. Thank you for giving this some thought. I understand your concern for the person. We ought ot be concerned, and we ought to show compassion. But we also need to advise him to do the right thing. This post is about determining what is right, not necessarily how we convey that to the person or what we do if he does not receive it.
And yes, part of this post deals with the definition of homosexuality, although that was not the point of the post per se.
LikeLike
January 2, 2017 at 12:10 am
Morals should not enter the conversation because you are presuming the morals you believe in are objective instead of subjective and true for everybody on earth and that is certainly not true.
You cannot have moral values regarding homosexuality because you are not a homosexual and only base the morals about homosexuality on ancient people who invented the Gods and gave their Gods the morals they, as ancient men held and who believed that those morals and Laws to be true for everybody in the world including the foods to eat, the Gods to worship, the cloth fabric to wear, when not to work etc. and if you disagreed with them they would kill you for blasphemy or disobedience to their Laws.
This is precisely why almost all religions of the world are not a force for good in the world; they practice and preach divisiveness, rejecting all other religions worshiping other Gods, if not other Gods, other messengers of the Gods different, same or otherwise and are prepared to reject everybody else who disagrees with them.
As far as assertions go that is all you state, theological assertions wrapped in belief of some imagination from days when knew everything about the Gods they invented but knew nothing about compassion or moral values when it came to sacrifices their children on divine commend theory.
What’s so wrong about Homo Love? NOTHING until you add the sex and turn sexuality into lust instead of love.
Listen carefully to this debate about why the Catholic Church; AKA Christianity is not a force for good in the world.
The full debate “for” and “against” is also included if you would like to here both sides in this Intelligence Square Debate and view the result of those for the motion and against the motion before the debate began and the results after the debate had taken place..religion did not have a good showing and lost a huge piece of those who changed their minds after hearing the impassioned debate: every aspect is touched upon in this debate.
LikeLike
January 2, 2017 at 9:36 am
We give deference to the mind because the brain is the seat of power. The Mind is the supreme authority while the body is mere conduits and channels for the Federation to discern, decide, dictate and declare. The body’s apparatuses are so many subordinate provincial subjects: States, Regions, Cities, Towns, Villages and Households are the various functions of the body connected by the federal highway of nerve connectors.
LikeLike