The issue as i see it is the huge amount of uncertanty that lies behind the themes raised. Particular words in biblical texts are disputed by many scholars, and even whole texts themselves. For example koitai has been likened to the modern term ‘user’ rather than the themes identified in earlier posts. Even the canon of scripture can be argued to be incomplete. e.g. the omission of Thomas the twin! It can safely be said that whatever our interpretation of scripture we cannot properly know what it meant to the people who wrote it in the same way as they would have only a dim understanding of how modern people speak to each other.

For many on this side of the atlantic believers or not it is a puzzle as to why the American Churches are so hooked up on a particular translation of both testaments of the bible which dates from 17th century england. (St James version)

There are many new translations which if anything show a great deal of diversity in early texts from the second and third centuries. (Some omit vitaly important verses such as the one in John concerning the trinity) And historians constantly show us more about how the canon was decided upon. e.g. the callous hand of Constantine at nicea which later murded people he had offered forgiveness.

As I read conversations like this one I find it hard to understand how a religion based on loving ones neighbour can generate so much intolerance of those neighbours, unless you take into account that a good deal of theology from the fourth century onwards seems intended to concentrate power in the hands of ‘bishops’ and other vested interests.

In the context of this saving souls becomes a matter of asking your heart rather than relying on ‘biblical’ interpretation which owes more to the politics of long gone centuries than to the intended meaning of the text.

My heart finds itself able to feel Christian without condemning lifestyles and identities different from my own, and being able to learn from women men homosexuals transgender and others about how they interpret and learn from scripture in their lives.

Interpretation of anything depends entirely on where you are standing when you make it…

Matthew 19:11-12
11Jesus replied, “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”

Many will say he didn’t mean this literally but…

Matthew 5:27-30
27″You have heard that it was said, ‘Do not commit adultery.’[e] 28But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.

Don’t believe Jesus? Early Church father, Origen self castrated himself. To those who can accept it…indeed.

You know this, but I have to say it for clarity’s sake and to express that you know I’m with you on this: Scripture does not forbid divorce, it sets boundaries on it. It manages it. On the other hand, I believe there are no grounds for voluntary gender reassignment through surgery with the possible exception of hermaphroditism or a where gender expressed in DNA conflicts with physical gender traits.

Thanks for helping me clarify my thinking.

Rich
BlogRodent

So, I found myself struggling with the question: Is it possible to be a post-operative transsexual and remain a Christian?

I wasn’t sure, and still am not entirely certain of my position, but I suspect maybe the answer is similar to this question’s conclusion: Is it possible to divorce and remarry while your first spouse is alive and remain a Christian?

Rich, these questions aren’t similar at all. Divorce requires the action of two people, and often one of the two is completely innocent. How would it compromise your Christianity if your ex had an affair and filed for divorce?

Sexual Conversion: Gender dysphoria, the UMC and the transgendered minister

Rich
BlogRodent

“…I have researched this TG and “TG Christian” issue. I have had the occasion to address it with the Southern Californa AG district re: a transgendered person at an AG church who referred to his/her AG church on his/her ‘ministry’ web site. In response to the concern I expressed through the Southern CA AG district, the name of the church with AG reference was removed from the web site.”

My Lord! Do you know Portland, Oregon has one of the highest rates of homeless youth in the Nation and THIS is what you approach the AoG in California with?

There is a long story behind all this. Briefly, that my girlfriend from college has lived through this with her husband of over 30 years. They are now divorced.

During the process of walking alongside her I have researched this TG and “TG Christian” issue. I have had the occasion to address it with the Southern Californa AG district re: a transgendered person at an AG church who referred to his/her AG church on his/her ‘ministry’ web site. In response to the concern I expressed through the Southern CA AG district, the name of the church with AG reference was removed from the web site.

You are right, there is no AG position paper or addressing of it … yet. I asked if there was an AG position paper yet, and were there plans to develop one? Answer from SoCA dist official was: “No, this doesn’t happen very often.” They will need to do so. Their denial does not change the issue at hand. Other countries are addressing it. An evangelical ministry to transgenders that is connected with YWAM in the United Kingdom has been active to help the Evangelicals in the UK take a stand on this issue.

Wonder what it will take to get some action in the US?

“I don’t know why the Pearson people would pray for me since, in their view, I am going to heaven anyway. In this case I am to be forgiven for believing that God made reproductive organs as a means of reproducing. Nonsense.”

“The final phase is to attack all those who disagree as hateful with the “I’ll pray for you” nonsense added to the end.”

Very telling about you Carl and a far different face from how you wanted to be seen at the beginning of this thread.

To those who are willing to engage people who reject the Bible , notice that there are always the same trends. First there is something that is exalted as authority other than the bible. In this case it is physical and emotional pleasure. In the Pearson debate it was human reasoning.

The next phase is almost always a return to scripture but at best unorthodox interpretations of passages taken out of context. They did that a little better in the pearson discussion because in this one the bible was mentioned but not quoted or directly referenced in support of any point.

The final phase is to attack all those who disagree as hateful with the “I’ll pray for you” nonsense added to the end.

I don’t know why the pearson people would pray for me since, in their view, I am going to heaven anyway. In this case I am to be forgiven for believing that God made reproductive organs as a means of reproducing. Nonsense.

Rich – Why these people troll your blog I do not know. I know that I respond because I am called to preach the Word.

Every honest preacher knows what it is like to exegete a scripture for a message only to find out it does not mean what he thought it meant and now must face the decision to either sound good or be doctrinally sound. We all have sin. We all have error.

But as Christians, it should be our hearts desire to have that error and sin rooted out, not justified.

At some point I will avoid these discussions. But I am not there yet.