They can "learn" to become more masculine or more feminine in how they walk, etc. I know some who have.

We discussed that. He tried it and it didn't work. Can you imagine the embarassment he's had to live with all his life? His first name is Butch, he was married, and decided he wouldn't have children because of this abnormality. He was a real estate agent in a town I once lived in. To watch him walk, hear him speak, and see his mannerisms one would say he was as gay as they come, but that isn't the case with him.

Interesting.

But my point still stands in regard to Deut. 22:5. That's my main issue here - not whether effeminate acting men or masculine acting women can or can't be rehabilitated. ;)

"God hates women acting like or desiring to be a man -- in other words to act masculine instead of feminine and likewise men being effeminate."



The above comment is why I asked. I just wanted to know how you feel about it when the behaviour occurs naturally, as opposed to someone adopting it. In other words, I believe some men are effeminate through no fault of their own. It isn't anything they picked up along the road of life or learned because of environment. The behaviour (being effeminate, not being gay) occurs naturally in their lives. You basically said God hates women acting like men and men acting like women and I was wondering if you think He still hates it when people are born acting like the opposite sex.

I don't believe they're born that way.

Then what explanation can you offer for the situation Butch is in? The behaviour is obviously multi generational, he's done everything in his power to act more manly, and isn't homosexual. What's left other than to say he was born that way and the effeminacy is natural?

Rico,
The word "wear" in Deut 22:5 most certainly does cover the transgendered.

In the Hebrew - "wear": "to exist, to be OR become."

Transgendered: "Appearing as, wishing to be considered as, or having undergone surgery to become a member of the opposite sex."

"To be or become" is including a transition. It covers the desire to the actual transformation.

My stance on Deut 22:5 is that, like many other scriptures, it drives to the matter of the heart. I cannot use this scripture, with such deep and pointed meaning, to bolster a dress code.

As I've said before, I don't believe that pants are generally as modest as a dress/skirt. I also believe some dresses/skirts can be as immodest when worn too tight. BUT, I would cover this issue in the NT under modesty. I wouldn't come back to the OT and pick up Deut 22:5 to uphold my stance on it. I think that is absolutely ridiculous and a misinterpretation of the scripture.

Maybe his name seemed to be a stigma to him. Perhaps his father was overbearing. Maybe he was raised solely by his mother. Maybe he watched too much Disney. :D

If his wife loves him then what is the problem?

Perhaps that would cover the the "Don'ts", but what about the "Dos"? Tithing, for example. There's controversy there, as the NT doesn't seem to affirm it (Jesus tells the Pharisees they should tithe, but that was during the old covenant). And the NT teaching on giving seems to replace tithing with giving as you see fit. 2 Corinthians 9:7. (According to some, anyway. Like I said, there's controversy!)

I don't believe the tithing is a new testament practice. How could it be? We clearly don't have the same type of setup, but I think the principle is there.

I Timothy 5:18 "For the scripture saith, thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward."

I believe the scripture you quoted above does take care of giving and the ministry. I don't believe the "tithing" goes to one man. It didn't go to just one man in the OT.