What Does The Bible Say About Transgenderism?
A friend asked me for biblical data concerning transgenderism. Here is what I wrote. I just copy-pasted from instagram, so, no spacings. I'll come back and edit later.
Okay, so, throughout the Bible, we have the warnings and condemnations about temple prostitutes. You see it in Deuteronomy 23:17-18, 1 Kings 14:24,15:12 22:46 and 2 Kings 23:7. So, you need to know some background, but these prostitutes were also trans (we'll just say trans for now, not trans-vestite, gender, or sexual). How do we know this? So from the textbook "Religion in Ancient Mesopotamia" it says this: "Since homosexual love was perfectly tolerated in the land, provided that it did not harm anyone, it should not be surprising to see professional homosexuals here, as if to balance the 'religious' prositutes mentioned above, the assinu, the kurgarru, the kulu'u, and even, on occasion, the kolû, who had rather a bad reputation in this regard, although we do not really know why. Nor do we know under what conditions they expressed their profession or their duties. >>>But we occasionally see them dressed as women, holding strictly feminine accessories (such as a spindle) in their hands in addition to manly weapons, as if to point out their sexual ambiguity<<<, and taking part, at least in honor of Ištar, in ritual, ambiguous, or lascivious dances. They were not, however, firmly integrated into the clerical corps, and their specific designation referred above all to their condition and to their way of making love." Emphasis my own. You can find it on pages 123-124 of that book. John Barclay Burns, professor at George Mason University, comments on these terms for the temple prostitutes. He writes, ""Sources from Mesopotamia testify to the existence of male cult figures whose sexuality was confused or liminal and who engaged in various sex-related practices. One text refers to the sinnišānu, literally, 'woman-like,' who went into a tavern and agreed to divide his earnings, presumably with the tavern-keeper. Taverns were permitted places of resort for prostitutes of both sexes. The assinnu was a member of Ishtar’s cultic staff with whom, it seems, a man might have intercourse, whose masculinity had become femininity (Erra IV 55-56; CAD, A: 341). The effeminate kulu'u, not a zikaru, a 'real' man, and the transvestite kurgarrû sang, acted, and danced in the worship of Inanna/Ishtar. "The kulu'u was certainly regarded as a male prostitute in the saying, amat LU kulu'u u: ha-rim-ti URU, “the word of the male or female prostitute of the city” (CAD, K: 529, 557). W. G. Lambert argued that there was a fair amount of evidence for a cluster of male types notorious for their femininity and that they served as prostitutes. One of these, the assinnu, lacked libido, either from a natural defect or castration (152-53). M. Nissinen pointed out that the cuneiform signs used for assinnu were UR.SAL, 'dog/woman,' evidently an insulting designation (32). Unfortunately, there is no evidence that the cognate Akkadian word for dog, kalbu, was ever employed as a metaphor in this precise context." End quote. So, quick summary before we move on to the next argument, the Bible unequivocally condemns temple prostitutes. Some of those prostitutes were the ancient versions of trans people. They wore female vestments, they were highly effeminate (more on this in the next argument), and, some purposefully castrated themselves, which is what trans surgery is. It is castration. So, the Bible does unequivocally condemn them. In a sentence: the Bible DOES NOT make a distinction between tranvestites and what we would call trans people. For ancient Israel, people who messed with their sexual identity were noted for their changing of clothes. It refers to the same people. The clothes were just an obvious sign that this person had this belief about themselves. So, you're very right when you go to this verse. You have that Biblical intuition. And that's good. Okay, next argument.
Okay, not going to get too much into detail because it's 3:30am, so I'll stop here, give a quick answer, and come back tomorrow evening. So in 1 Corinthians 6:9 (assuming you're using a NIV, as per our last zoom convo), it says that the people who do not inherit the kingdom of God are "men who have sex with men." But if you look at the Greek (do you use Blue Letter Bible? If you don't, you should) it's fusing two words there, malakos, which means "effiminate" and "arsenokoites" which is a compound word of "arsen" which means "male" or "masculine" and "koite" which means "bed. The word "coitus" which means sex, comes from the same word. So, the translators have combined these two words to the phrase "men who have sex with men" because it is conveying the idea that St. Paul isn't just condemning the homosexual men who still play the male role, ya know. Sorry to get graphic, but, he isn't just condemning the guy who sticks his penis in the other guys anus. There are other places in the Bible where it condemns just the "arsenokoites", the masculine men who have sex with other men. But to make clear that he isn't just condemning them, St. Paul is also calling out and condemning the guy who is taking it up the anus as well. And how does he name them? He calls them the malakos, the effeminates. So, you had men who would feminize themselves, and they would do this through their vestments (transvestites) how they acted (transgender) and castrated themselves (transexuals). These are the people which St. Paul is condemning, because again, for him, and the Holy Spirit who inspired him, there is no difference. These effiminate men were the transpeople of the day, and St. Paul says that if they do not repent, they do not inherit the Kingdom of God. Now, there's something else about this verse. Sometimes, what you hear said about the temple prostitutes is something like, "Oh, they're only condemned because they were pagan." LOL That's absurd on the face, but the upshot of the 1 Corinthians 6:9 passage is that it describes the ancient trans person (the malakos) in a general term, not in any pagan temple context. So the Holy Spirit still condemns them apart from the pagan context.
Okay, so, throughout the Bible, we have the warnings and condemnations about temple prostitutes. You see it in Deuteronomy 23:17-18, 1 Kings 14:24,15:12 22:46 and 2 Kings 23:7. So, you need to know some background, but these prostitutes were also trans (we'll just say trans for now, not trans-vestite, gender, or sexual). How do we know this? So from the textbook "Religion in Ancient Mesopotamia" it says this: "Since homosexual love was perfectly tolerated in the land, provided that it did not harm anyone, it should not be surprising to see professional homosexuals here, as if to balance the 'religious' prositutes mentioned above, the assinu, the kurgarru, the kulu'u, and even, on occasion, the kolû, who had rather a bad reputation in this regard, although we do not really know why. Nor do we know under what conditions they expressed their profession or their duties. >>>But we occasionally see them dressed as women, holding strictly feminine accessories (such as a spindle) in their hands in addition to manly weapons, as if to point out their sexual ambiguity<<<, and taking part, at least in honor of Ištar, in ritual, ambiguous, or lascivious dances. They were not, however, firmly integrated into the clerical corps, and their specific designation referred above all to their condition and to their way of making love." Emphasis my own. You can find it on pages 123-124 of that book. John Barclay Burns, professor at George Mason University, comments on these terms for the temple prostitutes. He writes, ""Sources from Mesopotamia testify to the existence of male cult figures whose sexuality was confused or liminal and who engaged in various sex-related practices. One text refers to the sinnišānu, literally, 'woman-like,' who went into a tavern and agreed to divide his earnings, presumably with the tavern-keeper. Taverns were permitted places of resort for prostitutes of both sexes. The assinnu was a member of Ishtar’s cultic staff with whom, it seems, a man might have intercourse, whose masculinity had become femininity (Erra IV 55-56; CAD, A: 341). The effeminate kulu'u, not a zikaru, a 'real' man, and the transvestite kurgarrû sang, acted, and danced in the worship of Inanna/Ishtar. "The kulu'u was certainly regarded as a male prostitute in the saying, amat LU kulu'u u: ha-rim-ti URU, “the word of the male or female prostitute of the city” (CAD, K: 529, 557). W. G. Lambert argued that there was a fair amount of evidence for a cluster of male types notorious for their femininity and that they served as prostitutes. One of these, the assinnu, lacked libido, either from a natural defect or castration (152-53). M. Nissinen pointed out that the cuneiform signs used for assinnu were UR.SAL, 'dog/woman,' evidently an insulting designation (32). Unfortunately, there is no evidence that the cognate Akkadian word for dog, kalbu, was ever employed as a metaphor in this precise context." End quote. So, quick summary before we move on to the next argument, the Bible unequivocally condemns temple prostitutes. Some of those prostitutes were the ancient versions of trans people. They wore female vestments, they were highly effeminate (more on this in the next argument), and, some purposefully castrated themselves, which is what trans surgery is. It is castration. So, the Bible does unequivocally condemn them. In a sentence: the Bible DOES NOT make a distinction between tranvestites and what we would call trans people. For ancient Israel, people who messed with their sexual identity were noted for their changing of clothes. It refers to the same people. The clothes were just an obvious sign that this person had this belief about themselves. So, you're very right when you go to this verse. You have that Biblical intuition. And that's good. Okay, next argument.
Okay, not going to get too much into detail because it's 3:30am, so I'll stop here, give a quick answer, and come back tomorrow evening. So in 1 Corinthians 6:9 (assuming you're using a NIV, as per our last zoom convo), it says that the people who do not inherit the kingdom of God are "men who have sex with men." But if you look at the Greek (do you use Blue Letter Bible? If you don't, you should) it's fusing two words there, malakos, which means "effiminate" and "arsenokoites" which is a compound word of "arsen" which means "male" or "masculine" and "koite" which means "bed. The word "coitus" which means sex, comes from the same word. So, the translators have combined these two words to the phrase "men who have sex with men" because it is conveying the idea that St. Paul isn't just condemning the homosexual men who still play the male role, ya know. Sorry to get graphic, but, he isn't just condemning the guy who sticks his penis in the other guys anus. There are other places in the Bible where it condemns just the "arsenokoites", the masculine men who have sex with other men. But to make clear that he isn't just condemning them, St. Paul is also calling out and condemning the guy who is taking it up the anus as well. And how does he name them? He calls them the malakos, the effeminates. So, you had men who would feminize themselves, and they would do this through their vestments (transvestites) how they acted (transgender) and castrated themselves (transexuals). These are the people which St. Paul is condemning, because again, for him, and the Holy Spirit who inspired him, there is no difference. These effiminate men were the transpeople of the day, and St. Paul says that if they do not repent, they do not inherit the Kingdom of God. Now, there's something else about this verse. Sometimes, what you hear said about the temple prostitutes is something like, "Oh, they're only condemned because they were pagan." LOL That's absurd on the face, but the upshot of the 1 Corinthians 6:9 passage is that it describes the ancient trans person (the malakos) in a general term, not in any pagan temple context. So the Holy Spirit still condemns them apart from the pagan context.
Comments
Post a Comment