It must be, it says it right there in Deuteronomy 22:5
A woman must not wear men’s clothing, nor a man wear women’s clothing, for the LORD your God detests anyone who does this.
That seems pretty clear to me. Not only is it a sin, but a detestable sin. At least that’s what my pastor was kind enough to remind me when I went to him for advice. He was quick to point out that while God welcomed all children to His flock – even the hurt and broken – He did not intend for them to stay that way. I asked him for resources and support to help me overcome this and he pointed me to Randall’s website.
Now as you know I’ve previously written about being a Christian crossdresser, and I firmly believe that God can do more than we could ever hope for or imagine – He even has the power to cure crossdressing (if you think about it for a second, this is probably quite easy compared with healing the sick and raising the dead).
But if crossdressing were such a detestable sin, surely the Bible would be overflowing with admonishments against crossdressing. At least a mention in the New Testament, or a reaffirmation by another prophet in the Old Testament. What we have though is Deuteronomy 22:5. Which happens to be only six verses away from Deuteronomy 22:11
Do not wear clothes of wool and linen woven together
And Deuteronomy 22:12
Make tassels on the four corners of the cloak you wear
Now I’m sure that every good Bible believing Christian checks to ensure their clothes aren’t made from different materials, and is diligent about making tassels for their coats. Surely being just six verses away would make these commandments as important and worthy of fervor? Not so it seems. The inconvenient laws from the Old Testament ‘no longer apply to modern society’. It seems somewhat hypocritical to me that Christians would use this verse to damn the transgendered as sinners and heretics. Joanna does this line of reasoning full justice when she discusses Crossdressing and Christianity
Randall constructs a compelling argument that crossdressing is not Christian. It is worth reading, he begins:
While searching for an answer to the question of cross-dressing being a sin, I realized that I was looking for a black and white literal answer in the Word that was not there. My reasoning was that if the prohibition was not there, it was OK to cross-dress. Later, I realized that was the same attitude the Pharisees had in Jesus’ day – they would strain at observing all of the “must dos,” but they would create all kinds of ways to follow the law literally while breaking it in spirit. It occurred to me that on this issue, I had become a legalist! (more)
Clearly crossdressing is not a sin, any more than eating pork or wearing clothes made of different fabrics. Given this we should should not be willing to accept the condemnation of others, especially not Christians. As Paul says in Romans 2:1
You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgement on someone else, for whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgement do the same things.
And in rejecting the condemnation of others, we should realize that Jesus Christ does not condemn us.
For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. – John 3:17-18
So we have accepted that crossdressing is not a sin, but what of the other lines of reasoning Randall puts forth? I’ll discuss those in more detail in a future post. In ending this post I want to again urge you.
Don’t let anyone else tell you that crossdressing is ‘right’ any more than you let anyone tell you that crossdressing is a sin. Your true purpose in life is known to God, and revealed to you through your relationship with Him. He may want to cure you, change your heart, or use you to bring comfort and blessing to others. Be open to His plan for your life.
Hugs and Blessings
Vanessa
Loading ...
Vanessa is a happily married 30 year old transgendered woman from Seattle. It's been a long road to acceptance for her, despite the fact that she has been crossdressing for more than 25 years. Sometimes, when she looks in the mirror she longs to see the girl that lives
within her. 
11 Comments
You might want to look at http://www.gendertree.com/
Sandra Stewart has a fairly good look at this issue and more in great detail.
I certainly think it worth the effort.
D
Reading your article about cross dressing and Christianity, it seems to me that the issue is being skirted without full review of Dt 22:5. The question is not one of dispensationsalism, but whether it was ever in the character of God to hate cross dressers. An analysis of the Hebrew requires not only reading what is, but recognizing what is NOT said:
Lo yihyeh not (will) be
khli-gever armour of a male
‘al-ishah upon a woman
v’lo and not
yilbesh (will) put on
gever a male
simlach mantle
ishah of a woman
ki for
toldot abomination
YHVH of YHVH
kol (are) all
oseh doing
eleh. these.
I am reciting this from memory. Check your own copy. You can get it at any Christian bookstore today.
Nowhere is the word for clothing (lavashim) used. The language is more specific.
Vessels of metal and pottery were referred to as “kli.” The garment referred to in Deuteronomy is something hard. Armour is a suitable translation. While the word “simlach” is used for a “dress” in modern Hebrew, it corresponds poorly with the biblical as in that day both men and women wore an inner garment equivalent to a tunic. A simlach is the outer garment, a mantle.
The point, then is not whether God ever hated cross dressers, but that those who remain in the covenant will not be placed in positions where they will take on occupations not suited (pun intended) to them. A similar idiom in English is, “He wears many hats.”
For those of us who are transsexual, this is even more poignant. By accepting inappropriate occupations, we debase ourselves, ad live a lie. What could be more abominable.
This chapter in Deuteronomy is hardly a list of damnations. But most translators and commentators will separate this one outside the conciliatory context of Deuteronomy 22 to give a pretext to justify hatred of transgender people. Dispensationalism aside, I regard the popular treatment of Dt 22: 5 as an abuse of sacred texts and that this reading makes far more sense.
Thanks for your detailed explanation Lynnea. If I understand your conclusion correctly, by accepting an inappropriate occupation (i.e. living as who we are) we debase ourselves. So this verse is more about being true to yourself and who God made you as, than a condemnation of the transgendered?
Ah, good old Deut. 22:5. Even when I first encountered it (as a callow 13 year-old combing the Old Testament for lurid tales of sex and violence), I was rather skeptical about it, not only because it was to be found in a part of the Bible chock full of bizarre laws (seemingly half of which were to be enforced with the threat of stoning*), but because it seemed silly for God to concern him/her/itself with something so trivial as what people wore (the way I saw it, it reduced him/her/it to the level of someone from the high school “in crowd”, who condemned others for not dressing in a suitably trendy fashion). Besides, who decides what qualifies as men’s clothing and what qualifies as women’s clothing? That’s right, OTHER HUMAN BEINGS! So whose authority do we ultimately take on which attire is “gender-appropriate” and therefore “divinely approved” – the fashion fascists? God help us! Or should we make it more democratic and leave it up to a periodic vote? And what happens when fashions start to change significantly, and one sex begins adopting the attire of the other en masse (as, for example, when women began to wear trousers in ever-increasing numbers)? Are the brave pioneers of these changes fated to be damned as “abominations”, while those timid souls who only follow the fashion once it’s become safely entrenched get off scot free? And if so, what of those in the middle? What is to be their fate?
Which sort of leads me to another reason I’m cynical about Deut. 22:5’s applicability to the modern world. Why is it that all but the most extreme Christian fundamentalists only seem to apply it to male crossdressers these days? I mean, it’s pretty clear that it applies equally to both sexes: it’s not as though it says, “A man must not wear women’s clothing, for verily the Lord Your God doth bring up the contents of his stomach at the very thought of such a vile thing; but a woman shall have permission to don the apparel of the man, for it has come to the Lord Your God’s attention that women wearing men’s clothes is quite the trendy thing nowadays (and actually sort of hot too), and there is nothing that doth please the Lord Your God more than seeing people follow the latest trends.” (Maybe it’s in the same version of the Bible in which God commanded the ancient Israelites to keep their homes well-stocked with handguns, assault rifles, hand grenades and rocket launchers; and enjoined his later followers to imitate their example for all time to come.) Indeed, if the sad fate of Joan of Arc is any indication, society once took both parts of this prohibition very seriously – apparently, the thing that ultimately sent the aforementioned Frenchwoman to the stake was her abominable “crime” of wearing men’s attire.
Funny you should bring up the OT law about tassels. If memory serves me correctly, this command is concluded with the stern injunction that God’s chosen people are to follow it “for all time to come” (or words to that effect), which leads me to wonder which part of “all time to come” millions of believers, both Christian and Jewish, over the centuries have failed to understand! Ironically, I actually have a piece of tasselled clothing myself: a black leather jacket to which I had long leather fringes attached. It’s become something of a trademark for me, and has led to me acquiring some unusual nicknames over the years, such as Tass and David Tasselhoff!
*In retrospect, the OT “capital crime” that bemuses me the most is that of disobedience to one’s parents. I doubt the penalty for that one would have been applied very stringently, even back in OT times. After all, how long is any society likely to last if it puts all its disobedient children to death?
@Zosimus: Your comment made me smile. It’s too true how well meaning Christians can get so focused on certain verses and interpretations and easily forget the verse right after it. Or even the second sentence of the verse they’re so passionate about. I think that Jesus correctly chastised those in His time who were doing this. Using the law to take people further away from God rather than closer to Him.
Brilliant Post! Thank You!
I am a m/f c….age 65…….and do it pretty openly for the last 3yrs. and am ok with it. In refrence to you Dt. comment…. I was tol by a christen lady friend who supports me stated that that book of the bible was dated back in the time when the Romans where in full swing of wine drinking and orgies.(not enough woomen to go around). Hmmmm…..
I have another christian lady friend of mine for years that supports me, but got on the tangent of it being wrong….I asked her if God made mistakes?..Her answer was no…..Ok then, if I am a creation of God than how can I be wrong? And I believe in God, or a greater divine being. I am native american by two tribes, and am leaning toward their old ways.
I my mind if I am happy doing what am doing . That is all that matters.
“Judge not less ye be judge”.
Thank you, Marcye
hell man get a life and live it as long as you harm no one ,the priests and vicars etc are 99% perverts who molest kids ,so why take their advice
dueteronomy 22:5 seems to be where many hang their hat as the final verse that says crossdressing is a sin. And yet it never occurs to anyone that back in that day womens clothes were probably close to what we would call a berka today. Not lingerie or high heels or flouncy skirts and satin blouses. So how can that verse be the end all and be-all for the narrow-minded bible thumpers?
vicki
It makes me sick that anyone would give a shit about this.
Dear Vanessa,
above web site is Jade Catherine excellent research about cross dressing and God. Deut 22.5 refers to neighboring community that praticed CD as attempt to convert fromGod and drive others from God.
Also that portion of Bible has to do with Jewish rules and per NT we are Gentiles and not held to Jewish law. Jesus’s new Conventant replaced the old. And Roman’s 14 Paul talks about eating the meat is not a sin but eating such that it harms others away from God.