TRANSGENDER / INTERSEX:
I believe the words "young woman (women) and woman (women)" referred to individuals that identified with that gender. "[Young-] women" consisted of anatomically heterosexual women, lesbians, trans-women, bi-sexual women and intersex women. The word "men" would consist of anatomically heterosexual men, gay men, trans-men, bi-sexual men and intersex men. Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek wouldn't sub-categorize or use the wrong gender for them. Gender variant "women" could also be called "girls, virgins, etc." and gender variant "men" could also be called "boys, virgins, etc."
For the Hebrew language, the same spelling for the word "young man" also refers to a "young woman" in the Law. Additionally, the word na-shim "women" has the masculine plural spelling or ending. I think the reason for it is because the ancients didn't view "women" to be always anatomically female. For the Aramaic language, the word "women" also has the masculine plural spelling or ending. The word "women" is pronounced ni-she in the Peshitta Bible and also has a older spelling of ni-shin in (1st Enoch 7:1, etc.). Both are masculine plural spellings or pronunciations. This is odd because the word "woman" is the very person of a feminine being. It should have a feminine plural ending if this word doesn't contain a broader understanding of "women." Lastly, for the Greek language, the word pais can refer to either a "boy, young man" or "girl, young woman." A feminine pronoun or other feminine word will let you know which gender is meant.
I will refute the following anti-trans, women, etc. verses below:
“The gear (or clothing) of a man shall not be on a woman, and neither shall a man wear the clothing of a woman ...” (Deut. 22:5 Masoretic Hebrew Text). The Hebrew word cli means "gear (such as a sword and shield or quiver and bow), weapon, tool, utensil, instrument, vessel, etc." and by extension “an outfit, armor.” Biblically, it mostly refers to things attached to the body or carried and vessels used for storage. "Clothing, armor or an outfit" aren't necessarily implied; even when you see the word "armour" or "armourbearer" in the King James Version. The Hebrew of 1 Samuel 14:1 literally says: "the young man carrying his gear (pl. sword & shield - armour [KJV]). Or just the last words "the one carrying his gear (pl. armor); translated as "armourbearer" (1 Sam. 14:7, 12-13, etc.). Nevertheless, the best way to see that cli also means "clothing" is by the Aramaic text. The Aramaic word ma-na or its plural pronunciation of ma-ne are the normal translations of the word cli in the Old Testament and also appears in the New Testament. Ma-ne also carries the meaning of "clothing, garments, armor" (Rev. 3:4; 16:15, etc.).
The key words to hone in on are the words "woman" and "man." I've already discussed that the words "woman" and "man" also refer to "a trans-gender and intersex person." So this verse is also saying “The gear (or clothing) of a man shall not be on a trans-woman (or other woman sex) and neither shall a trans-man (or other man sex) wear the clothing of a woman ..." So we can conclude this verse isn't referring to trans genders who are wearing the clothing that matches the gender that they perceive or identify with. Since clothing is a part of identity, it would be unnatural for an identifiable woman or man to wear the wrong clothing under normal civil life. This begs the question of why someone would do this and hence why the LORD God abhors this deed. I don't believe God would be abhorring actors or actresses from doing this so I will discuss below some reasons on why individuals may do this, especially in a society where the sexes are separated.
I believe there was a particular reason for the man or the woman to be disguising themselves. If someone was pursuing a soldier, that soldier could hide by pretending to be the opposite gender. Or someone may dress up as the opposite gender to get access to a gender restricted area to commit fornication or adultery. Idolatry would be another reason. An exchanging of garments could also happen between conspirators. A hetero eunuch could wear the clothing and veil of a woman to get into the king’s harem to try and sleep with his wives. One of the king’s wives could feign to be the eunuch soldier or guard to safeguard him. That woman could hide her hair inside the soldier’s helmet if she had long hair or didn’t cut it; thus appearing to be a male soldier.
Note: Cli (gear, weapon, clothing, etc.) is the modern Hebrew pronunciation; which doesn't always pronounce the sheva (short and rushed "e" sound), especially on the first letter of a word or preposition. James Strong gives this word's pronunciation as celi.
There is a possibility this verse is mistranslated and misunderstood. The word "on" also means "against" in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. And the word cli may not mean "clothing or armor" here; and hence could be a later meaning. There are also better words for clothing and armor in those languages. The text may read: "The weapon (tool, gear, vessel) of a man shall not be against a woman, and a man shall not wear the clothing of a woman. For the LORD your God abhors everyone [who] does these things." (Deuteronomy 22:5). Perhaps this verse is only meant in the context of war. Men were killed and women taken alive as booty (Deut. 20:13-16). So a man may want to disguise himself as a woman to escape death.
"Is not instinct also teaching you that a man, when his hair is erect (qa-em standing), he has disgrace (or reproach)? And when a woman grows out (dam-rab-bai) her hair, she has praise (or glory); because her hair was given to her for (or in the place of) a covering (or veil). But if [any] one argues against these things, we don't have a custom like this, and neither [does] the churches of God." (1 Cor. 11:14-15 Peshitta). The Aramaic text says something quite different than the English translations and Dr. Lamsa's translation, which retained and polished up the KJV text here. The Aramaic text says that a man is not to have erect hair, NOT "long hair" (Lamsa, KJV). Qa-em means: “standing, erect and upright.” The next word after long is the word sa-ạra, meaning hair. The Aramaic text has two words here while the Greek text just has one word.
Also, the Aramaic text of the next verse reads: , "And when a woman grows out her hair, she has praise (or glory) ..." Paul isn't relating a custom where a woman has to have long (Lamsa, KJV) hair; but that she should have hair, regardless of whether the length is short or long. Paul earlier had said that if a woman prays or prophesies when her head is unveiled, than she is equal to a woman that has her head shaved or shorn (1 Cor. 11:5). She shouldn't have a disfigured or bald head like a slave (Deut. 21:12). Gri-a "shaved or shaved one" has both an adjective and a noun meaning. It can refer to a monk; or contemptuously, to a slave. That is why Paul said: "...but if it is a shameful thing (or hideous) for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered [ with hair]. (1 Cor. 11:6)"
I want to reiterate that Paul is discussing a "custom" that is non binding on women. It is an opinion that he had that was based on the times. Paul hinted others may not agree with his opinion and hence this custom isn't obligatory or a command from God. Not much else is known about this custom. I personally don't mind if a woman has a bald head if she wants that. It's her choice and it isn't hurting anyone.
JACOB'S DAUGHTER DINAH:
Now Dinah the daughter of Leah, whom she had borne to Jacob, went out to see the daughters of the land. And when Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, prince of the country, saw her, he took her and lay with her, and violated her. His soul was strongly attracted to Dinah the daughter of Jacob, and he loved the young woman and spoke kindly to the young woman. So Shechem spoke to his father Hamor, saying, "Get me [this] young woman (girl) as a wife ."... "The soul of my son Shechem longs for your daughter. Please give her to him as a wife. And make marriages with us; give your daughters to us, and take our daughters to yourselves ... the land shall be before you. ... acquire possessions for yourselves in it." Then Shechem said ... "Let me find favor in your eyes ... give me the young woman as a wife." (Gen. 34:1-4, 8-12 NKJV). Dinah is called the daughter of Leah, given female pronouns and Shechem wants Dinah to be his wife. However, Shechem never calls Dinah a al-mah "young woman." He calls Dinah a na-ar, which can mean a "boy" or "(transgender-) girl," depending on the context. This Hebrew word is translated three times as "young woman" in regard to Dinah. However, na-ar means: "boy, child, young man and (pl.) children" elsewhere in the Bible.
It's not likely that na-ar would have been pronounced na-a-ra; without the final h letter. That would perhaps make it the only word of its kind. Also, a Hebrew person is suppose to get the full meaning of a statement whether it is spoken or written. That is significant, because after the first five book of the Law, the following books started adding the final "h" to na-ar; when the person was a female. Thus, the word came to be spelled and pronounced as na-a-rah. Lastly, this Hebrew word was likely initially like the Greek word pais "young man, young woman, etc." It's a masculine word that can mean "boy" or "girl." Context, pronouns and other words let the reader know which meaning is meant.
One time, the Hebrew word yal-dah "girl" is translated in the New King James Version as "young woman." However, Shechem literally asks his father to "get [this] girl for me for a wife" (Gen. 34:4). Later, Shechem said to Dinah's father Jacob and her brothers: "Give me [this] boy (i.e. girl) for a wife" (Gen. 34:12). Everywhere else the word "daughter (female of any age, hence: "woman") and al-mah "young woman" are used for this and other similar statements. Also, I don't think the word na-ar, which literally means "boy, young man," would be the word used when asking for a wife (i.e. an anatomical female). Finally, the word "girl" and "boy" are more-so words of endearment for LGBT relationships in that culture.*
Therefore, there is something female and male about Dinah. Dinah could be transgender, intersex or cisgender (if surgery was performed at birth to assign the particular gender). She is mentioned again at (Gen. 46:15) but is never ascribed as having children. That chapter lists the descendants of Jacob and his children. One verse mentions a daughter having children (Gen. 46:20). She is not listed in the Book of Chronicles as having children; even though that book sometimes lists the children of "daughters" and "sisters" (1 Chron. 1:50; 2:16-17). So, she very well could be trans-gender.
Na-ar "boy" and yal-dah "girl" were translated those four times as tli-tha (girl) in the Aramaic translation. So an Aramean could see Dinah as possibly a "transgender-female." That's because the word "girl" is usually a term of endearment for a lesbian spouse (or girlfriend) and a transgender spouse (or girlfriend). Nevertheless, sometimes a female lover or wife can also be called a "girl" in heterosexual relationships (1 Ki. 1:2). The Hebrew word na-a-rah has a first meaning of a "girl" but can also mean a "young woman" in a supporting context. It could be understood as literally meaning a "girl" but a young woman" in meaning. So even though this word was translated as a "young woman" a First Kings 1:2 in the early translations, this same word was translated as "girl" elsewhere. So, sometimes the female in a heterosexual relationship can be called a "girl."
The Greek translation also used feminine words for its translation of the masculine word na-ar (boy). It translated the first two occurrences of na-ar as par-the-nos (virgin?) in verse three, and the third occurrence in verse twelve as "girl." The Hebrew word yal-dah was also translated as "girl." Maybe the word par-then-os also referred to a woman being "transgender" here and a "lesbian, etc." elsewhere in the Bible. Since Shechem already slept with Dinah, I don't think a Greek reader would consider Dinah a "virgin."
The Hebrew word be-thu-lah is usually interpreted to mean a "virgin or chaste woman." However, this word has the masculine plural ending of -im. That suggests it is a "collective word." I suggest it means not only "a woman who hasn't had sex with a man" (virgin) but also "a woman who doesn't have sex with a man" (lesbian), etc. There was a Latin text I read on the internet a while back, which I wish I had saved, but it stated that "virgins were having sex with virgins." That suggests that the word "virgin" does in fact also mean a "lesbian." There are at least a couple verses showing that the so-called "virgins" were displaying masculine qualities. Hence, those be-thu-lahs may actually be "lesbians." (Lam. 2:21) says "... my lesbians and my chosen (young) men have fallen (died) by the sword .." Usually women were too scared or didn't fight. They usually didn't get military training and were spared in war. So, we see that these hypothetical "virgins" were fighting and fell alongside "chosen men;" who were selected because of their military training and expertise. Another example of a "virgin" possibly being a "lesbian" is at (2 Ki. 19:21). It states that "a virgin (lesbian) of a daughter of Zion has despised you [and] mocked you. A daughter of Jerusalem has waved [her] head at you."
*Note: Certain words are usually used for heterosexual relationships and LGBT relationships. For example, the words man (husband), woman (wife) and" he took (married)" are usually used for heterosexual relationships. The words "boy" and "girl" are usually used for people in a LGBT relationship. That's to designate what type of relationship it is. Similarly, a slave-woman who is being slept with is usually called a "concubine;" to designate her status. However, we do know that she can also be called a wife (Gen. 25:1; 1 Chron. 1:32). Therefore, the Bible also shows that all of the sexual orientations can use the same terminology. At (1 Cor. 7:8-9) the Aramaic text has Paul saying that it is beneficial for arm-la-tha (lesbians?) "to take a wife than to burn with desire." So we see that a female spouse in a lesbian relationship can also be called a "wife." If a spouse in a lesbian relationship can be called a "wife," than a male spouse in a gay relationship can be called a "husband." The Hebrew word for "man" also may be interpreted as "husband," between men, in some of its occurrences in the Bible. I've also seen and suspect that the words "lovers, partners, yoked together (married), marriage-covenant, etc." are or can be used as designators and designations for persons in all of the sexual orientations.
ABISHAG THE SHUNAMMITESS:
Now King David was old, advanced in years; and they put covers on him, but he could not get warm. Therefore his servants said to him, "Let a young woman, a virgin, be sought for our lord the king, and let her stand before the king, and let her care for him; and let her lie in your bosom, that our lord the king may be warm." So they sought for a lovely (beautiful) young woman throughout all the territory of Israel, and found Abishag the Shunammite, and brought her to the king. The young woman was very lovely (beautiful); and she cared for the king, and served him; but the king did not know her. - So David rested with his fathers, and was buried in the City of David. - So she [Bathsheba] said, "Let Abishag the Shunammite be given to Adonijah your brother as (for a) wife. (1 Ki. 1:1-4; 2:10, 21 NKJV). Bathsheba said this to her son Solomon: "Let Abishag the Shunammite be given to Adoniyah your brother for a wife." The verb she used is in the third masculine singular (3MS) Hofal Imperfect form. She literally said: "Let him (Abishag) be given (yut-tan) to Adoniyah your brother for a wife." Tut-tan is the Hebrew pronunciation for "Let her be given." So there is something "male" about Abishag. I think she was transgender (i.e. a trans-woman). Bathsheba, Adoniyah and others likely also knew this. Elsewhere she is given feminine pronouns and words.
The Aramaic Targum and Greek LXX also support the 3MS Hebrew reading of "Let him (Abishag) be given to Adoniyah for a wife." So I don't believe the word is corrupted. It appears to be original; or a very old reading at the very least. Yet, there is a Targum Variant which reads "Let her be given" like the Peshitta and Latin Vulgate readings. However, trans-women can be given feminine pronouns, etc.; so I think the Aramaic and Latin texts just translated the 3MS word as a third feminine singular (3FS) word.
MISPAR THE EXILE:
Mispar (Mizpar - KJV) is genetically a male and was able to produce children (Ezra 2:1-2). The Bible also deliberately lists her feminine names. Mispar is also called Mispereth "number, account, narration" (Nehemiah 7:7). Additionally, Mispereth is also called Has-sophereth "the female scribe" (Ezra 2:55) or without the definite article as Sophereth "female scribe" (Neh. 7:57).
Mispereth appears to have a non-conforming gender. Perhaps she was a trans-woman or unisex woman. She has three feminine names and only one masculine name in the Bible. All of her names imply she was a female scribe, writer or secretary.
Note: I am still going through the Aramaic Old Testament. More information about transgender / intersex people and the Bible will be posted as that information is brought to light.
I want to debunk Michael Drosnin's use of the word "Calif." to refer to "California" in his book: The Bible Code Copyright © 1997 on pages 140-142. I was born in California in 1977 and left that state in 2001 when I joined the military. Never did I see the word California abbreviated as "Calif." Its abbreviation was two letters (CA) like every other state. However, many people have read his book and now the News is abbreviating California as "Calif." This is like trying to fulfill false prophecy. I'm sure other people in California would agree with what I have to say. However, other people in other states may be deceived.
The Hebrew language has three letters that have a "K" sound. They are the Khet, Caph and Qoph letters. It is generally believed that the Khet letter should be transliterated as "K," the Caph letter as "C" and the Qoph letter as "Q." Calif is "Qaliph" or "Qalif" in the Bible Code. So the Caph or "C" isn't used in the hypothetical Bible Code. Even now there are T-shirts sold with the Hebrew word Qalifornia on them.
There is also another way to interpret the "L.A. Calif" code Michael found. The "LA" form the Hebrew word lo "not." That code could read "not California" next to "great earthquake." Also, qalif is a Hebrew word that means "peelable, easy peeled." Those letters could also make up the statement "not peelable, not peeled easy."
The Old Testament codes are interesting but should be dealt with using caution. There are contradictions and false codes that have been found. The Aramaic New Testament also has Bible codes but some of them don't make sense. The Bible is not unique in that it ONLY has codes. The Hebrew and Aramaic languages are also unique in that a lot of their words don't contain vowels; making it easier than using non Semitic languages to form words through equal distant skipping. The three or more letter words can be constructed to say whatever someone wants it to say.
Note: It would be incorrect to say that Hebrew doesn't have vowels; though some words are made up of only consonants. Other Hebrew words are made up in part with vowels. Some Hebrew words have all their vowels with the consonant letters. There are 4 Hebrew and / or Aramaic letters that served as vowels. The Aleph and Ayin generally have an "a" or "e" (as in the word pet) sound. The vav generally has an "o" or "u" sound. And the yod generally has an "i" or "e" (as in the word they) sound.
Is the Bible Against Homosexuality? by Preacher Mattai © 2016. All rights reserved.
Sub Pages: LGBT