Author Topic: My thoughts on rejection of transgender people  (Read 366 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Rachel Montgomery

  • Family
  • *****
  • Posts: 715
  • Reputation: +13/-0
  • Gender: Female
My thoughts on rejection of transgender people
« on: February 11, 2021, 02:34:39 pm »
Admin note ~ split from another topic.

"16. Please limit religious discussions to the spirituality forum. If a thread in another forum turns into a religious discussion please move the thread to the spirituality forum. Our moderators will assist in this process if necessary. Two restrictions apply to your use of the spirituality boards:
A. You are not to pass judgments on others beliefs, any more than they are welcome to pass judgement on yours.
B. You are free to talk about how your spirituality affects your life, but you cannot proselytize or attempt to convert others."



Well, for some people it speaks to the god they worship.  Some people worship a god they believe sees us as an abomination.  Even though it makes no sense, and flies in the face of science and reason, faith (even misplaced faith) is powerful in shaping how people see the world and others in it.  When I think about a god, it would be the one who created all life, who created some that are gynandromorph’s (both male and female at once).   A perfect god clearly doesn’t see its creation as an abomination. 

We are exceptions to the rule, but we are as we developed naturally.  You can call it an error, but ultimately that depends on what the bigger plan was to begin with.

Offline Gertrude

  • Trudie
  • Family
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,014
  • Reputation: +13/-0
  • Gender: Female
Re: My thoughts on rejection of transgender people
« Reply #1 on: February 11, 2021, 03:31:08 pm »
Well, for some people it speaks to the god they worship.  Some people worship a god they believe sees us as an abomination.  Even though it makes no sense, and flies in the face of science and reason, faith (even misplaced faith) is powerful in shaping how people see the world and others in it.  When I think about a god, it would be the one who created all life, who created some that are gynandromorph’s (both male and female at once).   A perfect god clearly doesn’t see its creation as an abomination. 

We are exceptions to the rule, but we are as we developed naturally.  You can call it an error, but ultimately that depends on what the bigger plan was to begin with.

I see it more as culture that uses religion as an argument from authority fallacy. When Christians have to lean on the Old Testament to justify their beliefs, generally, confirmation bias is afoot.

Offline Rachel Montgomery

  • Family
  • *****
  • Posts: 715
  • Reputation: +13/-0
  • Gender: Female
Re: My thoughts on rejection of transgender people
« Reply #2 on: February 11, 2021, 06:26:01 pm »
Also, there are plenty of groups out there just looking for someone to be angry at.  It doesn't matter who or why so much as that they agree on it.  The whole LGBT community has always been a popular target for these people.

I don’t know that I agree with your conclusion.  In fact, I think I disagree.  But, maybe you wouldn’t disagree with what I am about to say, and I simply misunderstand what you said.

The Christian “God” (AKA: YHWH, Jehovah, Jesus’ dad) was the same god as the Jewish god of the Old Testament.  I am agnostic, but I am very familiar with Christian dogma, and text.  In order to know their god, Christians try to read everything written about Him.  That includes knowing Him by what He said and did in the OT.   So, looking at the OT to signal the nature of an all knowing, all powerful, perfect god makes sense.

Christians have a problem, in that they tend to not know Hebrew.  And, they tend to read translations into their own languages.  Any time something is translated, there is a serious risk of losing some intended meaning.  Add to that, the culture of the OT seems familiar to them, because they read the OT, but they don’t live in that culture, and don’t really understand what certain things meant to the people of those earlier times. 

So, they read something today in English and they don’t question what the original text actually said, and furthermore what that meant to people of the time.  Man shall not wear that which pertains to a woman.  Why was that said?  What did it mean to prohibit? 

Jesus says the OT laws were mediated by angels between God and men.  So, what laws did men alter?  And, why would God allow that anyway?  Did men just make the law easier on them?  Or, did they add things that seemed “messed up” or “just weird” to them?

I suspect the reality is, both the OT and NT were written by men guessing what God wants.  And, therefore, they are just the best ideas people had a couple to a few thousand years ago, in a different culture, on the other side of the world.  Why would a creator make me as I am, and then hate ME for being what it made me?  It doesn’t make sense. 

If there is an all knowing Creator God and someone loves the creator, and they are kind to their fellow man, I suspect they will be alright.  And, anyone who disagrees will just have to disagree. 

Offline Gertrude

  • Trudie
  • Family
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,014
  • Reputation: +13/-0
  • Gender: Female
Re: My thoughts on rejection of transgender people
« Reply #3 on: February 11, 2021, 08:18:44 pm »
I don’t know that I agree with your conclusion.  In fact, I think I disagree.  But, maybe you wouldn’t disagree with what I am about to say, and I simply misunderstand what you said.

The Christian “God” (AKA: YHWH, Jehovah, Jesus’ dad) was the same god as the Jewish god of the Old Testament.  I am agnostic, but I am very familiar with Christian dogma, and text.  In order to know their god, Christians try to read everything written about Him.  That includes knowing Him by what He said and did in the OT.   So, looking at the OT to signal the nature of an all knowing, all powerful, perfect god makes sense.

Christians have a problem, in that they tend to not know Hebrew.  And, they tend to read translations into their own languages.  Any time something is translated, there is a serious risk of losing some intended meaning.  Add to that, the culture of the OT seems familiar to them, because they read the OT, but they don’t live in that culture, and don’t really understand what certain things meant to the people of those earlier times. 

So, they read something today in English and they don’t question what the original text actually said, and furthermore what that meant to people of the time.  Man shall not wear that which pertains to a woman.  Why was that said?  What did it mean to prohibit? 

Jesus says the OT laws were mediated by angels between God and men.  So, what laws did men alter?  And, why would God allow that anyway?  Did men just make the law easier on them?  Or, did they add things that seemed “messed up” or “just weird” to them?

I suspect the reality is, both the OT and NT were written by men guessing what God wants.  And, therefore, they are just the best ideas people had a couple to a few thousand years ago, in a different culture, on the other side of the world.  Why would a creator make me as I am, and then hate ME for being what it made me?  It doesn’t make sense. 

If there is an all knowing Creator God and someone loves the creator, and they are kind to their fellow man, I suspect they will be alright.  And, anyone who disagrees will just have to disagree.

We could start right off and say that his name wasn't Jesus. The other thing is that he really didn't find what we call christianity. That came later. Another interesting thing is that the ancient jews had at least 6 categories for sex/gender. Lastly, I would think that if one is serious about being a christian, the 4 gospels would be enough and then we'd find some interesting conflicts between their behavior and his teaching. "Jesus" was a radical in his time, not a conservative born again christian. If he was conservative, they wouldn't have killed him. Compared to today, sure, he was conservative in some ways, but in context, he moved their cheese.

Offline Rachel Montgomery

  • Family
  • *****
  • Posts: 715
  • Reputation: +13/-0
  • Gender: Female
Re: My thoughts on rejection of transgender people
« Reply #4 on: February 11, 2021, 09:08:14 pm »
Quote from: Gertrude
We could start right off and say that his name wasn't Jesus. The other thing is that he really didn't find what we call christianity. That came later. Another interesting thing is that the ancient jews had at least 6 categories for sex/gender. Lastly, I would think that if one is serious about being a christian, the 4 gospels would be enough and then we'd find some interesting conflicts between their behavior and his teaching. "Jesus" was a radical in his time, not a conservative born again christian. If he was conservative, they wouldn't have killed him. Compared to today, sure, he was conservative in some ways, but in context, he moved their cheese.

Now you have peaked my interest.  What was his name?  And, who is the “he” are we talking about?  What is the source of your information?

Jesus Christ didn’t FIND Christianity, he was supposed to BE Christianity (until Paul hijacked it). 

I would agree that anyone is better off sticking to the 4 gospels, but Christians generally regard Paul as being the most important apostle. 

Also, what were the 6 categories?  Are MTF described recognizably in any of them?  And, how were they treated by ancient Jews?

By today’s standards, Jesus was quite conservative, but not as conservative as many Republican Christians.  The reason conservatism is considered conservative is that the teachings of Jesus are the foundation of modern western culture.  It doesn’t matter how novel your ideas are when you express them, if they become orthodoxy in the culture, they are conservative at this point.  Do you agree?

Looking forward to learning about who “he” was, and who established Christianity according to your sources. 

Tags: