So my mom put this on my facebook today...

[kittenpower]

Matthew 7:1  "Do not judge, or you to will be Judged"

[kittenpower]

The bible was pieced together in that 1700s by a bunch of men trying to set up an iron clad hierarchy. They succeeded. In other words, those are not spiritual words to live by.

Sent from my KFSOWI using Tapatalk

A question I asked when I was a small child "why doesn't the Bible mention Dinosaurs?" ...and cue the crickets

[Beatriz]

Matthew 7:1  "Do not judge, or you to will be Judged"

Actually, that's actually slightly out of context as well. Judging by itself is necessary for the most part (otherwise, how would you know if what they tell you is right or wrong?): what Jesus is condemning is the hypocrisy in which one judges another without looking at themselves, or as an excuse so as not to look at themselves.

That said, the Bible does speak about judging with equity, and someone judging something they don't know or haven't experienced at all (typical case of trans issues) is anything but judging with equity. Same as for being biased and hearing no other arguments other than your own.

Unfortunately, no matter what the Bible says, many Christians have been acting exactly as the judgemental pharisees back in Jesus's times acted.

As for dinosaurs, they're mentioned in Genesis under land animals in general. 

[kittenpower]

So, people who read the Bible during the 16th century, knew about dinosaurs?  Sorry, but a general statement about land animals does not answer the dinosaur question.  The Bible mentions Birds and Lions specifically, and the existence of dinosaurs is so spectacular, that the authors of the Bible would have specifically mentioned them, if they had known about them. God is in my heart, not in a book...

[Beatriz]

So, people who read the Bible during the 16th century, knew about dinosaurs?  Sorry, but a general statement about land animals does not answer the dinosaur question.  The Bible mentions Birds and Lions specifically, and the existence of dinosaurs is so spectacular, that the authors of the Bible would have specifically mentioned them, if they had known about them. God is in my heart, not in a book...

That's if they had known about them?
I dunno if they knew about dinosaurs during the 16th century, but the writer of Genesis definitely didn't. And it is clearly stated that posterior translations should remain as loyal to the original book and accurate as possible. This didn't always happen over history, but it's what was supposed to happen.

Christians do believe the Bible was inspired by the Holy Ghost, but it was written by humans, people who were subject to their historical context. They had different social and personal issues, different knowledge settings, different lives altogether... that is why Christians constantly reinterpret the Bible nowadays (or at least are supposed to).

It having been written in a different historical context doesn't mean that nothing applies to nowadays, right? If it was written that way, there must've been a reason.



That said, I don't quite understand where you're coming from. Uh okay, the Bible doesn't mention dinosaurs directly, meaning God is not in it? Uhmm o.O

Of course still, I'm only speaking about what Christians (and I) believe. Your beliefs are only your own, it's just that I'm confused about your post.

_{(We're also kind of going off-topic now)}

[Rachel]

Hi Kyra,

I am sorry you are dealing with this from your Mom, especially on Facebook. I do not know what to say but hugs.

People will find anything to support themselves on an emotional issue. I hope with some time your Mom will support you and your transition.

Using religion to support an argument is one of those things that evokes a lot of emotional responses. It is difficult to use reason when emotions are raw. I recommend letting some time pass them reconnecting. Try to keep it positive. I know it hurts now.

[kittenpower]

That's if they had known about them?
I dunno if they knew about dinosaurs during the 16th century, but the writer of Genesis definitely didn't. And it is clearly stated that posterior translations should remain as loyal to the original book and accurate as possible. This didn't always happen over history, but it's what was supposed to happen.

Christians do believe the Bible was inspired by the Holy Ghost, but it was written by humans, people who were subject to their historical context. They had different social and personal issues, different knowledge settings, different lives altogether... that is why Christians constantly reinterpret the Bible nowadays (or at least are supposed to).

It having been written in a different historical context doesn't mean that nothing applies to nowadays, right? If it was written that way, there must've been a reason.



That said, I don't quite understand where you're coming from. Uh okay, the Bible doesn't mention dinosaurs directly, meaning God is not in it? Uhmm o.O

Of course still, I'm only speaking about what Christians (and I) believe. Your beliefs are only your own, it's just that I'm confused about your post.

_{(We're also kind of going off-topic now)}

No, people did not know about dinosaurs in the 16th century (bones must have been found, but not a lot of people knew), but the Bible was in print at that time; my point being that dinosaurs were not mentioned in the Bible. So, it's rather convenient to say that dinosaurs were mentioned in the book of genesis as animals of the earth, because "we" know of their existence.  The book of Genesis mentions God forming the earth and the heavens in six days, and then taking a break on the seventh day. And then to my recollection goes into the story of the Garden of Eden, and Adam and Eve.  In my opinion if God would have related that story to the person who wrote the book of Genesis; God would have included the information about the dinosaurs, because it's fascinating, they ruled the earth for millions of years, and their remains are here for us to discover, so why not include it in the bible.  The dinosaur issue is probably not a big deal to many people, but it is something that caused me to doubt the religious beliefs that were being passed to me at a very young age. I do have a very strong belief in God, but I am not guided by the Bible.  I assume that you hold the Bible sacred, and I respect your beliefs.

[Lady Smith]

The bible was pieced together in that 1700s by a bunch of men trying to set up an iron clad hierarchy. They succeeded. In other words, those are not spiritual words to live by.

Not so, the Bible was in existence long before then.  Mostly these days I study the oldest manuscripts I can find in an effort to get away from the taint of the Reformation.  Thanks to the internet and certain specialist on-line archives there are a great many of the older texts available.  I particularly favour the Syriac translations myself.

[Beatriz]

No, people did not know about dinosaurs in the 16th century (bones must have been found, but not a lot of people knew), but the Bible was in print at that time; my point being that dinosaurs were not mentioned in the Bible. So, it's rather convenient to say that dinosaurs were mentioned in the book of genesis as animals of the earth, because "we" know of their existence.  The book of Genesis mentions God forming the earth and the heavens in six days, and then taking a break on the seventh day. And then to my recollection goes into the story of the Garden of Eden, and Adam and Eve.  In my opinion if God would have related that story to the person who wrote the book of Genesis; God would have included the information about the dinosaurs, because it's fascinating, they ruled the earth for millions of years, and their remains are here for us to discover, so why not include it in the bible.  The dinosaur issue is probably not a big deal to many people, but it is something that caused me to doubt the religious beliefs that were being passed to me at a very young age. I do have a very strong belief in God, but I am not guided by the Bible.  I assume that you hold the Bible sacred, and I respect your beliefs.

Maybe God just didn't find dinosaurs so majestic and important? His perspective is different from ours, after all, and His greatest living creation was the human being in the first place.

I do hold the Bible sacred, but I personally think it's impossible not to reinterpret it, as many parts either make zero sense out of context or can be used to distort the book's original meaning entirely. (Such as biblical passages being used to justify nazism)

That's the biggest problem of having a book which some hold as sacred and the word of God. Exactly because people hold it as sacred, they say "the truth is there" and from there make themselves the exclusive "owners of the truth". It's very convenient to ignore both that we're humans, and therefore subject to gross interpretation mistakes and bias, and that the context was entirely different even if someone is to hold it as sacred...

[Lady Smith]

I always thought Genesis 1: 24-25 covered all bases when it came to land creatures.

Genesis 1:24-25 Complete Jewish Bible (CJB)

(A: iii) 24 God said, "Let the earth bring forth each kind of living creature — each kind of livestock, crawling animal and wild beast"; and that is how it was. 25 God made each kind of wild beast, each kind of livestock and every kind of animal that crawls along the ground; and God saw that it was good.

According to the Septuagint which was the Greek version of the Old Testament which was used in the early Christian church the same verses read in translation; -

24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creatures according to its kind, quadrupeds and reptiles and wild beasts of the earth according to their kind, and it was so. 25 And God made the wild beasts of the earth according to their kind, and cattle according to their kind, and all the reptiles of the earth according to their kind, and God saw that they were good.

And in Greek they read; -

24 Καὶ εἶπεν ὁ Θεός· ἐξαγαγέτω ἡ γῆ ψυχὴν ζῶσαν κατὰ γένος, τετράποδα καὶ ἑρπετὰ καὶ θηρία τῆς γῆς κατὰ γένος. καὶ ἐγένετο οὕτως. 25 καὶ ἐποίησεν ὁ Θεὸς τὰ θηρία τῆς γῆς κατὰ γένος, καὶ τὰ κτήνη κατὰ γένος αὐτῶν καὶ πάντα τὰ ἑρπετὰ τῆς γῆς κατὰ γένος αὐτῶν. καὶ εἶδεν ὁ Θεός, ὅτι καλά.

And a modern translation taken at random says: -

Genesis 1:24-25New International Version (NIV)

24 And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

All of which tells me that you have to be very certain of the accuracy and quality of the particular modern Bible translation you're quoting from because some of them can be very misleading and confusing indeed. 
Which is why when bigoted fan-boy christians wave bad translations of the Bible about as if they are a licence to hate others it just plain makes me weep.

[kittenpower]

Maybe God just didn't find dinosaurs so majestic and important? His perspective is different from ours, after all, and His greatest living creation was the human being in the first place.

I do hold the Bible sacred, but I personally think it's impossible not to reinterpret it, as many parts either make zero sense out of context or can be used to distort the book's original meaning entirely. (Such as biblical passages being used to justify nazism)

That's the biggest problem of having a book which some hold as sacred and the word of God. Exactly because people hold it as sacred, they say "the truth is there" and from there make themselves the exclusive "owners of the truth". It's very convenient to ignore both that we're humans, and therefore subject to gross interpretation mistakes and bias, and that the context was entirely different even if someone is to hold it as sacred...

God created the dinosaurs, so of course he would have considered them to be "majestic and important", after all, he nurtured them for millions of years. And how long have humans been here? You stated " As for dinosaurs, they're mentioned in Genesis under land animals in general".   

You don't have an answer to the question, so you try to explain it away with generalities? 

[Beatriz]

God created the dinosaurs, so of course he would have considered them to be "majestic and important", after all, he nurtured them for millions of years. And how long have humans been here? You stated " As for dinosaurs, they're mentioned in Genesis under land animals in general".   

You don't have an answer to the question, so you try to explain it away with generalities? 

I didn't really mean to answer your question, just gave a possible answer in the beggining of my post - read "possible answer", not answer -, as we were going by the principle of mutual respect in the first place. If so, I don't see much of a point in trying to change or challenge your opinion, or in you trying to change mine or belittle me in any way.

(some rude parts edited out)

All of which tells me that you have to be very certain of the accuracy and quality of the particular modern Bible translation you're quoting from because some of them can be very misleading and confusing indeed. 
Which is why when bigoted fan-boy christians wave bad translations of the Bible about as if they are a licence to hate others it just plain makes me weep.

I haven't studied it in detail at all, but I think "wild beasts, cattle and reptiles" would at least cover all bases for land animals according to the knowledge of the time.

And YES. The NIV actually goes as far as translating malakoi and arsenokoitai (or however those are written in actual or romanized Greek) in 1 Co 6:9-10 as "men who have sex with men", and the Portuguese/Brazilian version of that - Nova Versão Internacional - translates it as "passive and active homossexuals!"

The "effeminate" translation of malakoi in the same verses has been used against me personally in an attempt from a cousin of mine to tell me I'm wrong and created a man and etc., too. Okay, so suddenly transsexual women are just "effeminate men", and I have a whole family of 11 uncles/aunts just from my father's side trying to convince me of that? o.O

I'm no Greek or Bible expert, but from what little study of the matter I had those translations are so biased, homophobic and inadequate in all senses of the word they make me cringe every time I see them. What scares me the most isn't prejudice in itself, but how complex the mechanisms behind perpetuating it are.

[Cindy]

 

If you want to start a new topic feel free to do so.

I'm pretty sure the OP was looking for support in regards to their mother and not the spirituality of paleontology!

Cindy

[kittenpower]

What does human time mean to God, who created it but is outside of it in the first place, and to whom a million years is but a second yet a second is as long as a million years? And if humans were in the same situation as dinosaurs when they faced extinction, they'd most likely have been able to avoid it with our current technology...

Whatever then, if you think you're less majestic or important than a dinosaur...

I didn't really mean to answer your question, just gave a possible answer in the beggining of my post - read "possible answer", not answer -, as we were going by the principle of mutual respect in the first place. If so, I don't see much of a point in trying to change or challenge your opinion, or in you trying to change mine or belittle me in any way.

You also ignored the only part of that post of mine that was on-topic .-.


I haven't studied it in detail at all, but I think "wild beasts, cattle and reptiles" would at least cover all bases for land animals according to the knowledge of the time.

And YES. The NIV actually goes as far as translating malakoi and arsenokoitai (or however those are written in actual or romanized Greek) in 1 Co 6:9-10 as "men who have sex with men", and the Portuguese/Brazilian version of that - Nova Versão Internacional - translates it as "passive and active homossexuals!"

The "effeminate" translation of malakoi in the same verses has been used against me personally in an attempt from a cousin of mine to tell me I'm wrong and created a man and etc., too. Okay, so suddenly transsexual women are just "effeminate men", and I have a whole family of 11 uncles/aunts just from my father's side trying to convince me of that? o.O

I'm no Greek or Bible expert, but from what little study of the matter I had those translations are so biased, homophobic and inadequate in all senses of the word they make me cringe every time I see them. What scares me the most isn't prejudice in itself, but how complex the mechanisms behind perpetuating it are.

I am not trying to belittle you; you were the first one to post the "laughing emoticon"

[Beatriz]

I am not trying to belittle you; you were the first one to post the "laughing emoticon"

I used a tongue emoticon to express friendliness (and how I wasn't taking the subject seriously, as I didn't know at the time you were) and an "o.O" to express confusion, I guess you could've taken them as offensive though. Sorry if you felt it was so.

(Also sorry for my previous post, it was unnecessarily rude, I actually came back to edit just now hoping I hadn't started a fight yet...)

If you want to start a new topic feel free to do so.

I'm pretty sure the OP was looking for support in regards to their mother and not the spirituality of paleontology!

Cindy

Will do, miss Cindy
I apologize for the trouble and derailing.

[Lady Smith]

If you want to start a new topic feel free to do so.

I'm pretty sure the OP was looking for support in regards to their mother and not the spirituality of paleontology!

Cindy

Oops sorry Cindy.

[Beatriz]

Oops sorry Cindy.

Isn't the discussion of biased translations of the Bible relevant to the topic still?
(Since it's a big part of what leads many Christians to misinterpret transgender issues so badly)

[Lady Smith]

Yes it does have relevance, but the discussion was starting to get too far away from the topic itself.   Cindy is right, - a new topic specifically for discussing variations in the translation of the Bible is what is needed.

[Beatriz]

Yes it does have relevance, but the discussion was starting to get too far away from the topic itself.   Cindy is right, - a new topic specifically for discussing variations in the translation of the Bible is what is needed.

Okay

(PS: would you recommend any version of the Bible in English in regards to relative accuracy? I personally read the old King James's version, which came before the social concepts of homossexuality and has seemed accurate when I compare it to other translations and older Scripture versions. But is there any more recent one that's recommended? All I know is that the NIV's heavily biased, even if that holds true to most translations due to the nature of translating itself)



Well, let me try to go back to the topic at hand then.

This kind of rejection from fundamentalist Christians is really common, to the point many will unfortunately refuse to hear anything you have to say about it. It's been so with my family on my father's side, including my father - who said he "honestly doesn't see any difference between 'this' and homossexuality", and ran away from my house crying, saying he'd never see me again.

Other of my family members have contacted me on Facebook, always (except one cousin) with the same assumptions: that I am nothing and no one but the mask I presented to them, that I am fundamentally wrong according to them, to society, to TV, to the Bible and to everyone but myself, and that it doesn't matter what I say, they wouldn't change their mind. Everyone has said so explicitly.

So it matters what they say about the Bible. But if I say that said interpretation doesn't make any sense according to the original Greek, that God makes no distinguishment between man and woman or circumcised and uncircumcised, and that it's hyprocisy to want to judge something they know nothing about (to the point of thinking it's homossexuality), that doesn't matter!

It's what makes me feel the most awful about them: not that they never knew anything about it and are prejudiced, but that they refuse any attempt of dialogue, and only want to shove their "love" and "truth" down my throat. As of late, I am seriously considering never seeing any of them again, and perhaps I'll block them on FB too if they bother me any more...



Of course, I'm really lucky - if anything, I consider myself truly blessed - that I have a mother who accepts me and tries her best to understand and help me. That's what love is about. But the undeniable truth is that most won't react that way, and many of those will never at all consider changing their minds.

I don't know how your mother will act in the future, or if it is worth the effort talking to her (I guess you should at least try, but then again you must've tried already). Still, you being yourself and having the right to be yourself should take priority over anything else.

If a "family member" rejects you in such a way, and if said behavior is persistent, they're not truly your family. Those who don't know you are strangers, and those who make you feel pain for the sake of themselves feeling better, oppressors. It's unfortunate, and it will leave scars, but your family is who you choose it to be.

I don't know if you're Christian yourself (I couldn't stomach reading much of the OP). But if you are, I highly recommend you seek a trans-friendly church, and explain to them how you feel and how your family has been treating you. That will not only renew your faith, but give you a true, understanding family.



Mt 12:46-50: (from the NIV, but I reckon it's good enough for this part)
46 While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to him. 47 Someone told him, "Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you."

48 He replied to him, "Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?" 49 Pointing to his disciples, he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers. 50 For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother."

Is 49:15:
15 Can a woman forget her nursing child And have no compassion on the son of her womb? Even these may forget, but I will not forget you.

Nowadays's mothers have indeed been forgetting their children, but God is unchanging.

[BenKenobi]

I'm a Christian and I believe that, while homosexuality and transgender folk probably were regarded the same now, it was for different reasons (as stated before). What really annoys me is the Sodom and Gomorrah argument, but I did find a nice little verse about that.
Ezekiel 16:48-50 KJV (from BibleGateway)
48 As I live, saith the Lord God, Sodom thy sister hath not done, she nor her daughters, as thou hast done, thou and thy daughters.

49 Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.

50 And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.

Christians say that the Bible is their sword and shield. I figure I ought to use it as well. No?