An Ethic of Embodiment

[stephaniec]

An Ethic of Embodiment

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rev-miller-jen-hoffman/an-ethic-of-embodiment_b_8322172.html?utm_hp_ref=transgender

The Huffington Post/Rev. Miller Jen Hoffman Posted:  11/13/2015 1:15 pm EST    Updated:  11/13/2015 1:59 pm EST

2015-10-17-1445110131-3544068-genderbend.jpg

"Paul writes in 1 Corinthians: For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. For in the one Spirit we were all baptized into one body -- Jews or Greeks, slaves or free -- and we were all made to drink of one Spirit. Indeed, the body does not consist of one member but of many."

[Tristyn]

Ok. Don't get me wrong. From what I read, I think this article was nice and all. But where in the Bible does it ever mention the words, "transgender" or "genderqueer?"  I see what the author is saying, but it never said these words in any translation of the Bible I ever read. And in my opinion, just because the Bible says one thing doesn't make it absolute fact for everyone. It kinda annoys me how people use "Well, the Bible says..." theory to explain commonly asked unanswered questions of life. >.>

~Nixy~

[Deborah]

I understand what the author is saying and agree in principle but the article in combining biblical text with an abundance of postmodern terminology comes across as nonsensical and will be unconvincing to anyone not already convinced.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kellam]

Thanks for sharing this stephaniec. I have regained my lost connection to God recently. It is things like this that have helped me heal those wounds that severed me from that body so many years ago when I listened to hate instead of love. I do not adhere to any faith traditions but I was raised in one. To read someone who is part of that tradition affirm my sense of self is of great help.

[Tristyn]

I understand what the author is saying and agree in principle but the article in combining biblical text with an abundance of postmodern terminology comes across as nonsensical and will be unconvincing to anyone not already convinced.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This was exactly what I was trying to say in my previous post, but you stated this much better. Unless someone could actually show me the precise verse and chapter in there sayin' those words "transgender" and "genderqueer," then I'll shut up. But I highly doubt that's even possible unless its modified text in there to meet the changing times of today. >.>

~Nixy~

[Kellam]

The whole bible is modified text. The old testament was oral histories first, women were the story tellers of the ancient middle eastern tribes. The Jesus bits were first put to print one hundred years or so after the death of the protagonist. On top of that consider that the differing viewpoints of each book of the new testement represent the viewpoints of their original tellers. Think about Einstein and the theory of relativity, no two observers can observe the same thing the same way. So repeated story telling for one hundred years written in Hebrew. Translated to Greek, to Latin, to German, to English. Edited by the patriarchy (kings, popes and priests) and on and on into modern day versions like The Living Bible put together in the 1970's or so. Or my favorite The Jefferson Bible assembled by Thomas Jefferson which took out the religion and kept only the moral lessons. The bible is as mutable as the human form itself. It is a living thing that is merely a suggestion of ethical dilemmas written by fallible human hands. They applied their own socio-cultural biases, intentionally and unintentionally. The word of God is a metaphor at best. We can add or subtract any word we wish and they will be true. The only argument over syntax that holds any value is over the first Hebrew transcripts.

For me this was as powerful to my personal experience of divinity as the rest of that experience. I am just as interested in Buddha as I am Jesus or any other person who has had a connection with the divine and chose or chooses to share it. I learned postmodern lingo from my study of contemporary art practices and queer theory. This piece spoke to me in a language I could understand. That to me is a valid point of access that helps me find resolution to my feelings of exclusion from a faith tradition that meant so much to me. It won't speak to everyone just like the art that has informed so much of my life. That is neither good nor bad. We all have our sources from which we draw moral lessons and they are as equal as the humans they touch.   

[Tristyn]

The whole bible is modified text. The old testament was oral histories first, women were the story tellers of the ancient middle eastern tribes. The Jesus bits were first put to print one hundred years or so after the death of the protagonist. On top of that consider that the differing viewpoints of each book of the new testement represent the viewpoints of their original tellers. Think about Einstein and the theory of relativity, no two observers can observe the same thing the same way. So repeated story telling for one hundred years written in Hebrew. Translated to Greek, to Latin, to German, to English. Edited by the patriarchy (kings, popes and priests) and on and on into modern day versions like The Living Bible put together in the 1970's or so. The bible is as mutable as the human form itself. It is a living thing that is merely a suggestion of ethical dilemmas written by fallible human hands. The word of God is a metaphor at best. We can add or subtract any word we wish and they will be true. The only argument over syntax that holds any value is over the first Hebrew transcripts.

For me this was as powerful to my personal experience of divinity as the rest of that experience. I am just as interested in Buddha as I am Jesus or any other person who has had a connection with the divine and chose to share it. I learned postmodern lingo from my study of contemporary art practices and queer theory. This piece spoke to me in a language I could understand. That to me is a valid point of access that helps me find resolution to my feelings of exclusion from a faith tradition That meant so much to me. It won't speak to everyone. That is neither good nor bad. We all have our sources from which we draw moral lessons and they are as equal as the humans they touch.

Yup!^^ I know. You will never hear these authentic facts on any documentary from tv cause information means power and the people in charge are greedy and not ever wanting to share. >.>

I could go all out on this and unleash every fact but I will refrain from doing that cause lots of people don't like to hear the facts.

~Nixy~

[Kellam]

Yup!^^ I know. You will never hear these authentic facts on any documentary from tv cause information means power and the people in charge are greedy and not ever wanting to share. >.>

I could go all out on this and unleash every fact but I will refrain from doing that cause lots of people don't like to hear the facts.

~Nixy~

You should! People didn't like what Jesus had to say either because it was a (Buddhist) truth. He was killed by the power structure as an enemy of the state. My Mom has been doing that since before I was born. She is part of a group of lay scholars and historians pulling women's roles back to the forefront of the judeo-christian tradition. We all need to share what we have learned so that we can hear eachother and grow as souls together and individually.

[Kellam]

The Buddhist bit was suggested by a documentary I saw suggesing that the three wise men from the east were Buddhist monks looking for the reincarnated soul of one of their own. There is a Buddhist monastery in India that claims to be Jesus' resting place. They say he returned there, to his place of learning, after the crucifixion ordeal. He had been trying to spread Buddhist theology to the Hebrew world. I personally love that story because of the connection aspect.

[Tristyn]

You should! People didn't like what Jesus had to say either because it was a (Buddhist) truth. He was killed by the power structure as an enemy of the state. My Mom has been doing that since before I was born. She is part of a group of lay scholars and historians pulling women's roles back to the forefront of the judeo-christian tradition. We all need to share what we jave learned so that we can hear eachother and grow as souls together and individually.

Maybe I am, admittedly, afraid. The way people's lives have ended were not nice if they shared "too much" info with the populace. Yes, so many great icons of history have lost their lives by the hand(s) of the majority and those in charge. I know that Christ was raised according to the King James Bible, but it doesn't necessarily justify the horror he endured for the sake of beings infected by The Human Condition. I could get so deep in this. But I would rather not trudge those murky waters, so to speak. >.<

~Nixy~

[Kellam]

If it helps at all my mother was in a discussion yesterday with one of her online faith groups. The topic was the idea that Jesus was trans. If you can accept the idea that God placed the soul of Jesus in Mary's womb and she was the sole contributor to his genetic makeup. Well then Mary only had female chromosomes. Which means Jesus had to be a trans man.

[Tristyn]

If it helps at all my mother was in a discussion yesterday with one of her online faith groups. The topic was the idea that Jesus was trans. If you can accept the idea that God placed the soul of Jesus in Mary's womb and she was the sole contributor to his genetic makeup. Well then Mary only had female chromosomes. Which means Jesus had to be a trans man.

This makes alot more sense than the way I was raised to forcefully believe. I never thought it this way. Your mom and I should hang out! I crave intelligent company. 

~Nixy~

[Kellam]

[Michelle-G]

Ok. Don't get me wrong. From what I read, I think this article was nice and all. But where in the Bible does it ever mention the words, "transgender" or "genderqueer?"

With all due respect, I think you are making yourself part of the problem. Biblical literalists see the Bible as a rule book, and if something is not explicitly stated then the concept is invalid.

But if the Bible is a book of guiding principles then this article is spot on. The Bible doesn't say "Thou shalt not smoke", but it does say that you should take care of your body. Smoking would be, therefore, a bad idea. That's the idea behind trans acceptance. We don't have to be specifically mentioned in order to have a place at the table.

[Deborah]

The Bible is a book of guiding principals but it is also the centrality of a religion with 2000 years of theology.  If you want to speak to an audience that already agreed with you then this article receives a standing ovation.  But if you want to speak with an audience that's on the fence or on the other side then it misses the mark.  To get through to them using biblical arguments you have to speak in a language they understand.

[Michelle-G]

To get through to them using biblical arguments you have to speak in a language they understand.

This assumes that all Christians are biblical literalists, and they are not. While it may be true that conservative Christians are [selectively] literal, progressives frequently are not.

Regardless, my objection was with a previous post that cited the lack of specificity in scripture regarding the words transgender and genderqueer. Such specificity is unnecessary unless one is a literalist, and my experience has shown me that this audience is nearly impossible to penetrate regardless of whether we are talking religion, gender politics or radfem trans exclusionism.

[Deborah]

I wasn't talking about biblical literalist.  Nothing will convince them. I was talking about 2000 years of accumulated theology and that's entirely separate from literalism. 

I realize that some Christians today do not feel obligated to established theology and recreate the religion as they go.  But the overwhelmingly vast majority do adhere to established theology including the Catholic Church, Orthodox Church, and many Protestant denominations.  That's probably well over 80% of the Christians in existence.

Creating new theology won't be received by them.  What will work is arguments from evidence and science to show that this is real and not something someone chooses on a whim.

As for the literalists, they are a lost cause.