->-bleeped-<- is rebellion against God

[Shana A]

->-bleeped-<- is rebellion against God

By Mike Boettcher
Dodge City Daily Globe
Posted Dec 31, 2010 @ 02:05 PM

http://www.dodgeglobe.com/opinions/x1458583597/->-bleeped-<--is-rebellion-against-God

DODGE CITY —

    Two recent front page stories in the Dodge City Globe have prompted this response. I will be accused, by some, of being an insensitive, homophobic bigot as a result of this letter. Out of fear of being politically incorrect, many have sat back, kept silent and accepted the "wisdom of men." However, far be it from me to keep silent when the wisdom of men distorts truth.

[...]     

They will probably practice transvestism / transvestitism and may also seek hormone therapy and/or surgery to bring their bodies into conformity with their perceived gender.

    The Bible has plenty to say about human sexuality. Most basic to our understanding of sex is that God created two (and only two) genders: "male and female He created them" (Genesis 1:27). All the modern-day speculation about numerous genders — or even a gender "continuum" with unlimited genders — is unbiblical.

[Muffin]

lols/scary............but mostly lols xP

[rejennyrated]

What I always want to post on these articles is "If God made only two genders then how come there are several million intersexed people in the world?"

Such geniuses are, of course, too ignorant and stupid to even know that such people exist and even if they did they would undoubtedly tell us that we were creatures of the devil and not the work of God or something equally unhelpful. Anything but confront the fact that the bible was written nearly two thousand years ago, and though God may not have changed our understanding of HER creation certainly has! 

Sadly I can't register and post my question because I don't  live in the USA so I lack the required Zip code, but if someone else would care to register and post my question I'd be most obliged! I don't guess we'll get any sensible response though...

[cynthialee]

I would like to take the stance (just too see a reaction) that I am actively thwarting gods will and I am pretty sure we have Jesus and Mohamud on the ropes. Then invite them to join the satan worship society so that we can get them set up to have their genitals removed also.

[tekla]

Apparently some people have a god that can only count to two.  Which seems kinda limiting.  My first grader could count way past that.  But then again their first grader was home schooled, so perhaps two was really gettin' up there.

[transheretic]

The author is clearly a member of the Biblical Illiterati.   What part of "and" does he not get?  That "and" leaves the door open for combinations, it would have been "or" if the classes were mutually exclusive, not "and".  Not to mention that Jesus, who had little to say on most of these identity/orientation issues DID wax on about the three different types of eunuchs and how they are as good as anyone.  Plus we have Isaiah 56 3-5 which appears to state that eunuchs (that was covering the transsexual priestesses of the ancient world) get a better place in heaven which appears to make transsexuals the actual chosen people......

True, crossdressing is verbotten (Deut 22) as is entrance to the Temple of anyone who has had their testicles smashed between two stones, but then women aren't supposed to enter the Temple either so that could be taken as an affirmation of womanhood.

[JS]

Good old Old Testament. Christianists love it, at least parts of it. They just want you to ignore the parts about stoning people for such crimes as "cursing your father and mother", and the part about not wearing clothes made of different fabrics, and the part about three daily animal sacrifices, and the part about how anyone with a "defiling skin disease" must live outside the camp and shout "Unclean! Unclean!", and the part about killing people who want to worship other gods, and all the other pieces of lunacy.

[Julie Marie]

Anytime someone goes to the Bible to prove a point or to tell someone how to live I get these nagging question popping up in my head:

Why is it that God chose between (about) 1700BC and (about) 150AD to communicate with man and divinely inspire him to write the word of God? 

What is about that time that was so special? 

Didn't God speak to us before?

Hasn't God spoken to us since? 

Why did God choose one point in time for man to forever use as a guideline for living his life?

Why didn't he keep updating his word so we can understand it in our language and in our time?

It seems to me if God is all knowing and all powerful he would have known that over time people change, languages evolve, interpretations change, circumstances change and it's ridiculous for anyone to live their life according to how people 2000-3500 years ago did.  By today's standard, they were pretty ignorant back then.

Why didn't God take those things into account when he was allegedly divinely inspiring certain people to write?

And then there's the whole man deciding what was supposed to be in the Bible and what wasn't.  Were they divinely inspired or were they politically inspired?

[Shana A]

http://www.jewishmosaic.org/verses/view/2

From Jewish Mosaic

What problem were the rabbis trying to solve?

Much of the commentary on this verse, Genesis 1:27, is an attempt to resolve two important discrepancies: 1) Both singular and plural grammatical forms are used in Genesis 1:27 to refer to the first human being(s).

[...]

The classical rabbinic commentators believed that the Torah came directly from God. According to this interpretation, every word in the Torah is both meaningful and intentional—not a single letter is wasted, and there are no mistakes. Therefore, anything that might appear to be a "contradiction" or an "error" is actually telling the reader something important about God's creation -- the insight that lies beneath must be discovered and explained. The commentaries of Rashi, Rabbi Jeremiah ben Eleazar, and Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachman all endeavor to address one or both of the following textual issues in Genesis 1:27.

The Singular/Plural Problem

An examination of the entire verse reveals that the first created human is referred to first in the singular, and then promptly in the plural. This leads to the questions: Was that first human a single or a multiple being? How can this discrepancy be explained, and what might it have to do with the "male and female" reference in the same verse?

My own interpretation of the OT is that both G-d and the first human (Adam wasn't really the first, Lilith was) are multi-gendered.

Z

[spacial]

Sadly I can't register and post my question because I don't  live in the USA so I lack the required Zip code,

I don't see a lot of point in commenting of this rather tired article. The arguments have been widely and conclusively dismissed by most Christians. The point of this article is clearly political.

But when I need to register using a zip code I generally use 90210 Which strangely seem so familiar.

[Catherine]

Firstly I would like to say that I believe there is a God or maybe many Gods....... BUT

the good books are written by PEOPLE who probably never travelled far from their homes.

The Old Testament to me seems to be a Family history with a few pointers of how to live your life. It covers around 4000 years of history. So it has a lot of the story written down as third hand. You can go through the Old Testament and work out exactly when the universe supposedly started ... it was about 6000 years ago and was a thursday (SOrt of messes up the idea of Sunday being the seventh day)

The New Testament again is hearsay written down often many years after the events by either listening to the dying apostles or writing after their death. We know the bible was cobbled together in the 3rd century to try and unite lots of differing factions of Christianity who were following the various testaments of the 13 apostles. The Bible is just four of the least controversial books about Jesus with a few more books added in. SO how it becomes the word of God is beyond me. Again this book is written to try and tell people how to live their lives.

The Koran again is someone's take on what has gone before it talks of Abraham and Jesus and other Prophets so is probbly quite realistic in that bit. But again the book is parochial and written by one person who is known to have had an undrage wife and was certainly a bigot. So how you can believe that is the word of God is again beyond me.

All of these books have so many contradictions in them it is obvious they were written by different people and the Koran was written by one person over a long time and his attitude to life changes as he gets older.

The Eastern Religions are at least pretty good with their philosophy. They do just say Live your life well and be good. The Main Religions do say this but they also mention about going off and smiting your enemies.

So to get back to the question in the original post. IF there was an all controlling God then he wouldn't make mistakes and there wouldn't be wars or famines or disasters natural or otherwise, and anyone who pontificates about Trans people by invoking the Bible and God really ought to explain the wars, disasters and famines first.

End or Rant and I apologise if I have offended anyone religious

[CaitJ]

Rebellion against who?
Never heard of him.

[JS]

Rebellion against who?
Never heard of him.

He's the invisible friend of a bunch of people. But some of them want to replace "invisible" with "everyone's", and "friend" with "master".

[CaitJ]

He's the invisible friend of a bunch of people. But some of them want to replace "invisible" with "everyone's", and "friend" with "master".

How quaint, yet totalitarian.

[Debra]

God. I guess cuz I'm not around my parents or in a different part of the country, I forget that there are still people who believe this kind of crap.

This is my response: http://www.transchristians.org/book/book-objections

[CaitJ]

God. I guess cuz I'm not around my parents or in a different part of the country, I forget that there are still people who believe this kind of crap.

This is my response: http://www.transchristians.org/book/book-objections

I'm sure I read a Bible quote somewhere that stated Jesus doesn't give a damn what gender you are - and that gender is actually irrelevant to him.

[MillieB]

I'm sure I read a Bible quote somewhere that stated Jesus doesn't give a damn what gender you are - and that gender is actually irrelevant to him.

There is something about how god couldn't care less about the body that you are in, or what you do to it, that all he even sees is your immortal soul. Which is in a lot of ways cooler than the god that wants to flay you alive for wearing a dress! It's still a load of old tut though!

[tekla]

Actually Jesus wore a dress, the pope too.

[MillieB]

The Pope terrifies me!! If you were making a movie and you had to cast an evil Pope, you'd get that guy!

[CaitJ]

the pope too.

Yes, but he's a Sith Lord, so that's okay.