"Sophia, the Trinity, and our Transgender God"
Elder Derrick Kikuchi — June 6, 2004
http://www.fprespa.org/tggod.htm

What proof does he have that there is even a God period?

Well we can always look at scripture; Genesis 1:27; "So God created man in His own image. In the image of God he created them, male & female he created them." Genesis 2: 21; "So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep.  While the man slept, the Lord God took out one of the man's ribs & closed up the opening.  Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib, & he brought her to the man." 
I know that when some people read Genesis they say that chapter one is an over view of creation and chapter 2 is a more detailed account of creation; and it is.  I believe that at the very less the first man was Trans and what God took from him we the essence of the woman from the man and that is what he used to create the first woman.  No if that is true then what is the Christians' problem?  I claim to be evangelical and attended an evangelical seminary & still see creation that way. 

I neither subscribe to the Christian faith nor do I diss it. I respect it from a distance as I respect all faiths and diss none. That goes for atheism too. My own faith is Pagan. It doesn't matter to me whether the Christian God can be proven to exist. What matters is this gentleman is helping to talk Christians out of transphobia and get them to see positive values for transgender, anyone who does that within a queerphobic religion deserves kudos.

I think he makes a good case for a vibrant and varied god.

This idea holds true to concepts my wife told me about while attending seminary.

Some of the Hebrew words for "god" lack a gender; part of the idea was that G'D was beyond gender while possessing attributes of both. It was postulated that the idea of a masculine god came later, as the patriarchic society was taking shape.

As to whether or not the existence of God can be proven, who cares? Atheists require proof; theists don't. I cannot prove that my patron god and my matron goddess exist. I believe they do. I make no claims that do indeed exists, and I acknowledge the possibility that they might not.

Proof negates faith.

Sounds like making god in our image and likeness.

Quite the opposite, Tekla.

"God" is something the human mind cannot fully comprehend. So, we try to use language to describe what is beyond our understanding.

The idea of trying to consign "god" to one gender or the other seems to be, to me, borderline blasphemy. That's remaking god in one's image, to me.

There are pagans who will says that sexual binaries prove that the Divine must be in 2 parts, 1 male and 1 female, because that's how humans and other animals breed.

The idea that the Abrahamic god would be seen as transgender or being both genders is supported by the language used in surviving texts. Older texts have words that imply no or both genders.

But still, any argument taken far enough will end in semantics. If I understand your comments on religion properly, nothing I ever post will be accepted by you as you reject it outright. Perhaps I'm wrong, but that's the way it seems.

Are we making deities in our own images? Some folks might do that. From what I've encountered, it's usually people trying to find a way to relate to that which they can't fully describe. For others, the concept of the Divine is so complete and total, that it MUST be transgender because it is transcendent.

Is that making something in our images? It doesn't seem that way to me.

Jnana (knowledge) must have bhakti (faith) to contemplete the All. (I believe that is Shankara. If not is was Vivekananda.) Both humans trying, as always, to convey the ineffable through the medium of their very effable writings and words.

Buddha, perhaps, said it best when it comes to such matters: "Those who speak it, don't know it. Those who know it, don't speak it."

And, Meister Eckhart: "The eye with which I contemplate God is the eye with which God contemplates me."

Nichole

Quote from: pennyjane on May 23, 2008, 06:14:15 AM
in just a couple of months my wife and i will be renewing our marriage vows, with our pastor presiding in our church sanctuary.  so, we will be having not only a transsexual wedding but a same sex one as well!  i'm disappointed that since the recent ruling of the permanent judicial commission our pastor will not be able to state nor imply that this is a "marriage" but calling it the wedding that it is will be no small step.  having read that ruling i think that if we called it a "marriege" we might grease up the wheels of justice for another run at full recognition.

If you are already married and are simply renewing your vows, even if it is same sex now, why would the pastor not be allowed to hold it out as a marriage?  In the eyes of the state, the church and everyone, if nothing has been done to dissolve the original marriage, then it is legal and you are already married.  I can't see why the PJC would have a problem with that.  Especially since it would seem to be getting into legal ground that the PCUSA probably doesn't want to tread on.

But then, I'm not a church scholar so who knows.

Beverly