Man to Man... or Woman

[eik]

You just judged that someone you don't know doesn't have the Spirit of Christ, and have assumed it your right and place to judge. You judge this--according to the Bible--because it is you who lack the spirit of Christ, and it is you who shall have that judged against you.

I didn't judge anyone as I was not referring to any poster. I was speaking hypothetically, reponding to allegations being made against me, as to which I am getting rather tired of them. So I shall stop responding. In any case, it's up to every Christian to judge the matter for themselves, otherwise the teaching I referred to would be pointless.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I'm not getting into that. The word gender meant only sex, amongst other things, until feminists corrupted the meaning from 1977. See the etymological dictionary. This new meaning became part of pop culture. It is not therefore a serious academic word. I see it as part of a new gnostic religion, an alternative to Christianity. Needless to say, it is a religion I do not adhere to.

I just wanted to see where you were coming from.

Medical science and pop culture are two different things. It's like judging thousands of people's illness based on pop culture and academia and not off the symptoms and consequences patients experience.

In other words, judging whether someone has a real illness because of academics, politics, and personal opinions not the cause, effects, and symptoms of the illness itself.

Now, you may have bias over this word transgender, gender, so have you; but, that doesn't invalidate people do have these congratulate of real symptoms all around the world (the name doesn't matter) without half of the people knowing what pop culture you're speaking of.

People's sufferings and treatment, and the validity of them, isn't based on pop culture and academics for it to be real or fake. Human biology, psychology, and so forth (the health of a person) is independent of all of that.

So, basically, you're saying people with illnesses that you disagree with are faking it-not-based on the cause and symptoms but because of politics and academica. The using information in another time period, language, culture, and religious bias to determine what is real symptoms etc and what isn't.

Transgenderism topic aside, do you see how off that sounds?

I'm not familiar with the origin of the terms gender etc but I do know from the good amount of children from all ages, all areas around the world, etc are influence, kicked out, told they were wrong, and even some here told directly they are going to hell, because of their parents religious biases. People kill themselves etc because of what you (and many people like you) believe. (The beliefs itself not you as a person)

and the interesting thing is, these consequences of people dying and their human cause are based on the bible.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I didn't judge anyone as I was not referring to any poster. I was speaking hypothetically, reponding to allegations being made against me, as to which I am getting rather tired of them. So I shall stop responding. In any case, it's up to every Christian to judge the matter for themselves, otherwise the teaching I referred to would be pointless.

You said Frank and I are trans because we got possessed by a demon as a child because he hated our parents and god, followed by implying it would otherwise have been impossible because it is your belief children have no moral autonomy, which itself makes no sense how a child can both be immoral towards their parents (and god if you believe it) but yet also lack moral agency. And then you on to judge Frank, repeatedly sating he is a Humanist and not a Christian, and now you added nit having the spirit of Christ to your list of judgements.

 

[Revoltingest]

What on Earth is an 'objective spiritual truth'?

An oxymoron.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Unnatural urges, by which I mean urges contrary to natural law, are clearly mentioned in Romans 1.


It's not defined as an illness but as a punishment for idoltary. See Romans 1.

You'd have to shorten Romans 1 so I know which points you're talking about.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I'm not getting into that. The word gender meant only sex, amongst other things, until feminists corrupted the meaning from 1977. See the etymological dictionary. This new meaning became part of pop culture. It is not therefore a serious academic word. I see it as part of a new gnostic religion, an alternative to Christianity. Needless to say, it is a religion I do not adhere to.

Something else dawned on me. If transgenderism and gender are made up terms, what exactly are you against?

It's one thing to be against pop culture, but if the illness is made up and the bible doesn't speak of it because it's made up, than I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with.

Transsexual is not gender based and not all people who are transsexual have gender dysphoria (trying not to generalize). So, I'm at a loss of what you're position is.

 

[eik]

Something else dawned on me. If transgenderism and gender are made up terms, what exactly are you against?

It's one thing to be against pop culture, but if the illness is made up and the bible doesn't speak of it because it's made up, than I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with.

I'm not saying subjective experiences are made up. I concede possession by evil spirits is very real, and has influences on the mind and body. This is a fundamental teaching of Christ. There is no attempt by scripture to mitigate the severity of the symptoms, and neither do I.

The issue is what the symptons are due to, and whether resistence is futile, as so many pretend. You allege "a condition of birth." That, in biblical terms, is arrant nonsense, unless there is a proven genetic disorder. A corrolary teaching is that resistence and trying to find a permanent cure is futile. That also is arrant nonsense: political BS.

My position is that any insistence that "gender disorder" is something you are inherently born with is untrue.

As I have previously explained to you, I think - may be it was someone else - it is due to what is known "original sin," i.e. the predisposition of the flesh to follow what is inherently wrong from birth, but to a rather more extreme degree than others. It is also due, in the modern era, to all kinds of external factors, such a poor parenting, conditioning by external propaganda, from media, political charlatans, and even atheist psychiatrists who pretend that there is no cure except in mutilation, who are in facts slaves to "political correctness" because we know that not so long ago, they held very different attitudes.

And it is also due at the same time, to an abject failure to participate in divine religion, per Romans 1, the refusal to engage in which manifests itself in divine punishment.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I'm not saying subjective experiences are made up. I concede possession by evil spirits is very real, and has influences on the mind and body. This is a fundamental teaching of Christ. There is no attempt by scripture to mitigate the severity of the symptoms, and neither do I.

Possession of spirits aren't medical illnesses and definitely not symptoms of them. The body and spirit are two different things.

I can see if you said the demons possessed a person's spirit-if going by your logic. But I don't see logically (and very much still in awe) of possession as symptoms of medical illnesses.

The issue is what the symptons are due to, and whether resistence is futile, as so many pretend. You allege "a condition of birth." That, in biblical terms, is arrant nonsense, unless there is a proven genetic disorder. A corrolary teaching is that resistence and trying to find a permanent cure is futile. That also is arrant nonsense: political BS.

Take away pop culture etc for a minute. Gender dysphoria just means one's perception of self isn't aligned with one's body. In very very basic terms. I assume it's in the category of other psychological illnesses that mirror discrepancy between identity and body.

I'm taking out terms like transgender, gender, etc etc because those are throwing you off from real symptoms to a real illness regardless the culture, language, and bias that's attached to it.

My position is that any insistence that "gender disorder" is something you are inherently born with is untrue.

As I have previously explained to you, I think - may be it was someone else - it is due to what is known "original sin," i.e. the predisposition of the flesh to follow what is inherently wrong from birth, but to a rather more extreme degree than others. It is also due, in the modern era, to all kinds of external factors, such a poor parenting, conditioning by external propaganda, from media, political charlatans, and even atheist psychiatrists who pretend that there is no cure except in mutilation, who are in facts slaves to "political correctness" because we know that not so long ago, they held very different attitudes.

Unless medical doctors are lying or maybe tricked? that sounds preposterous.

Atheist psychologist?? I've been to many psychologist and only one told me his religion. And I quote: "I'm not going to talk about lesbianism. I disagree with it. We're not going to talk about it." My former therapist was catholic.

Many doctors and psychologist follow the bible just they don't mix their profession and skills with their religious convictions. Gosh. If they did that, and since majority of people here in the States are christian, we'd run out of doctors.

I'm taking out politics since medical illnesses and politics don't (and shouldn't) match up.

And it is also due at the same time, to an abject failure to participate in divine religion, per Romans 1, the refusal to engage in which manifests itself in divine punishment.

That's a generalization. Many people who suffer from identity/body discrepancy tend to be christian. They just know the difference between religious beliefs and medical symptoms. Many doctors do.

I'm still at awe that you don't?

 

[nPeace]

It false because there is no common ancestor for all languages. This story claims here was and that the rest came from there.

Huh? I don't know what you are talking about, sorry. Do you? It doesn't look that way to me.

I cited the WPATH Standards of Care as a source of good information to support my claims for this thread and for the benefit of others. That is citing.


Your citing a movie that involved zookeepers. I am referrencing facts about biology and geograpgy.

??? You lost me on this one, since what I presented is not about zoo keeping.

You ask thatvquestion and yet you tell me what I say is not accurate?

Can you answer the question, or do you not want to, since the answer does not agree with your statement.

Theu know more than you or I because it's their life.

What is their life, has nothing to do with the account in Genesis... now does it.

Yes. The waters could not have been calm with such a storm.

It's not just sailing. The ship had no meams for navigation, no means to survive larger waves, and no means to prevent it capsizing. There would be no way to control or steer it. It also lacked necessary features to allow to survive those conditions.

Says you, and not the Biblical account.
Would you take a child that can't swim; tell the child you will help them; throw them in the water, and walk away.
God instructed Noah what to do. God brought the animals to Noah. God closed the door.
What else did God do? God carried Noah and family, safely through the waters... according to what is written.

 

[eik]

Possession of spirits aren't medical illnesses and definitely not symptoms of them. The body and spirit are two different things.

I can see if you said the demons possessed a person's spirit-if going by your logic. But I don't see logically (and very much still in awe) of possession as symptoms of medical illnesses.

A medical illness includes a psychological illness, but in any case, all kinds of medical illnesses are imputed as having their origination in evil spirits in the bible.

I never said that body and spirit were not two different things. But they are not independent.

Take away pop culture etc for a minute. Gender dysphoria just means one's perception of self isn't aligned with one's body. In very very basic terms. I assume it's in the category of other psychological illnesses that mirror discrepancy between identity and body.

I'm taking out terms like transgender, gender, etc etc because those are throwing you off from real symptoms to a real illness regardless the culture, language, and bias that's attached to it.

Unless medical doctors are lying or maybe tricked? that sounds preposterous.

Few people's conception of themselves aligns with reality, in actual fact. it doesn't mean that all have medical illnesses, but many have spiritual issues. Some peoples' perceptions are more perverse than others, and the lunatic asylums used to be full of such people, before they were all closed down.

Atheist psychologist?? I've been to many psychologist and only one told me his religion. And I quote: "I'm not going to talk about lesbianism. I disagree with it. We're not going to talk about it." My former therapist was catholic.

May be I was guilty of trying to confine them to an implausible consensus, although I think you'll find that religious convictions are not allowed to play any part in their assessments, otherwise they'll be sacked (certainly the case in the UK).

Many doctors and psychologist follow the bible just they don't mix their profession and skills with their religious convictions. Gosh. If they did that, and since majority of people here in the States are christian, we'd run out of doctors.

Don't follow you.

I'm taking out politics since medical illnesses and politics don't (and shouldn't) match up.

They do, because the treatments today are defined by what politicians allow. In the UK politicians are planning to ban 'gay conversion therapy.'
PM pledges ban on 'gay conversion therapy'

That's a generalization. Many people who suffer from identity/body discrepancy tend to be christian. They just know the difference between religious beliefs and medical symptoms. Many doctors do.

Unfortunately much christianity in the US is very superficial. In any event, I know there are many people going around calling themselves Christians who are forbidden by the bible from doing so. Many evangelists in fact. What you might casually call a Christian, I wouldn't necessarily agree with. There is religious Christianity and there is cultural christianity and the two are not the same. Christian is a very abused word at present.

Thus giving up the world for God is very antithetical to many Christians. How many of these Christians watch TV, go to the movies, immerse themselves in every kind of pagan activity? Our society is not devoted to holiness. You can't fool God. Many people try. You have to give up the love of the world to be a Christian.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

not the Biblical account.

What the Bible gives us, per the Bible's account, is not a sea worthy vessel. What we have per the Bible is a verse saying all the people of the world were of one language until god made it not that way.
And because the Bible doesn't even mention transgender people, its rubbish to use to attack transgender people.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Those are divisions among muslims. But the religion is straight, unless your mind is crooked.

Islam is the collective of muslims.
Just like christianity is the collective of christians.

Doesn't change the fact that there are many different denominations.
They all read the same book.

 

[Piculet]

And because the Bible doesn't even mention transgender people, its rubbish to use to attack transgender people.

That's one sad argument and I think you know why.

Islam is the collective of muslims.

No. Islam is a religion. It's a doctrine. You can read a book about it if it helps.

 

[nPeace]

What the Bible gives us, per the Bible's account, is not a sea worthy vessel. What we have per the Bible is a verse saying all the people of the world were of one language until god made it not that way.

It seems to me, you read the Bible as some people do, from a pure fleshly perspective.
It is no wonder skeptics create their own narrative, and never get the correct picture.

According to the Bible, David was not a battle-hardy warrior. He was but a shepherd boy. Yet, he defeated a warrior, feet above his height... with just a sling and a stone.

The Israelites were not an army of "Rambos", yet thousands of experienced soldiers fled from before them, and fell by the sword.

Jesus didn't look like royalty, did he.

I could go on, but to recount all the events to make this point, would be long, and still mean nothing to the fleshly person.

The ark God instructed Noah to build, may not look seaworthy to you, but why should it look seaworthy?
Like those examples I mentioned the others like it, all say one thing. The almighty God doesn't seek to impress man.
Perhaps many of the scoffers were laughing at the "unimpressive little box Noah was building". "Can it even float? Har Har." They must have wailed.
They stopped laughing though... just before they drowned.

(Zechariah 4:6) . . .‘“Not by a military force, nor by power, but by my spirit,” says Jehovah . . .

God can use a flea, and show man they are not as big and important, as they imagine themselves to be.
(1 Corinthians 1:18-31)

And because the Bible doesn't even mention transgender people, its rubbish to use to attack transgender people.

With that kind of thinking, we would all be babes, needing milk wouldn't we. (Hebrews 5:11-14)

Imagine that growing up as a child, your grandmother taught you cleanliness. You never saw, what we know today as, toothpaste; maybe Palmolive (Cream); Shampoo; soap...
Now since your grandmother never mentioned these things... don't use them...Your grandma's words were useless.

Right though. The Bible is useless to babes.

I hope I didn't miss any of your posts. I was away, a while. I'll check back, just in case.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It seems to me, you read the Bible as some people do, from a pure fleshly perspective.
It is no wonder skeptics create their own narrative, and never get the correct picture.

According to the Bible, David was not a battle-hardy warrior. He was but a shepherd boy. Yet, he defeated a warrior, feet above his height... with just a sling and a stone.

The Israelites were not an army of "Rambos", yet thousands of experienced soldiers fled from before them, and fell by the sword.

Jesus didn't look like royalty, did he.

I could go on, but to recount all the events to make this point, would be long, and still mean nothing to the fleshly person.

The ark God instructed Noah to build, may not look seaworthy to you, but why should it look seaworthy?
Like those examples I mentioned the others like it, all say one thing. The almighty God doesn't seek to impress man.
Perhaps many of the scoffers were laughing at the "unimpressive little box Noah was building". "Can it even float? Har Har." They must have wailed.
They stopped laughing though... just before they drowned.

(Zechariah 4:6) . . .‘“Not by a military force, nor by power, but by my spirit,” says Jehovah . . .

God can use a flea, and show man they are not as big and important, as they imagine themselves to be.
(1 Corinthians 1:18-31)


With that kind of thinking, we would all be babes, needing milk wouldn't we. (Hebrews 5:11-14)

Imagine that growing up as a child, your grandmother taught you cleanliness. You never saw, what we know today as, toothpaste; maybe Palmolive (Cream); Shampoo; soap...
Now since your grandmother never mentioned these things... don't use them...Your grandma's words were useless.

Right though. The Bible is useless to babes.

I hope I didn't miss any of your posts. I was away, a while. I'll check back, just in case.

If you did miss any I'll just assume it's more of the same. You make excuses for the Bible (how convenient the Biblical evidence that we have and how it can't work that way gets downplayed and dismissed).
Thus, the Bible is absurd to use in such a discussion. It doesn't mention transgender people and it consistently reveals itself to be ignorant of science, geology, geography, and everything else it tries to explain but fails at doing so.
You want to turn to the Bible to tell us why it's bad to transition, but the Bible is so far off base from fact it doesn't even get the value of pi correct.

 

[nPeace]

If you did miss any I'll just assume it's more of the same. You make excuses for the Bible (how convenient the Biblical evidence that we have and how it can't work that way gets downplayed and dismissed).
Thus, the Bible is absurd to use in such a discussion. It doesn't mention transgender people and it consistently reveals itself to be ignorant of science, geology, geography, and everything else it tries to explain but fails at doing so.
You want to turn to the Bible to tell us why it's bad to transition, but the Bible is so far off base from fact it doesn't even get the value of pi correct.

Yes, I would assume it's more of the same arguments made that skeptics want to believe, as opposed to arguments that are made with any reason, or consideration for what is actually in the Bible.
The Pi argument for example has been shown to be one of those old, weak, torn to shreds, and trashed, "Let's try this one, and see if we can distract from what we can't deal with" arguments.

As for the claim that the Bible is ignorant where science, geology, and geography is concerned... perhaps you might want to tell that to the archaeologist, because they don't seem to know.
Perhaps modern names of places, and things have got you confused.

Don't hurt your head.
This is an incomplete list of places, lands, and countries mentioned in the Bible.

"Real" scientists don't claim to know everything, and "real" scientists accept that they are not always right about many things. They can't even understand the amazingly functioning organ inside their own head.
So for one to make the statement that the Bible is ignorant about science, I think one needs to ask themselves, "Do I really know what the Bible contains, or do I read it with a personal bias? Do scientists really know what they claim to know, or is it really just what they believe? Am I on the side of truth, or am I just living a lie?"

Did you know medicine was practiced long before modern science was even thought of... or ToE was even an idea... and mentioned in the Bible?
That's one reason why Ben Carson doesn't "gulp down the Dar-Wine". He didn't need evolution to teach him about the brain.
Seems that organ keeps coming up. Do you really believe your brain is a product of evolution?
I think some people say they believe, but I don't think they do. I think they accept what they want, and for personal reasons.

I see though, you want to discuss what the Bible has to say, on transgender, and transitioning.
I think that's good.
I could do that, the only problem is, it's not practical for one to think they can live in a house that would never be built.
In other words, the roots come before the stalk, and it seems to me, you want to bypass the roots.
The Bible addresses the root.

So if you can't identify who, or what you are, then certainly, the Bible is indeed very useful here.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

That's one reason why Ben Carson doesn't "gulp down the Dar-Wine". He didn't need evolution to teach him about the brain.

He was a surgeon, not a scientist. A surgeon doesn't need to know the finer points of evolutionary theory to do their job but I personally wouldn't have someone so divorced from reality operating on me.

 

[nPeace]

He was a surgeon, not a scientist. A surgeon doesn't need to know the finer points of evolutionary theory to do their job but I personally wouldn't have someone so divorced from reality operating on me.

We all have opinions, and often feel they are right. I don't know the man personally, but I don't think you really know what is reality. From what little I do know of Ben, he is more in touch with reality.
You, like Rival, and others, admit (even if you didn't voice it) that you go back and forth about who or what you are.
If one does not know that, then they will choose what they think they are.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

We all have opinions, and often feel they are right. I don't know the man personally, but I don't think you really know what is reality. From what little I do know of Ben, he is more in touch with reality.
You, like Rival, and others, admit (even if you didn't voice it) that you go back and forth about who or what you are.
If one does not know that, then they will choose what they think they are.

Ben Carson may be a skilled surgeon but the man strikes me as an idiot in political and social matters. No - if you deny evolutionary theory, you are far from reality and that is fact, not opinion. It's as stupid as denying the theory of gravity, germ theory or believing in a flat Earth.

I never said that I go back and forth about who or what I am. The only major area of confusion I've had about myself is which spiritual path to commit to. Otherwise? I know who I am and it doesn't shift much.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

"Do I really know what the Bible contains, or do I read it with a personal bias? Do scientists really know what they claim to know, or is it really just what they believe? Am I on the side of truth, or am I just living a lie?"

The better queation is "I am making excuses because I don't really have a good argument?" You cant defend any of the charges that the Bible is wrong without making absurd claims, claims thatvalways lack evidence. You say the Bible never says everyone spoke the same language amd dont know that even though the Bible says that. We don't know what the Ark was like even though the gives us a blueprint, a blueprint for ship lacking things like a sterm amd rudder amd thus not seaworthy. And now for pi its no defense at all, only that somehow its a tired argument. But what the Bible gives is a value exacrly equal to three.
And despite all these shortcomings, all this scientific and medical ignorance of the Bible, you want to judge us based on this religious text of ancient superstitions?
And evolution isn't in the Bible, by the way.