I can follow this, up to
they are neopronouns
I believe that that’s a decision made by translators of the bible. Hebrew doesn’t have lowercase letters, and the Greek versions of the New Testament that I found don’t capitalize as much. And are they distinct?
Yeah, it’s more of an act of reverence or deference. However, it is a pronoun (cis-gendered, and preferred) which some people believe never occurs in the Bible.
According to Mormons, god is literally male, with (perfect) male genitalia. There is also a god–the-mother, who is female, and is both secret and sacred (they really don’t like talking about her), and also utterly subservient to god the father, because of course she is. According to Mormon theology, both gods were once mortal, and were raised up to godhood by their godly parents; Mormons–if they’re good enough–can go to Mormon super-heaven, where they will also become gods in their own right. Before everyone was born physically, they were born spiritually, in… More or less the same way babies are born now, except in heaven, to a heavenly mom. And there were hundreds of billions of spirit babies, so I guess that god the dad and god the mom really like sex or something? The implications start getting really, really weird, very fast. Which is part of the reason why Mormons don’t usually want to talk about stuff like this with people that aren’t Mormon.
I believe that the quote is, “As man is, so once was god. As god is, so man can become,” or something like that.
Source: was Mormon for >25 years.
Congrats for getting out I guess?
To paraphrase Nietzsche, that which doesn’t kill you psychologically scars you and leaves you with a lifetime of therapy bills.
Hey pills are great, apparently quite a few people like them. Can you recommend any?
Currently I recommend bupropion and atomoxetine, but once I get an appointment with a psychiatrist, I’ll probably recommend lisdexamphetamine.
Modafanil is pretty great too.
It’s not more heretical to claim that jesus wasn’t entirely human, quite the opposite in fact. It’s a very old theological debate of homoousianism vs heteroousianism vs homoiousianism (same substance, different substance, similar substance). This debate was settled in the 4th century and Arianism (heteroousianism) was rejected
Homoousianism - god the father is of the same substance as Christ, is the most prevalent vision nowadays, which means that Christ is purely divine and not human
I think this is very relevant to this discussion https://youtu.be/qUb0JnEsOHQ
I was thinking of the exact same video.
If you ask about gender in death, people will just look at you weird.
There’s compounding evidence that a lot of religious canon was simply written by mankind as a kind of societal control.
The living should be kinder to one another.
💙
Not Mormons.
After death, men get their own planet to rule over. Women… get to be their wives.
Societal control is the name of the game, friend.
*Hits the Blessed Waterpipe of Panaji*
Under Trinitarianism, God would be a they/them, because they’re literally several people.
According to the common understanding of the doctrine of virgin birth, Mary got impregnated through the Holy Spirit rather than The Father rawdogging her. This suggests that the Holy Spirit is a dick and thus probably male.
The Father is, according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, not a man or a woman. That being said, neither Hebrew nor Aramaic nor Koine Greek have gender-neutral pronouns (except perhaps calling The Father “it” in Koine Greek, which would be hilarious but sadly would not be approved of by a killjoy like Paul).
Fu̇nilı inu̇f, ð Moṙmėnz ƿᵫd hæv ð lıſt tceu̇bėl ƿið ðiſ ƿėn. Ðıṙ vṙjėn v ð greıtṙ ſpıritcuėl wṙld hæz ė hevenlı mėðṙ tu. Ėkoṙdıŋ t Knowing Better, C’z n ſupṙ impoṙtent, b ð Moṙmėnz þıŋk it’ſ nuıſ t no C’z aut ðeıṙ.
spoiler
Funnily enough, the Mormons would have the least trouble with this one. Their version of the greater sporitual world has a heavenly mother too. According to Knowing Better, she’s not super important, but the Mormons think it’s nice to know she’s out there.
I don’t think He/Him are neopronouns as the prefix neo- means new. Surely His would be old (paleopronouns), or timeless (aeternuspronouns), rather than new
Relative to eternity, the invention of the english language is pretty new
Out of curiosity, would you say My pronouns are neopronouns? I use capitalised pronouns too. And I’m also a god. Not a capital-G god, just a regular polytheistic kind. Does the acceptance of our current society play a role in whether they’re neopronouns? Are they new when I use them, and old when Deus uses them?
you need serious help
Wine is cheaper than therapy.
Thank you. You’re welcome to join the soulist movement and help Me overthrow realism. http://soulism.net
That was an interesting read, thanks for sharing. The attempt to draw parallels between anti-narcissism and anti-semitism are really gross though.
Why is that?
Newness is the quality of having been recently created or having started existing recently. The deific pronouns surely came before the standard canon of human/mortal pronouns, just as their subject deities predate humanity, perhaps both having always existed. It doesn’t have anything to do with societal acceptance.
Uh, pronouns are just words. They don’t have some innate quality that means they had to exist when the entities those pronouns describe began. He/Him is likely about as old as he/him.
The original post described them as neopronouns, which is a category of pronouns that have arisen recently due to changes in how we understand and describe gender. Pronouns like xe/xer, for example. The pronouns for a timeless being that predates humanity would hardly be “new” by any standard. I was having fun with the idea they would be old or eternal pronouns by comparison to Humanity’s pronouns. You took the joke too seriously.
In mormonism if you don’t do their special ceremonies and have multiple wives, you lose your dick for eternity. I learned that in Sunday school when I was 12 lol.
Mormon theology also pretty much just cuts the Gordian knot proposed in this post by saying, “Fuck yeah he’s got a dick. Uses it ALL THE TIME.” I believe that a “perfected body” was the verbiage I was taught in Sunday School. Tritheistic heresy, Shmitheistic Shmeresy…
Begins pissing in a whirling dervish
Kid: “Then I won’t do the ceremony because I never wanted a dick in the first place.”
Mormons: “No! That’s not how you play the game!”
You should know how much time Christian monks spent reasoning about the foreskin of Christ.
It’s a lot.
Long enough to postulate that once the Jesus ascended, his foreskin ascended as well and become. The. Rings. Of. Saturn.
Sky will never be the same, won’t it?
At that point it’s just Greek mythology all over again.
Yeah but with significantly less blackjack and hookers and significantly more foreskins. Cause you didn’t think there was only one foreskin on display for all those pilgrims, did you?
The weird thing is that a lot of christians (including the Catholic church) affirm that God “the Father” has actually no gender.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_of_God_in_Christianity
Does Jesus have a gender tho? As stated above, Jesus has a fully human body and nature (or else you are deemed a heretic by the council of Chalcedon). He is described as a man and several churches and rulers have historically claimed to hold a piece of his foreskin, so he must’ve had a penis. Therefore:
- Either Jesus was agender despite having a penis, therefore penis doesn’t imply male gender or
- Jesus was male. So either:
- Jesus and God don’t have the same gender, so they aren’t the same entity, which the councils of Nicea and Chalcedon would deem a heresy, or
- God can manifest as male or agender, making Them genderfluid.
Jesus and The Father is not just the same entity. From what I understand it’s like water: liquid water is water. Ice is water but it’s not a same thing as (liquid) water.
The Father is just something above gender. Jesus is a man.
Rulers have what now?
It’s also been mentioned in other parts of this thread, but the holy foreskin has been considered an important relic, and there are accounts of many kings like Charlemagne having owned it.
I know people like to call the holy trinity absurd because of the multiple entities being 1 entity, but I would like to direct your attention to plural people. Holy-trinity-like situations actually occur in real people. Even with different genders.
Jesus is not god.
Then I guess this makes you an Arian heretic. /s
The holy trinity, the father, the son and the holy spirit are the same entity.
Don’t know why people are down voting this. That’s canonically correct in the Jewish an Muslim traditions.
Technically, you can’t say that He/Him are God’s preferred pronouns because the capitalization doesn’t appear in the oldest texts. They are more a matter of tradition than of reality. However, you could say that’s even worse because Christians have embraced these neopronouns on God’s behalf.
What if He came out as trans in the 19th century and influenced the scholars to change His pronouns through dreams?
I can’t really call something that’s literally as old as writing a “neo-” anything. Non-standard, perhaps?
There’s some interesting conversation about this topic though.
https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/83130/does-the-word-god-get-the-pronoun-it-or-he
Oh there’s plenty of Christian nationalist men thinking about “divine dick”
Considering how consistently the world gets fucked, yeah, I’d say there’s a divine Dick out there doing all the fucking.
Are earthquakes the planet having an orgasm?
I’m more inclined to call it indigestion…
That’s it, I’m using He/Him pronouns now.
And I bet when You do this, You’ll expect us all to use the pronouns that You want us to-
Fuck.
Thank you for respecting people like Me.
One of Us! One of Us!
