My pastor denied my gender

[older]

On 8/3/2019 at 2:07 AM, LogicalFallacy said:

 

Amazing. I never knew. That's it, I'm a flat earther now, I will....

 

wait... how come the moon when photographed from the US is inverted when photographed from NZ?

The camera is upside down.

 

7 hours ago, LogicalFallacy said:

 

Maybe New Zealand doesn't exist? 

 

Duuu duuuhh duuuunnnn!

I've been to New Zealand and I can verify that it does exist. But the Kiwis know what a good deal they have and are very good at hiding it from the rest of the world.

[Georgia]

18 hours ago, ficino said:

 

Re your If - Then conditional: no, the geocentric model is not correct. Therefore we are not at the center of the universe, except in the trivial sense that any point can be construed to be at the center.

 

From what accredited university have you earned a Ph.D., and in what scientific field? What publications in refereed venues have you published?

 

I am guessing, the answers to these questions are "none."

 

Go away. You obviously have no expertise in the relevant disciplines.

Your extremely rude. I asked kindly not to be called names, such a nutter, crack pot, someone also said I'm delusional with this topic and my disorder will effect other topics too. Attack my views but not me personally, that's absolutely not fair. 

 

Go away- for what ? Is this not a place to debate? Don't patronise me because I have an alternative view, I would not do the same to you. What does it matter if I don't have a PHD? In an accredited university that is part of the institute that I believe has deceived us all- what sense does that make? I am educated to masters degree level- Queen Mary University of London- check it out if your that interested. 

 

I was taught what the system wants me to know, no more than that. 

 

Debate amongst yourselves, I'm out. 

[LogicalFallacy]

Obviously having a masters degree doesn't preclude one from running off with conspiracy theories, or holding to ancient writings because of ones religious predilections.

 

What conspiracy theories have we heard thus far?

 

Hmm Spherical earth, carbon dating, something to do with science blocking crazy shit that has no relation to reality, evolution was mentioned I believe. No doubt that Darwin person set out on a rampage to destroy the one being in the universe that is technically impossible to destroy. Big balls on that man.

 

@Georgia Perhaps if you could provide the mountain of evidence for your "alternative" views to combat the mountain of evidence that the "mainstream" views have we might be able to evaluate the two sets of evidence and see which matches reality.

 

Thus far the best we've had is that because Genesis says so then it must be. That's not evidence, that's a religious conviction, one not supported by evidence.

 

Out of curiosity - what subject/s is your masters in?

[Astreja]

6 hours ago, Georgia said:

Your extremely rude. I asked kindly not to be called names, such a nutter, crack pot, someone also said I'm delusional with this topic and my disorder will effect other topics too. Attack my views but not me personally, that's absolutely not fair.

 

No, that's not how it works, Georgia.  You are presenting an utterly laughable point of view that strongly suggests you have an execrably poor knowledge of science.  You do not get to present your fan-fiction-grade hypotheses on the same stage alongside theories that real scientists have supported with literally millions of man-hours of experimentation, calculation, testing and retesting.

 

It's a damned pity that conspiracy-humping and willful ignorance doesn't usually translate into negative real-world consequences, forcing people to become more informed about Life, the Universe and Everything.

[LogicalFallacy]

10 minutes ago, Astreja said:

It's a damned pity that conspiracy-humping and willful ignorance doesn't usually translate into negative real-world consequences, forcing people to become more informed about Life, the Universe and Everything.

 

Yes. The flat earther will drive around in their 2019 Awesome Mobile running the latest sat nav system that uses calculations based entirely on a spherical earth all while proclaiming that science is wrong and the earth is flat.

 

Then they moan and bitch when their fucktardedness is pointed out.

[Astreja]

I think science denial is, first and foremost, a disease of the ego.  People who can't be bothered to understand science -- something that is within the grasp of almost everyone who wants to understand it -- throw in their lot with people who see conspiracies under every rock and twig, because then they can pretend to be experts in something really, really special and secret.

 

As a citizen scientist myself (primarily astronomy, but with a decent basic knowledge of just about all the sciences), with a dad who was an electronics engineer working in aerospace, and a brother working in genetics and immunology, I consider it an actual insult when people like Georgia show up and want to be taken seriously.

[disillusioned]

13 hours ago, Georgia said:

 I am educated to masters degree level- Queen Mary University of London- check it out if your that interested. 

 

 

Honest question: what was your field of study?

[LogicalFallacy]

*Cough* Flat earth *cough*

 

 

I know, I couldn't resist. There I was enjoying the video and they take us to the view of earth from the ISS... and as a commenter said - well at least the crew up there can laugh their arses off at all the flat earthers below. I wonder if they have internet? They could watch the latest flat earther video then shit themselves laughing for entertainment  

 

For a thorough tour of the ISS see here. Well worth the watch imo. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGP6Y0Pnhe4 

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

The only thing flat-earthers have to fear is sphere itself.

[Joshpantera]

23 hours ago, Georgia said:

Go away- for what ? Is this not a place to debate? Don't patronise me because I have an alternative view, I would not do the same to you. What does it matter if I don't have a PHD? In an accredited university that is part of the institute that I believe has deceived us all- what sense does that make? I am educated to masters degree level- Queen Mary University of London- check it out if your that interested. 

 

I was taught what the system wants me to know, no more than that. 

 

Debate amongst yourselves, I'm out

 

This IS the place to debate. But you have to be pretty tough to stick through debating something like a flat earth claim. As you can see. No, that isn't an easy debate to have as it turns out. 

 

Do as you will, though. Good day. 

 

 

[OrdinaryClay]

On 7/26/2019 at 2:10 AM, Hole_In_My_Heart said:

 What makes this even worse is that my church is one of those that teaches the interpretation of Genesis that the original human being created was both male and female, which would inescapably mean not only that men and women were created simultaneously and are therefore equal, but that combinations of parts, and we assume awareness of gender, other than just male and just female are possible.

What denomination, or affiliation is that? I've never heard of such a congregation.

[Hole_In_My_Heart]

2 hours ago, OrdinaryClay said:

What denomination, or affiliation is that? I've never heard of such a congregation.

 

It's a reasonably common teaching in nondenominational charismatic churches.

[OrdinaryClay]

19 hours ago, Hole_In_My_Heart said:

 

It's a reasonably common teaching in nondenominational charismatic churches.

No it's not.

[nontheistpilgrim]

Surely it is a 'reasonably common teaching' that male and female BOTH were created. The interpretation of that as being a single person being created both male and female is wrong, I think. I've never heard that. BUT I have heard it stated that we all, as individuals, have both male and female traits (whatever that means) and I would agree that there is a 'male' and 'female' side of me.

This does not take anything away from the issue of non-binary. And I couldn't care less whether the Bible has anything to say about that.

[Hole_In_My_Heart]

9 minutes ago, nontheistpilgrim said:

Surely it is a 'reasonably common teaching' that male and female BOTH were created. The interpretation of that as being a single person being created both male and female is wrong, I think. I've never heard that. BUT I have heard it stated that we all, as individuals, have both male and female traits (whatever that means) and I would agree that there is a 'male' and 'female' side of me.

This does not take anything away from the issue of non-binary. And I couldn't care less whether the Bible has anything to say about that.

 

I appreciate the nod to the non-binary, thank you! I've studied the original Hebrew, and I feel confident that it does in fact describe a person of nonspecific gender being created, and then split into 2 people each of which had a gender… Not that it matters, just as a point of interest. One of the saddest things about Christianity is that so many things that are taught are based on centuries of patriarchal opinions and contortion of the scripture, rather than what it actually says in the original languages.

[Hole_In_My_Heart]

2 hours ago, OrdinaryClay said:

No it's not.

 

Yet another way in which you are WRONG, LOL. You're wasting your time on this forum, neither I nor anyone else here cares about anything you have to say.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

22 hours ago, Hole_In_My_Heart said:

 

It's a reasonably common teaching in nondenominational charismatic churches.

 

2 hours ago, OrdinaryClay said:

No it's not.

Yes, it is.  It is a common enough teaching that I heard it taught in several different environments ranging from the very traditional to the more extremist of pentecostalism.  It may not be accepted as orthodox or canonical in most denominations; but it is a fairly common teaching.

[nontheistpilgrim]

Either I don't understand (quite likely!) or I remain sceptical - as to the teaching in charismatic and/or pentecostal churches. I am genuinely interested to explore this a bit further (to confirm my prejudices about Xty!).

Does anyone have a link to any teaching about the subject by such churches/theologians/pastors? I would be very grateful.

(Is it possible that this is a pond difference? I would have expected - watch my prejudices - that if present, the teaching would be more likely in UK and I've not heard of it here.)

 

[Hole_In_My_Heart]

1 hour ago, nontheistpilgrim said:

Either I don't understand (quite likely!) or I remain sceptical - as to the teaching in charismatic and/or pentecostal churches. I am genuinely interested to explore this a bit further (to confirm my prejudices about Xty!).

Does anyone have a link to any teaching about the subject by such churches/theologians/pastors? I would be very grateful.

(Is it possible that this is a pond difference? I would have expected - watch my prejudices - that if present, the teaching would be more likely in UK and I've not heard of it here.)

 

 

This one might be a little too dense in Hebrew, but maybe it will help:

 

https://margmowczko.com/human-man-woman-genesis-2/

 

So this patriarchal BS you see throughout most of Christianity, that man was created first and therefore is somehow superior, is not in fact backed up by the Bible... Surprise surprise. 

 

I'm curious as to why you would think that this teaching would be more of a UK thing? I don't know anything about your churches over there.

[nontheistpilgrim]

OK, thanks. I have only had a quick scan of the article and I WILL read in full later. But this wouldn't be taught in evangelical / charismatic / pentecostal churches would it? You have to leave your brain at the door as you enter and .... enough!

I am making enquiries in UK.

Meanwhile, at the risk of showing my ignorance: I have always seen the US as more conservative in its Christianity than here in UK. We are, I think, a more secularised society than US. I know we've got a Trump lookalike as Prime Minister but he wasn't elected (not elected at all, actually) by a right wing evangelical majority.

 

I think I need to get clued-up about non-binary identity. You mention the idea of man being superior to woman - but that isn't about non-binary, is it?

Help me, please.

[Hole_In_My_Heart]

43 minutes ago, nontheistpilgrim said:

OK, thanks. I have only had a quick scan of the article and I WILL read in full later. But this wouldn't be taught in evangelical / charismatic / pentecostal churches would it? You have to leave your brain at the door as you enter and .... enough!

I am making enquiries in UK.

Meanwhile, at the risk of showing my ignorance: I have always seen the US as more conservative in its Christianity than here in UK. We are, I think, a more secularised society than US. I know we've got a Trump lookalike as Prime Minister but he wasn't elected (not elected at all, actually) by a right wing evangelical majority.

 

I think I need to get clued-up about non-binary identity. You mention the idea of man being superior to woman - but that isn't about non-binary, is it?

Help me, please.

 

Most churches don't go as in-depth into the original languages as that article does, but yes, conceptually, this is something that would be taught in some charismatic churches; I don't know about the other 2 categories, I have been spared personal experience with them. I'll be interested to hear if any churches over there teach this; I have no idea how your churches are different from ours. 

 

I think what sometimes makes the way things are in America difficult for Brits to understand is that you forget that the United States is HUGE. We have 329 million people here, compared to 67 million in the UK, representing an incredibly wide range of types and intensities of religious belief. The power, though, is in the big denominational churches, such as Catholics and Baptists, and their leaders tend to be more conservative, and hog all the headlines. Ditto whoever is speaking for evangelicals as a whole, or claiming to. Nondenominational churches rarely make the news unless they are megachurches, and not often even then. What you see on the news about American Christianity is not representative of Christianity as a whole in this country. Is it the same way over there? 

 

Most people exist in the universe of the binary genders, in other words the standard 2 genders, male and female. Non-binary people are neither male nor female; they might be a mixture, or have just a tiny bit of gender, or none at all like me. The Biblical description of the original person that was created is of interest to non-binary people because if, as seems reasonably clear, the Bible describes the original person as being neither male nor female, that would provide scriptural proof of the existence of non-binary genders… Of course, the existence of intersex people, who are born with PHYSICAL genders that are neither male nor female, already proves that via science, but you know you can't get many Christians to listen to anything about science.

[nontheistpilgrim]

Thanks, that's helpful.

I hadn't 'twigged' that the original created being is thought to be distinguishable from 'man' and 'woman' - the article is clear about that, as are you. I've now read the article plus I'm well into all the following discussion. I have to say that some of the arguments seem to me to be far-fetched. As you will acknowledge I expect, the Bible was composed by people who were of very different eras, had very different writing styles, had very different objectives and understood 'truth' in different ways which they expressed in different forms. Yes, I think that all that makes it less than helpful for today. But having said that, I couldn't care less what the Bible teaches, being much more accepting of scientific explanations / theories and people's experiences today.

 

Are you really saying that this ' Most people exist in the universe of the binary genders, in other words the standard 2 genders, male and female. Non-binary people are neither male nor female; they might be a mixture, or have just a tiny bit of gender, or none at all like me. The Biblical description of the original person that was created is of interest to non-binary people because if, as seems reasonably clear, the Bible describes the original person as being neither male nor female, that would provide scriptural proof of the existence of non-binary genders…'  is discussed in charismatic churches? Amazing, to me.

 

I will get back to you when I receive any responses to my enquiries over here (it's an advantage to live in a small country ).

 

As regards UK/USA....yes I do forget the size of America and yes, on the whole, I only have media to guide me in how I look at Xsty there. But I have a couple of friends (amongst the 329 million ) who are evangelical and have thought of returning home to UK after the election of Trump and the growth of the evangelical church in USA. And many of my friends have said that they would never consider living in USA after Trump and his supporters. Over here, the evangelicals get a disproportionate amount of media attention, probably not as unbalanced as in USA. (Note: but I hear that Benny Hinn is adjusting his theology - I wait to see if he returns or otherwise redistributes the wealth he has made from gullible xstns.)

[Hole_In_My_Heart]

On 9/9/2019 at 6:43 AM, nontheistpilgrim said:

Thanks, that's helpful.

I hadn't 'twigged' that the original created being is thought to be distinguishable from 'man' and 'woman' - the article is clear about that, as are you. I've now read the article plus I'm well into all the following discussion. I have to say that some of the arguments seem to me to be far-fetched. As you will acknowledge I expect, the Bible was composed by people who were of very different eras, had very different writing styles, had very different objectives and understood 'truth' in different ways which they expressed in different forms. Yes, I think that all that makes it less than helpful for today. But having said that, I couldn't care less what the Bible teaches, being much more accepting of scientific explanations / theories and people's experiences today.

 

Are you really saying that this ' Most people exist in the universe of the binary genders, in other words the standard 2 genders, male and female. Non-binary people are neither male nor female; they might be a mixture, or have just a tiny bit of gender, or none at all like me. The Biblical description of the original person that was created is of interest to non-binary people because if, as seems reasonably clear, the Bible describes the original person as being neither male nor female, that would provide scriptural proof of the existence of non-binary genders…'  is discussed in charismatic churches? Amazing, to me.

 

I will get back to you when I receive any responses to my enquiries over here (it's an advantage to live in a small country ).

 

As regards UK/USA....yes I do forget the size of America and yes, on the whole, I only have media to guide me in how I look at Xsty there. But I have a couple of friends (amongst the 329 million ) who are evangelical and have thought of returning home to UK after the election of Trump and the growth of the evangelical church in USA. And many of my friends have said that they would never consider living in USA after Trump and his supporters. Over here, the evangelicals get a disproportionate amount of media attention, probably not as unbalanced as in USA. (Note: but I hear that Benny Hinn is adjusting his theology - I wait to see if he returns or otherwise redistributes the wealth he has made from gullible xstns.)

 

The Bible does not give a description of the original created being; we don't know if it had any primary or secondary sexual characteristics, or if so which ones. We don't know what gender it considered itself, or even if it had any perception of gender; if there's only one person, does it ever occur to them that certain parts of their body mean that they have a certain gender and what it is and what it means, if there isn't any other person with different body parts to compare themselves to? Questions of this nature will probably seem pointless to most binary people, but to a non-binary person, this is serious stuff! 

 

To the best of my knowledge, what I described about non--binary gender is NOT being discussed in churches of any kind, other than presumably those few that exist specifically to serve our community; that was a totally different subject, sorry for the confusion!

 

Trump supporters weren't recently moved here from another planet, they have always been here in enormous numbers, just not represented in the media in any way. A quick review of articles shows that the size of evangelical churches (this isn't one church like the Catholic Church, this is many churches in loose affiliation) has remained steady for about 20 years, so they aren't growing, they are just becoming more vocal and given more airtime. You can't really judge anything based on what they say in the media!

[OrdinaryClay]

On 9/8/2019 at 3:49 PM, nontheistpilgrim said:

Surely it is a 'reasonably common teaching' that male and female BOTH were created. The interpretation of that as being a single person being created both male and female is wrong, I think. I've never heard that. BUT I have heard it stated that we all, as individuals, have both male and female traits (whatever that means) and I would agree that there is a 'male' and 'female' side of me.

 

You just said you didn't know what it meant then you said you had it. That's strange.

[OrdinaryClay]

On 9/8/2019 at 3:49 PM, nontheistpilgrim said:

This does not take anything away from the issue of non-binary. And I couldn't care less whether the Bible has anything to say about that.

So what exactly is a non-theist pilgrim? Sounds kind of spiritual.