Quote:
Your religion focuses on a vengeful and wrathful God that will imprison all those who don't keep his version of morality forever in torment. That's not something I made up, it's the selling point for a good many of your fellow believers.
Redstone said:
Sure, most especially the spirit that our body envelops.
Redstone said:
Sure, most especially the spirit that our body envelops.
My point is a narrow one regarding sex (or its synonym gender, as the wholly absurd Dr. John Money did massive damage in many ways, including to his patients)
This point is: chromosomes provide genetic material. These are very easy to identify, and consistent in function across time and environment with regards to sex. Do we believe in science, or not?
Zobel said:
It's not correct, it's a lie by way of omission. It's wrong on multiple levels including some of the implicit assumptions like "versions" of morality. These things are incompatible with any understanding of Christianity.
Describing God as vengeful and wrathful is at best an incomplete picture, but really it's just wrong. Those aren't His primary attributes - youd be far closer to the mark simply describing Him as Love, or the most frequent way He is described as compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in loving devotion. Jesus is not vengeful or wrathful, and He is the exact image of God. What does God look like? The Man dead on the cross for people He loves.
There have been numerous discussions on hell, and choice, and free will, but suffice to say there is no "imprisonment" or cruelty on God's part.
If your knowledge of Christianity allows you to believe that what you have written is in any way a correct understanding and not a caricature, it is lacking indeed.
Redstone said:
You need to think this through a bit more.
Klinefelter et al. point directly to sex binary - including the extremely rare intersex. What do the presence of such anomalies (those persons whom deserve our compassion, without question) say about well over 99% of births?
And in the case of Klinefelter - the medical community, and the government, writes "male" an awful lot, correct?
Are you trying to prove the point that you're oversimplifying things?Quote:
Your beliefs are founded in salvation through a brutal murder...
It seems you must have. "Hell" or the abyss is not intended for humans and never was. People aren't "placed" there, and yes, they are their of their own option. This entire premise reveals a kind of simplistic thinking that I can't really comprehend. These are childish arguments about complex things. I wouldn't accept such shallow thinking in engineering or business discussions, let alone in matters as weighty as this.Quote:
And I'm sorry I must have misunderstood the concept of hell, I was unaware these sinners you believe will be placed there are free to leave? Clearly if it's not imprisonment, entrapment, or whatever other term you wish to apply to it, it's optional? Or is it as I said.... optional if you choose to live on earth by certain laws, otherwise, to the pit you go. Matthew 25:41( for the argument about the burning imagery), Mark 9:43.. there are plenty of other imagery of the painful end waiting for those who chose not to.embrace your godhead...
You may have heard hatred preached from the pulpit. I can't do anything about that. But if you think of God, and can imagine Him with conditional love for humans and terrible wrath based on some silly, simplistic human ideas of conditions - what you were taught is simply incompatible with the Christian faith. I don't doubt that you were taught this. I'm telling you what you have in your mind is a ridiculous caricature of the reality.Quote:
I spent my youth and young adulthood scouring the Bible as a way to close out the hatred I heard preached in the pulpit. I believed truly that I would find this love you speak of. It is conditional love, with a terrible wrath for those who do not meet the conditions.
No, that pain and self-hatred certainly does not exist anymore. You can ask those closest to me, the same people who actually know me. I didn't "create" a new identity to mask over pain. I embraced who I am, and the pain/self-hatred went away.Quote:
What came through in your blog posts was the intense self-hatred that you felt. I was sad to read about it. I know that the Sacred Heart of Jesus was infinitely more grieved and sorrowful than I could ever be to see that pain and suffering in you. I am no psychologist, but I fear that pain and self-hatred still exists, and has only been papered over. To escape that pain, you have created a new identity for yourself. You created Natalie. And Natalie is a new person, in the Greek sense of the word - a mask through which you present yourself to the world. You created Natalie so that you could killJamesNatalie. I know that you cringe to see that name, and I don't use it lightly, or to hurt you. That cringe is your old self-hatred revealing itself again.
No, it doesn't reveal any specific truth here. The term "deadname" is not one I chose. It's simply the term that is used. It has no deeper meaning beyond that it is the name of our pre-transition selves. I haven't tried burying my old identity. I'm largely the same person I have always been, I have the same interests as before, my faith is deeper than before. I'm simply just living as the person I've always been, but had to mask.Quote:
For posting your birth name here, I may be accused of dead-naming you. But doesn't that just reveal the truth in what I already said? You have tried to kill and bury your old identity. I can't say that I blame you or judge you for it. I have never walked in your shoes, but I believe you when you describe the agony you have felt throughout your life. I can believe that it would come as a relief to feel that you have escaped from the person you so hated in yourself.
Okay, again, I want to stress that you stop deadnaming me. Not only is is disrespectful, given what's happened on this board before, it poses a risk to me. Stop.Quote:
But if you know anything about Sacred Scripture, you know that Christ's perfect mercy is restorative, not palliative. He came here, and took the form of a man, and hung dying and broken on the cross not so that He could cover over your wounds or anesthetize them, but so that you could be healed. Because He loves YOU,JamesNatalie. You were made perfectly in the image and likeness of God. He who knew you before He formed you in the womb. He who breathed life into you, and loved you from the beginning. You are a masterpiece.
There so much self-righteousness here. You know nothing of me, my faith, or my calling in Christ. Please stop deadnaming me. Please stop offering unsolicited, and grossly unqualified, psychoanalysis that is rooted solely in a few blog posts you read.Quote:
It is good that you seek to serve Christ. As should we all. But notice in Scripture that before Christ sends anyone else out on a mission, He first calls them in to Himself. He is calling you in,JamesNatalie.
Btw, I just want to address this more specifically. You know that I cringe at seeing my old name. You even link it to old "self-hatred". You seem to understand that deadnaming a trans person is an offensive action. Yet, you do so repeatedly throughout your post. Do you honestly expect me to engage with someone who starts the engagement with what is essentially "I am going to offend you and repeatedly insult you, but just hear me out..."?Quote:
You created Natalie so that you could killJamesNatalie. I know that you cringe to see that name, and I don't use it lightly, or to hurt you. That cringe is your old self-hatred revealing itself again.
For posting your birth name here, I may be accused of dead-naming you.
It's not insightful. You just agree with it. Any trans person or any psychological professional can tell you there's nothing insightful about it. It's just a bunch of fluff to hide that he doesn't know anything about gender dysphoria or trans people.Joe Boudain said:
Very very insightful post. Thank you for sharing this as it said what I wished to convey much more eloquently than I was able.
You don't get to tell me where I find insight, and the reason you agree with the trans people and the psychologists who affirm your belief is that they agree with you; so at worst we're in the same boat.PacifistAg said:It's not insightful. You just agree with it. Any trans person or any psychological professional can tell you there's nothing insightful about it. It's just a bunch of fluff to hide that he doesn't know anything about gender dysphoria or trans people.Joe Boudain said:
Very very insightful post. Thank you for sharing this as it said what I wished to convey much more eloquently than I was able.
You're right. You are free to find insight in unqualified opinions. And it's not just psychologists that "affirm my belief". It's every major medical association, so yeah, I will find insight in the statements of actual qualified professionals as opposed to people who start their psychological analysis with "I'm no psychologist". But you do you.Quote:
You don't get to tell me where I find insight, and the reason you agree with the trans people and the psychologists who affirm your belief is that they agree with you; so at worst we're in the same boat.
It's a very recent change, that has not come at the behest of any sort of new scientific discovery, but rather the forced warping of reality to suit a social agenda.PacifistAg said:You're right. You are free to find insight in unqualified opinions. And it's not just psychologists that "affirm my belief". It's every major medical association, so yeah, I will find insight in the statements of actual qualified professionals as opposed to people who start their psychological analysis with "I'm no psychologist". But you do you.Quote:
You don't get to tell me where I find insight, and the reason you agree with the trans people and the psychologists who affirm your belief is that they agree with you; so at worst we're in the same boat.
It is absolutely scary when the same agenda is rationally discussing allowing young children to chemically castrate themselves, or cut their genitals off, and removing them from their parents if they don't let them do so.PacifistAg said:
Oh the scary "trans agenda". Gasp!
I would caution being so proud of those groups endorsements.PacifistAg said:You're right. You are free to find insight in unqualified opinions. And it's not just psychologists that "affirm my belief". It's every major medical association, so yeah, I will find insight in the statements of actual qualified professionals as opposed to people who start their psychological analysis with "I'm no psychologist". But you do you.Quote:
You don't get to tell me where I find insight, and the reason you agree with the trans people and the psychologists who affirm your belief is that they agree with you; so at worst we're in the same boat.
