Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
the same bible also says people can't eat fat Lev 3:17, can't eat pork Lev 11:7-8, can't eat shrimp or anything lacking fins or scales Deuteronomy 14:9-10
What the Bible says About Being Male and Female -
What the Bible says About Being Male and Female. The New York City Council recently passed a bill that allows New Yorkers to designate an “X” for their sex…www.returntoorder.org
What the Bible says About Being Male and Female
By
307
What the Bible says About Being Male and Female
The New York City Council recently passed a bill that allows New Yorkers to designate an “X” for their sex on their birth certificates if they don’t identify as either male or female. Additionally, a parent can do the same thing for their newborn children. The measure was passed by a vote of 41-6.
City Council Speaker Corey Johnson justified the action saying: “There are plenty of New Yorkers who don’t identify as either male or female. Gender is a spectrum for many folks, and it’s not a fixed thing. So for New Yorkers who are transgender, who are gender non-conforming, who are non-binary, to have an option to better self-identify on such an important document, their birth certificate, unlocks all sorts of things for them.”
Similar actions were taken by the States of Washington, Vermont, California, and Oregon, as well as the District of Columbia. The language of the Washington State directive is eye-popping, “a gender that is not exclusively male or female, including, but not limited to, intersex, agender, amalgagender, androgynous, bigender, demigender, female-to-male, genderfluid, genderqueer, male-to-female, neutrois, nonbinary, pangender, third sex, transgender, transsexual, Two Spirit, and unspecified.”1
The list is chilling, indicating just how far the revolutionaries are willing to go to remove any sense of limits. The enlightened will accept the changes. Only the dark reactionaries will reject them.
Although the temptation is real, these new classifications cannot be rejected as “just plain silly.” Nor can one take the libertarian attitude, claiming that government has no business telling people how they may define themselves. This thinking requires a response. The purpose of this article is to define five responses – legal, historical, scriptural, societal, and moral.
The legal response is the most complicated. Those who advocate these changes claim that it is a mere substitution of one word for another. This is a typical radical tactic; present a massive change as though it is trivial.
What Does Saint Thomas Say About Immigration?
Consider how one’s sex affects an individual’s dealing with the government or any other official entity. The radicals are now working hard to remove it from such actions as getting married and having children. One’s sex is still vital in determining all aspects of life. Any changes will radically affect getting into college, joining sports teams, deciding child custody, or enlisting in the military. The legal system has been bending over backward to attempt to accommodate those who call themselves homosexual. Chaos will erupt as each of these “genders” demands their own special set of legal “rights.”
Complicating the legal situation would be those who would wish to change their “gender.” Many of these terms have no legal definition – creating definitions is exclusionary. Would one “gender” entitle a person to a greater amount of legal protection? Would that person automatically lose the protections that attached themselves to their previous “gender?” The possibilities are endless.
The nature of such change is also important as part of the historical record. Today’s marriage licenses, drivers’ licenses, wills and other documents will become historical documents. Until now, they have accurately reflected the roles and numbers of men and women in our society. By taking away that factual information, and substituting a changeable opinion about the way that an individual wants to be known, that record will be permanently obscured.
Holy Scripture discusses the nature of humans as either male or female in at least four places:
What does Saint Thomas Aquinas say about Marriage?
- Genesis 1:27 – And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
- Genesis 5:2 – He created them male and female; and blessed them: and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
- Matthew 19:4-5 – Who answering, said to them: Have ye not read, that he who made man from the beginning, Made them male and female? And he said: For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be in one flesh.
- Mark 10:6 – But from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female.
Note that the same words are used in all four places. Individuals are created as male or female. There is no room for any other reasonable interpretation.
Society is regulated by unwritten customs and by written codes of law. An individual who rejects a certain set of identifications will still need to interact with those who accept and embrace them. Customs and laws regulate how people treat those who are unlike themselves. By creating so many different conditions, most of which are not obvious, the already tenuous connections with each other grow more complicated. At best, there will be confusion; at worst, real violence could take place.
[like url=ReturnToOrder.org]
Finally, there is the moral dimension. Human beings have struggled with the morality of the relationships between male and female since Adam and Eve. Sexual morality and immorality are a constant source of contention in society. The moral rules, as outlined by Holy Mother Church, are relatively simple. The ways of breaking those rules make up a very long list, and each of them carries their own set of consequences.
Eventually, the plethora of “genders” will create so much confusion that society just breaks down. That will suit the revolutionaries because they will be standing at the ready to reassemble the pieces according to their own design.
It means Jesus didn't identify himself as male or female.What does that mean exactly?
There the troll is back.Your challenge to me is the trolling. You are begging for a ten page semantic debate, when most functional adults understand the difference between scientific definition of sex and gender identity psychology. In fact, I doubt we even disagree on much here. But you will find a way anyway. Booooring.
Yet he referred to himself as the "Son of Man" quite often.It means Jesus didn't identify himself as male or female.
The bible is all hearsay.Yet he referred to himself as the "Son of Man" quite often.
Witness testimonyThe bible is all hearsay.
Interesting belief.It means Jesus didn't identify himself as male or female.
The bible was written several generations after the "facts". So no, not witness testimony.Witness testimony
In the late 80's 1988? Omni Magazine did an interesting piece about a possibility Jesus was a woman. In short their thesis was based on women with Turner's syndrom matches the description of clean cut (not bearded) short stature(4'6") and they sweat blood.Interesting belief.
Cool story.In the late 80's 1988? Omni Magazine did an interesting piece about a possibility Jesus was a woman. In short their thesis was based on women with Turner's syndrom matches the description of clean cut (not bearded) short stature(4'6") and they sweat blood.
Think in terms of that woman principle in Kindergarden cop, could she confuse people if she wanted to in a male dominated society?
I added the case is strengthened with the finds in the apochrypha*, it sort of backs the possibility as it describes a
bi Jesus who had relations with Lazarus and John. Also the only known person with that Name Jesus was used by a woman, so it might have been a woman's name.
So one of the 3-4 Christs used in the Jesus myth could have been a cross gender figure and perhaps the rejected woman who wrote Q & even was written into the story as Mary Magdalene or even the reason and secret mystery behind the Mary worshiping church.
Sources:
A newly translated Gnostic gospel, entitled The Secret Book of Judas of Kerioth, According to this seemingly authentic early Cainite-Ophite text, translated from the Coptic by Mohammed al-Murtada and Francis Bendik, said Jesus had an active bisexual love life,including relationswith John, Lazarus and Mary Magdelene.
Also validating that: is in the missing portions of Mark it shows Jesus sleeping with a naked young rich man, but also the NT validates this:
"...there followed him a certain young man, having a linen cloth cast about his naked body; and the young men laid hold of him: And he left the linen cloth, and fled from them naked." (Mark 14:51-52). Was this the companion that Luke observed with Jesus inside the garden?
"...he that is courageous among the mighty shall flee away naked on that day..."(Amos 2:16----the Hebrew 'labab' translated 'flee away' here, actually means 'transported with love', and also 'ravished'). Now that certainly fits this episode of the young man fleeing away naked from Jesus outside the garden of Gethsemane.
Who was this young man if not perhaps the rich man whom "Then Jesus beholding him, loved him..."(Mark 10:21). Perhaps it was the rich man Lazarus, of whom "...he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth..."(John 11:11----The Greek 'philos' translated 'friend', also means 'dear' and 'fond of').
Incorrect. Most were written within a generation of Jesus' death; they were spoken before that; the oldest known copy that has survived does not equate to the time the first copy was written.The bible was written several generations after the "facts"
But you don't know that, it's a guess.Incorrect. Most were written within a generation of Jesus' death; they were spoken before that; the oldest known copy that has survived does not equate to the time the first copy was written.
www.israel365news.com
Written as in the original copy or written as in a copy of the original? How would they know the difference?But you don't know that, it's a guess.
"most scholars believe were written between the third century BCE and the first century CE."
"NEW DEAD SEA SCROLL REVELATION: EIGHT MANUSCRIPTS WERE WRITTEN BY SAME MYSTERIOUS SCRIBE"
New Dead Sea Scroll revelation: Eight manuscripts were written by same mysterious scribe
The study revealed that some of the scrolls were more ancient than previously thought.
Free Book: Return to Order: From a Frenzied Economy to an Organic Christian Society—Where We’ve Been, How We Got Here, and Where We Need to Go
