Christian trigger words

[Nihilist Virus]

I made a thread which was deleted on the grounds that transsexualism cannot be discussed on the Christian forums. So I remade the thread and edited that topic out while supplementing my position with further evidence. It was deleted again. So I think I've found their best trigger since the time I was in the habit of reminding them that the Bible was written by racist, sexist, genocidal, slave-driving rapists. Here's the thread I posted:

-------------------------

As an American I have to keep answering whether I'm a liberal or conservative. I'm neither. I think both parties have unforgivably stupid ideas. Here, I want to point out that right-wing Christians are hypocritical in the attacks they make on transsexuals.

Firstly, let's establish that every Christian believes they have a soul. The soul, in fact, is their actual being. A Christian's body is just a vehicle and the soul is the driver.

But what is a soul?

A soul is a transdimensional, immortal, non-physical entity which will be placed into a new body on a "new earth."

So to summarize, conservative Christians laugh at transsexuals, saying, "A man who self-identifies as a woman? Absurd! But let's not mention the fact that I self-identify as a transdimensional, immortal abstraction which will one day be reincarnated on another planet. BTW, those Mormons sure do believe in some wacky stuff!"

I always try to be respectful to transsexuals, not just to their face but also when their back is turned. But I do think that the way Christians self-identify takes this whole fad a little too far. Please, someone give a reason as to why I might be any of these things:

Transdimensional
Immaterial
Immortal


Anything at all, really, would go a long way in establishing Christianity as true.

-------------------------

Transdimensionality:

Space and time define height, width, and length. Due to inevitable heat death, one must exit the universe to live forever. To exit space is to be transdimensional.

Immortality:

John 3:16

Immaterial:

Matter and energy comprise physical material. To exit the universe is to become non-physical.

Reincarnation:

1 Corinthians 15:35-38

Exoplanet:

Revelation 21:1

Bonus trigger:

Tell Christians that their religion is sorcery. Sorcery being, among other things, the invocation of a deity or powerful spirit so that it can possess you or guide you.

[Natachan]

While I do think what you just posted is hilarious I’m concerned that it might give ammo to people who dismiss gender non-conforming people or who embrace gender essentialism. I also think it’s a false equivalence to compare these things.

[Belacqua]

Firstly, let's establish that every Christian believes they have a soul. The soul, in fact, is their actual being. A Christian's body is just a vehicle and the soul is the driver.

But what is a soul?

A soul is a transdimensional, immortal, non-physical entity which will be placed into a new body on a "new earth."

Thomas Aquinas, who was a Christian, defined the soul as the form of the body. 

Following Aristotle, he said that every material object has both matter (hyle) and form (morphe). 

Form, in this view, is more than just shape. It includes the workings of a particular thing. So the form of the human body includes the ability to do the things that bodies do -- breath, eat, etc. A human body which couldn't do these things would in some way lack its proper form. 

Christians who follow Aquinas posit that this form is an intrinsic part of who we are. The only supernatural thing they claim about the soul is that it can be transferred after death to a different type of matter. But the form that you are, plus the matter which the form forms, is what you are. 

Therefore, the idea that a man's soul is detachable and can be transferred into a woman's body at will, or vice versa, would go against what a person's true form is. They define violence as that which opposes the flourishing of the form one has, in an effort to make it do something against that flourishing. According to them, if you are born with the form of a man, it is doing violence to yourself to attempt to change that form into something else.

There are a lot of arguments why people should be able to be trans if they want. As far as I personally am concerned, I think it's up to them.

But if we want to attack the Christian position we should attack the real position they have. I suspect that the definition you give here, and the obvious problems it presents, would not be relevant to, say, the Pope, who knows what Aquinas wrote as the official dogma of the church.

[Shell B]

It's never good to make a point with censorship.

[Nihilist Virus]

While I do think what you just posted is hilarious I’m concerned that it might give ammo to people who dismiss gender non-conforming people or who embrace gender essentialism. I also think it’s a false equivalence to compare these things.

I was comparing them because Christians notoriously have a hard time understanding simple points (or they pretend to not understand). So I wanted to acquaint them with something they understand first. Also I'm entirely factual so it it was ultimately a serious thread.

---

Firstly, let's establish that every Christian believes they have a soul. The soul, in fact, is their actual being. A Christian's body is just a vehicle and the soul is the driver.

But what is a soul?

A soul is a transdimensional, immortal, non-physical entity which will be placed into a new body on a "new earth."

Thomas Aquinas, who was a Christian, defined the soul as the form of the body. 

Following Aristotle, he said that every material object has both matter (hyle) and form (morphe). 

Form, in this view, is more than just shape. It includes the workings of a particular thing. So the form of the human body includes the ability to do the things that bodies do -- breath, eat, etc. A human body which couldn't do these things would in some way lack its proper form. 

Christians who follow Aquinas posit that this form is an intrinsic part of who we are. The only supernatural thing they claim about the soul is that it can be transferred after death to a different type of matter. But the form that you are, plus the matter which the form forms, is what you are. 

Therefore, the idea that a man's soul is detachable and can be transferred into a woman's body at will, or vice versa, would go against what a person's true form is. They define violence as that which opposes the flourishing of the form one has, in an effort to make it do something against that flourishing. According to them, if you are born with the form of a man, it is doing violence to yourself to attempt to change that form into something else.

There are a lot of arguments why people should be able to be trans if they want. As far as I personally am concerned, I think it's up to them.

But if we want to attack the Christian position we should attack the real position they have. I suspect that the definition you give here, and the obvious problems it presents, would not be relevant to, say, the Pope, who knows what Aquinas wrote as the official dogma of the church.

Interesting. Thanks. But Christiity is not about facts. It's about authority. Aquinas had a lot of pull, but not nearly as much as Paul. I quote Paul to make my points.

---

It's never good to make a point with censorship.

You must not talk to Christians much.

[vulcanlogician]

According to them, if you are born with the form of a man, it is doing violence to yourself to attempt to change that form into something else.

Such an assessment lacks depth. Even if hylomorphism is true, it's a crude mind incapable of recognizing nuance that assumes that genitals are so key to one's essence.

[T0 Th3 M4X]

The overall premise has a lot of problems. First, saying the Bible was written by people and using descriptions that has little to nothing to do with any of it. Also, that's not generally how a Christian would view the "soul."

Another issue is that Christianity doesn't demand any unfair treatment of others based simply on moral objections. It assumes we all make mistakes, and as such, we need to work together to deal with those mistakes. Not only does that include God, but others in the community.

I used to have a client who was transsexual. Off and on I would have to drop by his home. He carried a purse and wore dresses. Although it seemed like an oddity, we just met him where he was at with who he was. We didn't have to agree with his choices, but we agreed with his right to be human and to determine himself. If that's what we focused on, we wouldn't have time to address the other conditions we were helping him with, which probably had little to do with his sexual identity. So I wasn't an obstacle, but rather a friendly face that was there to assist him. If I would've made myself an obstacle, then I would've never been able to provide the help I was there to give him because he wouldn't have trusted me.

[Belacqua]

it's a crude mind incapable of recognizing nuance that assumes that genitals are so key to one's essence.

Here both trans activists and Thomists agree: gender is a lot more than genitalia. 

Trans activists say that everything about the body -- genitalia, chromosomes, body type -- can be incorrect in regard to a person's true gender. Thomists probably think it can't, though I've never actually heard that argued.

---

I quote Paul to make my points.

Which statements of Paul are you working with, exactly?

[Nihilist Virus]

Another issue is that Christianity doesn't demand any unfair treatment of others based simply on moral objections.

Is there another Bible I'm unaware of? The one I know says to kill homosexuals, that you can own slaves, and it is pervasively racist and sexist. Just to name a few things.

---

it's a crude mind incapable of recognizing nuance that assumes that genitals are so key to one's essence.

Here both trans activists and Thomists agree: gender is a lot more than genitalia. 

Trans activists say that everything about the body -- genitalia, chromosomes, body type -- can be incorrect in regard to a person's true gender. Thomists probably think it can't, though I've never actually heard that argued.

---

I quote Paul to make my points.

Which statements of Paul are you working with, exactly?

It's in the OP. At the bottom. I also quote the author of John and the author of Revelation.

[Amarok]

Another issue is that Christianity doesn't demand any unfair treatment of others based simply on moral objections.

Is there another Bible I'm unaware of?  The one I know says to kill homosexuals, that you can own slaves, and it is pervasively racist and sexist. Just to name a few things.

---

Here both trans activists and Thomists agree: gender is a lot more than genitalia. 

Trans activists say that everything about the body -- genitalia, chromosomes, body type -- can be incorrect in regard to a person's true gender. Thomists probably think it can't, though I've never actually heard that argued.

---

Which statements of Paul are you working with, exactly?

It's in the OP.  At the bottom.  I also quote the author of John and the author of Revelation.

And trying to say that was just the old testament fails as both are indorsed or at the very least not condemned in the new