What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

[_ Old Earth _] Man and Woman?

E

evesforeva

Member
This is kinda difficult to unpack because I have many, many questions. They all revolve around the gender binary.

"So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them" - Genesis 1:27

This passage seems to say that human beings were created in some sort of discrete gender binary. Am I reading this wrong?

But we don't seem to have a true gender binary. Different cultures have conflicting opinions on how many genders there are and what constitutes a discrete gender identity. And then there are myriads of people within every culture that seem to be between gender roles or outside of gender roles. Some cultures' prescribed gender roles are internally inconsistent.

My current guess on how to reconcile the fluidity of gender with the passage quoted above has something to do with sin. Perhaps God had a perfect design for a consistent gender binary and eating the forbidden fruit ruined it. Am I totally off-base here?

If it is caused by sin, is it a sin? For example, Adam and Eve were originally vegetarians, but eating meat is not sinful. (At least I don't think it is :confused:) Is it like that?

Or perhaps it's more like when young children die of cancer. Caused by sin, but certainly not their own. Is the false gender binary a product of God's mystery?

Or if it is a sin to accept the fluidity of gender then where in the Bible are the explanations of what the true, internally consistent gender binary looks like?

Thanks in advanced for thoughtful responses!
 
Hello, evesforeva. :)

Well, first of all, for understanding your post and follow the idea, we must believe that both gender and sexual orientation is something genetic. Gender, obvious, none can contest that's a genetic issue. Sexual orientation, hmm... I believe it's a behavioral matter.

So, in gender, we are created as a binary: man or woman. Both created by God as you quoted Genesis 1:27.

Still, you recognize people that behavior not as a man, nor as a woman. Then you question if it's something caused by sin, after the man ate the forbidden fruit.

When you say "Adam and Eve were originally vegetarians, but eating meat is not sinful" you say the sin is on the act of eating meat. If sin is an act, things as having sex, drinking, watching TV, playing games, etc. can all be a sin? There's nothing wrong about doing those things.

I believe sin is being apart of God and not seeking His true and justice. That will lead people to acts of injustice and lie. Misrepresenting things created by God. Misrepresenting, for example, the genders created by God. Losing the human nature identity. That's what Satan does (and did when lured Eva to eat the fruit); he lies. He misrepresents God's true.

People rejects God and try to find their own "trues", but there's only God's true, all other things are mistakes from the sinful nature.

Romans 1:22-24

Hope I could help. Sorry for the poor english. (:
 
The Bible Gives instructions on acceptable beahaviors for both young men and women. The Bible also talks about what is expected from both young men and women. The confusion on genders is from people who have not read many of the commands.

Besides the Ten commandments there are dietary laws, moral laws, and many other laws. By following the Dietary laws you can avoid many sicknesses and diseases. By following the moral law you can avoid emotional discomfort. By following the Ten Commandments you will find balance in you life.

Many christians don't follow all of the laws or commands... Some don't even strive for it. Don't concern yourself with why they don't. Be an example of why they should follow them.:pray
 
I'm not clear why this is not a question for Christianity and Science? I think the two responders have offered up some decent ground work, but this will ultimately tail spin into whether or not gender is just our physical make, or does it have more to do with the complete person.

Therefore, I'm going to move this to Christianity and Science, hoping that as this topic unrolls, assuming it will because of the honest intentions of the poster, it will stay a matter of civil opinion sharing.
 
evesforeva said:
This is kinda difficult to unpack because I have many, many questions. They all revolve around the gender binary.

"So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them" - Genesis 1:27

This passage seems to say that human beings were created in some sort of discrete gender binary. Am I reading this wrong?

But we don't seem to have a true gender binary. Different cultures have conflicting opinions on how many genders there are and what constitutes a discrete gender identity. And then there are myriads of people within every culture that seem to be between gender roles or outside of gender roles. Some cultures' prescribed gender roles are internally inconsistent.

My current guess on how to reconcile the fluidity of gender with the passage quoted above has something to do with sin. Perhaps God had a perfect design for a consistent gender binary and eating the forbidden fruit ruined it. Am I totally off-base here?

If it is caused by sin, is it a sin? For example, Adam and Eve were originally vegetarians, but eating meat is not sinful. (At least I don't think it is :confused:) Is it like that?

Or perhaps it's more like when young children die of cancer. Caused by sin, but certainly not their own. Is the false gender binary a product of God's mystery?

Or if it is a sin to accept the fluidity of gender then where in the Bible are the explanations of what the true, internally consistent gender binary looks like?

Thanks in advanced for thoughtful responses!
Click to expand...


So you are saying that Google's brouser is wrong in requesting a gender choice for appliacants which lists:
Male
Female
Other?



It is also interesting that Gen 5:2 supports Theistic Evolution interpretations which recommends that the Bible reader understand the 22 names listed in the Genealogy from Adam to the three racial stocks of Japheth, Ham, and Shem as species:


Gen 5:2 says god called them, the man and his wife, the "Adamites,"... i.e.; a species:

Gen 5:2 Male and female created he THEM; and blessed THEM, and called THEIR name Adam, (a species), in the day when THEY were created.

http://kofh2u.tripod.com/id31.html

 
phi said:
Hello, evesforeva. :)

Well, first of all, for understanding your post and follow the idea, we must believe that both gender and sexual orientation is something genetic. Gender, obvious, none can contest that's a genetic issue. Sexual orientation, hmm... I believe it's a behavioral matter.
(:
Click to expand...



Recent genetic research has argued that Homosexuality is related to a recessive Trait that is tied into the Neanderthal genes we all carry today ever since the "sons-of-God" saw those women of (Neanderthal) men and took them for wives.

They also connect Atuism to this same source.
What seems to confirm these theories is the sudden rise in both conditions since the 1960 Sexual Revolution which has boosted women in a more authoritive and dominant position in the social structure, bring the culture closer to the Matriarchy-type Neanderthal societies where women clearly dominanted in what was a sexually promicuous environment.

The idea here is that both the Nature of the recessive genes in us and the rise of women as Nurture kindles both these switches in the traits of the present population.
 
cupid dave said:
Recent genetic research has argued that Homosexuality is related to a recessive Trait that is tied into the Neanderthal genes .
Click to expand...


No it hasn't.

There is one person who used to claim that and it had gained some noteriety, but there is not genetic research that would lend itself to such a hypothesis.


Or, if there is, please present the evidence of it.
 
Adam said:
No it hasn't.

There is one person who used to claim that and it had gained some noteriety, but there is not genetic research that would lend itself to such a hypothesis.


Or, if there is, please present the evidence of it.
Click to expand...


LOL
1) That one guy was probably correct, but you woud never be convinced by his evidence, I am sure.
Perhaps you will tell Us who that fellow was so we can what evidence you found wanting already?



2) You can say "these ideas would not lend itself to such a hypothesis" about every case where you request V.
Evidence is merely facts that support the theory, but people can always demand more and more.

Science can never prove to you anything because to do so requires that you tell us that you will accept the evidence as proof and are thereby convinced.
You have the pwoer o never be convinced and never say you accept the evidence as satisfactory.

Look at these discuaaions about Evolution.
Mountains if facts are worth zero to people who refuse to entertain that they are wrong.

Such people are fundamentally opposed to accepting what conflicts with
their initial opinion.


Hnce it is a fool's mission to start a long list of evidentiary facts in support of an idea that you have no intention of ever accepting come hell or high water.
 
The "one guy" I am talking about was a psychologist, not a geneticist, so he had no evidence. I just can't remember his name.


All I require is actual evidence.

If you have some, please present it.
 
Adam said:
The "one guy" I am talking about was a psychologist, not a geneticist, so he had no evidence. I just can't remember his name.


All I require is actual evidence.

If you have some, please present it.
Click to expand...


You first, since you claim this psychologist has been discredited.
Who was he???
 
Rather than me doing all the work, I will retract my statement. I'll even say that I was wrong about the person, let's call him "SG".

Let's say that there is no evidence for my claims about SG and I was mistaken.


Now, where is the evidence for the genetic research that "has argued that Homosexuality is related to a recessive Trait that is tied into the Neanderthal genes"?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
cupid dave said:
So you are saying that Google's brouser is wrong in requesting a gender choice for appliacants which lists:
Male
Female
Other?



It is also interesting that Gen 5:2 supports Theistic Evolution interpretations which recommends that the Bible reader understand the 22 names listed in the Genealogy from Adam to the three racial stocks of Japheth, Ham, and Shem as species:


Gen 5:2 says god called them, the man and his wife, the "Adamites,"... i.e.; a species:

Gen 5:2 Male and female created he THEM; and blessed THEM, and called THEIR name Adam, (a species), in the day when THEY were created.

http://kofh2u.tripod.com/id31.html
Click to expand...

Very interesting to note, that Gen 5:2 Says "and called their name Adam". I have read that passage about 300 or so times without seeing that phrase. It's amazing how you can read the Bible everyday and find new nuggets each time.:clap:nod
 
Man-After-God said:
Very interesting to note, that Gen 5:2 Says "and called their name Adam". I have read that passage about 300 or so times without seeing that phrase. It's amazing how you can read the Bible everyday and find new nuggets each time.:clap:nod
Click to expand...


So true.
I read and re-read over and again.

Still, ever so often some one will post a verse which startles me that it so clearly supports Theistic Evolution.


Just this week, after I had posted the Theistic Evolution idea that the next step for mankind will be the evolution which allows us to enter into our Unconscious mind.

I was detailing the concept of Life After Death.
We will eveolve with the ability to see back in time, over the whole genetic vine from which we have been Born Again and again into this now present life experience.
Our encoding lives in the blood of the living.

We will again be born out of the Gene Pool abiding in the blood to the living generations, while we rest in the death that took us physcially away from the living.

Although I have many verses that support this view of "eternal Life,' as a re-run or memory back into time, I missed the verses below which some posted quite unaware of this whiole Theistic Evolution idea:


THE SPIRIT IN MAN GOES BACK AND IS STORED UNTIL IT IS GIVEN A NEW BODY.

Job 32:8 But there is a spirit in man: and the inspiration of
the Almighty giveth them understanding.

Ec 12:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was:
and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.
 
Before I became a true believer this is where I always got stuck at in Science and is currently where my wife is. She is atheist though I believe one day God will use me as an example that will make her a believer.

Though I got off the point sorry. Is genetics I always got stuck on if we are a pattern of two people then all of us would have a similar genetic marker. I have since given up this and believe God has his design and I live by faith.
 
chris7375 said:
Before I became a true believer this is where I always got stuck at in Science and is currently where my wife is. She is atheist though I believe one day God will use me as an example that will make her a believer.

Though I got off the point sorry. Is genetics I always got stuck on if we are a pattern of two people then all of us would have a similar genetic marker. I have since given up this and believe God has his design and I live by faith.
Click to expand...


Faith...?

People say that but mean they have no rtional argument for sayingthey believe in God.
They say my belief that their is a god is based on nothing I can argue, but is just my faith in that there is a god.

When Christ said he is RTruth, he meant that.
Do you believe in Truth as the light into the world you were biorn again into?
 
cupid dave said:
Faith...?

People say that but mean they have no rtional argument for sayingthey believe in God.
They say my belief that their is a god is based on nothing I can argue, but is just my faith in that there is a god.

When Christ said he is RTruth, he meant that.
Do you believe in Truth as the light into the world you were biorn again into?
Click to expand...

Agreed. To me, faith and evidence are linked. The more I know about God, the more evidence I have that he's trustworthy, the more my faith in him grows.

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2
 
Grazer said:
Agreed. To me, faith and evidence are linked. The more I know about God, the more evidence I have that he's trustworthy, the more my faith in him grows.

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...

Well you are the first person here to agree with me openly about anything I have posted.

America is not facing the Facts of Life and in every way avoiding if not intentionally denying the Truth.
Truth is our God, because it reveals the Father, who is Reality.
And man and nations can only survive if they accept the Spirit of Truth.

Whereas Christians todayought be rallying about the sexual decay which now cost America $1 Trillion dollars in Welfare and unimaginable expenses in fighting violent crime, 70% of which is caused by kids who were raised by Single Mothers, they fight with Science about Genesis.

If you back these men into a corner, you often find that their rationale is that if they can not explain Genesis they lose the power to tell people how to properly behave.
They illogically want to jam lies down the thoats of the very people who, thereafter, they want to accept Truth as their God.

Sad and funny to me.
 
No worries Cupid, I agree with most of what you post usually anyway :)

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top