Should we accept and use non-binary gender pronouns?

[DamianWarS]

Those who identify as transgendered can become disconnected with their birth gender but also not fully connected with the other side so can, but not all, prefer more gender neutral pronouns or nonbinary pronouns that extend beyond the he/she options

I differentiate between neutral and nonbinary in that neutral uses the established plural pronoun which is already gender neutral where nonbinary invents new pronouns.

A neutral example would be they/their/them and a nonbinary example may be ze/zer/zem (there are many others)

So in the following example "You can buy his book at the corner store" would change to "you can buy their book at..." or "you can buy zer book at..." and this would be at the individuals preference based on how they want to be identified.

The former use of the plural pronoun is inherited if you cannot obviously identify the gender of a person. You just replace man/woman with person and it is automatic. "That man is getting his haircut" turns into "that person is getting their haircut". This is natural if we are not sure but should we comply if we are sure (or at least think we are) and/or upon request not to be called he/she but by another pronoun?

Is this just being decent and respectful, an example of love your neighbour, or does it unfairly force ideologies that traditional Christianity can't agree with?

 

[dogs4thewin]

I see nothing wrong with using pronouns that do not indicate gender. Particularly in a world where the gender roles have blurred.

 

[Tolworth John]

Those who identify as transgendered

That is the key, a biologicaly male thinks he is female or the other way around.
Society has bourght in to the lie that gender is detemined by how one 'feels' or thinks, when it is actualy determined biologically at conception.

How should a Christian react?
If you are working and a 'man' approaches you, address him as sir, if a women approaches you address her as madame.
However if someone who is transgender attends church, it is up to the church leaders to deal with the situation.
As church members address a man as sir etc, it is not up to us to say you are really a woman so I can't call you sir.

Sorry if this seems wishy washy.
The trans, like thegay need to be loved as people, not judged but also to be informed of what is apropriate behaviour in church.

 

[dogs4thewin]

That is the key, a biologicaly male thinks he is female or the other way around.
Society has bourght in to the lie that gender is detemined by how one 'feels' or thinks, when it is actualy determined biologically at conception.

How should a Christian react?
If you are working and a 'man' approaches you, address him as sir, if a women approaches you address her as madame.
However if someone who is transgender attends church, it is up to the church leaders to deal with the situation.
As church members address a man as sir etc, it is not up to us to say you are really a woman so I can't call you sir.

Sorry if this seems wishy washy.
The trans, like thegay need to be loved as people, not judged but also to be informed of what is apropriate behaviour in church.

Keep in mind that not everyone trans or otherwise is IN the church; therefore why would they really care the behavior the church finds acceptable?

 

[JazzHands]

I'll respect anyone's decision to employ them but I won't sanction or use them myself. I see this whole silly development as another way of attacking the establishment just as indignant children like to provoke their parents.

 

[DamianWarS]

Keep in mind that not everyone trans or otherwise is IN the church; therefore why would they really care the behavior the church finds acceptable?

I'm not asking about what they consider acceptable or responsible, as the premise is about their voiced request so their desires are clear. I'm asking what the churches response should be. Do we dishonour God by using nonbinary pronouns or do we help lead a trans closer to God by respecting them in a way they desire? I honestly don't know.

 

[Not David]

I just don' t use them.

 

[DamianWarS]

I'll respect anyone's decision to employ them but I won't sanction or use them myself. I see this whole silly development as another way of attacking the establishment just as indignant children like to provoke their parents.

As an greater issue I agree, yet some have established high values with these alternative pronouns and if they are not used don't just take offence but are hurt. Do we accommodate their feelings and show them a respect they ask for or do we refuse ending potential for a relationship or to share the gospel?

 

[JazzHands]

I'm not asking about what they consider acceptable or responsible, as the premise is about their voiced request so their desires are clear. I'm asking what the churches response should be. Do we dishonour God by using nonbinary pronouns or do we help lead a trans closer to God by respecting them in a way they desire? I honestly don't know.

I'm not sure it's a quandary that can be easily resolved Damian - the cat is out of the bag so to speak. I feel for these people because I think they're lost and there is no shepherd guiding them. At some point, the walls of their very fragile temple, resting on sand foundations are likely to collapse. THAT'S when the father embraces his lost lambs again. The church though, should not be compromising its doctrine.

 

[DamianWarS]

I just don' t use them.

Have you been asked to?

 

[Tolworth John]

Keep in mind that not everyone trans or otherwise is IN the church; therefore why would they really care the behavior the church finds acceptable?

I was referring to how the church should treat trands/gays and that assumes that they are attending some function at the church.

 

[DamianWarS]

I'm not sure it's a quandary that can be easily resolved Damian - the cat is out of the bag so to speak. I feel for these people because I think they're lost and there is no shepherd guiding them. At some point, the walls of their very fragile temple, resting on sand foundations are likely to collapse. THAT'S when the father embraces his lost lambs again. The church though, should not be compromising its doctrine.

Can both exist? "We fundamentally believe in male and female but as a means to reach the lost may address individuals by pronouns of their choosing as expressions not of doctrine but of love"

 

[Not David]

Have you been asked to?

No, hopefully I won't.

 

[DamianWarS]

I was referring to how the church should treat trands/gays and that assumes that they are attending some function at the church.

If you define the church as a function it does but if you define it as a body of believers, these believers may agree together on how to reach the lost.

 

[JazzHands]

whoops...

 

[JazzHands]

Can both exist? "We fundamentally believe in male and female but as a means to reach the lost may address individuals by pronouns of their choosing as expressions not of doctrine but of love"

As an analogy, if a child refuses to eat their supper unless it's fish fingers and chips, you don't force them to eat and you don't give them fish fingers and chips. Eventually, nature takes over and the child agrees to eat their roast beef and cabbage. Voila

 

[Oldmantook]

Those who identify as transgendered can become disconnected with their birth gender but also not fully connected with the other side so can, but not all, prefer more gender neutral pronouns or nonbinary pronouns that extend beyond the he/she options

I differentiate between neutral and nonbinary in that neutral uses the established plural pronoun which is already gender neutral where nonbinary invents new pronouns.

A neutral example would be they/their/them and a nonbinary example may be ze/zer/zem (there are many others)

So in the following example "You can buy his book at the corner store" would change to "you can buy their book at..." or "you can buy zer book at..." and this would be at the individuals preference based on how they want to be identified.

The former use of the plural pronoun is inherited if you cannot obviously identify the gender of a person. You just replace man/woman with person and it is automatic. "That man is getting his haircut" turns into "that person is getting their haircut". This is natural if we are not sure but should we comply if we are sure (or at least think we are) and/or upon request not to be called he/she but by another pronoun?

Is this just being decent and respectful, an example of love your neighbour, or does it unfairly force ideologies that traditional Christianity can't agree with?

They are anti-christ ideologies. They seek to destroy God's structure and plan for the family by eliminating any distinction between male and female.

 

[JazzHands]

They are anti-christ ideologies. They seek to destroy God's structure and plan for the family by eliminating any distinction between male and female.

I think it's more 'anti-establishment' than anti-christian oldmantook.

Youths have been rebelling against the establishment since time immemorial, it's just that in the past, family units were strong and, at the risk of sounding 'misogynistic', fathers especially, did not tolerate such indulgent behaviour.

In fact, I'll even go a step further and suggest that this kind of behaviour is a cry for help. People who rage against God are usually desperate to receive a sign from God. We've become so wishy-washy and so afraid of offending people that we have no authority. No child wants to feel unprotected!

 

[Oldmantook]

I think it's more 'anti-establishment' than anti-christian oldmantook.

Youths have been rebelling against the establishment since time immemorial, it's just that in the past, family units were strong and, at the risk of sounding 'misogynistic', fathers especially, did not tolerate such indulgent behaviour.

I'm an old guy. While it is true that youth rebel, that rebellion has never manifested itself to the extent now where genderless belief has become so widespread/accepted.
Bear in mind that the original baphomet had both male and female parts thus blurring the distinction between man and woman. That should give you a clue as to the origin behind these ideologies.

 

[JazzHands]

I'm an old guy. While it is true that youth rebel, that rebellion has never manifested itself to the extent now where genderless belief has become so widespread/accepted.
Bear in mind that the original baphomet had both male and female parts thus blurring the distinction between man and woman. That should give you a clue as to the origin behind these ideologies.

It's certainly an interesting observation Oldmantook but I don't put much store in Satanic cults nor do I believe that they will ever have widespread appeal. I don't believe that there is some seedy cabal engineering all of this, all I see is a decadent society that has become far too indulgent and has abrogated its responsibility to the next generation.

Socialism only emerges when people choose to surrender their liberties in exchange for security. Big Gov. is not equipped to house train wayward adolescents. Fathers would be, however, for some bizarre reason, there has been a concerted attempt to emasculate men and I think that is playing a large part in this whole mess.