Should we accept and use non-binary gender pronouns?

AACJ

Please Pray
Nov 17, 2016
1,975
1,584
US
✟103,451.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
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?
Why would you use this comparison example? Are you implying that because it is "natural" (appropriate?) in the first case, then it should be natural in the second?

Let's get to the most important issue here. We must have an authoritative base from which to address the morality of accommodating transgenderism in any of its aspects or at any level. Is the 66 books of the Bible to be the only rule for faith and practice? Is the Bible in fact our ultimate guide for what we believe and do? It should be.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

AACJ

Please Pray
Nov 17, 2016
1,975
1,584
US
✟103,451.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
A. Nobody who has been enabled by the Father to accept Jesus is going to be lost over pronouns.
Not necessarily true.

Willfully violating one's conscience can and will certainly lead one down the road to continued rebellion against the Holy Spirit. That can and will result in being lost. But I believe your speaking from a Calvinian perspective.

And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin (Romans 14:23).

Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck (1 Timothy 1:19).

If someone cannot in good faith accommodate the pronoun issue, then to do otherwise does constitute sin in and of itself.

Do you mean using pronouns in the course of accommodating the desire of a "transgender" by referring to them by their preferred pronoun? If so, then I believe your claim can be construed to be implying that it is not contrary to God's will to practice such accommodation. Just becasue some sinful act or thought does not result in a person being severed from Christ does not mean that such an act or thought is not sin itself, which is one apparent concern in the OP.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

AACJ

Please Pray
Nov 17, 2016
1,975
1,584
US
✟103,451.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
B. It's not going to take hold in the long run. Languages become less complex over time, they don't become more complex. As immigration to the US continues, that's going to become more and more true. As more and more people learn no other way to communicated than by typing with their thumbs, that's going to become more and more true. Efforts to make English more complex will ultimately fail.

What? It will take hold to the extent that the use of certain pronouns is mandated by law and takes hold though tradition publicly and privately.

New California law allows jail time for using wrong gender pronoun, sponsor denies that would happen

New California law allows jail time for using wrong gender pronoun, sponsor denies that would happen

Sweden adds gender-neutral pronoun to dictionary

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/151780/GNL_Guidelines_EN.pdf


Pro-"transgender" legislation has been enacted. It has already taken hold to a great extent. The only way it will and can be stopped is through the work of the Church, by prayer and other means. Fortunately, through the prayers and activity of the Chruch of God, the Trump administration has already done much to curb the negative influence of transgenderism in the US.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

DamianWarS

Follower of Isa Al Masih
Supporter
May 15, 2008
9,486
3,322
✟858,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Replace the phrase "traditional Christianity" with 'God's Word.' Traditional Christianity is not the prime authority in matters of faith and practice. Do you disagree?
God's word doesn't explicitly comment on what pronouns we should use
 
  • Agree
Reactions: PloverWing
Upvote 0

AACJ

Please Pray
Nov 17, 2016
1,975
1,584
US
✟103,451.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
God's word doesn't explicitly comment on what pronouns we should use

We know how and in what way God and Christ used pronouns in the Bible.

Neither does it "explicitly" contain a formulaic sentence for the Trinity. It does however explicitly teach on the subjects of accommodating lies, gender expression, God's creational intent and plan for gender objectivity and identity, miraculous intervention, etc. The doctrine of the Trinity is inferred. The appropriate use of God-approved pronouns is to be reckoned according to God's creational intent and plan that all persons have a definite, God-ordained gender. If a person feels contrary to their God-ordained sex/gender, then God Almighty can change the way the think, feel and behave. Devine intervention. Happens all the time.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,119
20,158
US
✟1,440,434.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Not necessarily true.

Willfully violating one's conscience can and will certainly lead one down the road to continued rebellion against the Holy Spirit. That can and will result in being lost. But I believe your speaking from a Calvinian perspective.

And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin (Romans 14:23).

Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck (1 Timothy 1:19).

If someone cannot in good faith accommodate the pronoun issue, then to do otherwise does constitute sin in and of itself.

Do you mean using pronouns in the course of accommodating the desire of a "transgender" by referring to them by their preferred pronoun? If so, then I believe your claim can be construed to be implying that it is not contrary to God's will to practice such accommodation. Just becasue an act of what constitutes a sinful action or thought is not going to result in a person being severed from Christ does not mean that such an act or thought is not sin itself, which is one apparent concern in the OP.

What I'm saying is that if whether we're looking through the lens of Arminianism or the lens of Calvinism, nothing as ultimately insignificant as a pronoun is going to prevent the gospel from reaching someone who is willing or elected (respectively) to accept it.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Darkhorse
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,119
20,158
US
✟1,440,434.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
What? It will take hold to the extent that the use of certain pronouns is mandated by law and takes hold though tradition publicly and privately.

New California law allows jail time for using wrong gender pronoun, sponsor denies that would happen

New California law allows jail time for using wrong gender pronoun, sponsor denies that would happen

Sweden adds gender-neutral pronoun to dictionary

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/151780/GNL_Guidelines_EN.pdf


Pro-"Transgender" legislation has been enacted. It has already taken hold to a great extent. The only way it will and can be stopped is through the work of the Church, by prayer and other means. Fortunately, through the prayers and activity of the Chruch of God, the Trump administration has already done much to curb the influence of Transgenderism in the US.

Gender-neutral is not anywhere near the same thing as preferred gender.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Darkhorse
Upvote 0

AACJ

Please Pray
Nov 17, 2016
1,975
1,584
US
✟103,451.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
Gender-neutral is not anywhere near the same thing as preferred gender.
I believe it is in many respects when gender neutrality is a preference. The preference in both cases has its roots in certain lies. If a person rejects God's plan for an appointed gender, is that not contrary to His will?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

AACJ

Please Pray
Nov 17, 2016
1,975
1,584
US
✟103,451.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
What I'm saying is that if whether we're looking through the lens of Arminianism or the lens of Calvinism, nothing as ultimately insignificant as a pronoun is going to prevent the gospel from reaching someone who is willing or elected (respectively) to accept it.

Are you combining two issues? I did not claim the Gospel would not reach certain people. Anyone can preach the Gospel, even a sinner or a professing Christian accommodating Transgenderism on some point. But what effect will that have on one's testimony and the perception of such authority upon which such testimony should be based?

My post made reference to a person accommodating another person's preference for a pronoun contrary to their biological or God appointed gender and the moral question of doing so. That of course involves the not-insignificant issue of directly or indirectly accommodating certain lies that serve as a basis for such a preference, such preference being contrary to God's will.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,119
20,158
US
✟1,440,434.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Are you combining two issues? I did not claim the Gospel would not reach certain people. Anyone can preach the Gospel, even a sinner or a professing Christian accommodating Transgenderism on some point. But what effect will that have on one's testimony and the perception of such authority upon which such testimony should be based?

My post made reference to a person accommodating another person's preference for a pronoun contrary to their biological or God appointed gender and the moral question of doing so. That of course involves the not-insignificant issue of directly or indirectly accommodating certain lies that serve as a basis for such a preference, such preference being contrary to God's will.

You missed my point.

The question is whether "we" need to adopt "non-binary" gender pronouns in order to evangelize people who claim non-binary gender identification.

My answer is "no," because the Holy Spirit is not blocked by pronouns.
 
Upvote 0

Tetra

Well-Known Member
Dec 18, 2016
1,223
708
41
Earth
✟64,448.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You missed my point.

The question is whether "we" need to adopt "non-binary" gender pronouns in order to evangelize people who claim non-binary gender identification.

My answer is "no," because the Holy Spirit is not blocked by pronouns.
I don't know if that's a good way to think, what IS the Holy Spirit blocked by??? Nothing.

So why take anything into consideration, why think about your audience at all?
 
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,119
20,158
US
✟1,440,434.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I don't know if that's a good way to think, what IS the Holy Spirit blocked by??? Nothing.

So why take anything into consideration, why think about your audience at all?

An evangelist really need only go where the Holy Spirit tells him to go and speak what the Holy Spirit tells him to speak. That will work the way the Holy Spirit wants it to work.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BarWi

Active Member
Oct 11, 2018
75
54
71
Midwest
✟20,902.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
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 believe that all goods are truth-derivative, i.e., to the extent a thing is true, to this extent it can be said to be "good". The question then becomes, is it "good" to yield to these kinds of requests? If we hold the term "good" to a general sense (we could go on forever defining the various types of good or lack thereof that might be applicable here), I come to the conclusion that there is little or no good served to society by imposing a change in behavior for the psychological desires (in contradistinction to factual and biological reality) of an emotionally flawed few. We are only entitled to facts, not opinions; the modification of pronouns do not identify with any actual facts. (And willful modification of the physical body does not produce usable facts.) I would think this should be a common sense issue and approach applicable to all, not merely the religious.

One might make the case that a good is graciously served to those whose psychological needs seem to require [in some sense] society to appease them. But then the question to me becomes, are we remaining steadfast to truth or bowing to a deception and falsehood?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: JazzHands
Upvote 0

DamianWarS

Follower of Isa Al Masih
Supporter
May 15, 2008
9,486
3,322
✟858,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I believe that all goods are truth-derivative, i.e., to the extent a thing is true, to this extent it can be said to be "good". The question then becomes, is it "good" to yield to these kinds of requests? If we hold the term "good" to a general sense (we could go on forever defining the various types of good or lack thereof that might be applicable here), I come to the conclusion that there is little or no good served to society by imposing a change in behavior for the psychological desires (in contradistinction to factual and biological reality) of an emotionally flawed few. We are only entitled to facts, not opinions; the modification of pronouns do not identify with any actual facts. (And willful modification of the physical body does not produce usable facts.) I would think this should be a common sense issue and approach applicable to all, not merely the religious.

One might make the case that a good is graciously served to those whose psychological needs seem to require [in some sense] society to appease them. But then the question to me becomes, are we remaining steadfast to truth or bowing to a deception and falsehood?

you speak of the good of society, favouring more the good of the masses is the good for the few. what I speak of is a missional agenda regardless how society deems it or regardless how the masses receive it. missional in the sense of to the individual or to their niche communities. Paul says "I have become all things to all people" then he continues with is justification "I do all this for the sake of the gospel". This should be the same with pronouns. we should not simply buy into the general demand but rather look at can the gospel reach these individuals better/worse if I use these pronouns? relationally it would seem to be better to use these pronouns but if it benefits them greater for receiving the gospel i don't know.
 
Upvote 0

BarWi

Active Member
Oct 11, 2018
75
54
71
Midwest
✟20,902.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
what I speak of is a missional agenda regardless how society deems it or regardless how the masses receive it...should be the same with pronouns. we should not simply buy into the general demand but rather look at can the gospel reach these individuals better/worse if I use these pronouns?
My argument is not whether society accepts or rejects, but what is actually selling falsely attributed good that is logically only a disguised detriment based on the assumption that pursuit of truth in all things is always and only the direction people should strive for.

Yes, there are examples that lies can be told to protect others, serving a good, but philosophically speaking these are examples of how human imperfection operates. It seems accurate to suppose in all possible worlds [all things being equal] to seek truth is always preferable to pursuit of the false. If the gender issue is psychological rather than factual, it seems a corruption, and therefore a falsehood. To yield to these requests seems tacit embrace of the false. To pander to falsehood in order to bring those embracing it into the flock--where the prime objective is to strive for truth in worship of the absolute Truth--seems a serious contradiction.

An associated problem arises: if those who want to change culture in ways the transgender community does spreads to other abnormalities and demands arise from these that the rest of us go along with them as well, where do you draw the line and say enough is enough? Of should we pander to every new kind of thinking that comes along? This possibility seems intuitively not far-fetched, given directions the culture has been going the last decade or so.

On the other hand I understand your point about trying to find common ground with those who think differently. But we need to weigh what direction "different" is taking us. Sometimes it's best to stand ground for the truth, regardless of how it might hurt feelings.
 
Upvote 0

Tetra

Well-Known Member
Dec 18, 2016
1,223
708
41
Earth
✟64,448.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I come to the conclusion that there is little or no good served to society by imposing a change in behavior for the psychological desires (in contradistinction to factual and biological reality) of an emotionally flawed few.
I don't know if "imposing" is the correct word, maybe request would be better.

Can you explain why a biological reality is relevant? I can think of many cosmetic changes other than transgenderism and never really found it to be relevant personally.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BarWi

Active Member
Oct 11, 2018
75
54
71
Midwest
✟20,902.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
I don't know if "imposing" is the correct word, maybe request would be better.
I don't think the trans community has the numbers or power to actually impose their views on culture, however the progressive community in general does have numbers to exert this influence for change, of which the trans folks are of course associates. I think impose is an accurate term in light of obvious attempts by activists (nearly all of whom are progressives) to 'change' cultural views in society.

Can you explain why a biological reality is relevant?
I'm surprised you ask this Tetra. Materialists have been practically screaming that factual existence is the only legitimate reality for centuries now.

Under the assumption that the human person works as a whole--body, psyche, soul [or however you may piece it together]--the natural course of life seems, with certain exceptions accounted for by human fallibility, to have produced psychological and spiritual natures in common with our material nature. Biologically, men have been by and large attracted to women and vice versa, which has propagated the race. Material, psychological and spiritual flaws--those natures humanity in general has recognized as abnormalities--have always been around, but have nonetheless been known as corruptions. We are what we are biologically or materially.

I respect the right of those who choose to live their lives in abnormal ways. Sometimes abnormality produces good things. I happen to think the progressive community provides a good in their counter to the harsher positions conservatives are sometimes naturally drawn to. The trans folks have the right to live their lives free of persecution with everyone else. But they do not, imo, have the right to insist on others recognizing their abnormalities as normal. Living life that way carries certain built-in consequences which they need to recognize and accept. Might be tough finding a job, people are naturally going to stare, and because all are imperfect, many are going to act with revulsion at the abnormal lifestyles. This is just life.
 
Upvote 0