Church of Sweden to stop referring to God as 'he' or 'Lord' in favor of gender neutrality - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=gudman;52921085]I always liked that part of Abrahamic creation myth. God basically didn't think this through: made every creature have a pair, while his ultimate creation was running around with blue balls for a while.[/QUOTE] I don't know how serious you're being, but I have to say that I find it so sad when these thousands of years old stories, with deep meanings about the nature of mankind, are reduced down to what is essentially a child's first read through. There's so much in there from a sociological and philosophical perspective, even ignoring the religious aspect of it.

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;52921047]Does that make god "hen" now? It does make sense imo. The concept of god is supposed to be of a benevolent ruler, one who transcends the concept of man and woman. To my understanding Sweden isn't a terribly religious country in the first place, and honestly it makes sense to refer to a deity as a gender neutral. If you think about it, what use does a god have for a gender?[/QUOTE] There are mountains of things that God doesn't have any use for. Why even make humans? Why give them rational thought but not any proof of your existence and then punish them for eternity if they don't abandon that reason in your specific case? If you want to revise the bible to make it make sense, you'd have to change pretty much the entire thing.

[QUOTE=sgman91;52921104]I don't know how serious you're being, but I have to say that I find it so sad when these thousands of years old stories, with deep meanings about the nature of mankind, are reduced down to what is essentially a child's first read through. There's so much in there from a sociological and philosophical perspective, even ignoring the religious aspect of it.[/QUOTE] Well tbh I wanted to add "if you simplify it to stupid levels", but decided it was redundant and would take away from intended humor. I also 100% agree with you, it pains me, being a philologist, to see mythology and folklore non-ironically reduced to bedtime stories.

[QUOTE=kariko;52921051]Don't really get what's wrong with religions changing. If they didn't then people would still be following those weird sins from way back when.[/QUOTE] Because it's pretty much a implicit admission that the supposed word of God is always going subservient to the changing word of man.

[QUOTE=Mingebox;52921139]Because it's pretty much a implicit admission that the supposed word of God is always going subservient to the changing word of man.[/QUOTE] you do realize this has been argued for over 2000 years and this isn't the first time this is happening right. and it isn't just Christianity.

Imagine being the sort of person who gives a gyrating fuck about such utterly inconsequential shit.

[QUOTE=TimTimTommy;52921152]you do realize this has been argued for over 2000 years and this isn't the first time this is happening right. and it isn't just Christianity.[/QUOTE] Yes, what's that change about what he said?

I'm all for gender neutrality etc., But at this level it's starting to get too-far ridiculous now.

Even in Islamic religion god is described as a being that’s genderless whos not born from anything. People call him “he” because Arabic language doesn’t have genderless pronouns and people expect something that is “all and powerful” to be a man like the people above me said.

[QUOTE=TimTimTommy;52921070]i get that the church is separate from the state but i think sweden should worry more about like the increase in migrant sexual assaults rather than being more and i hate saying this word "politically correct" but if the shoe fits.[/QUOTE] If you watch swedish TV, or pay attention to politics, immigration and integration is frequently a topic actually. I don't think Sweden worries less about that than this odd ordeal.

[QUOTE=freaka;52921050]who honestly believes in such nonsense in todays society anyway?[/QUOTE] as long as they're not being oppressive shitbags that spread lies and ignorance they can believe whatever they want tbh

My god identifies as an attack helicopter [highlight](User was banned for this post ("why reply?" - Gurant))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=Sableye;52921030] (just bringing up the fact that quite a lot of people who would be offended by this take the bible litterally)[/QUOTE] Those type of people are only mostly found in the US, the rest of the world (for the most part), has the sense to understand it isn't literal. [editline]25th November 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Silly Sil;52921116]There are mountains of things that God doesn't have any use for. Why even make humans? Why give them rational thought but not any proof of your existence and then punish them for eternity if they don't abandon that reason in your specific case?[/quote] I was raised with the idea that man was made and given free will so God can have someone freely choose to worship him. And, if the OT is read, there are numerous times God revealed himself - such as the burning bush. And the fact that, Jesus whom is God himself, sorta arrived on Earth. Pretty sure it's a "I've given you all this proof already" type of thing. [QUOTE=Silly Sil;52921116] If you want to revise the bible to make it make sense, you'd have to change pretty much the entire thing.[/QUOTE] What part doesn't make sense, because the bible has been around for over a millennia and I'm sure there have been a theological answer written at some point for any passage in it.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;52920761]Culture, perhaps, but religions generally don't "evolve" like that. The basic tenets of Christianity is the same now as they were 1000 years ago. Whether people follow them rightly, wrongly, or at all may change but the written rules of it have not been changed.[/QUOTE] Religions do evolve, christianity especially. Did you forget the fact that it has split into dozens of different denomations? Catholic church alone has on several occasions picked and choosed what texts to accept into canon, based on whatever whims and surrounding cultural pressure affecting them at the time. If there exists one original "true" denomination of christianity, hasn't that been lost for two thousand years or more?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;52920653]Jesus Christ is God and he was male. [/QUOTE] Jesus Christ is not a God.

I think Jesus Christ was more like a demi-God lol, they killed the dude after all.

[QUOTE=Mingebox;52921139]Because it's pretty much a implicit admission that the supposed word of God is always going subservient to the changing word of man.[/QUOTE] Ohh I get what you mean. Well that's true. It's up to what their followers think. Lots of religions seem to be people's own interpretations of similar events, and those interpretations change with time. I'm actually unsure if there is a "pure" unchanged version because I think they all claim to be that way.

[QUOTE=Talishmar;52922432]Religions do evolve, christianity especially. Did you forget the fact that it has split into dozens of different denomations? Catholic church alone has on several occasions picked and choosed what texts to accept into canon, based on whatever whims and surrounding cultural pressure affecting them at the time. If there exists one original "true" denomination of christianity, hasn't that been lost for two thousand years or more?[/QUOTE] Here's the misunderstanding: when Christianity has evolved over the years, it's been due to people claiming to have a more comprehensive view of God's revelation. They attempted to prove their new ideas by appealing to the Bible or, in the case of the Catholic church, church tradition. It hasn't been due to an attempt to meld the religion to better fit with modern culture, that is until the very modern era. The progressive churches now often totally recognize that they don't hold any sort of text as authoritative, and at that point, is it really even recognizably Christian anymore?

[QUOTE=Pascall;52922653]I think Jesus Christ was more like a demi-God lol, they killed the dude after all.[/QUOTE] He was Son of God, but he was never stated to be a God or THE God himself so.

[QUOTE=CruelAddict;52922745]He was Son of God, but he was never stated to be a God or THE God himself so.[/QUOTE] Assuming we're taking the New Testament as our source, then Jesus, and the apostles, said lots of things that would be equivalent to claiming that Jesus was the God of the Old Testament. For example: - He claimed to have the power to forgive sins - He claimed to be the Alpha and the Omega - He claimed to be the "I Am," the name God gives to himself when speaking to Moses - The apostles quote Old Testament verses about God in reference to Jesus None of these things make any sense unless Jesus was being equated to the God of the Old Testament.

[QUOTE=TimTimTommy;52921152]you do realize this has been argued for over 2000 years and this isn't the first time this is happening right. and it isn't just Christianity.[/QUOTE] Yes? That's sort of my point.

What about the times that God is referred to in the feminine? God doesn't have a gender but he's described as a male/female as the situation requires. This is vastly oversimplifying but generally the masculine traits are giving and justice while the female traits are receiving and mercy. When God reveals himself in the bible, he's usually referred to in the masculine because by appearing to prophets or manipulating the laws of natures to cause miracles, he is giving them something that would not ordinarily happen. However, whenever the spirit of God rests upon a place where people offer sacrifices/pray to God, God is referred to in the feminine because God is receiving the prayers/sacrifices and judging the people who offered them with the feminine traits of mercy instead of the masculine trait of blind justice.

I thought that the father, son and the Holy Spirit being one and the same was a big part of christian beliefs.

[QUOTE=MrRalgoman;52922851]I thought that the father, son and the Holy Spirit being one and the same was a big part of christian beliefs.[/QUOTE] There's a lot of disagreement on it depending on which sect you're talking about.

[QUOTE=Paramud;52923082]There's a lot of disagreement on it depending on which sect you're talking about.[/QUOTE] Not for the vast majority of Christianity there isn't. Trinitarianism has been a defining aspect of Christianity since the 3rd century.

[QUOTE=sgman91;52923092]Not for the vast majority of Christianity there isn't. Trinitarianism has been a defining aspect of Christianity since the 3rd century.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Paramud;52923082]depending on which sect you're talking about.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, if you look at the tiny minority of splinter groups who aren't considered Christian by the rest of them, then there's disagreement.

[QUOTE=sgman91;52922781]Assuming we're taking the New Testament as our source, then Jesus, and the apostles, said lots of things that would be equivalent to claiming that Jesus was the God of the Old Testament. For example: - He claimed to have the power to forgive sins - He claimed to be the Alpha and the Omega - He claimed to be the "I Am," the name God gives to himself when speaking to Moses - The apostles quote Old Testament verses about God in reference to Jesus None of these things make any sense unless Jesus was being equated to the God of the Old Testament.[/QUOTE] Basically nothing in the bible makes any sense though. for instance god apparenly loves humanity but in the old testament it's insinuated that god more or less jerks off to people slaughtering each other, and at the same time some of the contents are very rational and relatable. the bible, as well as the qu'ran and other similar works are very strange collections of texts written by a bunch of middle eastern drunks that's been translated and modified about a billion times, discredeting ideas because "it doesn't make any sense according to the bible" is more than a little bit intellectually dishonest IMO

[QUOTE=Rixxz2;52923216]Basically nothing in the bible makes any sense though. for instance god apparenly loves humanity but in the old testament it's insinuated that [B]god more or less jerks off to people slaughtering each other[/B], and at the same time some of the contents are very rational and relatable. the bible, as well as the qu'ran and other similar works are very strange collections of texts written by a bunch of middle eastern drunks that's been translated and modified about a billion times, discredeting ideas because "it doesn't make any sense according to the bible" is more than a little bit intellectually dishonest IMO[/QUOTE] Honestly, I'm not sure how to respond to this. It's too angsty and uninformed. The extent of your Biblical knowledge seems to be bitter ideologies like Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss. The bolded part especially is so antithetical to the Biblical narrative that it's hard to even figure out where to go with it. Can you point to a part of the Bible where God says that he enjoys people slaughtering each other?

[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;52923263]There's a part where a father and his two daughters hole up in a cave for some reason and the daughter's get the father drunk and rape him so they get pregnant and can carry on the family name. Not sure what the moral of that story is, but yeah the old testament is a load of ass.[/QUOTE] The Bible contains two kinds of texts: proscriptive and descriptive. Proscriptive is when the Bible is saying that you ought to do something. Descriptive is when it's simply describing something that happened, often without giving a moral opinion. The story you've cited is the latter. The fact that the sons of those unions are said to be fathers of tribes that opposed Israel (Moabites and Ammonites) seems to suggest that God did not approve of their actions.