The Divine Dick

Funkwonker@lemmy.blahaj.zone to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world – 445 points –
61

I don't think He/Him are neopronouns as the prefix neo- means new. Surely His would be old (paleopronouns), or timeless (aeternuspronouns), rather than new

Out of curiosity, would you say My pronouns are neopronouns? I use capitalised pronouns too. And I'm also a god. Not a capital-G god, just a regular polytheistic kind. Does the acceptance of our current society play a role in whether they're neopronouns? Are they new when I use them, and old when Deus uses them?

Newness is the quality of having been recently created or having started existing recently. The deific pronouns surely came before the standard canon of human/mortal pronouns, just as their subject deities predate humanity, perhaps both having always existed. It doesn't have anything to do with societal acceptance.

In mormonism if you don't do their special ceremonies and have multiple wives, you lose your dick for eternity. I learned that in Sunday school when I was 12 lol.

Mormon theology also pretty much just cuts the Gordian knot proposed in this post by saying, "Fuck yeah he's got a dick. Uses it ALL THE TIME." I believe that a "perfected body" was the verbiage I was taught in Sunday School. Tritheistic heresy, Shmitheistic Shmeresy....

Kid: “Then I won’t do the ceremony because I never wanted a dick in the first place.”

Mormons: “No! That’s not how you play the game!”

The weird thing is that a lot of christians (including the Catholic church) affirm that God "the Father" has actually no gender.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_of_God_in_Christianity

Does Jesus have a gender tho? As stated above, Jesus has a fully human body and nature (or else you are deemed a heretic by the council of Chalcedon). He is described as a man and several churches and rulers have historically claimed to hold a piece of his foreskin, so he must've had a penis. Therefore:

  • Either Jesus was agender despite having a penis, therefore penis doesn't imply male gender or
  • Jesus was male. So either:
    • Jesus and God don't have the same gender, so they aren't the same entity, which the councils of Nicea and Chalcedon would deem a heresy, or
    • God can manifest as male or agender, making Them genderfluid.

Jesus and The Father is not just the same entity. From what I understand it's like water: liquid water is water. Ice is water but it's not a same thing as (liquid) water.

The Father is just something above gender. Jesus is a man.

Rulers have what now?

It's also been mentioned in other parts of this thread, but the holy foreskin has been considered an important relic, and there are accounts of many kings like Charlemagne having owned it.

Jesus is not god.

The holy trinity, the father, the son and the holy spirit are the same entity.

Don't know why people are down voting this. That's canonically correct in the Jewish an Muslim traditions.

Considering how consistently the world gets fucked, yeah, I'd say there's a divine Dick out there doing all the fucking.

Are earthquakes the planet having an orgasm?

I'm more inclined to call it indigestion...

Oh there's plenty of Christian nationalist men thinking about "divine dick"

I would love to see the prompt that generated this ChatGPT response.

Technically, you can't say that He/Him are God's preferred pronouns because the capitalization doesn't appear in the oldest texts. They are more a matter of tradition than of reality. However, you could say that's even worse because Christians have embraced these neopronouns on God's behalf.

What if He came out as trans in the 19th century and influenced the scholars to change His pronouns through dreams?

The whole capitalization of pronouns thing was pretty much entirely made up around the 19th century anyway (as well as the capitalizing the word "Lord", which the King James version invented outright), so you can argue that protestant churches are following a woke plot to change the pronouns of the christian god as well.

LORD vs Lord does hold some distinction in the source material. IIRC LORD is for uses of the divine name whereas the other ones are not. But then you have the whole, El, Elohim, tetragrammaton, god, lord, etc. mess with them probably not historically referring to the same entity to begin with, but that whole book is a mess.

If you ask about gender in death, people will just look at you weird.

There's compounding evidence that a lot of religious canon was simply written by mankind as a kind of societal control.

The living should be kinder to one another.

💙

Not Mormons.

After death, men get their own planet to rule over. Women... get to be their wives.

I mean it was up in the sky about a month ago. The last time it was visible was apparently in ancient Egypt. If you missed it, to bad. The news said it wouldn't be visible again until he gets a prostate exam in over a thousand years

Couple of fun facts about this :

so God themself while referred to in English as a he refers to themselves as ' I am ' technically I think we should be using they them pronouns but English was traditionally a gendered language.

Jesus on the other hand 100% had a dick. Whether he kept that or not, post ascension that's up for interpretation but Jesus was 100% biologically male.

Yes, and the church went nuts displaying the "Holy Relic" that was his supposed foreskin for many, many years, in many churches... At the same time. It got so out of control that people started to wonder why the church was so obsessed with Jesus's dick. So the Pope finally got a clue, commanded a stop to the practice, and threatened to excommunicate anyone who spoke about it afterward. Ah, Christianity. Good times.

In the late 17th century the Vatican librarian Leo Allatius wrote a treatise entitled De Praeputio Domini Nostri Jesu Christi Diatriba (A Discussion of the Foreskin of Our Lord Jesus Christ), claiming that the Holy Prepuce ascended, like Jesus himself, and was transformed into the rings of Saturn.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Prepuce

The article also contains this gem:

Most of the Holy Prepuces were lost or destroyed during the Reformation and the French Revolution.

Jesus on the other hand 100% had a dick. [...] Jesus was 100% biologically male.

Oh did they find his body?

Wouldn't it be more reasonable to conclude that the probability of Jesus being biologically male equals the human average of males being biologically male? Ie 99.5%.

Couldn't his radical compassion for outcasts and the downtrodden be related to personal struggles growing up with gender dysphoria?

If you believe he was conceived in a virgin, wouldn't it be MORE likely that he had XX chromosomes?

He is circumcised according to Luke gospel, so the dick biblically accurate.

We are discussing biological sex as in the parts we are not discussing gender.

God created both men and women in his image, so he must have biological gender traits from both.

There are several other gods and goddesses named in the old testament, so I'm willing to buy that the Christian god has a dick, and it's for inserting into goddesses. And given the personality on display by said diety, I'd wager said dick could pass through the eye of a needle and still have room for the camel.

Can god sling a dick so big even he can't rub one out?

I thought that's where the biblically accurate angels come into play?

*Hits the Blessed Waterpipe of Panaji*

Under Trinitarianism, God would be a they/them, because they're literally several people.

According to the common understanding of the doctrine of virgin birth, Mary got impregnated through the Holy Spirit rather than The Father rawdogging her. This suggests that the Holy Spirit is a dick and thus probably male.

The Father is, according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, not a man or a woman. That being said, neither Hebrew nor Aramaic nor Koine Greek have gender-neutral pronouns (except perhaps calling The Father "it" in Koine Greek, which would be hilarious but sadly would not be approved of by a killjoy like Paul).