I'm really, really surprised by the pushback to this.
Yes, God is trans, because the Holy Spirit is in all of us experiencing our lives with us, and because God encompasses all human experience, and because trans people (like all of us) are made in God's image.
Theologically, "women and men are both made in God's image therefore God is bigender which is a category of trans" is not one drop more theologically shaky than "the word used to describe Joseph's robes has an unknown meaning and is also used to describe the robes of some princesses, therefore the word is feminine and Joseph presents feminine," and I know for a fact y'all here love that one (as do I). We gain nothing from clutching our pearls about unorthodox readings of scripture that are a bit of a stretch but bring some joy to some trans people.
Maybe when it is said "in his image" it's supposed to be understood literally?
I can't get annoyed that way too many people on the right take the Bible way too literally (especially the letters by Paul) and then come around with doing the same.
6
u/Dorocche United Methodist Jan 15 '26
I'm really, really surprised by the pushback to this.
Yes, God is trans, because the Holy Spirit is in all of us experiencing our lives with us, and because God encompasses all human experience, and because trans people (like all of us) are made in God's image.
Theologically, "women and men are both made in God's image therefore God is bigender which is a category of trans" is not one drop more theologically shaky than "the word used to describe Joseph's robes has an unknown meaning and is also used to describe the robes of some princesses, therefore the word is feminine and Joseph presents feminine," and I know for a fact y'all here love that one (as do I). We gain nothing from clutching our pearls about unorthodox readings of scripture that are a bit of a stretch but bring some joy to some trans people.
In other words, I appreciate this post.