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?
Thank you. You’re welcome to join the soulist movement and help Me overthrow realism. http://soulism.net
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.
Uh, pronouns are just words. They don’t have some innate quality that means they had to exist when the entities those pronouns describe began. He/Him is likely about as old as he/him.
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…
You should know how much time Christian monks spent reasoning about the foreskin of Christ.
It’s a lot.
Long enough to postulate that once the Jesus ascended, his foreskin ascended as well and become. The. Rings. Of. Saturn.
Sky will never be the same, won’t it?
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.
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.
I can’t really call something that’s literally as old as writing a “neo-” anything. Non-standard, perhaps?
There’s some interesting conversation about this topic though.
https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/83130/does-the-word-god-get-the-pronoun-it-or-he
