The first human person was created both male and female and was gender fluid

The first human was created male and female…Physically, male and female biological sex then descended from the first human. Yet there are many interpretations of this line of scripture (male and female he created them) to mean that male and female we all remain to some degree because our spirit is and will always remain the breath of God. God is not a man or woman and has no gender, but is the union of the principals of gender. If you can’t understand what I’m saying - and you really don’t seem to - there really is nothing else I know how to say to make you get it. So continuing to repeat myself a thousand different ways to try to help you get it and see that it is backed up by scripture and tradition is a waste of my time. You’ll get it eventually or you won’t.

I have exhausted myself trying to explain the Church’s teachings on TOB and creation. This person basically thinks gender is fluid and is upset women cannot become priest.

How would you respond to this particular statement? It is so far left and crazy I am having difficulty reasoning with this person. Do you see anything that contradicts any writtings of popes and doctrinal teaching. Somthing specific to show God isn’t the union of the principals of gender. And we all remain to some degree male and female because we are the breath of God. Someone give me something substantial!



She also used PJPII to back her claim “Man is ‘male and female’ right from the beginning.”

And quotes TOB lecture 8 Union of man and Woman

My response:
“When Pope John Paul is talking about man as “male and female” right from the beginning he is referring to the Elohist text of Genesis. There are two creation accounts the Elohist text in which female isn’t created from man but they both are created right from the beginning after the animals. But theology of the body goes more so into the second creation account, the Yahwist text where woman is created from Adam after the animals when he found no commonality with the animals and desired someone he can share love with. We as Catholics do not take either text as literal historical accounts of creation because we have two different creation accounts. The Pope is simply pointing out why he here in TOB and in particular the chapter on original unity decided to use the Yahwist verses the Elohist text.”

How else would you approach this??

Her beliefs are based in ignorance, so it’s not likely that you will be able to change her views on anything.

  1. Gender fluidity is a myth. All are born either male or female (except for a rare few who are developmentally deformed). You either have two X chromosomes (female) or an X and a Y (male) (again except for the rare XXY, XYY, XXX ,etc.).
  2. How you “feel” about your gender has nothing to do with what your gender is.
    Feelings do not create reality. Sorry liberals the real world does not work that way.
  3. Regardless of how many creation stories there are in Genesis, Adam was male, Eve was female. They were both heterosexual and had children. Trying to push modern liberal agendas on ancient scripture is intellectually dishonest at best.

Gender fluid is a myth. But it’s being marketed now as if it were true.


Why then would the plural pronoun “them” (i.e., "male and female He created them") be used - along with the fact that there are two names, Adam and Eve - seems to me that denotes more than one individual! :smiley: Sexual reproduction is an established fact in higher forms of life. We don’t reproduce by one being dividing into two the way lower life forms do. If I were the OP, I would firmly tell the other person that it’s a funny coincidence that this theological/biological “revelation” is just now coming to light - during a time when “genderfluid” is a popular cultural thing. Coincidence? I think not. :rolleyes:

Here’s my thing with these people. If you are so against the Church’s teachings, why would you want more priests? Men or women?? If you are anti-church and anti-church teaching, clearly you are not suited to represent the Church.

Supposedly, it’s about fairness, and supposed ‘evidence’ they have that shows women shared, to some degree, in priestly duties, at least in the early Church. It is rooted in a radical feminist idea that “If men can do it, why not women?” And there are some professions where women can do the same job, but they are still women. A man or woman as carpenter would add nothing as far as skill, but the myth has been created that women need more power. That ‘male dominated’ jobs, even meat cutter, need more women. Which means what, exactly?

Men are in charge of too many things. This is called the “patriarchy.” Which must be overthrown so that women can be in charge. That includes the Church.


It will be hard to explain it to her given that she lacks basic reading comprehension skills. Try to explain to her that Biblical words like “man” are generally proxies for “human beings,” or “human kind.” Similarly, mankind is taken to mean humans, not specifically male humans.

Has she graduated from 5th grade yet?

The person saying this has started with the conclusion and is finding text and “facts” that they think support their conclusion. This is the exact opposite of what logical people do, looking at the facts then coming to a conclusion. Nothing you say to debunk this twisted thought is going to change their mind since they will just find new “facts” to support their predetermined conclusion. In my opinion, I think you are wasting your time.

The first human person was created both male and female and was gender fluid.

That’s wrong for a start. The first human was called Adam and was male. He was created in the image of God, meaning God is male. This is also supported by the Our Father (note that it isn’t Our Mother, nor Our Creator of an Non-Defined Gender).

People who believe nonsense like this are similar to Holocaust deniers. You could jump in a time machine, go back to whenever the first truly human person came about, and introduce them to Adam, and they still wouldn’t believe you.

That line in scripture points to the literal opposite of what this person is trying to assert, and speaks about the distinction between the sexes. (it also says “them,” implying a set, further reinforcing the fact that one was male and the other was female.)

You might try pointing out that species that reproduce A-sexually (without the need for a partner), are biologically more apt to survive, seeing as how you only need one of them to continue the species, and that it makes no sense for the genders to have been one and then split at a later date. Even if Adam and Eve had been “gender fluid,” and contained both genders within themselves, it is a statistical impossibility for both of them to have the genetic mutation resulting in single-sex offspring, at the same generational point, and to all of their many offspring. Beyond that first generation, the likelihood of a two part procreative system (male and female as separate and distinct physical forms) being capable of overtaking a single-part procreative system drops off dramatically.

In short, if Adam and Eve had been truly hermaphroditic (containing both male and female reproductive organs), then their offspring would have been as well, because that would be the base state of humanity. Instead, as far back as fossil records go (even as far as to pre-Homo Sapien humans), we invariably find a distinction between males and females, meaning that this person could not be more wrong if they tried.

Your friend is twisting scripture to conform with their perception of reality, rather than allowing scripture to inform them about the true composition of reality. If they have truly convinced themselves that their position is correct, nothing you say to them will change their minds. At this point, only God can do that, and only if they are willing to let Him.

Hi, Odell!
…the problem lies in the agenda… God is Spirit (no gender); He designated Himself as the God of Israel; as God, He Revealed Himself as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit–each entity/designation as male.

When God Created the Universe and brought man into existence He made him both male and female–two creatures of the same species that would define the species and promote procreation… when God made man man received the breath of life through a direct interaction by God–man lived because God’s Spirit was breathed into him.

Because man (Adam and Eve) was infused with God’s Spirit his dignity does not depend upon gender (man vs. woman) but upon God’s Spirit; however since man in deed was created in a dual gender there are gender specifics built only into Adam as well as only into Eve.

The gender issue only becomes problematic when man wants to emulate and be treated as a woman and vice versa.

God’s Spirit does not make for gender fluidity.

Only those who are arrogant enough or ignorant enough can conceive of such merger (the Spirit of God making human gender fluid).

Maran atha!


Hi, Odell!
…St. John Paul II was intimating that man and woman have the same dignity (value of life) because they were Created in the Image and Likeness of God: both have God’s Spirit which grants them their innate rights and values. Neither man nor woman was Created subservient/lesser than the other–rather they were Created as counterparts ("…this is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh…").

Maran atha!


Wow! All I can say here is wow…

If she’s upset about no female priests, ask her this: “If Jesus wanted women to be priests, why didn’t he make one of the female disciples an Apostle?” If the her response is cultural bias of the time, that’s not it. Christ wasn’t held back by cultural norms. He knew that we would be having this very same discussion. Yet He still didn’t make any female Apostles and priests.

There is a marriage between Priest and Church, just like the Church was the Bride of Christ.

Hi, Odell!
…there lies only ignorance…

In the Beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.

God so loved the world that He Gave His Only Begotten Son so that the world should Live.

In Christ God chose us Before the Beginning of Creation for Salvation.

These three statements (paraphrased) demonstrate that God Existed as the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit from the Beginning.

God’s Revelation of God’s Existence precedes the Incarnation of the Word; hence, the argument presented to you is void and null!

Maran atha!


TOB??? Too many acronyms with no explanation LOL

Hi, Phil!
…for that matter, why wouldn’t Jesus choose six male and six female Disciples?

Sadly, reason has given in to conjecture: ‘if one can think it it is’ (basically: ‘I am god–just as hollowood tells me so’). :banghead::banghead::banghead:

Maran atha!


TOB = Theology of the Body, which was written and taught by St. Pope John Paul II.

I’d like to know what “Priestly duties” women shared in??? God Bless, Memaw

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit