Does God have a sex?

[Joykins]

I invite anyone to join

POINT: God is referred to in the Bible with the male pronoun and as "Father" and "Son" and Jesus was incarnated as a man.

COUNTERPOINT:

It's hardly that unambiguous.

* The singular of "Elohim" (which is in the new definition) is feminine.

* The Hebrew word for the Holy Spirit is feminine.

God is not subject to human sex except in the Person of the Son who was incarnated as a male.

POINT: The gender of nouns does not indicate sex in any way.

COUNTER-POINT:
They do when the subject is a person, though. Mostly. Das Maedchen being an apparent counterexample.


POINT: noun gender does not always match a person's gender as various languages have words for "boy" or "girl" that may be neuter.

COUNTER-POINT:

True. Then there is the grammatical idiosyncrasy of addressing God by the informal 2nd person pronoun...

A better evidence would be that God created male and female in His own image :)

POINT:
The pronouns used to refer to God in the Bible include "he", "him", and "his".

COUNTER-POINT:
"He", "him", and "his" are unmarked pronouns in English grammar.


I take the position that God remains beyond gender.

Anyone want to debate or continue?

[GreenMunchkin]

The only problem is, Joy, any post made by any of us will get carried back to WWMC, twisted and slanted, so we can be gossiped about and maligned. The amount of misinformation is ridiculous - it doesn't even get cleared up when it comes to light that we aren't the ones in the wrong.

So, thanks, but no thanks. I'd rather be involved in threads that are created in love; not where ammo is being sought out.

God bless you very much.

[Joykins]

If you think that is my motive here you are very wrong. This is my attempt to be rule-abiding while not losing my words to the bit-bucket, and to offer a continuance of the conversation if anyone is interested.

Grammar is a big interest of mine.

[SpiritualAntiseptic]

Let's see- the Father and the Holy Spirit do not have a human sex. Spirit doesn't seem to have gender. However, Christ is part of the part of the Trinity, which includes His humanity (which includes His gender). I guess the question remains- do we keep gender after the resurrection? I don't know the answer to that.

[SpiritualAntiseptic]

The only problem is, Joy, any post made by any of us will get carried back to WWMC, twisted and slanted, so we can be gossiped about and maligned. The amount of misinformation is ridiculous - it doesn't even get cleared up when it comes to light that we aren't the ones in the wrong.

So, thanks, but no thanks. I'd rather be involved in threads that are created in love; not where ammo is being sought out.

God bless you very much.

That's because (as I've seen) some people here make statements without being careful for what they can mean. There isn't much critical evaluation of the words they choose.

[Time2BCounted]

I invite anyone to join

...Does God have a sex?

... the Person of the Son who was incarnated as a male.

You answered yourself it seems

[Bananna]

HaShem has no gender, Hebrew has only feminine form and masculine form. While German has Masculine, feminine and Neuter.

The form is masculine for HaShem. Feminine for the Holy Spirit.

[Joykins]

You answered yourself it seems

Is Jesus a part of God?

[Time2BCounted]

What do you mean a 'part' of God?

Joh 20:28And Thomas answered and said to him, `My Lord and my God;`


Is Jesus God?
Was Jesus born a male?

Seems to me thats all the answer we need

[Joykins]

So you hold the position that God is male?

[Time2BCounted]

So you hold the position that God is male?
I hold the position that i believe and hold to and teach the Word of God, every word without adding to it or subtracting from it.

What position do you hold?

Do you agree Jesus was born a male?

Do you agree that Jesus is God?

What more do we actually know from this point?

Why would you add or subtract from what we are told?

[Speculative]

I take the position that God remains beyond gender.

I agree with you. I still use the masculine when referring to God, though. To call God "it" seems disrespectful to me, and his most direct and universally known revelation of himself was as the Son, Jesus Christ. Therefore, to me, the masculine seems appropriate.

However, I do not object to using the feminine to refer to God. (your point about the Holy Spirit is well taken) :)

[Joykins]

I generally use "He" for God the Father and God the Son and "She" for the Holy Spirit. I like traditional language.

Could God have incarnated as a woman if He'd wanted to?

[Bananna]

I agree with you. I still use the masculine when referring to God, though. To call God "it" seems disrespectful to me, and his most direct and universally known revelation of himself was as the Son, Jesus Christ. Therefore, to me, the masculine seems appropriate.

However, I do not object to using the feminine to refer to God. (your point about the Holy Spirit is well taken) :)
Referring to HaShem as She is not an offense it is just bad grammer

[Bananna]

I generally use "He" for God the Father and God the Son and "She" for the Holy Spirit. I like traditional language.

Could God have incarnated as a woman if He'd wanted to?
While God has all ability there are somethings He cannot do because they are contrary to his nature.

The question is not can?, but would?

[Joykins]

While God has all ability there are somethings He cannot do because they are contrary to his nature.

The question is not can?, but would?

If women are created in the image of God, I think it would not be contrary to his nature to do so.

I know that he did not. I can think of many reasons not to that would have mainly to do with human sexism rather than the eternal nature of God.

[Simon_Templar]

As Melethiel pointed out in the previous discussion on this, grammatical gender has no connection to real gender. Gender in language, as in refering to ships as "she" is purely a abstract concept and has no connection to real gender. If you actually go and take a class in an ancient language this is one of the things you will learn. I learned this in a latin class at a secular university, no connection to any theological issues. Gender is merely a concept we use to organize language. Its application to language is completely arbitrary.

Now, on the question of God's gender. God the Father and God the Holy Spirit do not have a sex because they are spirit. Jesus Christ is male because he has an incarnate body.
However, God has chosen to reveal himself in terms of male gender predominantly.

The bible says that God created man in his own image, male and female he created them.

This is taken by many to mean that God is both male and female, or that he contains both masculine and feminine characteristics.

It is true that God contains both masculine and feminine characteristics. Thats clear from various references in the bible that describe God. Further, it has often been pointed out that the Holy Spirit is the person of the trinity who is most often described with feminine characteristics.
However, I would submit that we are looking at this question from a basic assumption that may not be correct. We are looking at this question through the lens of divided gender. As humanity exists today, there are two genders which are contrasted against each other. However when God first created man, there was only one gender, because God created Adam, and didn't create Eve until no other companion was found for Adam.

I don't believe that this meant that humanity was devoid of feminine traits prior to Eve's creation. I believe that humanity, and God's image was complete in Adam. When Eve was created, she was created from Adam, physically as her body was built out of his body, but also in that her humanity was taken from his humanity.

The point of making the companion was so that relationship could exist between them. It was so that they would need one another in order to be completed.

so essentially, before the creation of Eve, there was only one gender, and it was described as masculine. That masculine included what we now call feminine traits.

[Albion]

While God has all ability there are somethings He cannot do because they are contrary to his nature.



How does God's nature prevent him from incarnating as a woman?

To me, God is a Father in some sense, but a spirit without a physical body does not have a gender as we normally understand this.

[Speculative]

Referring to HaShem as She is not an offense it is just bad grammerI believe that referring to 'ruach' in the feminine would be proper grammar, which is what we are talking about.

[NewGuy101]

I'm not a big grammar person, actually that's why I'm an engineering major.:P


But according to bible.org (http://net.bible.org/strong.php?id=0430)

Myhla 'elohiym

Pronunciation:el-o-heem'Origin:plural of 0433 (http://net.bible.org/strong.php?id=0433)Reference:TWOT - 93cPrtSpch:noun masculine pluralIn AV:God 2346, god 244, judge 5, GOD 1, goddess 2, great 2, mighty 2, angels 1, exceeding 1, God-ward + 04136 (http://net.bible.org/strong.php?id=04136) 1, godly 1Count:2606Definition:1) (plural)
1a) rulers, judges
1b) divine ones
1c) angels
1d) gods
2) (plural intensive - singular meaning)
2a) god, goddess
2b) godlike one
2c) works or special possessions of God
2d) the (true) God
2e) God plural of 433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically
used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the
supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to
magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative:-angels, X
exceeding, God (gods)(-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X
mighty.
see HEBREW for 0433 (http://net.bible.org/strong.php?id=0433)


What am I missing? Is the noun here plural so it makes it masculine and the singular tense makes it femine?

[Time2BCounted]

I generally use "He" for God the Father and God the Son and "She" for the Holy Spirit. I like traditional language.

Could God have incarnated as a woman if He'd wanted to?
Ok Joy lets take a look at this

Holy - English
qodesh - Hebrew - masculine noun


Spirit - English
ruwach - Hebrew - feminine noun

Concerning Joseph we have this...
Gen 41:8 And it came to pass in the morning 01242 that his spirit 07307 (ruwach, feminine) was troubled 06470 ; and he sent 07971 and called 07121 for all the magicians 02748 of Egypt 04714, and all the wise men 02450 thereof: and Pharaoh 06547 told 05608 them his dream 02472; but [there was] none that could interpret 06622 them unto Pharaoh 06547.

Joseph IS MALE yet his spirit is the very same feminine noun. A feminine noun doesnt make the object feminine, or else Joseph was a female. Then we have this

Job 32:8 But 0403 [there is] a spirit 07307 (rewach - feminine) in man 0582: and the inspiration 05397 of the Almighty 07706 giveth them understanding 0995 .

Pro 17:27 He that hath 03045 knowledge 01847 spareth 02820 his words 0561: [and] a man 0376 of understanding 08394 is of an excellent 03368 07119 spirit 07307 (ruwach - feminine).

Pro 18:14 The spirit 07307 (ruwash - feminine) of a man 0376 will sustain 03557 his infirmity 04245; but a wounded 05218 spirit 07307 who can bear 05375 ?

So there you go... Jeoseph and men in general, when their spirit was referred to, it is ALWAYS with the feminine noun 'ruwach'. So unless one would say all men with 'spirit' are in fact not men, but women, or genderless, you would have a case.

You are presumptuous if you try to teach what you are in a dogmatic fashion imho. You have nothing but a theory in fact.

As for me, i dont claim to know what God is. He is too high and majestic for me or any human mind to fully comprehend.

I do know Jesus is God, and Jesus was born a male, so for you to attack anyone here for acknowledging this, based on faulty presumption, i would ask if your intent is other than honorable.

The fact is that 'spirit', whether referring to God or the human male gender, is feminine, so you have no case for anything either way imho.

If we stick to what we are told and study to show ourselves approved, we have little to be contentious over.

[Speculative]

Nevermind. I'm too slow. What I was going to say is already being addressed :)

[NewGuy101]

Ok Joy lets take a look at this

Holy - English
qodesh - Hebrew - masculine noun


Spirit - English
ruwach - Hebrew - feminine noun

Concerning Joseph we have this...
Gen 41:8 And it came to pass in the morning 01242 that his spirit 07307 (ruwach, feminine) was troubled 06470 ; and he sent 07971 and called 07121 for all the magicians 02748 of Egypt 04714, and all the wise men 02450 thereof: and Pharaoh 06547 told 05608 them his dream 02472; but [there was] none that could interpret 06622 them unto Pharaoh 06547.

Joseph IS MALE yet his spirit is the very same feminine noun. A feminine noun doesnt make the object feminine, or else Joseph was a female. Then we have this

Job 32:8 But 0403 [there is] a spirit 07307 (rewach - feminine) in man 0582: and the inspiration 05397 of the Almighty 07706 giveth them understanding 0995 .

Pro 17:27 He that hath 03045 knowledge 01847 spareth 02820 his words 0561: [and] a man 0376 of understanding 08394 is of an excellent 03368 07119 spirit 07307 (ruwach - feminine).

Pro 18:14 The spirit 07307 (ruwash - feminine) of a man 0376 will sustain 03557 his infirmity 04245; but a wounded 05218 spirit 07307 who can bear 05375 ?

So there you go... Jeoseph and men in general, when their spirit was referred to, it is ALWAYS with the feminine noun 'ruwach'. So unless one would say all men with 'spirit' are in fact not men, but women, or genderless, you would have a case.

You are presumptuous if you try to teach what you are in a dogmatic fashion imho. You have nothing but a theory in fact.

As for me, i dont claim to know what God is. He is too high and majestic for me or any human mind to fully comprehend.

I do know Jesus is God, and Jesus was born a male, so for you to attack anyone here for acknowledging this, based on faulty presumption, i would ask if your intent is other than honorable.

The fact is that 'spirit', whether referring to God or the human male gender, is feminine, so you have no case for anything either way imho.

If we stick to what we are told and study to show ourselves approved, we have little to be contentious over.
ooh, we are refering to the holy spirit! She Joy used the term elohim. :|

Logically speaking that would make everyones spirit female. Even mine :D

[Time2BCounted]

ooh, we are refering to the holy spirit! She Joy used the term elohim. :|

Logically speaking that would make everyones spirit female. Even mine :D
Yeah shes a slick one isnt she lol ;)

[Joykins]

As Melethiel pointed out in the previous discussion on this, grammatical gender has no connection to real gender. Gender in language, as in refering to ships as "she" is purely a abstract concept and has no connection to real gender. If you actually go and take a class in an ancient language this is one of the things you will learn. I learned this in a latin class at a secular university, no connection to any theological issues. Gender is merely a concept we use to organize language. Its application to language is completely arbitrary.

It's not *as* arbitrary when it comes to people though. In German I am always "die Joy."

Now, on the question of God's gender. God the Father and God the Holy Spirit do not have a sex because they are spirit. Jesus Christ is male because he has an incarnate body.

Agreed.

However, God has chosen to reveal himself in terms of male gender predominantly.

Agreed.


The bible says that God created man in his own image, male and female he created them.

Agreed.


This is taken by many to mean that God is both male and female, or that he contains both masculine and feminine characteristics.

Agreed.

It is true that God contains both masculine and feminine characteristics. Thats clear from various references in the bible that describe God. Further, it has often been pointed out that the Holy Spirit is the person of the trinity who is most often described with feminine characteristics. [/quote]

Agreed.


However, I would submit that we are looking at this question from a basic assumption that may not be correct. We are looking at this question through the lens of divided gender. As humanity exists today, there are two genders which are contrasted against each other. However when God first created man, there was only one gender, because God created Adam, and didn't create Eve until no other companion was found for Adam.

I don't believe that this meant that humanity was devoid of feminine traits prior to Eve's creation. I believe that humanity, and God's image was complete in Adam. When Eve was created, she was created from Adam, physically as her body was built out of his body, but also in that her humanity was taken from his humanity.

The point of making the companion was so that relationship could exist between them. It was so that they would need one another in order to be completed.

so essentially, before the creation of Eve, there was only one gender, and it was described as masculine. That masculine included what we now call feminine traits.

The creation story quoted from in Genesis 1 - the simultaneous creation of male and female in the image of God on the 6th day (last thing created):

Genesis 1:26-27

The creation story quoted from in Genesis 2 - the creation of man, the creation of animals, then the delayed creation of woman from man:

Genesis 2:6-24

I tend to agree that the "image" of God included both traits, as currently expressed in male and female.

I can find nothing to argue about here, except maybe that Adam's feelings of loneliness were because something was already missing (the feminine/female) in his species...and I don't insist.

[Joykins]

ooh, we are refering to the holy spirit! She Joy used the term elohim. :|

Logically speaking that would make everyones spirit female. Even mine :D


Not female. Feminine :tutu: Female is a sex, feminine is a gender.

I have to admit I don't understand your first paragraph.

[Joykins]

I do know Jesus is God, and Jesus was born a male, so for you to attack anyone here for acknowledging this, based on faulty presumption, i would ask if your intent is other than honorable.

:scratch: :scratch: :scratch:

I wrote that Jesus was born a male. I didn't think there was any disagreement on this, or that I attacked anyone for acknowledging it. :confused:

[NewGuy101]

Not female. Feminine :tutu: Female is a sex, feminine is a gender.

I have to admit I don't understand your first paragraph.
Which first paragraph?


And I ment femine...sorry.

[Joykins]

I didn't understand this:

ooh, we are refering to the holy spirit! She Joy used the term elohim. :|

Elohim is plural for Eloah which is a Hebrew feminine noun.

Ruach is Hebrew for spirit and a feminine noun.

In language, gender does not equal sex but does determine the pronoun and declension-- like a ship or country may be called "she" even though the ship or country is not a person.

[NewGuy101]

I didn't understand this:



Elohim is plural for Eloah which is a Hebrew feminine noun.

Ruach is Hebrew for spirit and a feminine noun.

In language, gender does not equal sex but does determine the pronoun and declension-- like a ship or country may be called "she" even though the ship or country is not a person.
According to my sources the term "Elohim" in hebrew is a masculine noun for God.

'elohiym <0430>

Myhla 'elohiym

Pronunciation:el-o-heem'Origin:plural of 0433 (http://net.bible.org/strong.php?id=0433)Reference:TWOT - 93cPrtSpch:noun masculine pluralIn AV:God 2346, god 244, judge 5, GOD 1, goddess 2, great 2, mighty 2, angels 1, exceeding 1, God-ward + 04136 (http://net.bible.org/strong.php?id=04136) 1, godly 1Count:2606Definition:1) (plural)
1a) rulers, judges
1b) divine ones
1c) angels
1d) gods
2) (plural intensive - singular meaning)
2a) god, goddess
2b) godlike one
2c) works or special possessions of God
2d) the (true) God
2e) God


I don't see any femine reference. But as I stated I havent studied hebrew much, nor grammar. I thought you were refering to holy spirit, the third person of the trinity which is a femine noun.


ruwach <07307>

xwr ruwach

Pronunciation:roo'-akhOrigin:from 07306 (http://net.bible.org/strong.php?id=07306)Reference:TWOT - 2131aPrtSpch:noun feminimeIn AV:Spirit or spirit 232, wind 92, breath 27, side 6, mind 5, blast 4, vain 2, air 1, anger 1, cool 1, courage 1, misc 6Count:378Definition:1) wind, breath, mind, spirit
1a) breath
1b) wind
1b1) of heaven
1b2) quarter (of wind), side
1b3) breath of air
1b4) air, gas
1b5) vain, empty thing
1c) spirit (as that which breathes quickly in animation or agitation)
1c1) spirit, animation, vivacity, vigour
1c2) courage
1c3) temper, anger
1c4) impatience, patience
1c5) spirit, disposition (as troubled, bitter, discontented)
1c6) disposition (of various kinds), unaccountable or uncontrollable
impulse
1c7) prophetic spirit
1d) spirit (of the living, breathing being in man and animals)
1d1) as gift, preserved by God, God's spirit, departing at
death, disembodied being
1e) spirit (as seat of emotion)
1e1) desire
1e2) sorrow, trouble
1f) spirit
1f1) as seat or organ of mental acts
1f2) rarely of the will
1f3) as seat especially of moral character
1g) Spirit of God, the third person of the triune God, the Holy Spirit,
coequal, coeternal with the Father and the Son
1g1) as inspiring ecstatic state of prophecy
1g2) as impelling prophet to utter instruction or warning
1g3) imparting warlike energy and executive and administrative power
1g4) as endowing men with various gifts
1g5) as energy of life
1g6) as manifest in the Shekinah glory
1g7) never referred to as a depersonalised force
You can correct me. :holy:

[Joykins]

The plural masculine noun Elohim refers to a (single) God understood as Father/Creator.

The singular of Elohim (Eloah) is a feminine noun.

It's a grammatical weirdness.

[Hentenza]

Very interesting discussion but pointless. In John 4:24 God is described as being spirit. A spirit has no human characteristics. It is impossible for us to know what God looks like because no one has seen God. Figurative language is used in the bible to assign God human characteristics so that we can understand God. This is called anthropomorphism. It simply a means for God (a spiritual being) to communicate truth about His nature to mankind, a physical being. So technically God is neither masculine nor feminine.

With that being said, the anthropomorphism used is masculine. Scripture contains over 170 references to God as the “Father.” By necessity, one cannot be a father unless he is male. Also, look at what Jesus say in John 10:30 "30I and the Father are one."

Something else to look at is the word "theos" which is a masculine noun in Greek that translates as God.

[Bananna]

If women are created in the image of God, I think it would not be contrary to his nature to do so.

I know that he did not. I can think of many reasons not to that would have mainly to do with human sexism rather than the eternal nature of God.
I hold a contrary view.

Man is a form and is animalistic in nature.
Spirit is a form and is transcendent in nature.

God comes to us in both He and She forms. The Sages teach on women's instictive connection to the spirit world. That is why men must strive to do so many laws that women are exempt from. Many of them seem more hard wired to the earth than the heavens.

[NewGuy101]

The plural masculine noun Elohim refers to a (single) God understood as Father/Creator.

The singular of Elohim (Eloah) is a feminine noun.

It's a grammatical weirdness.
OHHH ok...thank yous :blush:

[Bananna]

The plural masculine noun Elohim refers to a (single) God understood as Father/Creator.

The singular of Elohim (Eloah) is a feminine noun.

It's a grammatical weirdness.



I always read the shema as saying Elohenu. Elohim is plural ending in 'm

[Simon_Templar]

Very interesting discussion but pointless. In John 4:24 God is described as being spirit. A spirit has no human characteristics. It is impossible for us to know what God looks like because no one has seen God. Figurative language is used in the bible to assign God human characteristics so that we can understand God. This is called anthropomorphism. It simply a means for God (a spiritual being) to communicate truth about His nature to mankind, a physical being. So technically God is neither masculine nor feminine.

With that being said, the anthropomorphism used is masculine. Scripture contains over 170 references to God as the “Father.” By necessity, one cannot be a father unless he is male. Also, look at what Jesus say in John 10:30 "30I and the Father are one."

Something else to look at is the word "theos" which is a masculine noun in Greek that translates as God.
I disagree.

The idea that spirit and physical are opposites, or totally unrelated does not arise from the bible, or from Christianity per say.. but rather from Platonic philosophy.

I'm not saying that God has a physical body, or that he has a sex. What I am saying is that when the bible says that man resembles God, there is no reason to doubt that this extends to our appearence as well as other aspects of our being.

I contend that the physical world in which we live is built upon the spiritual, and it is an extension of, or an expression of the spiritual. As such the 'spirit' is not something that is compeltely "other" and disconnected from physical reality. Rather they are directly connected.

It is often alledged that ideas like this are "anthropomorphism".. making God in the image and likeness of man... I would suggest that what this actually is, is Theomorphism recognizing that man is the image and likeness of God.

[NewGuy101]

I disagree.

The idea that spirit and physical are opposites, or totally unrelated does not arise from the bible, or from Christianity per say.. but rather from Platonic philosophy.

I'm not saying that God has a physical body, or that he has a sex. What I am saying is that when the bible says that man resembles God, there is no reason to doubt that this extends to our appearence as well as other aspects of our being.

I contend that the physical world in which we live is built upon the spiritual, and it is an extension of, or an expression of the spiritual. As such the 'spirit' is not something that is compeltely "other" and disconnected from physical reality. Rather they are directly connected.

It is often alledged that ideas like this are "anthropomorphism".. making God in the image and likeness of man... I would suggest that what this actually is, is Theomorphism recognizing that man is the image and likeness of God.
Well there is no arguing that atleast one person in the trinity is defintely physically a male. I just don't know how much we can extend those physical characteristics to the other two persons of God.

[Joykins]

I always heard it as Elohenu but I never heard Christians saying it in Hebrew, only Jewish people.

[Hentenza]

I disagree.

The idea that spirit and physical are opposites, or totally unrelated does not arise from the bible, or from Christianity per say.. but rather from Platonic philosophy.


I'm not saying that God has a physical body, or that he has a sex. What I am saying is that when the bible says that man resembles God, there is no reason to doubt that this extends to our appearence as well as other aspects of our being.

I contend that the physical world in which we live is built upon the spiritual, and it is an extension of, or an expression of the spiritual. As such the 'spirit' is not something that is compeltely "other" and disconnected from physical reality. Rather they are directly connected.

It is often alledged that ideas like this are "anthropomorphism".. making God in the image and likeness of man... I would suggest that what this actually is, is Theomorphism recognizing that man is the image and likeness of God.

Theomorphism is a neologism which is mainly embraced by religions that believe that God has a physical body. It is a dangerous theology which, if not properly defined, is heretic. To me anthropomorphism is a better fit.
The bible does not directly describe what spiritual beings look like. There are some references to kinds of angels that have substance attributes but other than that scriptures are relatively silent.
The point that I was trying to make was that the figurative language used in scripture referencing God is masculine. The bible writers used this language to allow us to understand God from our limited physical perspective. There is no way to prove whether a spiritual form is feminine or masculine. Scripture language only gives us a usage reference.

[Joykins]

This is the shema as I have heard it:

Shema yisrael Adonai eloheinu Adonai echad

[Joykins]

The question to me is was that masculine imagery put there because of our limitations or because they are the more accurate represenation? I don't know.

[Time2BCounted]

Here's one thought Joy,

The Holy Spirit Fathered the baby Jesus how?

[Albion]

The question to me is was that masculine imagery put there because of our limitations or because they are the more accurate represenation? I don't know.

As I see it, there would be no reason at all to "masculinize" God "because of our limitations," considering that goddesses were a routine feature of most of the other religions in that region and time.

[Bananna]

That is the shema as it is written

"Eloheinu" "Eloheynu" same thing

Shema Y'shrael (HaShem) Eloheinu (HaShem) Echad,

The plurality is with all israel... not in God.

[~*Lady Trekki*~]

Very interesting discussion but pointless.

Exactly. :thumbsup:

[Joykins]

As I see it, there would be no reason at all to "masculinize" God "because of our limitations," considering that goddesses were a routine feature of most of the other religions in that region and time.

Being monotheistic would mean that when you personify your deity you would have to have a sex, though? Either god or goddess, you couldn't have both. I'm not familiar with any goddesses that do not come from pantheistic or polytheistic systems, but I'm certainly no expert.

[Albion]

Being monotheistic would mean that when you personify your deity you would have to have a sex, though? Either god or goddess, you couldn't have both. I'm not familiar with any goddesses that do not come from pantheistic or polytheistic systems, but I'm certainly no expert.

It would not matter, Joy. I understood you to mean that there was possibly a masculinization of God for the reason that this would fit with human understandings ("The question to me is was that masculine imagery put there because of our limitations....").

What difference would it make if we are speaking of a monotheistic or of a polytheistic religion? None that I can see.

We know that women as gods were accepted by people of that time. But beyond that, we also know that certain goddesses were considered by those religions to be the special objects of devotion, in case someone would contend that there were goddesses but only as secondary deities.

So there would seem to be no particular reason to have to cast a genderless God as a male in order for mankind to comprehend or believe in God.

[Joykins]

It would not matter, Joy. I understood you to mean that there was possibly a masculinization of God for the reason that this would fit with human understandings ("The question to me is was that masculine imagery put there because of our limitations....").

What difference would it make if we are speaking of a monotheistic or of a polytheistic religion? None that I can see.

We know that women as gods were accepted by people of that time. But beyond that, we also know that certain goddesses were considered by those religions to be the special objects of devotion, in case someone would contend that there were goddesses but only as secondary deities.

So there would seem to be no particular reason to have to cast a genderless God as a male in order for mankind to comprehend or believe in God.

Only if you wished to personify him? To refer to your God as "it" would imply a thing.

Did you ever see a goddess in the absence of a god?

Which would you perceive as more authoritative?

[Time2BCounted]

I would say personally there is no ULTIMATE authority but ONE

[Albion]

Only if you wished to personify him? To refer to your God as "it" would imply a thing.

OK, so I take it that you feel one or the other gender had to be used, and not because of anything except that we don't relate to incorporeal beings very well. Is that it?

Did you ever see a goddess in the absence of a god?

That argument I don't think flies...if we consider the religions of antiquity. By stipulating that they were mainly polytheistic, you could raise this issue, but yes!, the goddesses of some were held in higher regard than the male deities.

Which would you perceive as more authoritative?

I'm not the one being discussed. The peoples of the ancient Near East, however, certainly did have some goddesses more highly placed than the gods. And although it's somewhat off the subject, women in some societies held the political power and wealth passed through the female line. The more we pursue such characteristics, the more do I think we'd find that you are trying to put a square peg (modern presumptions about ancient peoples) into a round hole (what the ancients actually did).

[Joykins]

What I think I'm trying to say is that ancient people, like ourselves, probably had connotations of power and might with masculinity. I know there were some war goddesses, but the Lord of Hosts also has an aspect as a God who aids his people in war.

[Albion]

What I think I'm trying to say is that ancient people, like ourselves, probably had connotations of power and might with masculinity.

Yes, I understand completely that this is your thesis. And at a glance it looks logical.

I was merely saying that the facts don't appear to support it.

We can make suppositions all day about what the ancients should have thought, but if, when we check into it, we find that what they really believed and did is something else...

...we are stuck with the facts.

[Angel4Truth]

I invite anyone to join

POINT: God is referred to in the Bible with the male pronoun and as "Father" and "Son" and Jesus was incarnated as a man.

COUNTERPOINT:

It's hardly that unambiguous.

* The singular of "Elohim" (which is in the new definition) is feminine.

* The Hebrew word for the Holy Spirit is feminine.

God is not subject to human sex except in the Person of the Son who was incarnated as a male.

POINT: The gender of nouns does not indicate sex in any way.

COUNTER-POINT:
They do when the subject is a person, though. Mostly. Das Maedchen being an apparent counterexample.


POINT: noun gender does not always match a person's gender as various languages have words for "boy" or "girl" that may be neuter.

COUNTER-POINT:

True. Then there is the grammatical idiosyncrasy of addressing God by the informal 2nd person pronoun...

A better evidence would be that God created male and female in His own image :)

POINT:
The pronouns used to refer to God in the Bible include "he", "him", and "his".

COUNTER-POINT:
"He", "him", and "his" are unmarked pronouns in English grammar.


I take the position that God remains beyond gender.

Anyone want to debate or continue?God is without gender (except in the person of Christ on earth) and is Spirit - the human gender terms are for our benefit to come as close to understanding of God as we can something we can get our mind around as Father to us all. The marriage is also used as a paralell of understanding in this same way - Israel said to be the wife of God and the church the betrothed of Christ.

What gender a human language word is composed of is irrelevant in terms of whether or not God has a gender just because humans have ascribed words as having genders. And thats my opinion on it.

[SolomonVII]

God has both masculine and feminine attributes. The polarity between the masculine and the feminine is contained within the fullness of the GodHead.
To the extent that the feminine is essentially other oriented, and giving of herself totally to the other as a consequence of the nature of the feminine, all Persons of the Godhead are referred to in terms of the masculine pronouns. If this were not the case, the femimine aspects of the Godhead would be defying the very nature of the feminine, and would in effect be not emptying themselves completely to the masculine other.

The nature of the feminine after all is not to become, but to give. God therefore cannot be referred to as 'she' without denigrating the nature of the feminine.

So the goodness and the Sophic wisdom which are aspects of the perfect feminine attributes of the Godhead submit themselves completely to the strength and emanation of the masculine polarity of the Godhead to consumate the act of Divine Creation.

For God is indeed One.The feminine does not exist separately from the male in Trinity, thereby to be worshipped separately as happens in the pagan religions and new age religions. But like the one-flesh union of male and female in the Sacrament of marriage, the feminine and the masculine exist in perfect unity within Trinity, and expresed only in their organic wholeness.

The sex of God then, to the extent that the sex of God can even be talked about, is referrred to in terms of the male. However contained within the male Persons of the Godhead are the feminine attributes that are as essential to the Divine as are the masculine attributes. THe goodness and the wisdom that are of the feminine nature give direction and purpose and meaning to the strength and the power of the masculine nature of God.

[SolomonVII]

Very interesting discussion but pointless. In John 4:24 God is described as being spirit. A spirit has no human characteristics. It is impossible for us to know what God looks like because no one has seen God. Figurative language is used in the bible to assign God human characteristics so that we can understand God. This is called anthropomorphism. It simply a means for God (a spiritual being) to communicate truth about His nature to mankind, a physical being. So technically God is neither masculine nor feminine.
I would have to disagree that it is a pointless discussion, or even that we are engaging in anthropomorphism. In an age where many women are looking to Wicca and New Age religions to help define themselves, and too many men are turning away from their masculine natures, it is important to understand how masculinity and femininity define themselves in the very Nature of God. This is more than just linguistic happenstance, and we can know that this is true by the very existence of male and female in our humanity, the very image of God.

And I believe it has already been mentioned, but it is not so much that we are imposing our selves upon God in an act of anthromorphism, but rather that God has written Himself into the image of man. "Male and female, he created they them". We are the image of God.

Marriage is a therefore a sacrament for it is in marriage that the nature of God becomes expressed in our lives most completely.
Not just gender, but sexuality itself is an expression of the full nature of God.