God: Woman, Man, Both or Neither?

[Rian]

I’m not aware of any direct female metaphors in scriptures...

I listed 4 a few posts up, if you're interested.

[Keep The Reason]

Seriously, Rian -- Where are you on the scale? I'm a #6.

1. Strong theist. 100 percent possibility of God. In the words of C.G. Jung, 'I do not believe, I know.'

2. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. De facto theist. 'I cannot know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there."

3. Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. Technically agnostic but leaning towards theism. 'I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God.'

4. Exactly 50 per cent. Completely impartial agnostic. 'God's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable.'

5. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. Technically agnostic but leaning towards atheism. 'I don't know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be sceptical.'

6. Very low probability, but short of zero. De facto atheist. 'I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there.'

7.Strong atheist. 'I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung 'knows' there is one.

[yjoeyh]

I’m not aware of any direct female metaphors in scriptures...

I listed 4 a few posts up, if you're interested.

Yeah I did see those after I made my post. Thanks!
It wasn't exactly what I was looking for as in direct metaphors (they were all similes as best I could tell) but good stuff none the less in demosntrating the use of subtle gender references in the language.

[Amos14]

I continue to appreciate the discussions I'm having with everybody on this forum and an thankful that I continue to get the chance to discuss and respond.

As for God being put into the “box” of being male, I’m not sure I get your point. Aren’t you suggesting that we put God in a “box” of being gender inclusive?

No. I'm trying to suggest that our finite human language cannot ever fully or adequately describe God and that we need to use more words (not less words) as we compare the divine with the human in order to think about God.

Again, being happy and comfortable is not what it’s all about. Growing and maturing is rarely an easy process and it does require that we deal with things that make us uncomfortable from time to time.

I totally agree with you! And ultimately, I would hope that the teens I worked with would eventually be able to reclaim the term "Father" and to use it in their prayer lives alongside some of the other names and metaphors that we used in our meeting. But that was not something that I could help them accomplish in my one meeting with them (I only met with each group once). I guess instead of using the phrase "to make them happy," I should have written something more like, "so that they wouldn't suffer more trauma."

As this forum is starting to make me think more about this topic and also giving me the opportunity to try to articulate my thoughts, I'm starting to realize that there are perhaps several different things being discussed in relation to gender. It seems to me that for one thing, we're talking about God and inclusive language. But in addition to that, we're talking about things like chivalry and people being free to express their sexuality. I don't have any problem with expressions of sexuality. I also don't have any problem with things like: a man opening a door for a woman, or a man defending a woman who might be attacked by a crazed motorcycle man (or motorcycle woman!) For me, the problems occur when sexism and discrimination are practiced. Can I get an Awomen? (Just kidding.) Although it's not true for everybody, I know that for some the strict use of "God as male" equates to "male as God" and therefore creates a gender hierarchy.

As for my scriptural reasons, I'll have to elaborate more on that when I have more time to type. However, I did list some of them in a previous post which I am now copying here:

... the word for Spirit in Hebrew is Ruah, and Ruah is feminine. The word for Spirit in Greek is Pneuma, and Pneuma is gender neutral. ... Isaiah 66:12-13, Isaiah 49:14-15, Matthew 23:37, Luke 13:34, 1 Corinthians 1:24 (the word “wisdom” is feminine), and Isaiah 42:14.

[Rian]

Although it's not true for everybody, I know that for some the strict use of "God as male" equates to "male as God" and therefore creates a gender hierarchy.

Interesting way to put it, and a good point.

I think a helpful verse is Galatians 3:28 : "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

And Jesus was certainly radically ahead of his time when dealing with women.

[Dr Mundo]

And Jesus was certainly radically ahead of his time when dealing with women.

If he was really a God, would it make sense to say he was ahead of his time? Especially if you claim this God to be an infinite God. He wouldn't need to be "ahead of his time" if time was not a factor for Jesus. Its just like saying he was ahead of his time for slavery too. I don't care who's time he was ahead of. Equal treatment of women, and an abolition of slavery is the only qualities I would admire from a person. Nothing short of that is respectable in my opinion.

[mitchellmckain]

And Jesus was certainly radically ahead of his time when dealing with women.

If he was really a God, would it make sense to say he was ahead of his time? Especially if you claim this God to be an infinite God. He wouldn't need to be "ahead of his time" if time was not a factor for Jesus. Its just like saying he was ahead of his time for slavery too. I don't care who's time he was ahead of. Equal treatment of women, and an abolition of slavery is the only qualities I would admire from a person. Nothing short of that is respectable in my opinion.

Rian may only have meant that with respect to seeing Jesus as a historical personage, but I have no difficulty with this on theological grounds.

The traditional historical Trinitarian doctrine is that Jesus was fully God AND fully man. Since I reject the idea that God is limited to theological definitions and assert that His omnipotence means that he can be whatever He wants to be and limit Himself in whatever way He chooses, that means that Jesus was fully human with all the limitations of a human being including learning things as a human being learns them within the context of his culture and the age in which he lived. What then does fully God mean in this context? It means that all power and all knowledge is no more necessary for God to remain God than an arm or a leg or a memory is necessary for a man to remain a man. It means that although Jesus was fully human, there was a disconnect with the inheritance from Adam and Eve in regards to a broken relationship with God. Jesus may have left power and knoweldge behind Him when He became a human infant but He did not leave His relationship with the Father. Thus Jesus did not grew up only learning from his own mistakes alone (by "the sweat of his brow") as every human being has done since Adam and Eve, but as human beings were originally meant to under the guidance of a Father in Heaven.

[Rian]

And Jesus was certainly radically ahead of his time when dealing with women.

If he was really a God, would it make sense to say he was ahead of his time?

I meant the time that he was living in as a man here on Earth.

[mikedsjr]

Amos,

You are certainly allowed to have your opinions, but I have to disagree with you! You mentioned that you want “accurate word for word translations.” I’m not sure what you mean when you this, but for me, “original” refers to the Hebrew (Old Testament) and the Greek (New Testament). There are parts of the Old Testament where the first member of the trinity is referred to as Elohim. This is a masculine plural in the Hebrew. Rather than being literal about the translation of this word, most scholars would say that by assigning it the plural form, the author is showing respect and greatness. So this is to say that a literal translation does not always get at the meaning. In addition, the word for Spirit in Hebrew is Ruah, and Ruah is feminine. The word for Spirit in Greek is Pneuma, and Pneuma is gender neutral. You also mentioned that “God is clearly defined as a He in Scripture,” and I must challenge you on that a bit more, mikedsir. In addition to the original Hebrew and Greek language that I just mentioned, I would also invite you to read Isaiah 66:12-13, Isaiah 49:14-15, Matthew 23:37, Luke 13:34, 1 Corinthians 1:24 (the word “wisdom” is feminine), and Isaiah 42:14. I also must mention that it’s difficult to decipher tone in a message typed on a forum, but you seem a bit angry at the very idea of God as female. If this makes you angry, I would encourage you to explore why. For example, do you think it’s demeaning to refer to God that way? If so, then perhaps you should reexamine your ideas about women and realize that calling God “She” is no more of a compliment or less of a compliment than calling God “He.”

First, I'm not angry - at least not at you. I'm stating things as a matter of fact from Scripture. I enjoyed the response you gave back to me too. The reason is its wasn't attacking. It was you given your position and you attempted to do it with Scripture, though it was wrong, and i'll tell you why.

I don't read Hebrew, so i will leave it up to those who do and do it well. Dr. James White has an article on his site when he defends Christianity against Mormonism explaining the term Elohim.

The name Elohim is based upon the singular and simpler form of the word God, lae (El). This is the generic name or designation for God in the Old Testament; that is, it functions in language as our generic term God. El is often used almost interchangeably with the plural for Elohim (Cf. Ex 34:14; Ps. 18:31; Deut. 32:17, 21). This Hebrew plural form of God, indicated by the im ending, and is used over 2000 times in the Old Testament. The im ending found in Genesis 1:1 does not express a plurality of Gods as maintained by Joseph Smith. "The religion of the Old Testament and Judaism is monotheistic. . ." The im ending in Hebrew functions as the indication of the superlative idea; to be understood as the plural of intensity or plural of majesty. The equivalent in English is the est ending on adjectives; i.e. great/greatest or high/highest. When the im ending is used in reference to God El, it serves to indicate His transcendence and superiority over all other (so-called) gods. "God is the God who really, and in the fullest sense of the word, is God."

So the word Elohim is translated as properly as can be in English language.

As for the the Scriptures you gave about womanhood. They don't equate womanhood to God no more than analogies from farmers and rulers parables equate manhood to God. That isn't their purpose. Their purpose is to help convey a meaning to the people they understand.


Isaiah 49:14-15 is using a analogy to convey a certain image that people can relate to that helps them understand how God responds. The imagery is in the actions of the mother helping her child. The imagery isn't to take the gender out as well. In fact, to make the point He ends vs 15 by saying a mother may forget her child, but I, God, will not forget you, Jerusalem. The issue is the action, not the gender.

Isaiah 66:12-13 again. Analogy of action, not gender. AS a mother comforts her children. Not God is a mother comforting her children.

Matt 23:37 & Luke 13:34 again an analogy. Notice the term "As a hen gathers her brood"
Honestly, I'm not sure why you aren't assuming God is a chicken who legs eggs.

And Wisdom.....is not God. Love is not God. Truth is not God. There is nothing that says Wisdom cant be used with a feminine word because it isn't a being.


Scripture says in directness of God, "He", "His", "Him", "Father", and "Son" for Jesus and the Holy Spirit is also called He. Never does Scripture use, "She" to directly refer to God.

[Rian]

Seriously, Rian -- Where are you on the scale? I'm a #6.

Well, you certainly fall into talking like a 7 quite often.

[Rian]

Well it's not clear. In the first version of the story, it sayd male and female he created them, but in the second story, hew took woman out of man -- one step removed.

Yes, a different emphasis in each story. But the wording is creating man in God's image, and they will rule over the earth. I think it's pretty clear, and further, in the NT, it says there is neither male nor female in Christ.

An interesting thing about the image deal is that after Adam and Eve sinned, their child was in their image. But that should probably be in the Christian forum ...

[JustJim]

An interesting thing about the image deal is that after Adam and Eve sinned, their child was in their image. But that should probably be in the Christian forum ...

Or maybe even better in the Evolution thread...

Jim

[Keep The Reason]

Seriously, Rian -- Where are you on the scale? I'm a #6.

Well, you certainly fall into talking like a 7 quite often.

Read what a #6 is to understand why.

[Rian]

I've read it many times, and understand it, and I think you slip into talking like a #7. But I think we'll probably disagree on that, because it's open to some interpretation.

[Keep The Reason]

I've read it many times, and understand it, and I think you slip into talking like a #7. But I think we'll probably disagree on that, because it's open to some interpretation.

I operate on the belief -- not the knowledge -- that gods do not exist. If I am asked do I KNOW that gods do not exist, I would say, withut hesitation, "No, I don't KNOW it for a fact -- but I operate as if my conclusion that they don't exist is valid."