Since God is neither male nor female and it is not human shouldn't we stop calling it He?

Question

I propose we call it (S)he/it.

Anyone else in favor of this change?

I believe it would be a more correct description and politically correct.

Answer 1

While you are correct that God has no physical anatomy, the Hebrew Christian tradition holds that important to the story is the role of Father as the one who blesses, who calls out and the world responds to His dream. Ok, so in sex the hard anatomy of a man, trying hard not to be crass here, initiates into the soft receptive womb. In the story of creation, it is very similiar. Womb has water. Over water the Spirit broods, granted ruach is feminine in hebrew. But the God calls out and the earth brings forth, etc.

Also important in Hebrew Christian tradition is the role of Yahweh God in initiating covenants- in the picture of marriage- with His people as bride.

Of course, at the same time there are some softer feminine images of God, and with humankind being made in the image/likeness (Hebrew zelem) of God, "Male and Female created He them" obviously God is not male or female as we understand. But might I respectfully suggest that "it" is a terribly impersonal pronoun.

What do you think?

Peace

Answer 2

He is refered to as He.

Answer 3

Go for it. I believe you're right in that God is neither male nor female. I find it more convenient to call God He than (S)he/it, but I have no objection to people who'd rather call God something else. I have found, however, that in a lot of prayers, the Church now tends to simply say 'God' again rather than using the pronoun - thus being more politically correct while also being easier to say.

Answer 4

This problem only exists in English, and only in modern times.

In other languages people are used to assigning gender to almost every object. In English we do not do that. Who knows why.

In English however, up until very recently, the male gender was understood to be inclusive of female as well - hence "Mankind" and "He" in reference to God.

I think that rather than argue about semantics, it would be a better idea for all of the "feminists" who cant understand some of the more basic conventions of the English language to take remedial grammar and realize that "He" is inclusive.

Then we can all be a bit more inteligent, and move on with our lives, and worry about something that actually effects someone's life for a change.

Answer 5

(S)he/it? Doesn't that sound a bit too much like an expletive to you?

I call God "he" due to the lack of a gender neutral pronoun in the english language & to avoid the pomposity and confusion that results from using convoluted terms like you just created above.

In the ancient Hebrew, both male and female pronouns are sometimes used to reference God but by far the vast majority of them are male.

So if you are going from a biblical guideline, male would be the more likely pronoun to apply to God though at times female might be appropriate.

But, like you said, God is spirit so this does not apply.

Esero26 wrong: "In the image of God he created them, male and female he created them"

Answer 6

Don't stop there. A grass roots campaign to stop calling ships "she" is in order. Of course calling them "she/its" and then using the same term for God might be confusing to the Marines.

Personally, I'd wipe my hands of the whole idea and let the grunts decide out it should come out.

Answer 7

Why would God need a sex. To say it would need one would mean that something came before God as the only reason you have a sex is to reproduce.
I dont claim to understand or know God, but i'd be suprised if it had a penis.

Answer 8

no. Let's allow God to define Himself, and He refers to Himself as a He, so let's just leave it at that, how about.

By the way, that is NOT male chauvanism, any more than me calling myself a "he", just because I am one.

Oh, by the way - it's not the gender of a person that makes him or her great - it's the level of service. Jesus said that if you want to be great in God's Kingdom, learn to be a servant to all. I don't see ANY sexism there.

Answer 9

To clear up your confusing on what God is, refer to Genesis 1:26 -27.

"Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth."
So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. "
New King James Version © 1982 Thomas Nelson

The confusion that you may have is in the latest "policitically correct" version of the bible published in 1996

"Then God said, "Let us make people in our image, to be like ourselves. They will be masters over all life--the fish in the sea, the birds in the sky, and all the livestock, wild animals, and small animals." So God created people in his own image; God patterned them after himself; male and female he created them.
New Living Translation © 1996 Tyndale Charitable Trust

For centuries it has been documented that God created man in his image, thus making God, in this context "male".

Jesus referred to God as the father. Chiristians and non christians alike since the beginning of time has referred to God as the father.

Do not let the politically correct way of saying things determine who and what God is. Read a bible that is a learning tool and not a political statement.

A good Bible that speaks in Modern Day English is "The Book" published by Tyndale House Publishers. While it is in MOdern Day English and easy for todays christians to read, it is not changed to reflect the political culture of today.

God Bless you as you seek the Lord

Answer 10

You can thank all the sexist men throughout history for calling the so-called "god," He...Personally, I think it is ridiculous...

If there is a God...I wish it was a woman, maybe then there would be more peace instead of violence in this world.