I think it is dangerous to attribute God with human-like features, including gender. I think that a lot of people try to put God into the category of being like us, but in reality - God is far more mysterious than we would like to think. I think it is a mistake to place a gender on God because God is not a human, and God is not necessarily a human-like entity. God is much more.
2006-09-14 10:31:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by Paley Pale 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Funny when people talk about whats in the Bible, as if it were a fact of some kind.
Before the Bible was written the way it is now.
God was a female. (Well think about it.)
People back then wrote what they knew (or thought they knew).
Only women can bring forth life, God was a female to those people.
Some prophets or priest didn't like this idea of it being a women.
So they changed it.
Now with the feminist movement, it's going back to being a women (but for all the wrong reasons).
Over the years people lost the true understanding of the meaning of God.
It's not so much something to be worshiped or feared.
I would rant on, but I don't feel like it.
2006-09-14 10:35:18
·
answer #2
·
answered by psych0bug 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Genesis 1:26 (NIV)
26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."
(there it has always been believed he was saying US and OUR to mean the Trinity of Father Son Holy Spirit..)
Genesis 2:20-22 (NIV)
20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field. But for Adam no suitable helper was found.
21 So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man's ribs and closed up the place with flesh.
22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.
(there is where he made woman. In the earlier verse he in Genesis it did not break down the specifics of when and why they said THEM but the THEM Is man and woman . He created Them. Not in physical image but in spiritual IMAGE. )
-
The Bible is not like other books . Its order is not chronological from start to finish. Many times it recaps, retells, re orders things . The bible is made up of many different books. its like a collection of stuff put to gether.
- Also you can not take everything that you read and put it down to human logic, - keep in mind this
Proverbs 3:5-6 (NIV)
5 Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding;
6 in all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make your paths straight.
2006-09-14 10:31:02
·
answer #3
·
answered by Christal 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's just easier for us to relate to God as a grandfatherly figure (hey it works on the Sistene ceiling!) An imposing male with flowing white hair & beard. The truth is that God is a being, an entity without a gender but being human ourselves it is hard for us to relate to that. Plus there's that whole Jesus, son of God & talking about the Father thing...The Bible does make it pretty clear God is male. However one could argue that the Bible was written for a patriarchal society that placed men above women.
I always had a hard time dealing with the concept of God. Especially the eternal thing. How could He always have existed? We're so used to beginnings & endings that it's hard to imagine something that was always there, had no beginning....
God is the origin of all things so he would be a combination of male & female if anything. Except that not having a body, just a beingness it's not appropriate to refer to Him (Her/It) that way.
2006-09-14 10:40:47
·
answer #4
·
answered by amp 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
God is probably not male or female. There would be no reason for Him to be one or the other. Same with the angels. He/they do not create by mating male with female. Angels are just created beings and God can create without mating and giving birth. The Hebrew language talked and wrote using the masculine pronoun. Man means human. His means "its"
2006-09-14 10:33:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
There are a couple of reasons why God is generally referred to using masculine terms and neither has anything to do with the Bible. First, the English language has no specific way to refer to God in the proper manner. We could use 'her' or 'him' or 'it', but none of them are really accurate. God is not like a man or woman or any inert object in this world, but the English language has no better alternatives. Second, the masculine pronouns are better than the feminine pronouns because God is the original seed-giving father of all living beings. This is stated in the Bhagavad-gita by the Lord Himself: "It should be understood that all species of life, O son of Kunti, are made possible by birth in this material nature, and that I am the seed-giving father." (Bg.14.4)
The Lord is the source of all material and spiritual energies, including all feminine qualities, but because He is the supreme enjoyer, and all His energies are meant to be enjoyed by Him, He is referred to as masculine in our languages. In reality, the Lord has a feminine counterpart that is His pleasure potency personified and She can be considered the Supreme Goddess. Those who know Her as the one who keeps the Lord under Her control are very confidential devotees of the Lord.
.
2006-09-14 11:19:34
·
answer #6
·
answered by Jagatkarta 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
if there is a God, i don't think he has a definite gender. if we are all made in the image of him then of course this makes sense because we all do not have the same sex we're male and female. god is only seen as a man because men made him so.
2006-09-14 10:23:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by andria 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
chauvinism indeed, but hey what can you expect?all the scripture are written by men, women is the second sex in the bible, we're identified with sin, temptation, lust, weakness, lack or no faith, in short, one of the things any good men of god should always be careful of. how can you identify god with such image?
if that isn't chauvinism then i don't know a better term for it, maybe sexist
2006-09-15 05:25:41
·
answer #8
·
answered by jingleh4m 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Who said that he had to be either? Perhaps being "like" God doesn't mean in physical form. When we go to heaven we will have "new bodies," who's to say that they will be physical? What if God is sexless? What if he just is, like a spirit, or form of energy?
2006-09-14 11:04:19
·
answer #9
·
answered by verony 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Of course it is a he. Just ask all the people that have been on the TV specials telling of their near death experience and how they saw god.
2006-09-14 10:18:00
·
answer #10
·
answered by Bravo Your Life! 3
·
1⤊
0⤋