-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Is God male? The Episcopal Church debates whether to change its Book of Common Prayer (WaPo)
- Thread starter Piecake
- Start date
User Warned: Trolling
I mean if you can complain about dumbledore not being openly gay then it should be ok to complain about another characters gender identity from another childrens fairy tale book.
I always have thought that believing on a monotheistic God in the style of the judeo-christian god and assigning them a gender is pretty inconsistent, if you believe in an entity with the qualities of GOD to tie said entity to a material plane by implying it's a being with gender would be limiting allegedly infinite power, therefore if you truly believe in an all mighty god it must be beyond this plane of existance and thus beyond the concept of gender.
So it would be logical to eradicate the idea of GOD being a lowly gendered being.
So it would be logical to eradicate the idea of GOD being a lowly gendered being.
I'd like to concur with the other posters that the Episocopal Church is nothing like that. It's the "friendliest" of the mainline denominations, other than perhaps the United Church of Christ. Almost all of my friends who were raised strictly religious (usually Baptist or Evangelical of some stripe) have drifted to the Episcopals or the UCC.
Regarding the OP, my local UCC church as a kid experimented with using "she" for a while and now switches back and forth occasionally (last I heard). It doesn't really end up making much of a difference, it just takes getting used to - and as others have said, giving god a gender in the first place doesn't make sense.
I really wish we had a non-gendered pronoun in English. It would be so useful.
Archbishop Welby can fuck himself, though. Dude would like nothing better than to excommunicate the American and Canadian branches to assaunge the fears of the more homophobic branches.
As an atheist who grew up in an Episcopal church, this doesn't really surprise me. My church at least was always very solidly progressive on issues (very welcoming of LGBT people back in the 90s, for example). I think this would be a really good thing. Although I don't believe in a god anymore, many people do, and I think it's important to have a broader concept and not be so restrictive and patriarchal about it.
God man Adam in his own image. He then made Eve from Adam, oftend referenced as removing a rib. The meaning of this is Eve was actually within Adam. It can be speculated that Adam was both male and female, in God's image.
How darez yous talks aboutz mez GoDz likez that, are yous Insaiyan?
With God being an incorporeal being beyond classifications of form and appearance, something tells me they aren't bound to human perspectives on gender.
My take is that God is a spirit, so not male or female, but he is referred primarily as male, specifically as a father. Now this might seem a bit far out but in the new testament the entire church body is referred to as the bride of Christ. So all of created humans are the female to God's maleness. Run wild and make jokes but this isn't a sexual thing, as we're told there's no use for that after death. I imagine whether male or female or no gender at all, all are loved by God equally and hopefully one day all will love each other equally with that same kind of love.
If the Christian God existed, there would be no reason for God to originaly be male since there's no 2nd God with female parts. That's the only reason the concept exists. (Puts on tinfoil hat): Though I suppose there could have been, and something happened to her along the way that he didn't tell us.
If you have the belief that Jesus is God made flesh, it makes sense to refer to God as male. In that case he impregnated a woman with himself.
Then there's also metaphor as he "planted the seed" of humanity on (mother)Earth, which is how men getting women pregnant was viewed.
So I think as far as writing in the Christian myth goes, male or genderless makes the most sense. Being an all powerful being though, he can take whatever form he wants at any moment, so any choice could be correct.
If you have the belief that Jesus is God made flesh, it makes sense to refer to God as male. In that case he impregnated a woman with himself.
Then there's also metaphor as he "planted the seed" of humanity on (mother)Earth, which is how men getting women pregnant was viewed.
So I think as far as writing in the Christian myth goes, male or genderless makes the most sense. Being an all powerful being though, he can take whatever form he wants at any moment, so any choice could be correct.
I always thought that if God existed, it's more like an eldritch abomination. If you can create black holes, would you really limit yourself to gender?
In fact, to distinguish as Male, it implies that there's a Female somewhere, something that is Not-Male to create maleness. Otherwise it's pointless to assign gender at all
To claim one thing means also claiming that which you are not. How can you claim to by Y ic in reality no other options exist. Claiming to be Y is meaningless without the use of the Other to distinguish itself.
What I'm trying to say is that God is a Stay Puff marshmallow man.
In fact, to distinguish as Male, it implies that there's a Female somewhere, something that is Not-Male to create maleness. Otherwise it's pointless to assign gender at all
To claim one thing means also claiming that which you are not. How can you claim to by Y ic in reality no other options exist. Claiming to be Y is meaningless without the use of the Other to distinguish itself.
What I'm trying to say is that God is a Stay Puff marshmallow man.
I always thought god was a bear...…….a marshmallow bear!
Why so many people feel the need to inform everybody that they totally do not believe in God in the most obnoxious way possible is beyond me. It's like a straight guy going into a gay-lifestyle thread and telling everyone he wouldn't do something like that because that's, like, really gay and he isn't gay. Okay?
As for the topic:
As for the topic:
God is certainly human in appearance. There are also descriptions of Him as having white hair, fiery eyes, clothed in red robes and skin like bronze. Male? Female? I don't know. I don't recall His appearance being described to that extent.
Last edited:
While we're fixing it, the bible needs a patch where all the pages become blank, tbh.
Lol no thanks people make up enough bullshit with words as it is I shudder to think what they can come up with if it's blank.
But are we sure Jesus was a man ? We can't already be sure of what was his actual skin color. So maybe Jesus never had a beard and was in fact a woman (or maybe even a bearded woman ?).
All Books refer to God as a male, but He is genderless and sexless. The two sexes are only a construct for earthlings. God created the sexes.
Well I am not a believer in God or the bible, but to Christians, doesnt the idea that God is male derive from "made Adam in his own image"
You can have the image of a man, but not be male though. A male of any species is identified by having testes, why would God have testes?
i do not have enough info on bible about god's sex. were there differend gender/sex angels before god created world/adam? did adam end eve have sexual organs before they were banished from paradise?
I suppose this part of Mathew 19:26 could apply:
"... with God all things are possible."
That opens up the door for every opinion being equally valid on what God may or may not have done/felt/is etc. Explains the burning bush for example!