A while ago, somebody started a GD thread called “Build a God.” I’d link to it but I don’t remember who started it and God is too few characters to search for and I don’t know how to use Google search or to embed links in a thread. Anywho, the opening post of that thread asked each poster to imagine his or her ideal god, starting with the name “Fred.”
I had a problem with this. It’s not a live issue for me, of course, as I am not a believer, but if I were I have a hard time conceiving of the author of creation as male. The universe’s sovereign might be male, female, hermaphroditic, or neuter, of course, but to my mind, creation on that scale is essentially a feminine act; I can’t wrap my mind around “God” as He. I’d buy Gaia if there were evidence; I can’t buy Yahweh. As for the supreme authority – well, I’ve made 384,303 wisecracks about worshipping Athena, and there’s some truth to that position for me. I don’t believe She literally exists, but sometimes Athena is a useful mental construct for me-- more useful than Jesus, to be frank.
But that’s just me, and as I said I’m not really a believer. Theists, do you conceive of the deity you worship as male, female, hermaphroditic, or neuter? Whatever your answer is, why does that concept have power for you?
When I was growing up, I thought of the main god as male, because that was by far the dominant image in the culture I was raised in, and the other gods I had heard of also came with the genders of their traditional depictions.
I now conceive of the original creator figure(s) as female, simply because that makes more sense as a generative metaphor. I don’t pretend to know or to assume gods are bound by human biology.
Here is my take on it. Man(kind) is made in the image of God, as we are God’s children. So looking to creation myth of Adam and Eve, God was in the beginning a single being, possessing man and women inside one. As God divided Adam (being both male and female), into 2 parts Adam (just male) and Eve (just female), God also needed to do this for Him/Herself. So yes there is a male and female God and both act as one God.
Why do we only hear of the male God in the patriarchal faiths? Because each group of people on the earth is only given a piece of the puzzle, they got the male God part. There are also matriarchal faiths which only got the female God part and as I see it some groups have the we are the children of God part, completing the family. The goal is how all these faiths are put together to form the whole, taking the best of all I have come up with a picture of God as the family of God, Father Mother God and God’s son’s and daughters (us), all God as God is one.
But if you only take a piece, or put the pieces in a way where there is oppression of one god over then other then you no longer have the picture of the family of god and leaves open things like male or female god.
Simple answer is that is how my religion traditionally sees God, though theologically we consider God neither male nor female. With our limited frame of reference we must think of God in metaphor and analogy. So when God exhibits personhood we naturally think of him with a gender. That gender is male because early belief thought of him that way, perhaps literally, for cultural reasons, and perhaps for cultural reasons we still think of God that way.
So I think of God as male by default, but I don’t literally believe he has a scrotum, unless he wants to, but he could just as easily materialize with a vagina.
Most societies in the historical past were patriarchal. It is entirely logical that, since they made God in their own image, that they would see Him as a Super-Dad.
I began losing confidence in that book when God ordered Joshua to whack everyone in the various Canaanite cities, including the newborn babies, with the proviso that soldiers who encountered hot chicks might spare them for raping purposes. It made me suspicious of the entire tome, even apart from the taxonomy errors.
Mayhap. But I wasn’t asking why the Peoples of the Book see God as male, but rather why individual theists and polytheists on the board see God as they do.
I certainly don’t think of God as exclusively male or exclusively female. Whatever being “made in the image of God” entails, it applies to both men and women.
One thing I plead ignorance about is whether “male” and “female” have any meaning that is not tied to our physical bodies (not just plumbing, but also hormones and brain structure and such). Is there anything male or female about a person’s soul?
I’m wondering why you think this way, since creation on a more human scale can be done by either a male or a female, if you’re talking about artistic creation, or by both in collaboration, if you’re talking about biological creation.
It seems like there was a thread on this very subject not too long ago. Ah, here we go — a bit over two years ago Skald the Rhymer asks “Theists: do you refer to God as “He,” “She,” “It,” or “They”?”, following it with:
There I pointed to a Catholic philosopher who argues that God should be considered analogically male because His relationship to us (and to creation generally) mirrors that of father to children. Not sure I buy it, but thereyougo.
Some religions portray the creation of the cosmos as an act of birth. Ergo, the creator is female.
Some religions portray creation as an act that directly involves the creator: dance, or sculpture. Getting right in there with physical hands.
Some religions portray phases of creation as sexual. Ouranus and Gaea had sex, wherever the sky touched the earth.
Some religions portray creation as abstract. In the beginning was the word (or idea.) Such a creator doesn’t have to have any physical body at all. It could be just a big ball of glowing gas. (“I’m not gas. I found that very insulting.”)
When they made the movie “Prince of Egypt,” the Exodus story in animated form, the voices coming from the Burning Bush were originally going to be a chorus of many human voices, male and female. Priests, Imams, Rabbis, and others objected, saying that only male voices could be permitted to speak as the voice of God.
This, I think, more than anything else, gave away the bigotry hiding behind the patriarchal view. They don’t so much care that God is male, as that God is not female. (The lengthy Old Testament rules regarding women in their time of impurity is another giveaway.)
If The Book says “He” and uses wording like “The Father,” isn’t that reason enough to assume a male gender? Do you see any conflict in biblical passages?
No conflict, but no specific support, either. Moses saw God’s hind-parts; did that include genitals? God made Adam in his own image; wedding tackle and all? Does God really have a beard, the way he’s often painted?
What color is God’s skin? Is he prognathous? Brachycephalous? Does he have epicanthic folds in the corners of his eyes? How many teeth does he have? How many cusps on the molars?
