Freethought & Rationalism Archive

spin · 12-20-2006, 12:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeffevnz

What about "Let us make [N(SH] man in our image and likeness..." or "Let us go down [NRDH] and confuse [NBLH] their language..."?

As you can see, all singular. However, this should content you somewhat: in "our image and our likeness" indicate a plural possessive pronoun...

spin

seebs · 12-20-2006, 12:36 AM

There was a very interesting (albeit probably crazy) guy at CF who insisted that God was inherently plural, and this addressed the whole male/female thing. I think.

Anyway, there's a lot of confusion because English either has no gender-neutral third person pronoun for sentient entities, or has one that is spelled exactly like the male pronoun.

Conventional Christian teaching is mostly that the question of male or female is simply the wrong question, and that God is neither, rather than both. Some groups prefer to view God as male, but so far as I know, it's more a fundamentalist thing than a historical thing.

There is certainly some evidence that God is thought of in whichever way seems useful; for instance, Job has a reference to God's womb, indirectly:

The Book of Job, Chapter 38, Verse 29
Out of whose womb came the ice? and the hoary frost of heaven, who hath gendered it?

Gundulf · 12-20-2006, 05:42 AM

Well, considering that the image of God is "male and female" in Gen 1...

Tao of Pooh · 12-20-2006, 06:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gstafleu

It is amazing. I did a search for the keywords "god" and "woman" together in the thread titles of this forum, and came up with... nothing! I did the search twice just in case I pressed the Enter key the wrong way the first time around. Right, clearly it is time for some rabble rousing feminism. After all it is almost Christmas, the time when Mary, not good old Joe, gave birth to Jesus.

In Gen 1 God creates man and woman in some unspecified manner. Gen 2 is more specific: the man is created from some red goop. Now let us consider some obviousnesses.

First it is women who give birth, not men. This fact is so obvious that I suspect even BC&H scholars will not ask for sources. Because of this same obviousness, we can also safely assume, without sources, that the fact was known to the people who came up with the Genesis stories.

Second, in ancient times there was, for not too subtle reasons, the idea that babies got formed from menstrual blood. Here of course I should give sources, but I don't have them. Well, I could give Gabriella Kalapos book about holidays, but it is probably better if I don't. So I'll plead the spirit of Christmas.

Now the fact that it is women who give birth is enough to make one wonder if the God if Gen 1/2 wasn't a woman. I suppose one could come up with an excuse about how Gen 1/2 wants to make the point that the God is extra special and has, in contrast with all other male creatures, the power to somehow give birth. But that seems rather transparent to me.

Then we have this red goop business (see e.g. http://www.keyway.ca/htm2002/adameve.htm). Where did God get this red goop? Perhaps she was menstruating and made a virtue out of necessity?

So anyway, I think there is some reason to assume that even the very male God of the Bible started out in female form. And now we do have a thread with "god" and "woman" in the title.

Gerard Stafleu

Sounds ok to me, I'll buy it.
I remember somewhat hazily reading something about the original (greek?) word for god being a male word with a female ending...or something like that.

If you explain something so clearly that nobody can misunderstand...somebody will.

12-20-2006, 12:36 AM	#12
seebs Contributor Join Date: May 2002 Location: Saint Paul, MN Posts: 24,524	There was a very interesting (albeit probably crazy) guy at CF who insisted that God was inherently plural, and this addressed the whole male/female thing. I think. Anyway, there's a lot of confusion because English either has no gender-neutral third person pronoun for sentient entities, or has one that is spelled exactly like the male pronoun. Conventional Christian teaching is mostly that the question of male or female is simply the wrong question, and that God is neither, rather than both. Some groups prefer to view God as male, but so far as I know, it's more a fundamentalist thing than a historical thing. There is certainly some evidence that God is thought of in whichever way seems useful; for instance, Job has a reference to God's womb, indirectly: The Book of Job, Chapter 38, Verse 29 Out of whose womb came the ice? and the hoary frost of heaven, who hath gendered it?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-20-2006, 05:42 AM	#13
Gundulf Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Spain Posts: 2,902	Well, considering that the image of God is "male and female" in Gen 1...

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.