Is God Male?

[Ovedya]

I've been following this topic with much curiousity and have come to two conclusions:-

1. We will never know the truth about God's gender from this discussion

2. We can learn so much about ourselves, regarding this topic

Looking at the stats I see that God is concedered "Male" or "Male Plus" by 77.4 % of the voters.

Only 23.3 % think of God as "Female amongst other genders"

God might be an yet unknown gender for all I know. After all Gender is a human defenition.

The stats could show that most of the voters are male.

It could also show that the voters are unknown gender but schuvenistic.

There are 31 votes in all which could mean that most people don't regard this topic as relevant.

Like I said we could learn a lot about ourselves but almost nothing about God.

God bless this forum I love it! It's so human

Well....There was a reason I started the poll. And it wasn't exactly to figure out whether God is male or female.

[hupo]

Well....There was a reason I started the poll. And it wasn't exactly to figure out whether God is male or female.

Tell me!!! Tell me !!!

[hupo]

why is God good?

Why is God honest? good? etc.

Why is God NOT a liar? Why isn't he a thief? and so on?

One cannot answer the question, because if God is the "first cause", which he must be, then the question "why" does not even logically apply to God, because it would imply something "caused" God to be good. Now one might argue that God caused God to be good, but that doesn't solve the problem because that would imply God could have been anything other than Good, etc.

So "reason" is bit of a paradox when talking about God. since God himself gives reasons for some of his actions. i.e. "For God so loved the World..." = "Because God love the world so much..." or "Because thou hast done this..." (Gen. 3:14).

Yet one can think of no reason why God should need a reason, or for that matter, no reason why God should have a reason...

Hi there WSB, I've been following your line of reasoning and actually quite agree with most of it.

However what I wanted to say here was how amused I am at your using so much reasoning for showing God need no reasons.

It reminds me of my thinking process which used to drive me nuts!

Doesn't it make you "blow a fuse" sometimes?

God dealt with it, as one day He asked me: "Why don't you live your life rather than explain it"

He sure hit the nail on the head, for me!!

May God bless you, for no reason

[firehill]

I said God is gender neutral because "gender" is a culturally defined term.

Who really cares if God has the male anatomy or not? Kinda silly since it does not matter AT ALL.

Again, it's not about anatomy. I think perhaps I could have worded it better: "Is God a man?"

No He's not and He says that he is not a man in the OT.

Further the Creator made humankind in in image according to Genesis 1:27, not just the male sex.

Where in the OT does it say that God is not a man? I hope you're not referring to "God is not a man, that he should lie, nor the son of man, that he should repent" because that verse (Num. 23:19) does not refer to God's gender or lack thereof.

I would ask this question again - in light of some of the previous posts - does God do anything without purpose or intent?

Numbers 23:19, yes I was refering to. The Hebrew ish means 'male'.

You should really learn some things about the language if you're going to cite it. In terms of being in contrast with God, the term "ish" means "human." Since this verse deals with the contrast between God and man, the term means "God is not human that He should lie." Try again.

So my question then is, with regard to God contrasting himself with ish, does He mean that the term is to be understood as simply 'human' or 'human male', that is , 'man'? I take 'God is not man that He should lie' as 'God is not a male human that He should lie.'

[firehill]

God is neither male nor female. He is God. He has no specific gender, but He likens Himself to a father, mostly. However, there is a reference to Him as a mother hen who longs to gather His Israel to Him with "her" wings.

God is.

Heresy.

You can be nice, truster. What is so heretical in my view of God as Spirit, which He is? Male is a human attribute.

And God does not posess human attributes?

Do you believe that God has a reason for everything that He does?

No we were made like Him, not the other way around therefore again, no He does not posses human attributes. Impossible. He is SPIRIT.

So then, correct me if I'm wrong, but you are saying that God does not possess human attributes.

So please explain why Christ resurrected as a man, and how He suddenly does not have the same attributes that he had as a man.

Also, since you responded to my post, can you answer the second question? Do you believe that God has a reason for everything He does?

We have attributes that reflect or image what God is like hence, God has 'eyes' and 'hands'. Animals have eyes and hands also but not human ones. Humankind was made in His image not the animal kingdom. God does not posses human attributes and neither do we posses divine attributes but our attributes reflect what God is like.

Christ resurrected as a man (He was fully man and fully God after all) because he died as a man but his resurrected body I believe is much different than what it was when he died, now being glorified, etc.

[firehill]

So then, correct me if I'm wrong, but you are saying that God does not possess human attributes.

No, God does not possess human attributes. Humans are created in the image and likeness of God, not the other way around. So humans possess god-like attributes, though we are inferior in every way. Even before the fall, obviously, humans were inferior in every way. Humans have similarities to God, but thats IT. God is eternal. So if man were like a line segment, God would be like a line. Understand?

The fact God made man in his "image and likeness" does not neccessarily mean that man literally looks like God, and even if it did, as I've shown before, an "image" of a man is either a painting or a sculputure or a phote or reflection, etc, and all are vastly inferior to a man, and possess very few of the man's actual attributes. A painting isn't alive, isn't intelligent, isn't 3 dimensional, etc.

So one could not say that God has human attributes. If God has attributes at all, he would have eternal attributes, and he would have some attributes that human beings do not have, never had, and never will have. Just as a painting will never be alive or intelligent, man will never have some attributes that God himself has. Never mind the "eternal" part, i.e. we have wisdom, God is eternally wise. We have love. God is eternally loving, etc. Never mind that for the moment.

God knows my thoughts because he is omniscient, for example. Now try as I might, I do not know even one of your thoughts. So I do not possess supernatural knowledge or telepathy of your thoughts, and even if I did through divine inspiration, it would not be an attribute of myself, but would be knowledge given by God through divine intervention. I might get lucky and "guess" what you are thinking once in a very long while, but even that is not "knowledge", but pure chance or the result of learning a few things about your personality which allow me to extrapolate what you "might" be thinking, etc.

God creates, but man cannot create at all. We do not have that attribute. We can procreate, we can BUILD, we can invent or discover things that already exist, but we cannot create. We can even fantasize and hypothesize about things which do not actually exist, or may or may not exist, but we cannot create. So if "creativity" is an attribute of God, it is one humans do not actually possess. Humans are inventive, but we are not "Creative" in the Biblical sense.

I could continue this line of reasoning, but I hope you get the picture by now.

So please explain why Christ resurrected as a man, and how He suddenly does not have the same attributes that he had as a man.

First of all, any attributes he had as a man were finite. Any attributes he has as the resurrected Christ cannot be finite. Again, assuming it is even proper to use the word "attributes" in reference to eternal God who is the first cause. As a man, for example, Jeus had needs, he got tired, hungry, weary, etc. Does God get tired? he may tire of our endless debates, but he does not "need" anything, and as he says in the prophets, even if he did get hungry, he would not tell us...Man has needs, God does not.

Again, God does not have "human" attributes, but man has some god-like attributes.

Also, since you responded to my post, can you answer the second question? Do you believe that God has a reason for everything He does?

"reason" is a difficult concept to apply to God, since God is the first cause. God's "Reason" for creating the universe is given in the book of revelation. "...and for thy pleasure they are and were created..." (rev. 4:11) So basicly, one of God's "reasons" for creating the universe was to entertain himself. Though I'm not sure what entertainment value any of us has, but there you have it.

But again, "reason" does not seem to apply to God himself. For example, why is God "good"? There is no reason I can think of that God should or "must" be moral at all. Yet we believe he is, and it is evident that he must be good because we see things in nature and in ourselves which point to a "good" creator, but nevertheless, why is God good?

Why is God honest? good? etc.

Why is God NOT a liar? Why isn't he a thief? and so on?

One cannot answer the question, because if God is the "first cause", which he must be, then the question "why" does not even logically apply to God, because it would imply something "caused" God to be good. Now one might argue that God caused God to be good, but that doesn't solve the problem because that would imply God could have been anything other than Good, etc.

So "reason" is bit of a paradox when talking about God. since God himself gives reasons for some of his actions. i.e. "For God so loved the World..." = "Because God love the world so much..." or "Because thou hast done this..." (Gen. 3:14).

Yet one can think of no reason why God should need a reason, or for that matter, no reason why God should have a reason...

You're so much more eloquent than I! Thanks for explaining this!!!

[GeneV]

why is God good?

Why is God honest? good? etc.

Why is God NOT a liar? Why isn't he a thief? and so on?

One cannot answer the question, because if God is the "first cause", which he must be, then the question "why" does not even logically apply to God, because it would imply something "caused" God to be good. Now one might argue that God caused God to be good, but that doesn't solve the problem because that would imply God could have been anything other than Good, etc.

So "reason" is bit of a paradox when talking about God. since God himself gives reasons for some of his actions. i.e. "For God so loved the World..." = "Because God love the world so much..." or "Because thou hast done this..." (Gen. 3:14).

Yet one can think of no reason why God should need a reason, or for that matter, no reason why God should have a reason...

Hi there WSB, I've been following your line of reasoning and actually quite agree with most of it.

However what I wanted to say here was how amused I am at your using so much reasoning for showing God need no reasons.

It reminds me of my thinking process which used to drive me nuts!

Doesn't it make you "blow a fuse" sometimes?

God dealt with it, as one day He asked me: "Why don't you live your life rather than explain it"

He sure hit the nail on the head, for me!!

May God bless you, for no reason

And I'll second that WSB & Hupo Yeah our human fraility shows everytime

Ovedya thanks again for this post - What was your reason by the way.....I think I missed the answer!!

[Guest lovinghim4ever]

From my human perspective I believe God to be neutral in gender, because He is whatever His children need Him to be whenever they need Him to be.

"God is Spirit, those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth" (John 4:24).

God is spirit, and I don't believe spirit has gender.

However, the Bible refers to Him in the masculine.

Why? I dunno!

Maybe because "No prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit" (2 Peter 1:20-21).

Why did God choose men to write the Bible? I dunno!

Maybe because women were not allowed to go to school and didn't know how to write.

[apothanein kerdos]

He's neither, He is outside the ontology of man.

However, we should always use male pronouns to describe Him, considering this is what occurred in the Bible.

[Guest yod]

I put "both male and female"

Yeshua is the visible image of the invisible God....and He is obviously male and refers to Elohim as "Father" so in human terms, He would be male.

But I think this ignores the mystery of Eve being taken from Adam's side (not his rib)

Even the hebrew word for God (Elohim) is a plural term. The Word used to describe Elohim as being one (echad) means a plurality of oneness

Since the 6th day of Creation, it takes both male and female in a spiritual state of "echad" (one) to be made completely in the image of God. In other words, since it is the will of the Father to give His Son a Bride, then the image of God is incomplete without the Bride. We reflect the true image of the "echad" of "elohim" in our relationships but none are more accurately portraying the likeness of Elohim than the marriage relationship between a man and a woman joined together in covenant like the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit