Why do we refer to God as male?

[annexi]

]

I think the verse saying 'God created man in his own image' would be more accurately re-written as 'Man created God in his own image'.

I'm wagering God is way less human-like than what religion makes 'him' out to be.

It's natural for us all to have hunches or opinions about things. But without having any significant facts beyond it being a hunch or a feeling really makes me opposed to using it to change something that's established.

Thank you. Two questions: do you think that because something is established, that gives it value? Why?

And, given that male and female hold equal power in creating life, doesn't it stand to reason that god would reflect the same principle?

[FreeRights]

do you think that because something is established, that gives it value? Why?

No, I think that if something is established, it can be challenged and through time, changed. That said, there should be sufficient grounds in which these changes happen. God is quite clearly referred to as male in the Bible, several times, and while I don't think that there's value to that fact at all, I don't see any amount of evidence, anywhere, suggesting otherwise.

We may get somewhere if we argue that he doesn't hold a gender at all - after all, the use of the word "he" in the English language is often used as the default gender modifier - it could mean either gender, if one isn't specifically being described. As God's actions are also inhuman, it may be not human at all and may not actually bear a gender at all.

And, given that male and female hold equal power in creating life, doesn't it stand to reason that god would reflect the same principle?

Theoretically yes, but it's clear in the Bibe - particularly the Old Testament - that this isn't the case.

You could reason with Christian faith all you want, but faith comes down to writings in a book. In this case, the book isn't particularly ambiguous in it's writing and once we begin questioning one fact as its written, it won't end there - the entire book and its' meanings can be re-interpreted into something that is not written.

[annexi]

I mean in real life, nature, we can observe directly and know to be true that human life is created from the equal contribution of male and female. It is 50/50. XX + XY yields human life. I think a more true understanding of God would correspond to this principle of nature.

You could reason with Christian faith all you want, but faith comes down to writings in a book

I think faith comes down to what one chooses to believe when the truth cannot be known. A person can use reason to arrive at faith. If a person thinks it through for themselves, I respect their choice. If they choose because something or someone told them to...therein I believe lies the problem.

In this case, the book isn't particularly ambiguous in it's writing and once we begin questioning one fact as its written, it won't end there - the entire book and its' meanings can be re-interpreted....

Lol that's what I'm hoping for.

[FreeRights]

I mean in real life, nature, we can observe directly and know to be true that human life is created from the equal contribution of male and female. It is 50/50. XX + XY yields human life. I think a more true understanding of God would correspond to this principle of nature.

If it's all part of God's divine plan, then everything happened and was written as it was supposed to.

[cliffy1]

If it's all part of God's divine plan, then everything happened and was written as it was supposed to.

Too many if, ands, and buts. Too many assumptions that have no basis in fact. There are many "holy" books written, why is yours any more divinely inspired than any other? Just because you say so? Many peoples had very strong spiritual beliefs but had no written language. Do we write them off because of that? Just because the authors of the book say it was divinely inspired is not proof that it was. All beliefs in the bible and the god of the bible are based entirely on blind faith.

I am not arguing the existence of a creator. I am arguing that those who say, unequivocally, that the bible is the word of god do not have a leg to stand on but their blind faith. What if the Creator gave its word to all people, in all historical time frames, in all geographical locations, in a language that they could understand, with characters and events that they could relate to? If this creator god is a loving and caring one, then it would make more sense this way than give it too only one people, in one geographical location in one historical time frame. Otherwise, this creator god would just be some psychotic fruit loop who created a species so flawed they could not possibly live up to its expectations and then punishes them for being flawed. Does not make sense at all.

[FreeRights]

Too many if, ands, and buts. Too many assumptions that have no basis in fact. There are many "holy" books written, why is yours any more divinely inspired than any other? Just because you say so? Many peoples had very strong spiritual beliefs but had no written language. Do we write them off because of that? Just because the authors of the book say it was divinely inspired is not proof that it was. All beliefs in the bible and the god of the bible are based entirely on blind faith.

I am not arguing the existence of a creator. I am arguing that those who say, unequivocally, that the bible is the word of god do not have a leg to stand on but their blind faith. What if the Creator gave its word to all people, in all historical time frames, in all geographical locations, in a language that they could understand, with characters and events that they could relate to? If this creator god is a loving and caring one, then it would make more sense this way than give it too only one people, in one geographical location in one historical time frame. Otherwise, this creator god would just be some psychotic fruit loop who created a species so flawed they could not possibly live up to its expectations and then punishes them for being flawed. Does not make sense at all.

Well, one "book" or belief is right, and most of the others are wrong. They can't all be right because the content differs too much.

To be fair, I'm an anti-theist or an atheist and have read many of the "holy" books for their historical content.

[annexi]

Well, one "book" or belief is right, and most of the others are wrong. They can't all be right because the content differs too much.

To be fair, I'm an anti-theist or an atheist and have read many of the "holy" books for their historical content.

Thank you. What is an anti-theist?

[annexi]

If it's all part of God's divine plan, then everything happened and was written as it was supposed to.

Too many if, ands, and buts. Too many assumptions that have no basis in fact. There are many "holy" books written, why is yours any more divinely inspired than any other? Just because you say so? Many peoples had very strong spiritual beliefs but had no written language. Do we write them off because of that? Just because the authors of the book say it was divinely inspired is not proof that it was. All beliefs in the bible and the god of the bible are based entirely on blind faith.

I am not arguing the existence of a creator. I am arguing that those who say, unequivocally, that the bible is the word of god do not have a leg to stand on but their blind faith...

What if the Creator gave its word to all people, in all historical time frames, in all geographical locations, in a language that they could understand, with characters and events that they could relate to? If this creator god is a loving and caring one, then it would make more sense this way than give it too only one people, in one geographical location in one historical time frame. ...

That is a very logical observation in my opinion. This opens up the possibility of many different ways to god, which I believe is possible.

[cliffy1]

That is a very logical observation in my opinion. This opens up the possibility of many different ways to god, which I believe is possible.

There are 7 billion people on this planet and there are 7 billion ways to Source. The journey is a personal one. The choice is ours. Nobody can tell you how to get there.

[annexi]

That is a very logical observation in my opinion. This opens up the possibility of many different ways to god, which I believe is possible.

There are 7 billion people on this planet and there are 7 billion ways to Source. The journey is a personal one. The choice is ours.

Well said.

Nobody can tell you how to get there.

Sure they can, I just don't have to buy their version of it. ;P

[cori]

Why God is referred to as a man?

Very easy to understand.....

When you really see the mess the world is
you get the answer (;>))

Only a man could do this.

[annexi]

Why God is referred to as a man?

Very easy to understand.....

When you really see the mess the world is
you get the answer (;>))

Only a man could do this.

haha wisdom from the mouths of babes. It's the tiny gods, lead by man, who have made a mess of the world (cf. Hafiz).

[masen]

We probably don't, we just didn't want to or have a pronoun for I AM THAT I AM. Most of us get caught up in pronouns instead of knowing or finding God, we get lost in the wilderness of our poorly created language. A HIgher Power is.