Jesus, what a gal!!

[wesw]

jesus, the son, had to experience all of the difficulties, temptations and pain of man, including death, so that god, the father, could understand, empathize with, and forgive mankind for their weaknesses and sins.

to me , it seems that god allowed himself to suffer to understand and forgive us, as well as giving us grace and the holy spirit and the means to forgive ourselves and begin life anew.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Jesus, the Son, had to experience all of the difficulties, temptations and pain of man, including death bear our punishment for sin, so that God, the Father, could understand, empathize with, and forgive mankind for theirweaknesses and sins.

to me , it seems that God allowed himself to suffer to understand and forgives us, as well as giving us grace and the holy spirit and the means to forgive ourselves and begin life anew.

FTFY

[Gob]

A group of women in the Church of England want to start referring to God as ‘She’ to combat sexism – with critics deriding the proposal as a case of political correctness gone mad.

Former Tory MP Ann Widdecombe, who left the Anglican Church following the decision to ordain women priests, called the proposal ‘plain silly’ and ‘the work of a few lunatics’.

But the women priests behind the idea argued that using ‘He’ suggests men are closer to God and called for the tables to be turned on sexism in the Church.

One of the supporters of the idea, the Rev Emma Percy, chaplain of Trinity College, Oxford, said the dominance of male language makes women feel that they are less holy.

The chaplain, who is also a member of Watch (Women and the Church), the pressure group that helped win the argument for female bishops in the Church of England, said using the word ‘She’ for God would be more inclusive.

‘When we use only male language for God we reinforce the idea that God is like a man and, in doing so, suggest that men are therefore more like God than women,’ she told The Sunday Times.

‘This means that women can see themselves as less holy and less able to represent Christ in the world. If we take seriously the idea that men and women are made in the image of God, both male and female language should be used.’

The Rev Kate Bottley, vicar of St Mary and St Martin’s, in Blyth, Nottinghamshire, told the paper that she and other priests had quietly dropped references to ‘He’ and ‘Him’ when referring to God.

[BoSoxGal]

Why can't they just remove the pronouns and always say God?

[Crackpot]

I'm for the completely impersonal "it"... Or maybe they could use one of the new pantheon of transgendered pronouns? I believe Futurama used "shklee"

[MajGenl.Meade]

That's clever - referring to the personal God as an impersonal 'it", along with sheep, goats, rabbits, the weather and a scary clown. (Surely some child is going to play with that?).

I'm all for the rather sensible appellation "God" or "Lord" or even "Yahweh" if we must avoid "He" - can't hurt. But "she" is historical and factual crap. God is Father (and not mother) and if people are stupid enough to feel diminished because God is "He" then they need a backbone and a brain.

[wesw]

I love mother earth too, I wouldn t call her a he....

meade wins a cookie for common sense.....

[Big RR]

Meade--you honestly think god has a gender and that the appellation "father" was not just used because at the time the boble was written men/fathers were the de facto head of the family?

Personally, I do think some churches are going too far overboard in trying to change the pronouns used with regard to mentioning god (if for no other reason because it destroys some of the poetry contained with the bible and hymns), but I cannot perceive of god having a gender. and even if god does have a gender, I do not think it would necessarily be male. As for "it", it is no more reserved for animals (who do have genders, my dog is always a good girl, not a good thing) than any other pronouns.

And FWIW, Lord connotes maleness to the same extent that father and he do; probably god as well (as the female would be a goddess).

[Guinevere]

Thank you, Big RR, for pointing out what should be obvious.

[MajGenl.Meade]

I don't care whether or not God has gender. I doubt it, if by gender one envisages dangley bits. It's good enough for me that Jesus calls HIM 'Father' and "Lord" and is himself "Lord" and is himself "God".

Being a Christian, I follow Christ which may seem odd to some'. Let me add "balls" to the backbone and brain requirement.

And if "actor" can be changed in meaning to include both male and female actors, (thus getting rid of 'actress' for everyone except the Oscars etc), then there's no need to insist on the English word "goddess" either. As a word, god may be (like actor) gender neutral. However, God (the one and only) is not "she" and not "it". (And BTW Big RR I tossed the clown in there to avoid the "animals only" charge). "It" is disrespectful when applied to persons other than asking "What sex is it?" when enquiring about a newborn.

[Big RR]

And if "actor" can be changed in meaning to include both male and female actors, (thus getting rid of 'actress' for everyone except the Oscars etc), then there's no need to insist on the English word "goddess" either.

I won't argue that anymore than I would say most words which are indicative of male gender (chairman or mankind, e.g.) are exclusively male, but I'm certain some would. I think the English convention is to use the male pronoun (or words that are traditionally associated with males) and it does not indicate any disrespect for the female gender, but there are many who would argue that, I'm sure.

As for "dangley bits", I don't think that's what gender mandates (not to derail the discussion, but many transexuals were born with one set of dangley bits and feel far more like the other gender), but then I honestly don't know what is dispositive of gender.

finally, yes, the bible does quote jesus as using father (or whatever the Aramaic or Hebrew words he used translate to in English, maybe papa or daddy or even sir?) when discussing (or even praying to) god, but we all do know jesus talked in very symbolic language a lot of time to promote understanding of god and heaven, etc., and even instructed us to pray "like" this (not to pray this, when he delivered the lord's prayer, so I don't think god is necessarily a father anymore than he is a vintner or arborist--use of father is just way to approach understanding what is beyond comprehension in the scientific sense. If it helps some to comprehend god as a mother, I can't see a problem with that--nothing is being changed about what god is, only in the way god is being approached by someone trying to understand.

Roy

[MajGenl.Meade]

Roy? Oops!

Yeah I guess you are correct (para 1 and 2). People do indeed approach God in ways that make them happy instead of the way that the Bible teaches. But isn't that man (sorry, woman) creating god instead of vice versa? OK. And then there's Malachi 2:10 and Jeremiah 3:19, not to mention a host of other references to God as father that predate Jesus' incarnation. It all just depends on whether one believes the Bible or not - if not, then God could be a turnip if it makes people happier

[Big RR]

I put names in occasionally to see if you're paying attention. You passed; congratulations.

as for the bible calling god "father", I do think it is because it was the best way to communicate to people that god is the head of the human family in the same way that the father was (at the time of the OT and NT writings). It is not necessary for god to be male to be father in this way. But people knew what a father was and it communicated something about the nature of god to them. If you prefer to approach god that way, fine with me; but it has nothing to do IMHO with whether one believes the bible is true or not, nor does it have anything to do with what makes people happy. It's an aid toward understanding, not a lesson in and of itself.

[Gob]

But "she" is historical and factual crap. God is Father (and not mother) and if people are stupid enough to feel diminished because God is "He" then they need a backbone and a brain.

More proof that god is a man made construction then.

[MajGenl.Meade]

[Guinevere]

And he makes fun of ruby's Pavlovian responses about the Republicans....

[Gob]

Sure do.

You see I've done exactly what rubato does here, I've introduced god into a thread which wasn't about god.

Just like he introduces "Republicans b-a-a-a-d.UGH!" into threads which are not political, or about republicans.

Agreed?

[BoSoxGal]

One doesn't have to take any of the Bible literally to believe it is true, Meade.

[MajGenl.Meade]

I have a problem with that sentence BSG, no matter how it is applied

"One doesn't have to take any of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire literally in order to believe it is true"

"One doesn't have to take any Hillary Rodham Clinton promise literally in order to believe it is true"

"One doesn't have to take any of Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone literally in order to believe it is true"

So it doesn't really work in one case of non-fiction and two of fiction - so what one earth does it actually mean?

You don't have to take this post literally in order to know it is true

[wesw]

meade meade meade, parables and metaphors were part and parcel of the bible and especially Jesus' teaching, right?

perhaps god only gave you as much truth as you can handle..... and candy coated it especially for you!

although none of we mere mortals can hang, but I have a suspicion that god is smarter than you....