Sexual preference is un-Godlike (Jesus, ritual, crucified, choice, creation)

[lizskid]

Interesting, that's not what they taught me in seminary. However, they did teach me that the Bible is a living document that can be interpretted by everyone in their own way. Thus, it can be read many ways and mean many things to many people. Praise be!

[Sonic247]

to lizkid: God's word is forever settled in heaven, he is the one who preserves it. He wouldn't refer to himself as being male to try and please a patriarichal society. If he comprimised like that then he never would be crucified, and all the prophets were hated for telling the truth. Because the world doesn't want to hear the truth but that never stopped God from saying it.

[Sonic247]

Because someone teaches in a seminary doesn't make them spiritual. The pharisees and scribe plotted together to crucify Jesus and they were most educated in the word of God.

[Green Gaia]

Originally Posted by lizskid

Well, being refered to as a male, or Father, would be pretty much required in the times that the stories were told then written, in a patriachal society. So, I wouldn't take that as a huge thing. However, I, too, continue to refer to God in that manner, but I think that is due to my upbringing in the church and my training thereafter. I do not believe, however, that God is a sexual being at all.

I agree. I think we have to examine the culture these stories and creation myths came out of to understand what they meant to them and possible meaning, if any, they could have for us today. This goes for any historical/religious text.

[adilrockstar]

Originally Posted by Feathers in Hair

If the topic is trivial, why did you bring up what gender you believe god is? (And other people can also get their beliefs from the Bible and simply have a different interpretation of it. It's one of the beauties of religion.)

Slow down Trigger. The OP metioned GENDER in his first sentence.

[Sonic247]

It would only be nessacary to study the culture if it came from the culture. And if it did why argue so much about it. But if it came from God then the culture didn't matter. And if it came from the culture the culture would like it's own prophets which it didn't.

[lizskid]

Originally Posted by Sonic247

to lizkid: God's word is forever settled in heaven, he is the one who preserves it. He wouldn't refer to himself as being male to try and please a patriarichal society.

You do understand the humans wrote the Bible? They chose the words, then others edited them in various processes. All in those societies I mentioned. Now, I have no doubt that those stories are relating spiritually miraculous experiences, but some of them date back to Asia/China far earlier than any dates given in the Bible, so I am not sure we can say God was referring to Himself at all. Whoever's hand wrote the words or changed them, I hold them dear to me and my Faith.

If he comprimised like that then he never would be crucified, and all the prophets were hated for telling the truth. Because the world doesn't want to hear the truth but that never stopped God from saying it.

I am assuming you mean Jesus as part of the triune God, and I absolutely agree! To have given in to the easy way would have negated us the chance of the convenant.

[Feathers in Hair]

Sorry, Ozzie- I think I derailed your thread!

Should I create a thread dedicated to the discussion of the gender of god, so that this one can remain about "Sexual Preference is Un-Godlike"? Also, would people want it in the Biblical debate area or the main area?

[Green Gaia]

Originally Posted by Sonic247

It would only be nessacary to study the culture if it came from the culture. And if it did why argue so much about it. But if it came from God then the culture didn't matter. And if it came from the culture the culture would like it's own prophets which it didn't.

Ok, prove it came from a deity.

[Guitar's Cry]

Originally Posted by Sonic247

to lizkid: God's word is forever settled in heaven, he is the one who preserves it. He wouldn't refer to himself as being male to try and please a patriarichal society. If he comprimised like that then he never would be crucified, and all the prophets were hated for telling the truth. Because the world doesn't want to hear the truth but that never stopped God from saying it.

I think the point was more towards the writers (as in physical writers) of the Bible trying to appease a patriarchal society.

My own take on God being genderless comes from my studies of biology and psychology, which have shown that gender and sex are much more complex than "male/female." It just struck me that if the physical lines of sex and gender are so blurred, how could God - as the high spiritual being - be confined to one gender. Not just why would a spiritual being have sexual organs or hormones, but why would It be relegated to a gender role?

But, I have nothing against someone assigning God(s) a gender. I think it may help in making that person feel closer to their God(s) of choice.