Neon Genesis Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 It seems to me that thinking of God as only feminine is just as wrong as thinking of God as only masculine. Spong is right that we tend to view divine through our own eyes. Steve I don't think it's wrong to think of God as either exclusively feminine or exclusively macsuline as long as it is understood that these are only symbols of God and not truth claims. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rivanna Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 (edited) To me, it’s understood that most if not all PC’s think of God as both male and female, so I don’t talk about it much, but it’s helpful when people say She and Her for God every once in a while. I haven’t read the book Yvonne referred to by Elizabeth Fiorenza, but have read similar ones that focus on Wisdom as female co-creator in the later and apocryphal books of the OT. Also as Marcus Borg points out, Jesus can be seen as the embodiment of Sophia – womblike compassion and inclusiveness. God’s feminine side is there in the very beginning, saying We will make human beings in our image. God's tender, motherly side is shown when Adam and Eve eat of the tree of knowing good and evil and become aware of their nakedness. “God sewed together clothes for them out of the skins of animals and they put them on.” As Richard Rohr says, “Surely this is a promise from a protective and nurturing God. This will become the momentum-building story of the whole Bible which gradually undoes the history of a fearsome and threatening deity.” Ilia Delio says “before encounter, God is perceived as omnipotent power; after encounter, God is perceived as humble love. God, against all expectation, is humble.” I once took a seminar on Mary Magdalene. Without her, Christianity would probably never have been founded, yet she’s only mentioned 13 times in the gospels and not at all in the rest of the NT. Edited May 10, 2012 by rivanna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deb N Posted May 20, 2012 Share Posted May 20, 2012 What are your thoughts on the Divine Feminine? I figured that if God made us in His own image then there would be reason to believe that at least some of Him was feminine. I do believe in the roles that women have held to a degree. I think that in order to have balance in spirit both the masculine and the feminine must be present. This is not to be confused with only a man and a woman comprising a union . In that case each individual brings some level of masculine and/or feminine into the relationship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yvonne Posted May 21, 2012 Author Share Posted May 21, 2012 Excellent point, Deb. I think its important the balance between masculine/feminine is maintained - whether its in a relationship or withinin ourselves. I don't remember if it was Karen Armstrong or another writer who made the point - but a purely masculine "anything" can become rigid and controlling, whereas a purely feminine "anything" can become wishy-washy and submissive. It is when we can find the balance that we become truly integrated, whether that balance is in our psyche, our spirituality, our politics, or practically anything else. Who ever the author was, I think he or she was right on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulS Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 I figured that if God made us in His own image then there would be reason to believe that at least some of Him was feminine. Of course, how else would God have gotten all the cooking and cleaning done! I'm sorry but I couldn't resist some pathetic, sexist humour. Please don't hold it against me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murmsk Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 Why is there a need to attach gender to God? steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glintofpewter Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 In considering God or ultimate reality or ground of being there is not need for gender. When we explore our intimate and personal relationship with the Divine it is hard to avoid gender. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yvonne Posted May 21, 2012 Author Share Posted May 21, 2012 I don't think its assigning a gender to God - its recognizing attributes like being protective (masculine) being nurturing (feminine) or what have you to a personal God. While not everyone thinks in terms of a "personal" God, for me, it helps deepend my awareness when I can imagine strong arms supporting me or a soft shoulder to cry on. Using imagination is a way for to enrich my experience during meditation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deb N Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 I once took a seminar on Mary Magdalene. Without her, Christianity would probably never have been founded, yet she’s only mentioned 13 times in the gospels and not at all in the rest of the NT. The Gnostics Gospels contain the Gospel of Mary (Magdalene), also Judas Iscariat. . They're pretty interesting all things considered. And they give a better perspective of what the feminine would look like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deb N Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 Why is there a need to attach gender to God? steve The best reason I can think of was to keep God in perspective to the largely unsophisticated and/or ignorant masses. It's pretty much just tradition at this point, though a contested one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinker Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 (edited) Without any significant representation of the Divine Feminine in the Godhead of Abrahamic religious traditions, women in Abrahamic dominated societies are demoted to second-class citizenship if not made virtual slaves to males dominating every important social aspect of society except the kitchen area. The weak Shekkinah and even Sophia, are mere ghosts (the Holy Ghost being one) of the ancient Divine Femine earth and sky goddess influence on societies where these powerful goddesses were thought to rule human lives, especially the lives of women. As a modern Gnostic Christian I know God is slowly but surely restoring the Holy Family again in human consciousness because we've seen what happens when Mother is divorced from Father and males rule societies without feminine oversite to do their male thing which is constant warfare to establish and control their territories and making religions and God match their male territorial ambitions. But things are changing as we enter a new spiritual aeon and already there exists a new Christian vision of the Spirit of Christ returning in feminine form. You can't have a "Father" without a Mother and you can't have a "Son" without a Daughter as that is the only way we recognize the meaning of those words, "father", "mother", "son", "daughter". Edited December 11, 2012 by skinker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeorgeW Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 , , , we've seen what happens when Mother is divorced from Father and males rule societies without feminine oversite to do their male thing which is constant warfare to establish and control their territories and making religions and God match their male territorial ambitions. While I don't think anyone would argue that a stable family is a not good thing, the fact is we are niw living in the most peaceful time in human history. George Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinker Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 Peaceful? For who? Are Gazans at peace? Or Afghans? Or all those starving Africans and Indians? Quite a few billion people are not at peace in our world so I ask you, who's at peace? Are you with these things going on that have everything to do with males in power fighting each other over territorial control? Even here in the land of the free and rich? I'm not a peace. The absence of declared war does not equal peace in my world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulS Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 It's not just the absence of declared war, Skinker, death caused by violence as a percentage of all deaths has declined dramatically over the centuries. Tribal warfare was nine times as deadly as war and genocide in the 20th century. Similarly, the murder rate of medieval Europe was over 30 times what it is today. And there are more chances of Americans dying in a bathtub (one in 950,000) than in a terror attack (one in 3.5 million), according to a paper published by John Mueller and Mark Stewart. Yes, there are millions starving as a result of overpopulation and under-resourcing, which is not all suprising when the world is divided up into countries and one country's problems are its own. I agree that territorial control influences or has influenced these situations in some circumstances, but by most measures the world really is heading in the 'right' direction IMO. Cheers Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeorgeW Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 Peaceful? For who? Are Gazans at peace? Or Afghans? Or all those starving Africans and Indians? Quite a few billion people are not at peace in our world so I ask you, who's at peace? Of course there is not complete peace today for everyone and every place. It is all relative and compared with history. The data is clear, we live in the most peaceful time in human history. I suggest you read "The Better Angels of Our Nature" by Steven Pinker - the evidence is not just clear, it is overwhelming. If you think it is so bad now, think for a minute about living through the Civil War, the Holocaust, the Crusades, the ethnic cleansing of Canaan, the 100 Years War, or any other time in history. George Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeorgeW Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 I agree that territorial control influences or has influenced these situations in some circumstances, but by most measures the world really is heading in the 'right' direction IMO. Yes, and the "territorial control influence" is not new. Much of the world (see U.S., South America, Australia, New Zealand, etc.) was established by "territorial control influence." Organizations today like the U.N., NATO, SEATO, etc. do not stop this, but they do moderate it. George Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.