infinitelord1 Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 i have always imagined god having both the traits of a female and traits of a male. I also have thought that when he created male and female he distributed his traits amongst males and females. Thats what i thought was partially meant by "created in his image". Under this belief i came to the conclusion that when a male and a female make love they are combining the traits of god........furthermore to create life. What do you think? I have been told that there has been a thread like this before.....but i decided to do it again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Knight Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 I think it is a reasonable answer, however, to push it as fact is still debateable, theres alot of debate on the issue of "Created us in His own image." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don John of Austria Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 All of the Persons of God are adressed as He by Divine Command and instruction. I think speculation beyond that is dangerous in the extreme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p0lar_bear Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 [quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Sep 16 2005, 10:27 AM']All of the Persons of God are adressed as He by Divine Command and instruction. I think speculation beyond that is dangerous in the extreme. [right][snapback]725376[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Yeah, all those medieval saints are going straight to hell for such speculation and...horror of horrors...imaging God in the feminine...stupid heretical saints! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toledo_jesus Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 God is Authority, and therefore addressed as a male. however, He certainly is not a human, though we are in His image. So, it is easier for me to say, "God is omnipotent and can do whatever He wills" than to assign human characteristics to Him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don John of Austria Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 [quote name='p0lar_bear' date='Sep 16 2005, 08:31 AM']Yeah, all those medieval saints are going straight to hell for such speculation and...horror of horrors...imaging God in the feminine...stupid heretical saints! [right][snapback]725389[/snapback][/right] [/quote] We've been through this before Polar bear. First I didn't say it was Heretical I said it was Dangerous. Secondly we have had great contention about whether or not those Saints where speaking metaphoricly or actually contending that God had Feminine Characteristics. Finally You must have a differant Idea of "all those" than me because ou are not talking about that many. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toledo_jesus Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 [quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Sep 16 2005, 09:35 AM'] it was Dangerous. [right][snapback]725398[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I agree, speculative theology should be reserved for those who know what they are talking about, and not shared with the sheep. I don't understand this idea of telling the people everything and trying to make everyone a mini-theologian. A rudimentary understanding is all the average person needs. edit to say that understanding the Faith better is never a bad idea though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 God is, prescinding from the incarnation, beyond any categories of created existence; thus, it is impossible to ascribe sexual characteristics to God [i]in se[/i]. In other words, God is, in His essence, beyond anything conceiveable by man, and this was clearly taught by St. Basil in Letter 234 where he said that ". . . we know our God from His energies, but do not undertake to approach near to His essence. His energies come down to us, but His essence remains beyond our reach." That being said, it is of course possible to ascribe male characeristics to the hypostasis of the eternal Logos because of the mystery of the incarnation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
track2004 Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 Most languages default to the masculine noun. English, being not so gender orientated, doesn't. I think about God being a he or a she the same way I deal with poena, ae (punishment) being feminine or modulator, oris (musician) being masculine. It's a noun, nothing says punishment really has any 'gender' or musicians have to be guys. It's just part of a language that translates into English oddly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 WORDS have gender, PEOPLE have sex. but that's true, it's the correct use of those terms, therefore it is incorrect to talk about a person's gender, you should talk about their sex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infinitelord1 Posted September 16, 2005 Author Share Posted September 16, 2005 (edited) [quote name='toledo_jesus' date='Sep 16 2005, 08:33 AM']God is Authority, and therefore addressed as a male. however, He certainly is not a human, though we are in His image. So, it is easier for me to say, "God is omnipotent and can do whatever He wills" than to assign human characteristics to Him. [right][snapback]725395[/snapback][/right] [/quote] what you say here is not what i am implying at all though.........i am saying that he distrubuted his traits amongst us. Not that we assign things to god. He assigned them to us. Edited September 16, 2005 by infinitelord1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infinitelord1 Posted September 16, 2005 Author Share Posted September 16, 2005 another thing...........we would have to define femine characteristics as being wrong before we could say that "assigning" feminine characteristics to god is wrong........dont you think? When i think of feminine characteristics i think of compassion.......emotional type stuff. When i think of masculine characteristics i think of dominating characteristics...........domination doesnt have to be bad..........it could just mean powerful or in gods case all powerful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infinitelord1 Posted September 16, 2005 Author Share Posted September 16, 2005 [quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Sep 16 2005, 08:27 AM']All of the Persons of God are adressed as He by Divine Command and instruction. I think speculation beyond that is dangerous in the extreme. [right][snapback]725376[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Anything can be dangerous in the extreme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 God made man in his image. male and female He created them. the theology of the body talks alot about how this imagio dei is reflected in the conjugal act of marriage. it is not really correct to say He distributed His traits among us, He doesn't have such traits. but in His relationship to mankind He is the giver and mankind the receiver... relate this to the conjugal act and it is clear in God's dealings with Man he is the masculine sex of the marriage. also in regards to the Church being female, she is the bride of Christ. God deals with man as a mann deals with a woman He loves. Every mann and every woman each are made in the imagio dei. They reflect the Trinitarian God in the marriage act, but that doesn't mean individually they only have little 'parts' of God, in the sense of dispersed traits. man and wife reflect the Trinitarian God when love between them forms a third person (sexual procreation). a celibate priest reflects the Trinitarian God in marrying the Church and him and his bride having spiritual children in his congregation. but individually they all reflect the imagio dei individually. it is in some way analogous to the distinction and full deity of each of the three persons of the Trinity. God the Son is not a part of God, He is God. Man is not a reflection of part of God, a reflection of just His masculine or feminine traits, Man is a reflection of God. so a mann is a reflection of God not just the mascuiine traits of God and a woman is a reflection of God not just the femine traits of God. (disclaimer: the "mann" is not a typo... I figured I'd go back to our germanic roots and put on an extra "n" when talking about the masculine of the species and just one "n" when talking about all mankind I'm cool like that ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infinitelord1 Posted September 17, 2005 Author Share Posted September 17, 2005 [quote name='Aloysius' date='Sep 16 2005, 02:42 PM']God made man in his image. male and female He created them. the theology of the body talks alot about how this imagio dei is reflected in the conjugal act of marriage. it is not really correct to say He distributed His traits among us, He doesn't have such traits. but in His relationship to mankind He is the giver and mankind the receiver... relate this to the conjugal act and it is clear in God's dealings with Man he is the masculine sex of the marriage. also in regards to the Church being female, she is the bride of Christ. God deals with man as a mann deals with a woman He loves. Every mann and every woman each are made in the imagio dei. They reflect the Trinitarian God in the marriage act, but that doesn't mean individually they only have little 'parts' of God, in the sense of dispersed traits. man and wife reflect the Trinitarian God when love between them forms a third person (sexual procreation). a celibate priest reflects the Trinitarian God in marrying the Church and him and his bride having spiritual children in his congregation. but individually they all reflect the imagio dei individually. it is in some way analogous to the distinction and full deity of each of the three persons of the Trinity. God the Son is not a part of God, He is God. Man is not a reflection of part of God, a reflection of just His masculine or feminine traits, Man is a reflection of God. so a mann is a reflection of God not just the mascuiine traits of God and a woman is a reflection of God not just the femine traits of God. (disclaimer: the "mann" is not a typo... I figured I'd go back to our germanic roots and put on an extra "n" when talking about the masculine of the species and just one "n" when talking about all mankind I'm cool like that ) [right][snapback]725895[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Under the logic of "god is the giver" dont you think that falls under the traits of a man? The man is usually the provider.......or you could say giver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now