Why does God have a gender?

[nobspeople]

The bible speaks of God as a 'he' or 'him'.
Is it possible that's not true? Is it possible God is an 'it' more than a 'he' or even a 'she'?

If God is not a 'he', would that change how you think of 'him'?
Would it change anything about 'his' story?

I've seen some believers see this concept as offensive. Are you one of those people that are offended if God is spoken about as a 'it' or 'she'?

[William]

[Replying to Miles in post #207]

I am not sure what you are trying to point out with these statistics re thread subject. ...will you elaborate

Because in answer to my comment " . . . that's the nature of a Do It Yourself religion like Christianity, which has fostered 200+ denomination in the USA alone," you said "All religions are 'do it yourself' in that regard," which prompted me to point out that all religions are not "do it yourself" in that regard. That most are far, far less fractured. For which I gave the number of factions of the world's other major religions as best as I could determine.


.

The "far less fractioned" do not in themselve negate my saying "all religions are made up" unless you saying "do it yourself" is meant to mean something else

[Miles]

[Replying to Miles in post #207]

I am not sure what you are trying to point out with these statistics re thread subject. ...will you elaborate

Because in answer to my comment " . . . that's the nature of a Do It Yourself religion like Christianity, which has fostered 200+ denomination in the USA alone," you said "All religions are 'do it yourself' in that regard," which prompted me to point out that all religions are not "do it yourself" in that regard. That most are far, far less fractured. For which I gave the number of factions of the world's other major religions as best as I could determine.


.

The "far less fractioned" do not in themselve negate my saying "all religions are made up" unless you saying "do it yourself" is meant to mean something else

Your "in that regard" certainly does.


.

[bjs1]

If any god does exist I reckon it would be genderless. The writers who created the documents making up the Bible were born in the days when men were thought to be the superior gender!

That seems to be the consensus among most, today. I wonder if it would be the same, say, 500 years ago?
Meaning, maybe society changes the POV those living in it at the time?

In “Salvation to the Rich Man,” Clement, the bishop of Alexandria who lived around 150-215 A.D., wrote, “In his ineffable essence he is father; in his compassion to us he became mother. The father by loving becomes feminine.”

The mother image was common among the church fathers. It was explicitly stated by Gregory, of Nyssa and Augustine of Hippo. So the idea in Christianity that God transcends Gender is not uniquely modern.

[The Tanager]

Yes. Focusing their intent upon outward images of The Creator on a throne.

You claim you were not being literal regarding falling on your face before The Creator sitting on a throne, when you begin your next phase reality experience. .. might I suggest that in future you spare us the time otherwise wasted by saying as much from the go get.

So there is no literal image or beacon [like a lighthouse] to remind you of The Creators eternal presence. You were being figurative?

Yes, I was being figurative. I will try to be more clear about that in the future.

Maybe the "supposed truth" the image of The Creator represents is also not to be taken literally.

For example, examining the Beloved John's experience [Revelations] one could understand that recorded event as being specific to that individuals personal expectations [LITERALLY] but rather, something we need take as figatitive.

Even if it was his literal experience, it has a lot of figurative elements.

While imagery can assist one in pointing to The Creator [even real experienced imagery re my argument as the Earth being a living self conscious entity and quite The Creator for that -if the shoe fits] these are best not taken literally. For there really are no images of The Creator which can be taken literally.

I agree.

There is no point in assuming an atheist position of argument as in a Soul Retriever showing their self to you. One already has done so for the specific purpose of setting up the next phase of operation.

But why not speed up the process by showing me things that will help bypass the current next stage I'm on a collision course with?

[William]

[Replying to The Tanager in post #215]

If you are on a collision course with the next phase, you have all the power to design it now so that it won't turn into a train wreak.

Besides which, haven't you already said that it would be what you want it to be. Pretty much a lovely place to stay forever of your own free will?

Or were you being figurative with that as well?

And I agree that John had a literal experience. It was real for him in that regard but everything was figurative within that experience. He of course placed meaning to the figurative which aligned with his beliefs.

From that, many Christians expect that this too is what they will literally experience, [The Creator being seated on a throne and worshipped...]They too will need retrieving eventually...

[William]

If any god does exist I reckon it would be genderless. The writers who created the documents making up the Bible were born in the days when men were thought to be the superior gender!

That seems to be the consensus among most, today. I wonder if it would be the same, say, 500 years ago?
Meaning, maybe society changes the POV those living in it at the time?

In “Salvation to the Rich Man,” Clement, the bishop of Alexandria who lived around 150-215 A.D., wrote, “In his ineffable essence he is father; in his compassion to us he became mother. The father by loving becomes feminine.”

The mother image was common among the church fathers. It was explicitly stated by Gregory, of Nyssa and Augustine of Hippo. So the idea in Christianity that God transcends Gender is not uniquely modern.

This touches upon the idea that The Creator Consciousness takes on the imagery of form for specific purpose. In Chirstian terms, The Masuline in regard to keeping the law and the feminine in regard to mercy. [FORGIVE THEM THEY KNOW NOT WHAT THEY DO]

The masculine shoots first and to hell with the questioning while the feminine says let's examine the facts in detail and find better solution.

Etc...

[The Tanager]

If you are on a collision course with the next phase, you have all the power to design it now so that it won't turn into a train wreak.

Besides which, haven't you already said that it would be what you want it to be. Pretty much a lovely place to stay forever of your own free will?

Or were you being figurative with that as well?

Yes, I think it will literally be a rapturous place to stay forever of my own free will. But if it's just a phase I'll move past because it is lacking, then I don't want it at all. A loving Soul Retriever, it seems, would therefore show me now what I need to skip over that, if any such showing could be done. If all that can be done is to plant this seed to be revisited upon in that next phase, then I understand a Soul Retriever showing me nothing else. But if that is all that could be done, then how have you been shown its truth already? And what got you there? Visions? Logic? What?

[William]

If you are on a collision course with the next phase, you have all the power to design it now so that it won't turn into a train wreak.

Besides which, haven't you already said that it would be what you want it to be. Pretty much a lovely place to stay forever of your own free will?

Or were you being figurative with that as well?

Yes, I think it will literally be a rapturous place to stay forever of my own free will.

Yes - that was the impression I got from your brief description.

But if it's just a phase I'll move past because it is lacking, then I don't want it at all.

Why not? Is it because of what I call "The Jonah Effect" [Jonah Chapter 4] Whereby Jonah was angry at the way things turned out because it wasn't the way he expected...

A loving Soul Retriever, it seems, would therefore show me now what I need to skip over that, if any such showing could be done.

All SR are loving. And yes. If one wants to be shown one need only ask sincerely. The difficulty therein for the SR is working with you to peel away your beliefs regarding what you will experience in the next phase.

If all that can be done is to plant this seed to be revisited upon in that next phase, then I understand a Soul Retriever showing me nothing else.

Essentially a SR [Jesus] was injected into this reality to plant the seeds. What you derive from that information is what has built your expectations on the next phase.
If those expectations are not something that you want to experience if they are lacking, you are not going to know about it until an SR tells you about it. If that were to happen and you argue that you are happy where you are and don't want to be shown anything else...then you will be left to your reality experience until it is decided that another visit might yield better results.

But if that is all that could be done, then how have you been shown its truth already? And what got you there? Visions? Logic? What?

I have been shown through at least 40 years of continued study which includes experience in alternate reality, the understanding of serendipity and synchronicity which The Creator opened my eyes to, prayer being answered, communion with The Creator etc... Logic does have much to do with it. But I would say that it was my choices which ultimately lead me to this point and so it is a matter of what the individual chooses as to determining outcomes.

[The Tanager]

But if it's just a phase I'll move past because it is lacking, then I don't want it at all.

Why not? Is it because of what I call "The Jonah Effect" [Jonah Chapter 4] Whereby Jonah was angry at the way things turned out because it wasn't the way he expected...

Whatever comes after I learn the lesson, it will be better, right? I'll have progressed. Well, why not learn it now?

All SR are loving. And yes. If one wants to be shown one need only ask sincerely. The difficulty therein for the SR is working with you to peel away your beliefs regarding what you will experience in the next phase.

Love chooses good over difficulty.

I have been shown through at least 40 years of continued study which includes experience in alternate reality, the understanding of serendipity and synchronicity which The Creator opened my eyes to, prayer being answered, communion with The Creator etc... Logic does have much to do with it. But I would say that it was my choices which ultimately lead me to this point and so it is a matter of what the individual chooses as to determining outcomes.

In your estimation, is there anything more you can show me in any form (logic works especially well with me, though) to point me to making different choices?

[William]

But if it's just a phase I'll move past because it is lacking, then I don't want it at all.

Why not? Is it because of what I call "The Jonah Effect" [Jonah Chapter 4] Whereby Jonah was angry at the way things turned out because it wasn't the way he expected...

Whatever comes after I learn the lesson, it will be better, right? I'll have progressed. Well, why not learn it now?

That is entirely up to you then, yes? An SR can show you the door to this life, but it is still you who will have to open it.

All SR are loving. And yes. If one wants to be shown one need only ask sincerely. The difficulty therein for the SR is working with you to peel away your beliefs regarding what you will experience in the next phase.

Love chooses good over difficulty.

Difficulty is simple acknowledged - and it is a two-way interaction J. Your free will is not encroached upon, so change is not something which can be forced upon you to have to accept. Love chooses to allow while being in a state of always being there to assist should one decide for change. Therefor "If one wants to be shown one need only ask sincerely." The "difficulty" mentioned has to do with what the SR is up against re what you are already convinced that you will experience in the next phase...

I have been shown through at least 40 years of continued study which includes experience in alternate reality, the understanding of serendipity and synchronicity which The Creator opened my eyes to, prayer being answered, communion with The Creator etc... Logic does have much to do with it. But I would say that it was my choices which ultimately lead me to this point and so it is a matter of what the individual chooses as to determining outcomes.

In your estimation, is there anything more you can show me in any form (logic works especially well with me, though) to point me to making different choices?

If you believe now that what you are going to experience is all that you will require for eternity, then logically no one can convince you otherwise.
If you have reservations regarding those beliefs you have - such as your mention that you would not like to experience something that wasn't the real deal [so to speak] then this might be a crack in which an SR could utilize to assist you.

What is the logic behind your current beliefs regarding afterlife experience?