A civil debate forum for people of all persuasions (Atheists, Agnostics, Deists, Christians, and adherents of any religion)


Reply to topic
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 1: Thu Mar 28, 2019 9:05 am
Reply
Masculine and Feminine

Like this post
I'm beginning to explore some thoughts on this. Obviously there are biological differences, even though the biology can get a bit blurred from male/female for some. Do you think there are masculine characteristics versus feminine characteristics? Is that more of a social construct? I'm pretty open to where this discussion goes. Any thoughts?

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 2: Thu Mar 28, 2019 5:22 pm
Reply

Like this post
If our biology is in the image of GOD then why is it evil when uncovered? It was called naked (the same word used to describe the crafty evil of Satan in the next verse) but they only 'saw' their bodies were evil once they ate and became sinners???

No their bodies were not evil and when their eyes were opened to their sin and they became ashamed over their nakedness, it was not their naked bodies that shamed them but their nakedness before GOD, unclothed by the fine linen of the righteous, which sin they had before they ate.

Before they ate - naked.
After they ate - naked.

Eating did not make them naked or change it in any way; it just opened their eyes to their nakedness / sinfulness that they did not think was sinful so that they saw their sin and were ashamed.

So, I do not think our biology is in the image of GOD. GOD is spirit and so are we, spirit persons, that is, people GOD can relate to and commune with and even marry in a way that is ludicrous to think could apply to a non-person.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 3: Thu Mar 28, 2019 6:56 pm
Reply

Like this post
[Replying to post 2 by ttruscott]

I was not saying that our biology was a part of the image of God that we received. I think God is a sexless Spirit. We seem agreed there, but do you still think there are "masculine" and "feminine" characteristics, where men get a different image of God (in some ways, at least) then the image of God that women get?

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 4: Mon Apr 29, 2019 2:11 pm
Reply

Like this post
Hello Tanger

You raise a good question: Firstly we all (Man and Woman) begin as exactly similar to females with slight differences that are indistinguishable. Man and Woman are Made similar like a blank canvas according to the properties of the parent genome passing down their native traits.

For example women are usually weaker and remain with less strength in their muscles needing to exercise more, running further and faster to gain muscle. A difference between men and women where women need to work harder to build muscle, men can simply grow into muscle without any work. Strength is identified and considered masculine trait, brawn or muscle mass. Over time we Boy and Girl grow away from and toward godliness exactly how we also the same grow away and toward into our sex. During puberty hormones certainly interact with our body to make us into men or women. Socially our treatment from others define our identification with our sex due to our physicality. This leads to a personality change moving away and distinguishing our sex, men don't perceive weakness as much as women as they haven't experienced physical weakness.

Weakness can allow someone man or woman to understand the art of delicacy socially and increasing empathy which builds our character. While women using more social intelligence to persuade other people with words being better at communicating feelings, which is considered a feminine trait. Rather than being brutish and single minded like men using their physical dominance to push others into cooperation. I am not saying women are weaker they merely need to put more effort into making muscle a defining factor in the sexes. Like an obese person (female) needs to work harder while their exercising and eating less food. Rather than a body-builder (male) who needs more food and less amount of exercise.

Therefore in my opinion a social consequence a female receives less food at the table and finds it harder to put on muscle, but easier to maintain their body. Otherwise if she received the same share as a growing boy her metabolism would store much more fat as she needs less energy to maintain her shape.

Question

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 5: Wed May 01, 2019 9:19 am
Reply

Like this post
Hello avalon! I would agree that those connections are generally true. Males are often seen as the "stronger" sex, but there are plenty of women who exhibit physical strength, not to mention other kinds of strength. And, therefore, I would not say "strength," even if limited to physical strength is really a masculine trait. I would say it is more generally true of men than women, but not strictly masculine. I would say the same thing about something like empathy. It is more generally true of women, and perhaps even easier for them, but I still wouldn't say that it is a feminine trait, per se. I think we can make general statements about male and female, what each sex is like, on average, but that there don't seem to genuinely be masculine and feminine traits.

One reason I've been exploring this is in another discussion on the image of God. Some non-Christians were talking about there being a masculine image and a feminine image, their belief that God has both images, and that traditional Christianity sees God through the masculine image alone, or at least, primarily through that image. I am not sure it is as clear cut as that.

I have also wanted to explore more why God chose to reveal Himself in more masculine terms. Is it just a feature of the societies He revealed Himself to, or is there something about calling God a Father rather than a Mother. If there is no strict masculine/feminine split then, perhaps, God still had a reason in inspiring masculine language to be used more often, relating perhaps to the idea of a male being the head of the household and God being our authority. Now, exactly what it means for a male to be the head of the household has different interpretations as well. Like I said, I need to reflect and discuss this more and am open to wherever the thread can go.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Display posts from previous:   


Jump to:  
Facebook
Tweet

 




On The Web | Ecodia | Hymn Lyrics Apps
Facebook | Twitter

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.   Produced by Ecodia.

Igloo   |  Lo-Fi Version