God described as a female
Where are places in the biblical text God is referred to as a female?
Comments
-
Never..... but he isn't male either. Do you mean the imagery of God as female?
Search "God WITHIN 5 Words feminine" gives many results like:
God Portrayed as MotherGod-language frames the infinite in human concepts and experiences. Describing God as having human form and characteristics is anthropomorphism. God speaks, has hands and feet, and sits on a throne.
With few exceptions, in the Hebrew Scriptures God language is masculine in gender. God is featured as an adult male. This is not accidental, but it is disconcerting in a modern society in which men and women call for equal rights and interchangeable or generic roles. Further, women (and men) who have been abused by men may become alienated from God by male characterizations of Deity. Even the term father can create fear, revulsion, and distancing, rather than conveying the intended solace, security, and affection.
God transcends gender. Unfortunately, however, neither Hebrew nor English has a singular, personal, inclusive pronoun by which to refer to God when the masculine metaphor is not intended.
In Hosea, God is variously pictured as a husband, a lover, the Holy One, the Most High, an offended parent—as well as a mother. Hosea challenges our exclusively male characterization of God. In the likeness of a mother, God carries the child through its infancy in the years of journeying through the wilderness. A mother affectionately and tenderly bonds with her infant by laying it against her cheek and bending forward to offer her breast to the nursing child (Hos. 11:4). The book of Hosea pictures God as a mother.
The feminine characterization of God also surfaces in the book of Isaiah. God, Israel’s Creator, embraces the function of both parents: as father, God begot Israel; as mother, God gave him birth (Isa. 45:10). When the child grew to adulthood, he turned against his divine parent in the worship of other gods. God expresses anguish over disobedient Israel in the agonizing cry of a woman in labor (42:14). God could never forget the erring son, Israel. Even if it were possible for a human mother to forget a child to whom she had given birth, it would remain impossible for God to forget the people Israel (49:15). Therefore, let Israel know that God will continue to offer a mother’s comfort by restoring the exiles to Jerusalem (66:12). Here the feminine characterization of God communicates depth of bonding, compassion, and nurture of a kind and to a degree which the “father” language and image does not convey.
Allen R. Guenther, Hosea, Amos, Believers Church Bible Commentary (Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1998), 184–185.0 -
If you have the Cultural Concepts Database you can search the Factbook for "God as mother".
0 -
Remember this verse in John 4:24 If God is either male or female how about the angels?
I know that all of you Greek scholars and other scholars could explain that God is masculine as far as grammar is concerned.
I would like to understand why this question comes up?
God Bless you all!!
0 -
Oh wow. This looks like a slippery slope. As a member of the literalist denomination, I always ask our smiling pastor exactly how he knows the Bible text is 'anthropomorphism'. Especially when the first chapter of Genesis is in the exact opposite direction ('made like'). And the jews were regarded by the greeks/romans as quite 'down to earth', to put it mildly.
Plus let's look at the evidence. Jesus, when presented the argument of which 'side' his disciples should sit on in heaven, obviously a 'side' wasn't at issue. It was 'which' side. Left or right. And Peter certainly located Jesus relative to God in what we'd call a 'physical way'. Stephen hopefully wasn't dreaming when he looked up into heaven and saw .... what? And Paul was reluctant to give up 'body'; it just didn't have to go to the doctor all the time.
Before someone gets wound up (ChristianDiscourse!!), I'm actually leading to another issue which merits a 'resource' ... in the OT, other males were assigned female roles/nature without too much bother. I've never heard Moses' gender being questioned. Plus if I remember right, even some of the Ugarit gods bounced around on role.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Denise said:
Oh wow. This looks like a slippery slope.
I hope not. I really dislike reading these kind of exchanges on the forum and I hope my quote above hasn't started it. Please don't start a debate.
Eugene, have you found an answer by the above responses?
0 -
I don't really have the time to read through it but I noticed that Logos' book The Early History of God has a section called:
Excursus: Gender Language for Yahweh.
0 -
I am sorry this has become a issue about gender. In my bible study last night I was trying to show God was God and not a he/she and was now gathering Scriptures to show the use of both genders for the one person who refused to see God as God but as a he. Thanks for your help
0 -
Actually, Stephen, your answer was spot-on (ignoring the periodic demands for a female pronoun/verb-form to accomodate imagery). The big bulk of God as female was in the 2-3rd century, before the bishops finally got a handle on the problem. Was reading an article on Nag Hammadi yesterday.
Eugene, not trying to 'start a debate' as Stephen worries about, but the issue you're struggling with, is trying to get the Scripture to support a common belief. Your friend in Bible class has the upper-hand in the discussion (since you qualified your question to 'the Bible').
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
I got this result, emphasis added.
[quote]
First, while it is true that the Bible uses masculine metaphorical language for naming God (though God is never literally male), it is also true that the Bible never employs feminine metaphorical language to name God. True, God is sometimes said to be or act in ways like a mother (or some other feminine image),10 but never is God called “Mother” as He is often called “Father.” Respect for God’s self-portrayal in Scripture requires that we respect this distinction. While we have every right (and responsibility) to employ feminine images as analogies to some aspects of God’s nature and ways, as is done often in Scripture itself, we are not permitted, by biblical precedence, to go further and to name God in ways He has not named Himself. He has named Himself “Father” but not “Mother.” This stubborn fact of scriptural revelation must itself restrain our talk of God.
Second, one might be tempted to dismiss the above “factual” point by appeal to the inherently patriarchal culture in which our biblical language of God was framed. But appeal to culture shows just how odd and even unique it is that Israel chose to use only masculine (and not feminine) language when naming God. The fact is that the most natural route Israel might have taken is to follow the lead of the nations surrounding her, which spoke with regularity and frequency of their deities as feminine.11 That Israel chose not to do this shows her resistance to follow natural and strong cultural pressures, and it indicates that she conceived of the true God, the God of Israel, as distinct from these false deities.
Bruce A. Ware, “Tampering with the Trinity: Does the Son Submit to His Father?,” in Biblical Foundations for Manhood and Womanhood, ed. Wayne Grudem, Foundations for the Family Series (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2002), 237–238.I tried to run a clause search of every time God is referenced in the OT in Analysis, so I could sort by the gender of the words referring to God, but the search has been going for 2 hours on this slow laptop. If this search ever finishes, I will verify the claims of Ware in the article.
Using Logos as a pastor, seminary professor, and Tyndale author
0 -
H.-J.van der Wal said:
If you have the Cultural Concepts Database you can search the Factbook for "God as mother".
Didn't know about that resource thanks for mentioning it [Y]
0 -
James Hiddle said:H.-J.van der Wal said:
If you have the Cultural Concepts Database you can search the Factbook for "God as mother".
Didn't know about that resource thanks for mentioning it
Thankfully God is neither male no female (yes God incarnated as the man Jesus) but ascribing sex to God is limiting in our human concepts. Calling God Father is a heritage that I value. But I remember a sermon spoken many years ago by the Dean of the Cathedral in Calgary. In that sermon he talked about a man who literally to could think of nothing but his abusive father, indeed everytime he said our father who art in heaven the memory of his father beating him and holding him face down in a toilet flooded his mind. For those of us who had good fathers God as Father is a wonderful image but for others it is a bad image. God is our loving source, since we believe God created everything, in our limited understanding it is natural for us to ascribe both male and female imagery to God, in the Patriarchal times when men were considered to be the sole contributor to creation of life planting seed in the fertile ground of woman. It was most natural to see the Creator God as male, the source of life, yet even in that culture as you see, there are passages the give a maternal description for God. I may not overly like referring to God as mother, but it is not unbiblical but perhaps continues to promote a wrong idea about God, that God has gender as we understand it.
-dan
0 -
James Hiddle said:H.-J.van der Wal said:
If you have the Cultural Concepts Database you can search the Factbook for "God as mother".
Didn't know about that resource thanks for mentioning it
The extremely small list of verses is interesting. There is nothing really conclusive there to support the idea of calling God mother. I got better results from an Everything search of "God AND gender" than from male or female. I also found an article in Themelios about it.
Using Logos as a pastor, seminary professor, and Tyndale author
0 -
I'm a novice but could it be that God is neither male or female? But as His created beings together (male and female) we represent God, in part. He has created both male and female and in creating us did He not do so in His image. God is whole, so He could not be part, therefore He must represent both male and female characteristics. Maybe that is why two can become one in marriage, we represent God more fully in marriage. Do we not all have one Father? And does He not want to gather all of us under His wings like a hen? Maybe that is just me, a silly laymen in the church.
0 -
StephenMcC said:Denise said:
Oh wow. This looks like a slippery slope.
I hope not. I really dislike reading these kind of exchanges on the forum and I hope my quote above hasn't started it. Please don't start a debate.
Don't start a debate?? Sorry, bud, but the second you said...
StephenMcC said:Never..... but he isn't male either.
...you started at least two debates. And simply assuming that it's all just an issue of "imagery" won't get you off the hook you already baited.
You see, your unrecognized personal assumptions lead you to assume you are simply transmitting indisputable facts, but there are actually at least a couple of reasons why that isn't the case. In other words, what is obvious and therefore simple to you isn't really--even if you are right, and I personally don't think you are. But that isn't the point.
My point is...I think you are misappropriating a lot of angst when you say that you "really dislike these kinds of exchanges on the forum". Here's an epiphany: THEY ARE IMPOSSIBLE TO AVOID. Think about it...the entire purpose of the software is to facilitate Biblical conversation. I'm fully aware of the websites "rules of conduct" and the reason why the rules are what they are. But in the battle of the anal retentives vs. the anal expulsives (if you don't like the terminology, blame Freud), neither one ever is, nor ever can be, "right". "Expulsion" is ontologically necessity, but it is also ontologically "messy". Messy can be a problem, a serious problem at times...but it also can't be avoided--just contained. Anal retentives like to avoid mess, and anal expulsives (like myself) don't mind a little mess here and there. It means things are happening, stuff is getting accomplished. The mess can get out of control, of course.
Again, my point here is that the rules of forum decorum aren't "right" in the clean, Pine Sol sort of way an anal retentive like yourself prefers to imagine, and constant referral to the compensatory rules can't negate the fact that they are in fact "compensating" for an inevitability. You, like "the Source" in the Matrix, may wish to alleviate your "matrix of perfection" of the inevitable messiness, but to do so is impossible--and to be quite plain, ultimately undesirable. The supposed cure is worse than the disease...and there is the unavoidable fact that Zion (if you are following the analogy) views your tendency as a disease in its own sight. To a point, that is an error as well.
Bob (whom I will refrain from labeling either AR or AE), almost miraculously sees all this, either by experience or temperamental default. His explanation of the EULA and his view of how it should be interpreted is that users "should be responsibly sensible"...a very pragmatic approach. As he said (my paraphrase), he generally views rules as an unpleasant necessity implemented with dependence upon generous doses of common sense, integrity, and equanimity. Effectively, I just described the Tohraah and its proper implementation. As a matter of creative ontology, of the two approaches, only anal expulsion is a legitimate form of existence. Nothing can survive total, perfect retention as a matter of principle. Everything, from bacteria to black holes, is designed to expel and cause mess...because the "mess", or the creation of it, is where the progress is.
So, even you, as a self-proclaimed AR (surprised?), even in the act of attempting to squelch AE activity, have inevitably created AE activity. YHWH, just as Denise suggested, explicitly affirms His male identity. All of the female descriptions, even the "self"-descriptions, are in clearly figurative contexts. That is my AE take, and I can defend it...but that's not my point. My point is that your AR declaration, assumed and perceived to be hypoallergenic, is a self-deception. The reality is you stepped in it and tracked all through the forum.
Now, as an anal expulsive, that doesn't bother me one bit...but if you could ever bring yourself to acknowledge the uncomfortable truth, it would probably result in self-loathing. That is where cognitive dissonance comes in. The best way to avoid the inevitable self-deception is to reject the validity of your natural inclination, which is to achieve "the perfect matrix" by policing or designing compliance to your way as a front-end ideal. That is historical sovietism. The solution? Just acknowledge, as even Neo had to, that "we need machines and machines need people."
YHWH says "do what I say or die". But He doesn't leave it there, poised under His jackboot. He has the expulsive temerity to then add, "See...I have set before you a choice," before eventually taking a prophesied 2000 year nap. How unsanitary!!! Whether Bob would agree with the theology or not, his business motivated acumen has generated the correct response. He used rules, in the EULA and the forum, to create a arena of "gray area" in which the game is designed to be played. The understanding is that the game can't be played perfectly or always within the lines, but the judgment is not one predicated on perfection but rather on the willingness and discipline to stay in the yard even though there is no chain on the collar. Where is the certainty in that? That...surprise, surprise!...is the beauty. There is no certainty...just willingness and desire to choose wisely. In other words, self-discipline, guided by the white law that creates the gray play space.
Jews have rejected the gray play space as not white enough, and have painted all manner of black space white. Christians have paraphrased the monk child, saying, "Don't attempt to play in the gray matrix...that is impossible. Only understand the truth: there is no matrix." If YHWH was awake, there would an enormous number of knuckles getting whacked with a wooden "spoon".
To sum up, it is an ontological essence that mess happen. Our job isn't to make sure it doesn't happen at all costs, and it especially isn't our job to take measures to keep it from happening under any circumstance. Stay in the gray. If you understood the Biblical analogy, you won't be scandalized by it. If you are scandalized, you might be a Christian. [:O]
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
Who plugged a nickel into David Paul? [:)]
0 -
LOL, Stephen did...what an odd thing for an upstanding AR to do!!
Btw, being the card-carrying AE I am, I repeat what I said after my last "nickel's worth". If you read this already, you may want to go back and give it another go.
I had some "mess" to clean up.
(Amazing the difference a couple of commas can make!)
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
Justin Gatlin said:James Hiddle said:H.-J.van der Wal said:
If you have the Cultural Concepts Database you can search the Factbook for "God as mother".
Didn't know about that resource thanks for mentioning it
The extremely small list of verses is interesting. There is nothing really conclusive there to support the idea of calling God mother. I got better results from an Everything search of "God AND gender" than from male or female. I also found an article in Themelios about it.
Sounds interesting I'll have to get that Themelios journal to read that article thanks.
0 -
My thoughts also. [:D]Gao Lu said:Who plugged a nickel into David Paul?
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
There's also a song by five finger death punch where they describe God as a female. The song is called "the wrong side of heaven and the righteous side of hell." It's about the fall of humanity. But like others have stated God is neither male nor female he is spirit. The male and female imagery it's only used to illustrate concepts In order to make it easy for us to understand or at least try to understand God.
DAL
0 -
Justin Gatlin said:James Hiddle said:H.-J.van der Wal said:
If you have the Cultural Concepts Database you can search the Factbook for "God as mother".
Didn't know about that resource thanks for mentioning it
The extremely small list of verses is interesting. There is nothing really conclusive there to support the idea of calling God mother. I got better results from an Everything search of "God AND gender" than from male or female. I also found an article in Themelios about it.
Factbook has a suggested search:
Proximity search excludes results from "God AND gender" that are 12 or more words apart:
God WITHIN 11 WORDS gender
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
How do you find the hyperlink to the Logos reference that you posted above?
0 -
I'd been staying out of this but you might be interested in the Shekinah as the feminine side of God.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Rayner said:
How do you find the hyperlink to the Logos reference that you posted above?
In the Factbook panel, click the icon at the top left and then select "Copy location as URL"
0 -
DAL said:
But like others have stated God is neither male nor female he is spirit.
...but, but...
**read the sign, David, read the SIGN**
Slippery When All Wet
*sigh*
Denise, have you got an extra pair of pitons I could borrow?
DAL said:The male and female imagery it's only used to illustrate concepts In order to make it easy for us to understand or at least try to understand God.
Yes, because as we all know, YHWH is just not quite up to the task of being able to get His creation to comprehend what He's like in reality. That is just a bridge too far. Sure, it seemed like He had a decent grasp on the whole omnipotence thing, and that nothing was even remotely hard for him, but for all we know, in this pitiful, frail, dirt mind we got saddled with from out of nowhere and is otherwise only just created in His image, that "all-powerful" idea may have been a figment of our own inability to comprehend His true nature. Since we can't really trust His explicit statements to us due to our clayish incapacity, He has to resort to hints and shadowy figures--not because He wants to...it's because He has to, don'tcha know.That's simply the best He can do for us and the most He can help us to do for ourselves. Poor YHWH...how disappointing this cavernous distance must be to Him. If only He had the same unlimited power his pathetic creatures all constantly attribute to Him, except for this one, most import point of all. [:(]
**Uh, David...the SIGN!!!**
Oh, snap!
[:#]
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
Graham Criddle said:Rayner said:
How do you find the hyperlink to the Logos reference that you posted above?
In the Factbook panel, click the icon at the top left and then select "Copy location as URL"
Thank you. In that case, I will suggest the following resources as of some use:
IVP Dictionary of the Old Testament: Prophets
Eve: Accused or Acquitted? (Joseph Abraham)
0 -
MJ. Smith said:
I'd been staying out of this but you might be interested in the Shekinah as the feminine side of God.
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
The "Shekinah" is a post-biblical term frequently used in rabbinic literature to denote the divine presence on earth. In its fullest development in late midrashic literature, the Shekinah represented an independent entity, God’s feminine alter ego, who could, and did, confront her male counterpart and argue with him on behalf of man. She was thus by function and position tantamount to a goddess, as Patai aptly indicated in the title of his study, the fourth chapter of which (pp. 137–156) deals with the origin and development of the concept. The present summary is, perforce, limited to essential points.
The concept of the Shekinah developed as a part of the process of hypostatisation or personification of divine qualities or aspects, a subject which has been treated at length by H. Ringgren (1947).
Pope, Marvin H. Song of Songs: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Vol. 7C. Anchor Yale Bible. New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2008.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Oooooh, shekinah as a post-Biblical term. Us targumites would draw great offense. Maybe even a 'debate'. Just yesterday, a Logos writer had pushed a targum back before the OT apocrypha. And then there's Qumran. Just having fun.
But David's need for a piton is unfortunate. I had expected DAL to go with a plain-text reading (which wouldn't argue yea or nea). It was the gnostics that grabbed the spirit and sophia (not to mention help from the shekinah), and off they went. Plain-text is the only thing that prevents a slippery slope (a key creedal statement in the literalist denomination).
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Good evening, God bless you all:
John 4:3, 1 Peter 2:4, 1 Peter 2:5.
Somebody once said never to underestimate how terrestrial we are, and how that makes us so anthropocentric in our conceptions.
The above verses make me wonder, maybe we have not got the slightest clue of what life will be like in heaven, and yet, here
we are thinking in gender terms just like the Sadducees.
Maybe when we get to heaven, we will be in for a big surprise, with respect to the nature of the glorified bodies and that of the other beings there.
I look forward to a life where gender and ethnicity are no longer of importance, but only to enjoy the radiance of God's Glory fully in Godly love.
Just a different perspective proposed, blessings.
0 -
Sorry the first verse was Revelation 4:3
blessings.
0 -
One thing you might try is to catalog the uses of male and female language and imagery. So, for instance, how many occurrences of male personal pronouns referring to God, how many occurrences of female personal pronouns referring to God, how many male images used to refer God's actions ("like a father unto you"), how many female images referring to God's actions ("like a hen gathering her chicks), etc. You might also break the images down based on where they appear and how they're used (e.g., in poetry, as a metaphor in a prose passage, etc.). Without trying to prejudge, understanding the way in which each type of language is used, and how often it is used, would seem relevant to understanding how God chooses to reveal God to us.
0 -
Good evening, God bless you all:
Very good methodology EastTN, thanks for sharing.
Blessings.
0 -
If we prove too much, we prove too little. Paul also compares himself to a mother, so any argumentation must not also work if applied to Paul, who remained distinctly male.
Using Logos as a pastor, seminary professor, and Tyndale author
0 -
Maybe 7-8 years ago, if you ran a Google search on "Moses nurse", you'd find lengthy discussions on exactly what Moses' role was (of course Moses himself had the same question).
But today if you do the same query, then you get a fairly decent Bible search. I'd assume they've tinkered around to make the google searches more religion responsive.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0
