Is it possible that God is neither man nor woman?

1. 66

   maddotposted 11 years ago

   Is it possible that God is neither man nor woman?

   replyreport
2. 0

   JThomp42posted 11 years ago

   The Bible says in Genesis that God made Adam ( Man) in his own Image. Then God made Eve from Adam's rib. Man was put on this earth first, Then God made Eve.

   replyreport
   1. 75

      lone77starposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      God man "man" in His own image, but God is not Homo sapiens. God made Adam later. And Adam of the Garden was not Adam of Earth. See Genesis 5:2 for clarification.

      replyreport
   2. 0

      JThomp42posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Read Genesis 1:26-27  Notice the word "He."

      replyreport
   3. 0

      Charles Hiltonposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      It is erroneous to take the book of Genesis literally. Even the Church regards the creation story as allegory.
      And dismissing allegory puts God in a literalist straight-jacket and deprives believers of valuable insights.

      replyreport
   4. 0

      JThomp42posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      What Church Charles?

      replyreport
   5. 0

      Charles Hiltonposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      There is only one unified Christian Church that I would Capitalize---the original Christian Church; the Catholic Church.

      replyreport
   6. 0

      JThomp42posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Understand now. So you are reading fro the Catholic Bible?

      replyreport
   7. 0

      Charles Hiltonposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The only difference between the Catholic Bible and the Protestant Bible is that the then self-appointed Protestant Pope, Martin Luther, disapproved of certain books and had them removed. Other than the Apocrypha, they're both the same.

      replyreport
   8. 0

      JThomp42posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I've never read the Catholic Bible, What about purgatory and other things that are not in the King James Version?

      replyreport
3. 0

   Charles Hiltonposted 11 years ago

   From the Judeo-Christian perspective, Jesus said that God is a spirit and that "...they who worship him must worship him in Spirit and in truth."
   Also, it states in the Bible that "...in Heaven, there is neither marrying nor giving in marriage."
   Yet, in the book of Genesis, it tells the story of angels mating with women and having children by them, which is why the Bible is an unreliable source for this question.
   If Heavenly beings are non-physical, how can they have reproductive organs?
   And if God created the sexes, how then, can he be of any one gender?
   If there is a God(and I have my doubts), IT most certainly is neither.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      arbitrarycurlsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Where in Genesis is there mention of angels mating with humans? The bible states that angels are only set in motion when they are doing God's work, psalm 103:20, 1 peter 1:12, 1 peter 3:22, 2 peter 2:11

      replyreport
   2. 0

      Charles Hiltonposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Genesis 6:2 - 6:4 is one of the most enigmatic passages in the Bible, that mentions the "sons of God" mating with the "daughters of men" and having children by them who were giants, aka Nephilim.
      Also, see Num.13:32-33 and the Book of Enoch.

      replyreport
   3. 59

      arbitrarycurlsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Thank you for providing the scriptures, but there are no mention of angels in either of those passages; they both mention giants, but giants aren't angels and the sons of God are men. Gen 6:1-7 tells of that.

      replyreport
   4. 0

      Charles Hiltonposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Some translations read 'giants' others read 'Nephilim', which were fallen angels. The Septuagint and Codex Vaticanus used the word 'Angels' for that passage. Medieval Jews edited 'angels' out.

      replyreport
   5. 59

      arbitrarycurlsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I have searched and have only come across the words giants or nephilim with the annotation that defines it as a giant. The bible is really good at explaining itself and when it wants to say that someone is a spirit, has a spirit, is an angel, it does

      replyreport
   6. 0

      Charles Hiltonposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Actually, the Bible is very ambiguous in places, and the story of the Nephilim is just one example. Why would it say "the daughters of men," but, not "the sons of men"? And how would mere mortals produce giants?

      replyreport
   7. 59

      arbitrarycurlsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      There is some ambiguity in the bible, but that 'open for interpretation' mindset dissipates the more you study it and get to know the word. God doesn't change and his desires for our lives will never change. Heb 13:8. Gal 3:26 for "sons of God"

      replyreport
   8. 0

      Charles Hiltonposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Actually, I have studied it---extensively. I'm a former fundamentalist Baptist; now lapsed Catholic who no longer believes the Bible to be God's word just because it claims to be. Any book can make that claim and many do.

      replyreport
   9. 59

      arbitrarycurlsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I'd call Robert Wadlow & John Rogan giants. Mortals also produce little people. No other book has statistically stood up to the Bible in terms of things that it claims and proof that it happened. 2 Timothy 3:16-17. What do you think is God's word

      replyreport
   10. 0

       Charles Hiltonposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       You can't claim a book to be perfect just because it claims itself to be; and cherry-picked quotes from said book are NOT proof of its infallibility.
       As for proofs and claims, the Bible fails miserably, as do all religious texts.

       replyreport
   11. 59

       arbitrarycurlsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       This is why I asked what you believe is God's word. Because if that scripture says it is and you disagree, you must have another source you rely on. And while studying the Bible, were you applying what it said to your life? Doing what it said?

       replyreport
   12. 0

       Charles Hiltonposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       If there is 'God's' word, it is nature. Indigenous peoples saw God all around them and they learned about God from creation. Anything more leads to abuse. Humans existed long before civilizations and books. What was 'God's word' then?

       replyreport
   13. 72

       Darrell Robertsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I agree with Charles the Bible is a bit ambiguous in some instances.  I also agree that the "Sons of God" were the angels.  I use to study the Bible diligently until I found the Bhagavad-Gita. I hope you both get a chance to read the Gita.

       replyreport
   14. 59

       arbitrarycurlsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       The people in the Bible didn't read a book to know God, he physically walked, talked, provided for them. I agree that nature is an excellent example of God. Even the way the human body works.                      Darrell Roberts, what's the gita?

       replyreport
4. 75

   lone77starposted 11 years ago

   Yes!
   
   God is neither man nor woman. God is a non-physical, spiritual and immortal source of creation. God created "man" in His own image and likeness, but God is not Homo sapiens. Therefore, we are inherently non-physical, spiritual and immortal sources of creation.
   
   We don't act like children of God, because we've turned away from God. We rely on physical continuity (money in the bank, property and more), rather than faith in the Father. Effectively, we've stopped being children of God and have become a cog in physical reality called "ego" -- the source of selfishness and ignorance.
   
   The Jews have been a patriarchal society, thus to them God is "Father." In matriarchal societies, God would be "Mother."
   
   But the Ten Commandments warn us against graven images, because God is not physical. We should never depend upon physical things for our spiritual growth. Depending upon the physical was what got us in trouble to begin with.
   
   Genesis is full of symbolism and metaphor. The Garden was a spiritual place -- not physical. Adam after the Garden was both male and female and a "them" (see Genesis 5:2).
   
   Man was created twice: Genesis 1:26 in the image of God; and Genesis 2:7 from the dust of the ground. The two are not the same. Man is immortal spirit wrapped in Homo sapiens flesh.
   
   And Genesis 6:3 adds to the clarification on our dual nature by saying that man is "also" flesh. If man is also flesh, then he is something else, too. That something else was created in the image and likeness of God -- the non-physical, spiritual and immortal source of creation.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      ElleBeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      This answer sums up pretty much everything I was going to say.  Great answer from the Judeo-Christian perspective.

      replyreport
   2. 72

      Darrell Robertsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      You really read your Bible. I met many people who did not pick up on that there were two creations of man.  I agree with ElleBee, well answered from a Biblical perspective.

      replyreport
5. 85

   Cristaleposted 11 years ago

   God is what you believe and if you believe that God is neither a man or a woman, then that is the truth for you. God is a spirit but we are also made in his image.

   replyreport
6. 38

   edhanposted 11 years ago

   God is is formless. This means God is in spiritual status.
   
   It is like the formless Qi energy that takes no shape. It is floating in the air and travel in light speed. We take God as a human form so that when people pray, there is an image of them to visualize.

   replyreport
7. 75

   Fuller-Lifeposted 11 years ago

   Not only is it possible, it is most likely. If Jesus is part of the Godhead (or trinity) and the three are in one, then God is male. But if the trinity exists in three separate entities, then one would argue that perhaps the Holy Spirit might be female - since most feminine attributes such as comforter and counselor are seen with the Holy Spirit. The Father is certainly more masculine in His description.
   
   But, what's the point of trying to "gender-lize" God? Is it because we have a problem with the interpretation of gender roles and we think one gender is superior over the other? Does it make God weaker if he is seen as female? Since the Bible describes women as weaker vessels.
   
   God is a spirit, but does not only exist in the spiritual realm. He also manifests himself physically by taking on many forms, including, I believe, showing up as a woman. We can do ourselves a favor by sticking to what the Bible says. He is father, therefore, MALE. Yet capable of embracing every attribute including that of a mother.
   
   It brings to mind the idea that God can be one of us, at any time, if he chose to show up, and walk among us. Remember that He walked among us...

   replyreport
8. 72

   Darrell Robertsposted 11 years ago

   It is possible for God to be "Man" it is possible for God to be "Woman" it is possible for God to be non "human".  Anything is possible.

   replyreport
9. 58

   movielardatadareposted 11 years ago

   God is a male Entity.  How do I know this?  Well, the Bible says God is a "He."

   replyreport
   1. 66

      maddotposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Who wrote the Bible?

      replyreport
10. 59

    arbitrarycurlsposted 11 years ago

    God is not a man but he is a male. He's not human, he's an entity.

    replyreport
11. 60

    siriflyposted 11 years ago

    God is simply whatever you want to believe.

    replyreport
    1. 63

       Claudia Marieposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       The Bible is written with the use of anthropomorphism - ascribing human form or attributes to a nonhuman thing or being. This is done to help us understand God. God is a spirit John 4:24

       replyreport
12. 52

    janpolelengposted 11 years ago

    GOD is indeed a man.
    Ask the authority when it comes to bible. He is the most sensible preacher.
    http://esoriano.wordpress.com/
    
    www.twitter.com/broelisoriano

    replyreport
    1. 58

       movielardatadareposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       He is most definitely a male entity.

       replyreport
13. 0

    danielabramposted 11 years ago

    God is whatever you believe God to be. This could be a man or a woman or neither.

    replyreport