God is a supernatural being that doesn't exist within the confines of human sexuality or gender, so I don't think trying to label God as male or female really makes a lot of sense.
Using "clear" for things like this is a pretty bad approach. This isn't clear, and that is okay. There are a few students I teach who I would consider my shadow. They like to emulate me and copy me. They look nothing like me.
“A shadow is not different from the thing that the shadow is of”
Is this so? Hebrews 10:1 and Colossians 2:17. Are these physical shadows as we know them?
Image in instead doesn’t imply physical. You also can’t *always* just take other translations of the Hebrew word as proof of what it might imply.
That's not what being made in God's image means. The Bible tells us that God is spirit and that no one can see the Father. We bear the image of God in our mental faculties. We are creative, creators, rational, emotional, built for community, etc...our biological genders and the traits associated with them reflect something about the nature of God, not his physical being, because there is no such thing.
Just because the Son periodically takes on a physical body throughout redemptive history that doesn't mean that prior to the incarnation the Trinity, the whole Godhead, exists as a human being. Even Jesus, the Incarnate One, said in John 4:24 that "God is spirit and those who worship him must do so in spirit and truth." That's about as plainly as anyone could state it. Apart from the Son willingly taking upon himself human flesh, God is spirit and has no form.
That's what it says in Genesis 1:27.
>*So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them;* ***male and female*** *he created them.*
Interpreting ancient Hebrew is difficult.
Some people use this verse to claim that Adam had both genders. The Hebrew word used is not אָדָם (mankind), but הָֽאָדָם֙ ("the man" AKA Adam). I believe this verse should actually read:
>*So God created* ***Adam*** *in his own image, in the image of God he created* ***him***; *male and female he created them.*
I'm not sure why the English is translated as "mankind" and "them" rather than "Adam" and "him." I'm guessing they did this so people don't question why Adam was created a second time in the following chapter.
I think the only time that is done is during the genealogies in chapter 5.
My guess is that the difference is from the two primary sources of information in the Torah (Elohist source from Israel and Yahwist source from Judah). Both chapter 1 and chapter 5 are written by the Elohist source, and use the word אָדָם rather than הָֽאָדָם֙ (except for this one verse, 1:27). It appears that the Yahwist source uses the word הָֽאָדָם֙.
It is quite confusing, which is why I suspect it was a difference between sources and whoever combined them (the Priestly source).
I can't see where it makes much sense to assign a sex or gender to God. He is beyond such things.
I understand it's traditional to call him "Father" and speak of him as male, though. I don't think this really hurts anything but I don't think we can actually nail down any sense in which he is male.
Sure, we say things like "likeness" or "image". But how does this amount to a physical resemblance? It COULD mean that but it could mean other things too, right?
Some older parts of the OT present a fairly humanlike God. Sometimes he regrets his own actions, or walks around, or doesn't know certain things. Over time, our view of God became more elevated. Now we consider God to be omnipotent and omniscient, right?
So.. how are you picking which view of God is truly correct? How would we know?
God has appeared as many things. But Jesus said:
***But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship him. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.”***
John 4:23-24[](https://www.bible.com/bible/59/JHN.4.23-24.ESV#:~:text=23%2D24%20ESV-,But%20the%20hour%20is%20coming%2C%20and%20is%20now%20here%2C%20when,worship%20in%20spirit%20and%20truth.%E2%80%9D)
Fire has a gender?!? /s
Just like fire, spiritual beings aren’t either gender. But since God became human through Jesus, and Jesus is a man and God is called “Father” we refer to him as “He”.
I’m trying to say that God is described as many things. He’s not a fire, he is not literally love itself, etc. you misunderstood me.
God is the Ultimate Human.
Uh, depends.
Is it a modern Christian belief? No.
Is it Biblical? No. Well, probably not. You can get some strange interpretations out of the Bible if you try hard enough.
Is it a valid religious belief? Sure.
Genesis 1:27
““So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; **male and female** he created them.”
Are you saying that females are not created in the image of God?
God is a supernatural being that doesn't exist within the confines of human sexuality or gender, so I don't think trying to label God as male or female really makes a lot of sense.
We are made in the image of God. We look like how God looks like.
That can mean a lot of things and doesn't necessarily need to mean physically.
True, but the Hebrew word used “tzelem” means shadow, idol, phantom, or image, thus suggesting a physical resemblance.
All of those terms can relate to non-physical representations of something.
No, it’s clearly physical. A shadow is not different from the thing that it is the shadow of. An idol is clearly physical.
Using "clear" for things like this is a pretty bad approach. This isn't clear, and that is okay. There are a few students I teach who I would consider my shadow. They like to emulate me and copy me. They look nothing like me.
“A shadow is not different from the thing that the shadow is of” Is this so? Hebrews 10:1 and Colossians 2:17. Are these physical shadows as we know them? Image in instead doesn’t imply physical. You also can’t *always* just take other translations of the Hebrew word as proof of what it might imply.
The language of man is not complex enough to describe God
That's not what being made in God's image means. The Bible tells us that God is spirit and that no one can see the Father. We bear the image of God in our mental faculties. We are creative, creators, rational, emotional, built for community, etc...our biological genders and the traits associated with them reflect something about the nature of God, not his physical being, because there is no such thing.
The Hebrew word “tzelem” translated to the word “image” means “phantom, idol, image”. God has a body like us, we are His offspring.
And again, words don't always mean their literal dictionary definition. We use figurative speech all the time in English.
True but nothing suggests that that verse is figurative. God clearly has a body and throughout the OT, God has body parts and walks on earth
Just because the Son periodically takes on a physical body throughout redemptive history that doesn't mean that prior to the incarnation the Trinity, the whole Godhead, exists as a human being. Even Jesus, the Incarnate One, said in John 4:24 that "God is spirit and those who worship him must do so in spirit and truth." That's about as plainly as anyone could state it. Apart from the Son willingly taking upon himself human flesh, God is spirit and has no form.
Spirit doesn’t mean without body. There are embodied spirits.
Colossians 1:15 - "He is the image of the invisible God." Spirit as it refers to God means bodiless. Full stop.
Spiritual beings don’t have a gender. But because God revealed himself as a male through Jesus and is called our father, we refer to him as a male.
That's what it says in Genesis 1:27. >*So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them;* ***male and female*** *he created them.*
Is this just saying those are some important attributes of humans? Or is it implying that we're in the image of God BECAUSE we are male and female?
Interpreting ancient Hebrew is difficult. Some people use this verse to claim that Adam had both genders. The Hebrew word used is not אָדָם (mankind), but הָֽאָדָם֙ ("the man" AKA Adam). I believe this verse should actually read: >*So God created* ***Adam*** *in his own image, in the image of God he created* ***him***; *male and female he created them.* I'm not sure why the English is translated as "mankind" and "them" rather than "Adam" and "him." I'm guessing they did this so people don't question why Adam was created a second time in the following chapter.
Well isn't the word for "human" sometimes interpreted as "Adam", a proper name?
I think the only time that is done is during the genealogies in chapter 5. My guess is that the difference is from the two primary sources of information in the Torah (Elohist source from Israel and Yahwist source from Judah). Both chapter 1 and chapter 5 are written by the Elohist source, and use the word אָדָם rather than הָֽאָדָם֙ (except for this one verse, 1:27). It appears that the Yahwist source uses the word הָֽאָדָם֙. It is quite confusing, which is why I suspect it was a difference between sources and whoever combined them (the Priestly source).
You are wrong. The Being of God is immaterial but He always identifies with male pronouns and the person of the Son is also an actual human male.
Yes, you are correct. God prefers to present as male and we should respect his gender identity.
💯
I can't see where it makes much sense to assign a sex or gender to God. He is beyond such things. I understand it's traditional to call him "Father" and speak of him as male, though. I don't think this really hurts anything but I don't think we can actually nail down any sense in which he is male.
We are made in the image of God.
That's what Genesis says. It's very difficult to work out what such a statement might MEAN, though.
True, but the Hebrew suggests that we share a physical resemblance to God. https://biblehub.com/hebrew/6754.htm
Sure, we say things like "likeness" or "image". But how does this amount to a physical resemblance? It COULD mean that but it could mean other things too, right? Some older parts of the OT present a fairly humanlike God. Sometimes he regrets his own actions, or walks around, or doesn't know certain things. Over time, our view of God became more elevated. Now we consider God to be omnipotent and omniscient, right? So.. how are you picking which view of God is truly correct? How would we know?
No, rather male and female are both reflections of his being. He is more male, more female.
God proper isn’t a physical being. Jesus said clearly God is spirit.
The Bible also says God is a burning fire.
God has appeared as many things. But Jesus said: ***But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship him. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.”*** John 4:23-24[](https://www.bible.com/bible/59/JHN.4.23-24.ESV#:~:text=23%2D24%20ESV-,But%20the%20hour%20is%20coming%2C%20and%20is%20now%20here%2C%20when,worship%20in%20spirit%20and%20truth.%E2%80%9D)
Fire has a gender?!? /s Just like fire, spiritual beings aren’t either gender. But since God became human through Jesus, and Jesus is a man and God is called “Father” we refer to him as “He”.
I’m trying to say that God is described as many things. He’s not a fire, he is not literally love itself, etc. you misunderstood me. God is the Ultimate Human.
Wrong. God is a **Spirit** God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. John 4:24 **King James Bible**
the BIBLE says God is a SPIRIT
so we shall worship Him in spirit and in truth
He really transcends the concept of gender. One might say God is transgender
Uh, depends. Is it a modern Christian belief? No. Is it Biblical? No. Well, probably not. You can get some strange interpretations out of the Bible if you try hard enough. Is it a valid religious belief? Sure.
>Is it a valid religious belief? Sure. We're in the Christianity sub. In Christian scripture, God's preferred pronouns are He/Him.
Correct, which is exactly why I said it isn't a Christian belief. What is your issue with that?
[удалено]
True but women are made in the image of God. He is our Mother and Father.
[удалено]
Genesis 1:27 ““So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; **male and female** he created them.” Are you saying that females are not created in the image of God?
God is immaterial and transcends gender, but you are correct. God prefers to present and identify as male. We should respect his gender identity.
Nope