Goddess or God?

What do you think of female Gods? Though God is technically neutral in most religions, he/she/it is usually referred to as ‘He.’ I suppose this is also added to in Christianity as Jesus was male.

I personally, as a woman, think I would find it easier to connect with the idea of God as an ‘it’ or a ‘she’ than as a ‘he,’ and I find it kind of saddening (but unsurprising) that most major religions have male Gods or leaders (in the case of Buddha.)

God is without gender, but in English ‘He’ is the proper third person singular neuter pronoun. The term “it” is used for objects, thus refering to God as “it” is therefore bringing God down to the level of my couch.
Your last option is to use “they.” Technically would be correct but is impersonal, and because it is more often plural it could change meaning in many verses quite a bit.

I suggest learning a language where the word “god” is gender neutral and then you can read the bible in that language.

What an interesting question. If you read some things here, you could get the impression that the Holy Spirit for catholic christians could be more of a feminine type if the divine could be translated to human terms. Of course, believers would have a lot of reason to quibble either way on this since their narrative does not disclose details that are not related to the “plan” or “bigger picture”.

I object to God being female, simply because if God was female, things would not be as they are now.:wink:

God has no gender. God is God ! Does it really matter if He really had a gender? He or she? Focusing and keeping “GOD” as the center of our life’s is what really counts! :thumbsup:
GOD Bless you!

If that is true, then why didn’t the inspired writers of the bible, going on the Holy Spirit that I think is what Jesus said he would Leave you all with as a comforter, leave you with a book written that should last until Jesus comes again which is a long time passing now…
and not write it in a way that could be understood for the same period of time until the coming of Christ?>:eek:

We have polygamy in there, slaves, and women that well- slept with their father, burned by their father…

I don’t see this God as a female at all. I see this God as a bit hard to fathom.

God is neither male or female, but in Him are perfect fatherhood and motherhood, for He is the Source and Summit of all good things, being a perfect being (i.e., a god).

The divine pronouns are neutral, as are the Persons. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, these three are revealed by God, who wishes to teach us about Himself. He is not a mother, nor a daughter, because such are gendered words, whereas father and son are neutral, and, because God is the source of creation, just as a father is the source of a child, whereas the Universe is like a mother, who bears the child in her womb, just as we are born in the Universe. It is a theological understanding of God, not created by men but revealed by God in Christ Jesus.

It is a true mystery of the cooperation of His Providence and our free-will, for He ordered all things to such an end that man would regard ‘father’ and ‘son’ and ‘he’ and ‘his’ to be neutral words and that the father would be the source of children and the mother the bearer of children. He is the Lord of all things, and He respects our free-will as well.

God is referred to as a He and a Father because in the time and the culture where the Bible was written was a male dominated society. i don`t think a lot of people at that time would submit to a woman

and yes, God is God. God is beyond gender. one of the primary reasons there are genders are to procreate. God does not need another party to create anything.

God said he found that it was not good for the man to be alone.

That always bothers me. It’s like an admission that he made man imperfectly, or that man could not be alone.

The Genesis stories are symbolic. Woman being made for man is a reference to the fact that God created men and women for each other and that God created marriage, among other things.

Biblical symbolism is rich in meaning, a la the Wisdom and Providence of God. The symbolism of the Bible refer to history, facts, realities, and truths.

In other words, you create a goddess in your own image and likeness, reversing what the REAL God did.

When dealing with God, it’s not a case of making up something we like or “find easy to connect with”, but ULTIMATE TRUTH as He has revealed Himself.

God is a spirit, has not body and therefore no sex. God has revealed himself as Father, which our own human fathers (imperfectly) reflect. That is why we use the pronoun “he.” God is Father. The second person of the Trinity is Son. He is also a male person in the Incarnation. The third person of the Trinity is the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is also referred to as “He.”

God is one God, not “Gods.”

I am a woman and in no way share your distress that God reveals himself to us as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. It’s the Truth. Why should that be sad?

I think you are going down the wrong path to frame the discussion as major religions “having” God as male-- as if the religion chose to “make” a male God. This is certainly true to an extent in classical mythology. They “made” gods in human and animal form representing various aspects of life. They had both male and female gods depending upon whether the god presided over mael or female aspects of life.

However, when it comes to the one, living God, it is not this way. God revealed himself to man.

Obviously Adam and Eve had intimate knowledge of God, but through Original Sin their intellect became darkened and their direct contact with God cut off. So, God revealed himself to Abraham. He revealed himself and chose Abraham to set himself apart in worship. He then further revealed his Name to Moses-- I AM. Later we are given the full truth about God-- He is a Trinit of Persons. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

God is most likely referred to as ‘He’ because back when this literature was taken down men ruled absolute (within the mortal world anyway).

For God to be referred to as a woman would have made God inferior.

God is ‘He’ for the same reason there is only one ‘Mr’, meaning absolute, while woman are made to describe themselves and their level of inferiority by ‘Mrs, Miss, Ms’.

The same goes for Woman and Female, we are an extension of the Male race, we do not have independence as far as labelling goes.

Remember, this was set in stone back when woman could get killed for even kissing another man when men would no doubt get a pat on the back for sleeping around and were encouraged to have more than one wife.

God has no gender but it will be an historic day indeed when the world accepts a female God within any of our mainstream religions.(Don’t hold your breath)

thanks for the informations bro…

a few paragraphs from the book

Trimorphic Protennoia…120-130 C.E…(early christian writings)

I am Protennoia, the Thought that dwells in the Light. I am the movement that dwells in the All, SHE in whom the All takes its stand, the first-born among those who came to be, she who exists before the All. SHE (Protennoia) is called by three names, although she dwells alone, since she is perfect. I am invisible within the Thought of the Invisible One. I am revealed in the immeasurable, ineffable (things). I am incomprehensible, dwelling in the incomprehensible. I move in every creature.

Now the Voice that originated from my Thought exists as three permanences: the Father, the Mother, the Son. Existing perceptibly as Speech, it (Voice) has within it a Word endowed with every , and it has three masculinities, three powers, and three names. They exist in the manner of Three … – which are quadrangels – secretly within a silence of the Ineffable One.

It is he alone who came to be, that is, the Christ. And, as for me, I anointed him as the glory of the Invisible Spirit, with goodness. Now the Three, I established alone in eternal glory over the Aeons in the Living Water, that is, the glory that surrounds him who first came forth to the Light of those exalted Aeons, and it is in glorious Light that he firmly perseveres. And he stood in his own Light that surrounds him, that is, the Eye of the Light that gloriously shines on me. He perpetuated the Father of all Aeons, who am I, the Thought of the Father, Protennoia, that is, Barbelo, the perfect Glory, and the immeasurable Invisible One who is hidden. I am the Image of the Invisible Spirit, and it is through me that the All took shape, and (I am) the Mother (as well as) the Light which she appointed as Virgin, she who is called ‘Meirothea’, the incomprehensible Womb, the unrestrainable and immeasurable Voice.

Cool story bro. But gnostism is a heresy.

Gnosticism is a whole other bag of worms. Incidently all Aeons were androgenous, but known through male and female aspects. However the chief of the panthenon was the Father of Light, and he does not have a female aspect.

So really you’ve got the same issues, only now you’re adhering to a dead religion.

I wouldn’t necessarily call it a dead religion, just one that went into large disuse. If I remember correctly, there are some Gnostic sects in the Middle East, plus, there’s been a revival of interest in Gnosticism in the West. I know one or two people who are studying it.

Indeed, the Mandians (who from what I’ve read have largely relocated to Sweden), and the Yazidi. Incidently both of these groups are based off of Judaism, not Christianity (although the Mandians do recognise John the Baptist as a prophet.)

Those who practice Neo-Gnosticism are reviving dead religions, usually Manichianism (the most successful gnostic religion, as well as the faith which St. Augustine held prior to his conversion to proper Christianity.) However we have no idea what Manichians believed other than the writings that have survived (a small minority) or were written by their opponents, hardly something on which to base a revived religion.

My own research on neo-gnostic cults is they are usually feel good groups who make stuff up as they go along, taking bits and pieces from the Nag-Hammadi.

Is the topic of this thread at all relevent to CAF? Does any poster seriously think Catholics are going to consider a goddess theology palatable in a religion such as ours? It seems more antagonistic and somewhat silly if anything. No Christian of any brand except the Episcopal Church would accept this neo-pagan way of seeing the Godhead.:confused::confused:

If it involves God then it’s relevant.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.