God no longer male, Scottish Episcopal Church rules

PilgrimToChrist · Sep 10, 2010

bliz said:
While on earth, Jesus was male

Jesus is still male. The Incarnation didn't end when Jesus ascended into Heaven. The union of the Divine and human natures is eternal.

The rest I agree with, I am just nitpicking.

bliz · Sep 10, 2010

CreedIsChrist said:
i\However when we relate to God's actions in the bible it is always directed more in a masculine sense with regard to his authority, strength, power, justice, and wrath. There are masuline attibutes and thus is seems God more idenitfys as a masculine essence or identity, especially with the advent of the god-MAN Jesus Christ.

To you.

It seems to you that God identifies more with His masculine essence.

That is simply a matter of opinion.

Gwendolyn · Sep 10, 2010

Femininity is not a "construct", ie something that was constructed at the exact moment that God decided to create woman. Women are also made in the image and likeness of God.

JoabAnias · Sep 10, 2010

The two shall become one.

God encompasses and transcends gender.

His image is misconstrued in so many ways.

Now to all you chauvinists and radical feminists; make me a sammich. :sorry:

Couldn't resist. ^_^

Virgil the Roman · Sep 10, 2010

I want one too; with some good stuffed red pepper soup! :sorry:

WarriorAngel · Sep 10, 2010

_Shannon_ said:
The correct term for all is man? We are all male? what the heck are you talking about? Are you just making stuff up as you go along? There are other languages out there besides English...

READ WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES.

To all reading this thread the above is not what the Church teaches....not at all.

YES Shannon - the correct term is mankind.

Most Hebrewic translations understand the name is ADAM which means man and Eve makes mankind.
A reference, however; that seems to have been thrown out in modern times because women [certain ones] had issue with the term...[?]

There is not a little divergence of opinion among Semitic scholars when they attempt to explain the etymological signification of the Hebrew adam (which in all probability was originally used as a common rather than a proper name), and so far no theory appears to be fully satisfactory. One cause of uncertainty in the matter is the fact that the root adam as signifying "man" or "mankind" is not common to all the Semitic tongues, though of course the name is adopted by them in translations of the Old Testament.
...

In the Old Testament the word is used both as a common and a proper noun, and in the former acceptation it has different meanings. Thus in Genesis 2:5, it is employed to signify a human being, man or woman; rarely, as in Genesis 2:22, it signifies man as opposed to woman, and, finally, it sometimes stands for mankind collectively, as in Genesis 1:26. The use of the term, as a proper as well as a common noun, is common to both the sources designated in critical circles as P and J. Thus in the first narrative of the Creation (P) the word is used with reference to the production of mankind in both sexes, but in Genesis 5:14, which belongs to the same source, it is also taken as a proper name. In like manner the second account of the creation (J) speaks of "the man" (ha-adam), but later on (Genesis 4:25) the same document employs the word as a proper name without the article.

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Adam

And we all know Eve means mother of all.

_Shannon_ · Sep 10, 2010

You don't even understand what you're reading there, do you?

Eucharisted · Sep 10, 2010

You guys are making the Pope chug beer

_Shannon_ · Sep 10, 2010

Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.

euzao · Sep 10, 2010

God does have "masculine essence", since masculine essence is itself contigent, and God is not contingent. Starts here. But anyway, are those kinds of idiot changes that make people leave Episcopal Church.

Michie · Sep 10, 2010

_Shannon_ said:
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.

Credit:
Benjamin Frankin.

The Grey Pilgrim · Sep 10, 2010

It is arrogance for anyone to arrogate to themselves the right to change the language Jesus used in referring to God.

The language that Jesus used to reveal to us the fact of our God "our Heavenly Father" is explicit.

The exclusive masculine terminology for God is what made Judaism-and later Christianity-distinguishable from the other polytheistic religions who had both male and female "gods".

To say that "God is no longer male" is to deny scripture and to deny God.

Michie · Sep 10, 2010

The Grey Pilgrim said:
It is arrogance for anyone to arrogate to themselves the right to change the language Jesus used in referring to God.

The language that Jesus used to reveal to us the fact of our God "our Heavenly Father" is explicit.

The exclusive masculine terminology for God is what made Judaism-and later Christianity-distinguishable from the other polytheistic religions who had both male and female "gods".

To say that "God is no longer male" is to deny scripture and to deny God.

I agree. You go with what has been revealed to us. You don't change it to suit personal tastes.

But as Paul said, we see now though a mirror darkly.

I believe God goes way beyond gender. But we will not see clearly this side if the veil. Let's not screw it up with political correctness.

euzao · Sep 10, 2010

They got "Scripture" and their our postmodern exegesis!

The Grey Pilgrim · Sep 10, 2010

More like eisegesis.

LivingWordUnity · Sep 10, 2010

Maybe their next vote will be to say whether or not God exists or whether God created man the other way around. That's what is wrong with Protestantism. Once they rejected the authority of the Church nothing is sacred and everything eventually becomes subject to a democratic vote.

Jay217 · Sep 10, 2010

God Created Adam in the Image of himself (Itself?). Wouldn't that be basis enought to gather that god is Male?

Or all the countless verses when they say 'Our Father' or it's prayer Itself?

The Father,The Son, The Holy Spirit, sounds alot better than - It, It's Son, It's Holy Spirit.

Truly The fact that God is male is mostly irrelevent when focusing on his word. But that doesn't me we can discredit him.

Think of any other good book, sure any book can be written by man or woman and that it shouldn't truly matter as we should focus on its content, but we shouldn't be proclaiming they have no gender... That'd be awkward.

PilgrimToChrist · Sep 11, 2010

Jay217 said:
God Created Adam in the Image of himself (Itself?). Wouldn't that be basis enought to gather that god is Male?

God created man in His own image, i.e. a spiritual being having an intellect and a will. It has nothing to do with whether God has a penis.

LivingWordUnity · Sep 11, 2010

PilgrimToChrist said:
God created man in His own image, i.e. a spiritual being having an intellect and a will. It has nothing to do with whether God has a penis.

God didn't have a penis from the beginning, but he did once he became a man. And when Jesus ascended into Heaven, he did so with his male body. So from the Incarnation the 2nd person of the Holy Trinity will always have a male body.

Antigone · Sep 11, 2010

I'm proposing a new thread.

Male no longer God. Scottish Episcopal Church rules!

Click to expand...

Much better that way.

God no longer male, Scottish Episcopal Church rules

Well-Known Member

Contributor

back in black

Steward of proportionality- I Cor 13:1, 1 Tim 3:15

Young Fogey & Monarchist-Distributist . . .

I close my eyes and see you smile

_Shannon_

Guest

Well-Known Member

_Shannon_

Guest

euzao

Guest

Well-Known Member

Sons of Thunder

Well-Known Member

euzao

Guest

Sons of Thunder

Unchanging Deposit of Faith, Traditional Catholic

Private In the Canadian Armed Forces

Well-Known Member

Unchanging Deposit of Faith, Traditional Catholic

The Wrath of Whatever

Similar threads