Why do we talk of God as if it is a man?

I would think God would be sexless. The fact that "he" is seen as a man just makes me believe God is a creation of men, and the idea that God could be female just didn't even enter their minds as women were considered inferiour beings

Fact is I would rather deal with him as a man than as a woman anyway. Think he is moe stable that way.

the problem with religious discussions is the fact that we can never have ever any reference other than the Bible, once we swerve away from this, we will be lost from the Biblical path of understanding things. if indeed we wish to learn Biblical facts, we have to stick to the Bible alone and nothing else. so, it is true that even Jesus Christ has attested to the fact that the Almighty God is a Father who lives in heaven. thus God can never be a woman. women should better recognize this because this is not a gender issue anyway and, i am a woman, too.

Thanks for the info. I'm a man but I think women deserve better than the way they are treated in most cultures

If that was the case why didn't God make her from his foot bone so he could walk all over her. He made her from his rib from his side so she could be equal. Man has made her less not god.

Equality is not about doing the same type of work. Women and men are different very different biologically and in the way they approach things but that's no excuse to treat women with less respect. Now the whole adam eve story is as sexist as can be. Man was created first women from the man. That's just B*sh*t we all know that this isn't the way it happened, and the authors of the bible of course didn't have the scientific knowledge we have now, so the made up a story from a man's perspective.

Really don't tell me you believe the whole rib story.

I would say one of the main differences between humans and chimps is religion, but Harry Poter and Star Wars are not good examples lol. Take better my example.

Well if you think of it it's not so strange. Back in the days only a handful of people could read and write. Nowadays everyone reads and writes, there are more books and magazines available than ever in history. For illiterate people a book was a holy object and highly regarded. Now we throw away paper, books, magazines. If you wanted to preserve a religion the best thing to do was make a book out of it. If you would do that nowadays and start your own religion the impact would be far less. The story of Adam and Eve just shows you how little people back them knew about the origion of life.

Unless the whole story of God making Adam is manmade fiction. Some people think that Harry Potter is real or Star Wars. We all know we have more than 90% of our DNA in common with chimps. This means humans and chimps are more related than chimps and gorilla's. That's genetics, it can be proven time after time. Isn't it more likely humans an chimps had a common ancestor which was apelike? That makes more sense to me.

Thank you for coming to my discussion! I saw you have the same idea as me. This is interesting. The next to discuss should be, if this idea is logic, why the most extended religions are contrary to this? Is it just a human manipulation?

I'm not religious so are ideas differ but if I would be religious I would follow your reasoning. I think it's also why we call the earth, Mother Earth and not father earth.

I think I understand why you say this

So he is sexless do you agree on that?

The whole religion issue comes down to faith. You have faith that the Bible's not true, and I have faith that it is. We certainly cannot prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the other is wrong. Basically what you're doing in this thread is asking people "why", and when they tell you what they believe and why they believe it, you're then telling them that you don't subscribe to their belief system, so that makes their answer inacceptable. It might be to you, but that doesn't make their reasoning wrong. Let's keep in mind that: 1. You are certainly not the first person to ask such a question, and if it could be answered in a way that could satisfy you, it would have been done by now. 2. To everything else in life, there is a truth. Not believing in the truth doesn't make it not the absolute truth, it just makes you a non-believer. 3. You may be standing more firm on your beliefs now than ever because you feel you have to defend your viewpoint rather than be open to others' perspectives. In the end, such thinking would only hurt YOU, not the people you're aiming barbs at. 4. No one will ever be able to convince you that God is male, or that the Bible is true, or any of the other faith-based beliefs they hold. But you do owe it to yourself to seek out the truth and research what you're taking a stand on. You should have reasons for what you believe in and what you don't believe in. Saying that you don't believe in something because you think it's hooey is fine unless you actually have to stand before God someday and justify that to HIM.

That is my whole point, I don't believe the Bible is all truth. Anyway since women are the ones that give birth, I think female species were the first on earth. With primitive species you can see sexless reproduction. The bible is nothing but a book from schizofrenic people who heared voices and wrote it down from their views at that period in time. Hardly worth it to base your life on.

I think you (not personal, I mean "you" in general meaning) have a serious problem when you let faith come before reason. If you have faith that God is a fridge circling behind the moon, I can't say you are lying, coz I can't see behind the moon, but you agree that this is rather unlikely. Now the bible is full of contradictions and if you know how it is what it is now there is little doubt on my mind it's a man made book.

I'm not sure that it matters what exact word was used in the text (virgin vs. young girl) since the rest of the story reveals that Mary was in fact both a virgin and a young woman. It seems that you're missing the forest through the trees.

Since Mary no woman has ever given birth as a virgin. It would all be clear when we could study Jesus DNA somehow. It would probably be just normal DNA and nothing Godlike. It can't be from Mary alone because in that case Jesus would have been female as to be male you require a Y chromosome. Without male intervention that is not possible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_consistency_and_the_Bible I just posted this page for quick reference, but of course this isn't the only reason. There are first of all the origins of how the bible was formed, some scriptures where left out on purpose. Let's just say that was a correct decision, than there are still different versions of the same bible. Protestants threw out 7 books from the original printed version published in Rheims in 1582. Resulting in the Authorized King James version. Many misconceptions arise with wrong translation: 1. "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign: Behold, a VIRGIN shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel." (Isaiah 7:14 - AV) The indispensable "VIRGIN" in the above verse has now been replaced in the RSV with the phrase "a young woman," which is the correct translation of the Hebrew word almah. Almah is the word which has occurred all along in the Hebrew text and NOT bethulah which means VIRGIN. Still this correction is not used in many languages. And you can go on an compile a whole book of errors, mistakes. There is also a lot of cruelty in the book especially in the old testament. Which has also doubtfull origins. It's too long to discuss it all here but I'm willing to post you a few links

Hey thanks for this reference

I always wonder about this sort of reasoning; about the "God just exists" thinking. I God exists, it/he/she must actually have some qualities, right? After all, it's GOD we're talking about here, and that being must have some preferred form (even if it is body-less, or in spirit form) along with qualities. This goes back to what I was saying in an earlier posting; that there must be a truth behind it all. We in this culture have a way of thinking that God will be whatever we'd like to think of him as. Or even not exist if we think he doesn't. None of which makes God who he is.

I'm not understanding the question - could you ask it in a different way?

Depending on your culture God will already be different sexless or not. You can also ask yourself the question why didn't God manifest 'him'self to other cultures before Christianity and Islam became the dominating religions in most parts of the world. Isn't it said that all those people didn't had the chance to know God???