Feminine God images in the Bible

Gramps49Gramps49 Shipmate
On March 16 we have Jesus describing how God like a hen would want to gather her chicks under her wing when talking about Jerusalem. See Luke 13:34 Parallel Matthew 23:37 See also Ps 91:4. Note that Psalm 91:4 depicts a male bird, but the two gospel depict a female hen.

Any way: This got me to thinking about other feminine images of God in the Bible.

There is the story of the woman looking for a lost coin in Luke 15

Or a woman in labor in Is 42.

The one image I like the most is in Is 49:15 Can a woman forget her nursing child, or show no compassion for the child of her womb? Even these may forget, yet I will not forget you.”

Question: how comfortable are you thinking of a feminine God

Related Factoid: there are only 93 women who speak in the Bible, 49 of whom are named. These women speak a total of 14,056 words collectively — roughly 1.1 percent of the Bible. Mary, the mother of Jesus, speaks 191 words; Mary Magdalene gets 61; Sarah, 141 (Freeman, Bible Women: All Their Words and Why They Matter).
«1

Comments

  • LatchKeyKidLatchKeyKid Shipmate
    Many religions have male and female deities.
    I quite like God having feminine characteristics.

    I have often wondered in a very masculine Christian God whether for some Mary provides the feminine balance. I'm not talking theology but appeal.
  • 2 Like newborn infants, long for the pure spiritual milk, that by it you may grow up into salvation— 3 if indeed you have tasted that the Lord is good. 1 Peter 2:2, which makes Christ a nursing mother.

    I don't have a problem with seeing the feminine in God. I don't like mucking around with customary language without an overriding need to do so, is all. If I had someone severely traumatized over gender, I'd consider it. But not to be trendy. In most cases, I just point up the feminine stuff and hope to equalize things a bit better that way.
  • Nick TamenNick Tamen Shipmate
    “As a mother comforts her child, so I will comfort you; you shall be comforted in Jerusalem.” Isaiah 66:13


    Deuteronomy 32:18, part of the Song of Moses, is a particularly interesting verse, I think. In the NRSV, it is “You were unmindful of the Rock that bore you; you forgot the God who gave you birth.” But there is a note indicating “that bore you” can also be translated “that fathered you,” which is what the NIV has. The KJV has “that begat thee,” and Robert Alter’s translation of the Torah has the line as “the Rock your bearer.”

    The root Hebrew word there is yalad, which, as I understand it, means “to bring forth” and can refer to both to a mother giving birth or to a father begetting a child.

    So in one verse, depending on how that word is understood and translated, you have either images of God as both father and mother or two images of God as mother.

    I’m not at all uncomfortable with seeing and recognizing the feminine in God. And I generally avoid any gender-specific references to God (such as “Father”) except in traditional formulations, like the baptismal formula or the Lord’s Prayer/Our Father.


  • My image of the feminine aspect of God isn't supported by the canon scripture as much as it is by the gnostic text The Thunder, Perfect Intellect (Nag Hammadi codex VI).

    AFF
  • HarryCHHarryCH Shipmate
    It seems obvious that God has a large and complex personality with plenty of capacity to have feminine characteristics or any other kind.
  • stetsonstetson Shipmate
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    And I generally avoid any gender-specific references to God (such as “Father”) except in traditional formulations, like the baptismal formula or the Lord’s Prayer/Our Father.

    Just outta curiousity, what pronoun do you use when refering to God in writing or conversation?
  • Nick TamenNick Tamen Shipmate
    stetson wrote: »
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    And I generally avoid any gender-specific references to God (such as “Father”) except in traditional formulations, like the baptismal formula or the Lord’s Prayer/Our Father.

    Just outta curiousity, what pronoun do you use when refering to God in writing or conversation?
    Depends on context, particularly the context of to whom the speech or writing is directed. With some people, I’ll use traditional masculine pronouns because I know it’s what they expect and are comfortable with. And if quoting something, I’ll generally go with the quote.

    Otherwise, I generally construct the sentences in a way that I don’t use pronouns. Hard at first, but not too hard at all once you get used to it.


  • stetsonstetson Shipmate
    edited March 6
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    stetson wrote: »
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    And I generally avoid any gender-specific references to God (such as “Father”) except in traditional formulations, like the baptismal formula or the Lord’s Prayer/Our Father.

    Just outta curiousity, what pronoun do you use when refering to God in writing or conversation?
    Depends on context, particularly the context of to whom the speech or writing is directed. With some people, I’ll use traditional masculine pronouns because I know it’s what they expect and are comfortable with. And if quoting something, I’ll generally go with the quote.

    Otherwise, I generally construct the sentences in a way that I don’t use pronouns. Hard at first, but not too hard at all once you get used to it.

    Thanks.

    I generally use masculine pronouns if I'm speaking in a biblical or western-philosophical context, eg. "According to Hume, if God wanted to create a world without suffering, he could've done so." That's because it's more congruent with the worldview of the thinkers under discussion.

    But you're suggestion of non-gendered sentences is a good one. As long you don't end up repeating "God" over and over again.
  • Nick TamenNick Tamen Shipmate
    stetson wrote: »
    But your suggestion of non-gendered sentences is a good one. As long you don't end up repeating "God" over and over again.
    Yes, that risk of repeating “God” over and over is what takes a little time to work around.


  • HillelHillel Shipmate
    Gramps49 wrote: »
    On March 16 we have Jesus describing how God like a hen would want to gather her chicks under her wing when talking about Jerusalem. See Luke 13:34 Parallel Matthew 23:37 See also Ps 91:4. Note that Psalm 91:4 depicts a male bird, but the two gospel depict a female hen.

    Any way: This got me to thinking about other feminine images of God in the Bible.

    There is the story of the woman looking for a lost coin in Luke 15

    Or a woman in labor in Is 42.

    The one image I like the most is in Is 49:15 Can a woman forget her nursing child, or show no compassion for the child of her womb? Even these may forget, yet I will not forget you.”

    Question: how comfortable are you thinking of a feminine God

    Related Factoid: there are only 93 women who speak in the Bible, 49 of whom are named. These women speak a total of 14,056 words collectively — roughly 1.1 percent of the Bible. Mary, the mother of Jesus, speaks 191 words; Mary Magdalene gets 61; Sarah, 141 (Freeman, Bible Women: All Their Words and Why They Matter).

    The Wisdom of God is frequently given female pronouns in the Old & New Testaments (e.g. Luke 7:35). It is possible that John referred to Jesus as the Logos rather than the Wisdom of God for precisely that reason.
  • … though Paul refers to him as the wisdom of God in 1 Corinthians, so it didn’t put him off.
  • stetsonstetson Shipmate
    … though Paul refers to him as the wisdom of God in 1 Corinthians, so it didn’t put him off.

    Who does "him" refer to there?
  • Nick TamenNick Tamen Shipmate
    edited March 6
    Hillel wrote: »
    Gramps49 wrote: »
    On March 16 we have Jesus describing how God like a hen would want to gather her chicks under her wing when talking about Jerusalem. See Luke 13:34 Parallel Matthew 23:37 See also Ps 91:4. Note that Psalm 91:4 depicts a male bird, but the two gospel depict a female hen.

    Any way: This got me to thinking about other feminine images of God in the Bible.

    There is the story of the woman looking for a lost coin in Luke 15

    Or a woman in labor in Is 42.

    The one image I like the most is in Is 49:15 Can a woman forget her nursing child, or show no compassion for the child of her womb? Even these may forget, yet I will not forget you.”

    Question: how comfortable are you thinking of a feminine God

    Related Factoid: there are only 93 women who speak in the Bible, 49 of whom are named. These women speak a total of 14,056 words collectively — roughly 1.1 percent of the Bible. Mary, the mother of Jesus, speaks 191 words; Mary Magdalene gets 61; Sarah, 141 (Freeman, Bible Women: All Their Words and Why They Matter).

    The Wisdom of God is frequently given female pronouns in the Old & New Testaments (e.g. Luke 7:35).
    Is that about portraying Wisdom as feminine—something Proverbs explicitly does—or does that have to do with grammatical gender? And if it’s the latter, how reliably can we draw inferences from that about the former? Given that English doesn’t have grammatical gender, do English-speakers read more into pronouns used in languages with grammatical gender than maybe we should?


    stetson wrote: »
    … though Paul refers to him as the wisdom of God in 1 Corinthians, so it didn’t put him off.

    Who does "him" refer to there?
    I take it as a response to “It is possible that John referred to Jesus as the Logos rather than the Wisdom of God for precisely that reason.”


  • stetson wrote: »
    … though Paul refers to him as the wisdom of God in 1 Corinthians, so it didn’t put him off.

    Who does "him" refer to there?

    Paul.
  • I help edit an ecumenical publication which has a policy of using non-gendered language for God. It's generally fairly easy to edit submissions which don't do that in order to conform them to the house style. I've never had to resort to clumsy syntax although there have been some instances where it's been a challenge.

    Outside of that context, I'm afraid I do use traditional masculine pronouns for God. At the risk of Hell Calls, I'm afraid that churches in my particular Christian tradition do use traditional masculine pronouns and terms like 'mankind' rather than 'humanity' in its liturgies.

    I understand the arguments and concerns about that.

    All that said, I see no problem whatsoever with the approach @Nick Tamen follows nor with the 'feminine' imagery of mother hens or the female persona of Wisdom etc.

    I think I'm in a similar place to @Lamb Chopped on this one.
  • Well, when I worked for Stephen Ministries, we had a policy of avoiding pronouns to the point of saying “God Godself came to God’s people” which got super silly looking and was hard to recast. But we did the best we could. If I’m not working with someone traumatized, though, I normally use the traditional masculine forms on account of that passage in John where Jesus breaks grammatical gender rules to use the masculine in preference to the neuter for the Spirit, which I take to be an intended choice. (If i am working with someone traumatized, I’ll do what helps that need, as I don’t think the Lord would mind.)
  • Nick TamenNick Tamen Shipmate
    Well, when I worked for Stephen Ministries, we had a policy of avoiding pronouns to the point of saying “God Godself came to God’s people” which got super silly looking and was hard to recast.
    Yeah, describing that as clunky is an understatement. :lol:

    I should acknowledge that my general avoidance of gender-specific references to God does not extend to avoiding the use of Lord. Some may find that inconsistent, and maybe it is. But you make your choices.

    I continue to use Lord for a few reasons. One is that my denomination takes the position for its own publications (like liturgical material) that Lord can’t be lost without also losing some important theological meaning.

    Another reason is that Lord doesn’t carry the same layers of meaning in the US that I suspect it does in the UK. Lord, as generally used here, is more a synonym for God than a word meaning “male ruler” or “nobleman.”


  • Interesting. I stand to be corrected but I've not encountered qualms about the use of the term 'Lord' in reference to God here in the UK.

    Other British Shipmates may have done.

    I know you aren't suggesting that aristocrats clatter down our streets in carriages while we tug our forelocks. Yes, we have the House of Lords and there are voices calling for its long overdue reform or for its abolition.

    And we do have hereditary peers as well as people who are awarded lordly titles for one reason or another.

    But I can't say I've noticed that spill over into how we talk about God - those of us who still do so.

    That said, I'm convinced that cultural and socio-political factors do colour the way we perceive God. Without putting too fine a point on it, I would expect to see a greater sense of individuality and a 'transactional' view of God among hardline Trumpists in the US.

    Equally, the traditional image of Anglicanism out in the shires here would be that rural parishioners would tend to see God as some kind of celestial English gentleman who deigns to make an appearance on special occasions - Harvest Festivals and the like.

    Those days are long gone but I think there are residual elements of that in pockets here and there. Herefordshire, I'm looking at you.
  • As a Quaker, I have learned to use "The Divine" to refer to God, and this had many advantages, not least evading the gender issue. Although I know it is not right for everyone, I found it very freeing.

    Wisdom as feminine, and the Holy Spirit as feminine, and the feminine as a critical part of the nature of the divine is something I have accepted for a long time - but this is because the concept of a male God is not one I am comfortable with. A gendered God is very problematic.

    It strikes me as anthropomorphism - that we project our patriarchy onto the divine and heavenly systems, and that is not right.
  • I don't think those who continue to use male pronouns for God do so imagining 'The Divine' to be an old bloke with a beard, but will agree that this is how it can easily come across.

    I'm not sure how we get around that for the Lord's prayer - if we say it that is - unless we say, 'Our Father and Mother ...' Or something like that.
  • peasepease Tech Admin
    The way I'd describe it is that I use "He" to refer to God because that's His chosen (or preferred) pronoun. But that's separate from the issue of His gender - it doesn't signify that He's male. Personal pronouns are not tied to someone's gender identity - they do not necessarily indicate their gender.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    pease wrote: »
    The way I'd describe it is that I use "He" to refer to God because that's His chosen (or preferred) pronoun.

    I'm not sure that we really know that.
  • peasepease Tech Admin
    True - I had been thinking about that before I posted. But there's a whole load of things that we don't really know about God - that doesn't stop us from having some clarity about our own attitude towards Him.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    pease wrote: »
    True - I had been thinking about that before I posted. But there's a whole load of things that we don't really know about God - that doesn't stop us from having some clarity about our own attitude towards Him.

    Well, that might be, but a statement of God's preferred pronouns us a statement about God's attitude, not ours.
  • God is neither male nor female.

    Just like a ship is neither male nor female, but we generally use the female pronoun "she" to refer to one. It is for convenience of conversation sake only.
  • stetsonstetson Shipmate
    God is neither male nor female.

    Just like a ship is neither male nor female, but we generally use the female pronoun "she" to refer to one. It is for convenience of conversation sake only.

    And, traditionally, a country was refered to as "she", and, more often than not, personified as a woman(Britannia, Columbia, Marianne etc), which, among other things, supposedly made male soldiers more willing to defend her.
  • Nick TamenNick Tamen Shipmate
    KarlLB wrote: »
    pease wrote: »
    The way I'd describe it is that I use "He" to refer to God because that's His chosen (or preferred) pronoun.

    I'm not sure that we really know that.
    I think we can point to Jesus using male pronouns to refer to God. I’m not sure we can extrapolate from that that God’s preferred pronouns are “he/him,” as opposed that being a reflection of the culture. (I have seen things that say “God—the original ‘they/them.’”)
    I know you aren't suggesting that aristocrats clatter down our streets in carriages while we tug our forelocks. Yes, we have the House of Lords and there are voices calling for its long overdue reform or for its abolition.

    And we do have hereditary peers as well as people who are awarded lordly titles for one reason or another.

    But I can't say I've noticed that spill over into how we talk about God - those of us who still do so.
    And perhaps it doesn’t. That wasn’t really quite what I was getting at at.

    What I was getting at—which may well not be worth noting in the long run—was simply that cultural differences might make how the word Lord is heard slightly different.

    An example from my experience: Many years ago I was a student in a national trial advocacy train-the-trainer program, learning how to teach trial advocacy. There were indeed student from around the U.S., and some from outside the U.S., including an advocate from Edinburgh in my group.

    As we did mock trial components, one of the ground rules was that we followed the procedures and customs for where we were from. That meant everyone was puzzled when I remained seated to question witnesses; apparently North Carolina is the only place, at least in the U.S., where that’s the rule.

    But the raised eyebrows at my remaining seated were nothing compared to the reaction when the Scottish advocate rose to make an objection and began with “My Lord.” Yes, she said, the judge is addressed as “My Lord” if male and “My Lady” if female. While that courtroom courtesy may not be an everyday thing for the vast majority of those in the UK, if courtroom procedurals are as popular on TV there as they are here, then I’d guess lots of people are familiar with it.

    My point was simply that while we do know how the word is used elsewhere, there’s not a use of the word in the U.S. where we have to think “male, so Lord” or “female, so Lady.” The result, I think, is that the gendered connection may be a little weaker here than it might be where a male would be addressed or referred to as Lord and a female as Lady.


    And this is perhaps where I should confess that more than once I’ve caught myself starting to pray—silently, not around other people, thank goodness!—with the words “Your Honor.” :lol:


  • That’s awesome. :lol:

    (I confess to feeling extremely flattered when I overheard my son address Jesus as “Mom” by mistake.)

    I agree that “Lord” is probably less gendered in the ears of people born into a culture where there are no lords. I’m thinking about the North American science fiction writers I’ve read who use “Lord” for both genders in the societies they invent. Presumably they know their audiences well enough to know the gender issue isn’t going to be constantly derailing them.
  • Nick TamenNick Tamen Shipmate
    edited March 7
    That’s awesome. :lol:

    (I confess to feeling extremely flattered when I overheard my son address Jesus as “Mom” by mistake.)
    Now that’s awesome!!

    I console myself that at least I never started with “May it please the court.” :lol:


  • GwaiGwai Epiphanies Host
    I'm not sure how we get around that for the Lord's prayer - if we say it that is - unless we say, 'Our Father and Mother ...' Or something like that.
    I do not say others should take up my habits, but I say "Our Parent" and use they/them pronouns for God the Parent because that's what I do for anyone whose pronouns I am unclear about. (I use he/him pronouns for Jesus as I am clear on his.)

  • BroJamesBroJames Purgatory Host
    I can’t say I speak for the generality of Brits, but I have occasionally heard a translation where Jesus addressed as kyrios in the Greek is translated into English as ‘Sir’ which to my mind sounds both unnatural, and, curiously, more gendered than ‘Lord’.

    Apropos of @Nick Tamen’s comment, England has High Court judicial officials who are King’s Bench Masters (or Chancery Masters) (whether they are male or female) who are properly addressed as ‘Master’.
  • Gramps49Gramps49 Shipmate
    A new trinitarian formula is getting more traction--well not so new. Creator, Redeemer, Sustainer.

    To Nicks point about Jesus using "he" in referring to God: we have only reports of Jesus using the 2nd Person male pronoun in referring to God. Remember, we do not have any specific writings directly from Jesus' hand. On the other hand, Jesus does use several illusions of God in the feminine.
  • Nick TamenNick Tamen Shipmate
    BroJames wrote: »
    I can’t say I speak for the generality of Brits, but I have occasionally heard a translation where Jesus addressed as kyrios in the Greek is translated into English as ‘Sir’ which to my mind sounds both unnatural, and, curiously, more gendered than ‘Lord’.
    Not to mention not as good a translation of kyrios.

    Apropos of @Nick Tamen’s comment, England has High Court judicial officials who are King’s Bench Masters (or Chancery Masters) (whether they are male or female) who are properly addressed as ‘Master’.
    Interesting; thanks.

    I guess maybe “Mistress” might present potential problems.


  • BroJamesBroJames Purgatory Host
    Gramps49 wrote: »
    A new trinitarian formula is getting more traction--well not so new. Creator, Redeemer, Sustainer.

    To Nicks point about Jesus using "he" in referring to God: we have only reports of Jesus using the 2nd Person male pronoun in referring to God. Remember, we do not have any specific writings directly from Jesus' hand. On the other hand, Jesus does use several illusions of God in the feminine.

    Not very new. At least three or four decades old, and fairly criticised for modalism. So, for example, Biblically, the first person of the Trinity redeems and sustains as well as creates, and the second person creates as well as redeems.
  • Nick TamenNick Tamen Shipmate
    BroJames wrote: »
    Gramps49 wrote: »
    A new trinitarian formula is getting more traction--well not so new. Creator, Redeemer, Sustainer.

    To Nicks point about Jesus using "he" in referring to God: we have only reports of Jesus using the 2nd Person male pronoun in referring to God. Remember, we do not have any specific writings directly from Jesus' hand. On the other hand, Jesus does use several illusions of God in the feminine.

    Not very new. At least three or four decades old, and fairly criticised for modalism. So, for example, Biblically, the first person of the Trinity redeems and sustains as well as creates, and the second person creates as well as redeems.
    Or older.

    I don’t think it’s inherently modalist, but I agree it’s susceptible to a modalist understanding.


  • Gramps49Gramps49 Shipmate
    edited March 7
    BroJames wrote: »
    Gramps49 wrote: »
    A new trinitarian formula is getting more traction--well not so new. Creator, Redeemer, Sustainer.

    To Nicks point about Jesus using "he" in referring to God: we have only reports of Jesus using the 2nd Person male pronoun in referring to God. Remember, we do not have any specific writings directly from Jesus' hand. On the other hand, Jesus does use several illusions of God in the feminine.

    Not very new. At least three or four decades old, and fairly criticised for modalism. So, for example, Biblically, the first person of the Trinity redeems and sustains as well as creates, and the second person creates as well as redeems.

    Be careful where you are stepping @BroJames. Modalism is a doctrine that denies the distinctiveness of the three Persons of the Trinity and claims that God changes modes or faces.
  • Nick TamenNick Tamen Shipmate
    Gramps49 wrote: »
    BroJames wrote: »
    Gramps49 wrote: »
    A new trinitarian formula is getting more traction--well not so new. Creator, Redeemer, Sustainer.

    To Nicks point about Jesus using "he" in referring to God: we have only reports of Jesus using the 2nd Person male pronoun in referring to God. Remember, we do not have any specific writings directly from Jesus' hand. On the other hand, Jesus does use several illusions of God in the feminine.

    Not very new. At least three or four decades old, and fairly criticised for modalism. So, for example, Biblically, the first person of the Trinity redeems and sustains as well as creates, and the second person creates as well as redeems.

    Be careful where you are stepping @BroJames. Modalism is a doctrine that denies the distinctiveness of the three Persons of the Trinity and claims that God changes modes or faces.
    Right—in this case, the “modes” of creator, redeemer and sustainer. Each of those “modes,” however, in fact belongs to all three Persons of the Trinity.


  • Gramps49 wrote: »
    BroJames wrote: »
    Gramps49 wrote: »
    A new trinitarian formula is getting more traction--well not so new. Creator, Redeemer, Sustainer.

    To Nicks point about Jesus using "he" in referring to God: we have only reports of Jesus using the 2nd Person male pronoun in referring to God. Remember, we do not have any specific writings directly from Jesus' hand. On the other hand, Jesus does use several illusions of God in the feminine.

    Not very new. At least three or four decades old, and fairly criticised for modalism. So, for example, Biblically, the first person of the Trinity redeems and sustains as well as creates, and the second person creates as well as redeems.

    Be careful where you are stepping @BroJames. Modalism is a doctrine that denies the distinctiveness of the three Persons of the Trinity and claims that God changes modes or faces.

    I believe this was the poinnt he was trying to make. I doubt anyone wants to appear modalist unless they actually ARE modalist, so it's a fair point.
  • Gramps49 wrote: »
    A new trinitarian formula is getting more traction--well not so new. Creator, Redeemer, Sustainer.

    To Nicks point about Jesus using "he" in referring to God: we have only reports of Jesus using the 2nd Person male pronoun in referring to God. Remember, we do not have any specific writings directly from Jesus' hand. On the other hand, Jesus does use several illusions of God in the feminine.

    To be fair, all data we have about him is reported. If his pronoun usage is suspect on those grounds, so are his allusions.
  • LatchKeyKidLatchKeyKid Shipmate
    When I worked at the Royal Brisbane Hospital the most senior nurse was Sister Ducket.
    Sister Ducket was a man.
  • peasepease Tech Admin
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    I think we can point to Jesus using male pronouns to refer to God. I’m not sure we can extrapolate from that that God’s preferred pronouns are “he/him,” as opposed that being a reflection of the culture. (I have seen things that say “God—the original ‘they/them.’”)
    We're all culturally constrained in the language we use concerning God, at least in the way we talk and write - which is likely to have some effect on the way we think. A significant number of languages don't have gendered personal pronouns (or this discussion). An implicit framing of this discussion is the English language, and the various criteria that English-speakers can consider when referring to God.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    Linguistic Relatively, aka weak form of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.

    I wonder if how much individuals do or don't think in words affects this?
  • agingjbagingjb Shipmate
    Don't Hebrew and Aramaic have two genders and doesn't Greek have three? Doesn't this make translation difficult in some crucial cases?

    And The Trinity is La Trinité in French and Die Dreifaltigkeit in German.
  • Nick TamenNick Tamen Shipmate
    pease wrote: »
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    I think we can point to Jesus using male pronouns to refer to God. I’m not sure we can extrapolate from that that God’s preferred pronouns are “he/him,” as opposed that being a reflection of the culture. (I have seen things that say “God—the original ‘they/them.’”)
    We're all culturally constrained in the language we use concerning God, at least in the way we talk and write - which is likely to have some effect on the way we think. A significant number of languages don't have gendered personal pronouns (or this discussion). An implicit framing of this discussion is the English language, and the various criteria that English-speakers can consider when referring to God.
    I agree completely.

  • Gramps49Gramps49 Shipmate
    agingjb wrote: »
    Don't Hebrew and Aramaic have two genders and doesn't Greek have three? Doesn't this make translation difficult in some crucial cases?

    And The Trinity is La Trinité in French and Die Dreifaltigkeit in German.

    The Talmud, which is written in Hebrew, recognizes seven genders. See My Jewish Learning.

    Aramaic has two, though Jesus seems to recognize a third: See Matthew 19:12
    For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”
  • Nick TamenNick Tamen Shipmate
    edited March 8
    Gramps49 wrote: »
    agingjb wrote: »
    Don't Hebrew and Aramaic have two genders and doesn't Greek have three? Doesn't this make translation difficult in some crucial cases?

    And The Trinity is La Trinité in French and Die Dreifaltigkeit in German.

    The Talmud, which is written in Hebrew, recognizes seven genders. See My Jewish Learning.

    Aramaic has two, though Jesus seems to recognize a third: See Matthew 19:12
    For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”
    Those are genders in the social science or “natural,” sense, not the grammatical sense, and I took @agingjb to be referring to grammatical gender.

    Grammatical gender and gender in the social science/natural sense are not the same thing, and inferences about things like gender identity cannot necessarily be drawn from grammatical gender, at least not reliably. See, for example, German, where the word for girl, Mädchen, is neuter, not feminine, as is the old honorific corresponding to Miss, Fräulein. That’s because all nouns with the diminutive suffixes -chen or -lein are neuter, not feminine or masculine, regardless of the natural gender of the person the noun refers to.


  • agingjbagingjb Shipmate
    Yes. And I assume the exact words in the original text of scripture are often considered important.
  • peasepease Tech Admin
    So far on this thread, it strikes me that most of the examples of "feminine" images of God (leaving aside grammatical notions of gender) are actually about motherhood. In relation to this, I note that "accounts that equate the feminine and the maternal" are "typical of patriarchal understandings of femininity".
  • LatchKeyKidLatchKeyKid Shipmate
    How does Jael figure in some account of femininity? Is it patriarchal because its authors were patriarchal?
    Or should some of the perceived masculine images of God also be recognised as feminine?
  • You can’t use what isn’t there. It’s not as if God had a great many non-maternal feminine images in available in those cultures to make use of, though Wisdom is one.
Sign In or Register to comment.