Talk:Gender of God

message: I have removed the following sentences (and corresponding references) from the "Evolutionary Process" section as it gives the false impression that metaphysics is somehow "over" in analytic philosophy and philosophy in general, arguably glossing over and/or ignoring the work done in the past few decades done by Kripke, Putnam, Lewis, Armstrong and many others. They read:
::...nor in philosophy. Analytic philosophy widely considers speculative metaphysics to be outside the reach of epistemology and scientific scrutiny.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by T of Locri (talk • contribs) 08:35, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Philosophy

message: I don't really have any input on the JCI issues.  However, I did notice that the "Polytheism" section sort of describes a form of pantheism.  In a nutshell, Polytheism is the belief in many distinct gods, of various genders (including neutral or hermaphroditic - the Norse Loki does gender switching IIRC).  They may or may not source from (or really be part of) one older god.  Pantheism is the belief that many gods are worshiped separately, but are actually all one.  (The reason I haven't stuffed this into the article is that I haven't gone and dug up sources yet.)
But the polytheistic stuff seems somewhat out of place here.  Polytheists don't have to ask what gender Thor is, or Diana, or Artemis.  Do the non-JCI religions even belong here, or is the article really about "The gender of God in the Judeo-Christian-Islamic traditions"?
--RavanAsteris (talk) 02:55, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The polytheism section doesn't contain any material about gender at all, so I'm going to be bold and remove it. --Alynna (talk) 12:18, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, that's what else was bothering me about it - the section as written had nothing to do with the topic!  Thanks for the sanity check. --RavanAsteris (talk) 03:46, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  polytheism/pantheism 

message: Hello, all. Just wanted to point out that in the (bestselling?) book, "The Shack", God appears as a woman for most of the book (despite the name "Papa"). Shall I add that to the "Pop Culture" section? Or is a novel not considered Pop Culture?
Bpenguin17 (talk) 22:32, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent work of fiction for sure which was quite poplar and was also made in to a movie . . . I would answer your 2010 question as yes, it should go in to Pop Culture . . . just a note on the author's view that God is a black woman . . . Jesus depicted as a country type hick, no disrespect, and the Holy Spirit as a woman . . . i loved it . . .  when I read God's word, the Bible, when i look at the Greek and the Hebrew and the Aramaic i too see God (Father Son Holy Spirit) a lot differently given studying the languages . . . CharleneHios (talk) 19:22, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[The Shack]] 

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :Gender of God's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "britannica":
From Supreme Being: 
From God in the Bahá'í Faith: 
From Manifestation of God: 
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 23:05, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:Gender of God]] 

message: the AHD's indo european roots appendix states that the root for God is Gheu (ə) -. The root means: To call, invoke. I find it interesting that the other english word from this root is "giddy", as in insane or possessed. So god may be considered more of a verb than a noun, and genderless. hey, its not my research.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:57, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Indo European]] [[Proto-Indo-European language|root]] from the [[American Heritage Dictionary]]

message: Is it really necessary to have an article about the gender of an imaginary being, where gender is not a relevant concept anyway? 51kwad (talk) 12:09, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Candidate for deletion? 

message: I would like to see some examples and citations to flesh out this potentially interesting point.  Sadly, I'm not the person to add this information, but as an interested reader, I'd say it lacks clarity and credibility in it's current state.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cspooner (talk • contribs) 18:04, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparative Religion - Role of language 

message: This website aims to show that the Catholic Church and the Islam are heresies. Therefore it is not a reliable source anyway one would look at it. It is a highly polemic source instead of being academically descriptive. I have reverted edits based upon carm.org propaganda. Tgeorgescu (talk) 22:39, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: In a historical, anthropological and sociological sense Christian are the persons/churches who define themselves as Christian. Tgeorgescu (talk) 22:43, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  carm.org 

message: Hi, I hope to be of some assistance in resolving the issue flagged on the 3O page.  I have very limited familiarity with biblical scholarship, so I hope I can bring a relatively unbiased voice to the discussion.  As I understand it, the question is whether there is a female component implied/embedded in the word "Elohim".  Is that correct?  If so, are there any WP:RS's which indicate this to be the case?  Cheers, Blippy (talk) 05:10, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, there is a book by Michael Coogan, which is properly cited in the footnotes. Besides, if we are to pontificate about the Bible (see above), it intuitively makes sense: the image of God is male and female, the likeness of God is male and female, therefore God (or Elohim) is/are male and female (Elohim is a plural). Tgeorgescu (talk) 15:40, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

text: In order to repeat myself, this wasn't a conflict between two scholarly views, presented by different reliable sources. It simply was removal of sourced information because the editor has his/her own interpretation of the Torah and therefore does not like what the cited reliable source said (source written by a world-class authority on the Hebrew Bible). So it is basically a conflict between verifiable information and original research, and the user got blocked for not ceasing reverting. No editor is allowed to delete sourced information simply because he/she does not like it. Chaos would ensue if we would allow that to happen. So, it was a conflict between vandalism and reverting vandalism, regardless of how noble the reasons for vandalism were. Tgeorgescu (talk) 15:59, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

text: So, the editor has abused the third opinion process. This was a conflict between something (verifiable information) and nothing (original research). A third opinion could only exist between something and something, not between something and nothing. Tgeorgescu (talk) 16:14, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for that Tgeorgescu, I guess you answered my question ;-)  So there are WP:RS's which the article cited.  Is that your understanding Nomnompuffs?  Do you also have WP:RS's for the edit/s you wished to make?  Cheers, Blippy (talk) 01:01, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I cannot answer instead him/her, but Elaine Pagels states that the same theological opinion as Coogan's is part of the Judeo-Christian tradition (to put it bluntly, Gnostics were Christians). Tgeorgescu (talk) 20:47, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: So I presume that if there are sources stating that Elohim is both male & female - it is likely they are responding to other sources which say this is not the case?  Do any WP:RS's along those lines exist?  Cheers, Blippy (talk) 23:46, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Pagels clearly states that God is mostly seen as male in the Judeo-Christian tradition (and that is what our Wikipedia article states, as abiding by WP:DUE), she also states that there are exceptions from this rule, one being an interpretation of Gen. 1:26-27. She is non-judgmental about this interpretation, she reports it as a fact about a notable theological opinion. Considering her whole article, she agrees with the idea that God was sometimes seen as female. Tgeorgescu (talk) 06:52, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

text: If there are sources which state that the image and likeness of God is male but not female, I frankly don't know, but interpreting the Bible literally this would be a bizarre position (even more bizarre that God is both male and female, since the later does not contradict the letter of the Bible). Tgeorgescu (talk) 07:05, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

text: So I understand that God being male and female is offending some religious sensibilities, but we are not censored for their protection. The really offensive stance would be that the image and likeness of God is male but not female, since it would offend both religious sensibilities and human reason in general (which can examine what is written in the Bible regardless of the religious persuasion of the reader). Tgeorgescu (talk) 07:20, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks again Tgeorgescu.  I guess I was just sounding out whether Nomnompuff's edit was indicative of a broader dispute which might warrant inclusion or explanation - as opposed to what happened (i.e. an unsourced WP:OR edit).  Anyway, Nomnompuff doesn't seem particularly active on this talk page at the moment, so I'm happy to wait a bit longer to see if they want to chat/clarify things further, otherwise it looks reasonably straight forward from my perspective.  Cheers, Blippy (talk) 07:24, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: On one hand Coogan's view smacks of propaganda for liberal Christianity (as fundamentalists see mainstream Biblical scholarship as a Satanic plot for propagating liberal Christianity); on the other hand its opposite stance cuts against the grain of the Bible. Tgeorgescu (talk) 07:35, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

text: Let's sort this out: the image and likeness of the Elohim are male and female. Who are then the Elohim? Yahweh (definitely male) and Asherah (definitely female). You see, the Ancient Hebrews worshiped a god and a goddess (among a plurality of other gods whose existence they admitted), only later polytheism evolved into monolatry and then into monotheism. Tgeorgescu (talk) 21:35, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: 3O

message: I made an edit here for the lead to begin:
:The gender of God, or of gods, can be viewed as a literal or as an allegorical aspect of a deity or of deities.
This was on the basis that the lead continues:
:In polytheistic religions, the gods are more likely to have literal sexual genders which would enable them to interact with each other, and even with humans, in a sexual way.  
And that a whole section is dedicated to: Gender_of_God#Hinduism within which there are many gods.  
The edit was reverted by  on the claim that "this article is specifically about monotheistic conceptions of God" which is not the case in regard to Hinduism.  Is there a route to clarification?
GregKaye 13:06, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gender of God or gods 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gender of God. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130303003725/http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P17.HTM to http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P17.HTM
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:52, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Dear Editors
this part is totally incorrect , God (Allah) is genderless and the reference to Him as He, is just the nature of Arabic, we refer to the moon as He and the sun as She, etc. the pronoun "Hiya" is not mentioned in Sura Ikhlas.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abu aamir (talk • contribs) 10:52, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  in Islam - Allah Gender 

message: Women 2600:8803:C203:400:2D55:40C5:97C2:7E34 (talk) 00:01, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  It’s god  a woman or man 

message: Gender of God is 2401:4900:3B20:C612:EA08:3DA2:8157:1657 (talk) 15:39, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the gender is generally referred to in the singular in the article. —C.Fred (talk) 16:36, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar 

message: — Assignment last updated by Zisha68 (talk) 02:33, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Psychology of Gender

message: About the gender of God. I was looking at something else on the internet and I came across this topic that whoever is in charge of Wikipedia is wrong! God is not a female he was never a mother! Deuteronomy 32:18 says of the Rock who begot you, you are unmindful and have forgotten the God who fathered you. That's what Deuteronomy 32:18 says! It does not say he is as a mother in that verse according to the words of Wikipedia! I have studied the Bible since 2006 and I continue to study it twice daily, every day and I have been a Christian for 18 years and I attend my church on a regular basis, but God was never a mother he is always a father, a male not a female! Just thought I clear that up for everybody! So do not mistaken God as a female or as a mother he is all three Trinities of the person within him; in other words he is God the Father, he is Jesus Christ as Son, and is the Holy Spirit all in one person! But he was never a mother or even acted as a mother! He is all male through and through! 73.177.183.196 (talk) 14:56, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Being a Christian and studying the Bible does not give you special editing rights. Unless you read the Bible in Koine Greek, Hebrew, Latin, Coptic, Syriac and know your Aramaic, you're not in the same league with the Bible professors we WP:CITE in this article. tgeorgescu (talk)  16:55, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gender of God