Protestantism

» Brian Tubbs - For the record...

If God had revealed Himself as a Herself, then I would have NO problem worshipping such a female God. Most of the conservatives in the Protestant community would say the same.

» pink101 - For the record...

In response to For the record... posted by BrianTubbs:

.
What about the Shekina, Brian?
.

-- posted by pink101

» Migisi - For the record...

In response to For the record... posted by BrianTubbs:
.
If God had revealed Himself as a Herself, then I would have NO problem worshipping such a female God.
.
Oh, I think you, and most men, would have a problem identifying with a Goddess.
.
Yes, Pink. Note how the divine feminine presence of God, the Shekinah, is marginalized and expunged from Christian doctrine altogether.

-- posted by Migisi

» pink101 - For the record...

In response to For the record... posted by Migisi:
.
Note how the divine feminine presence of God, the Shekinah, is marginalized and expunged from Christian doctrine altogether.
.
Oh, no. Not really.
.
There is much talk of the Shekina Glory of God in deep Christian thinking.
.
It's just that there is no thought that it has to do with anything feminine; so, in a way you are correct.
.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Brian Tubbs - Image of God

The human race (male AND female) is -- according to Genesis - created in God's image. (Some ultra-fundamentalists argue that Man was created in God's image and Woman was created in Man's image, but Genesis 1 refutes that pretty clearly). So, both men and women reflect the image of God. The human race then is most complete when men and women work together. That, after all, is what marriage is supposed to reflect. Man and woman together, completing each other, and serving God together.

» Brian Tubbs - What about it, Pink?

In response to For the record... posted by pink101:

What about it, Pink? The classic Christian understanding is that it refers to the manifestation of God's presence. To the extent that it may represent some of God's "feminine" characteristics (a debatable point), I can only point to my previous post, which says that the human race (male AND female) was made in the image of God.

» Brian Tubbs - Answering Migisi

In response to For the record... posted by Migisi:

Migisi, you see Christianity (and Judaism -- and, for that matter, all the other religions as well) as a human creation. It's a religion developed by the human race, and its development (in your view) was dominated by men. Therefore, the doctrine of the Trinity (Father, Son, and Holy Ghost) is sexist or at least patriarchical, because men developed the doctrine. That's your view - your perspective on the whole thing.

And that is why you doubt my statement that I would be willing to worship a female Goddess - if that reflected the true nature of God.

My perspective is that God chose to reveal Himself to the human race in a masculine form -- quite emphatically via the "Father" and the "Son." I therefore accept that. It's God's revelation. Period. If you want to call God a "sexist," be my guest. I will simply accept His revelation and worship Him accordingly.

» pink101 - What about it, Pink?

In response to What about it, Pink? posted by BrianTubbs:

.
I'm sure you know of the Branch Davidians.
.
Here's what they had to say about it:
.
http://www.the-branch.org/God's_Family_I...
.
It's more than curious.
.

-- posted by pink101

» redback - Female Trinity

In response to Female Trinity posted by Migisi:

I appreciate Brian has to draw a line in his sand for his record but his later comment still leaves the mystery of the Trinity unresolved for me...and my record.

Brian: "...both men and women reflect the image of God."

And so naturally have done so since they were (deformed or healthy) babies...of all races...including ambiguous gender???

This is not as simplisitc as the concept of Dad the breadwinner therefore head of the household, therefore logical head of the Trinity. God didn't develop Himself into our image for synchronicity, did He? The scripture about us being in the likeness of God surely embraces gender and race and spirituality...and our countless appearances??? What does the one "image" of a woman AND man entail or are we in the several images of God.

I am far from persuaded about the literal interpretation. But hey, I'm a straggler in these things.

Here's where the Christian spirituality/faith vs its man-made religion...gets ambiguous for me. Is Christian feminism a religious power struggle or a valid faith-developing review of literalism? Does it really threaten the religious powerbase regardless. From the article and others, it seems to me the man-made religion of Christianity didn't seem to want a woman-made version...if Oddie has the odds on truth.

And the Trinity is historically, culturally and maybe hopelessly (from a literalist take) tangled within that. Maybe there's no half measures. Maybe issues will either contribute or contaminate...faith.

-- posted by redback

» Brian Tubbs - Partial answer to redback

In response to Female Trinity posted by redback:

Remember that, according to Genesis, the Creation takes place before the Fall. Thus, the image of God in humanity is most reflected BEFORE sin and the thousands of years of human history since.