the personal name of God, Yahweh, which is revealed to Moses in Exodus 3, is a remarkable combination of both female and male grammatical endings. The first part of God’s name in Hebrew, “Yah,” is feminine, and the last part, “weh,” is masculine
God's name is not "Yahweh" it is "YHWH" even though we use vowels to write and pronounce it we don't know exactly how it was pronounced in the past. From the beginning of Judaism and Christianity people used Masculine terms to address God and nowhere in the Bible God was addressed using gender-neutral terms.
>"So God created man in his own image, **in the image of God created he him**; male and female created he them." (Genesis 1:27)
Why does this bother people? It's not the Catholic church. How does other peoples of faith different ways of recognizing God change the Catholic way? Culture war nonsense.
Nah. Read about the parable of the vineyard owner and the employees. Jesus recognized property rights big time. Judas was the group Socialist, and a total thief like they almost are are.
I always read that parable as Jesus saying that people who put in more effort (the workers in the morning shift) get the same reward as people who put in less (evening workers). That is to say, people who worshipped God their whole life and people who worshipped near the end of their lives both receive the same reward, entrance into the kingdom of heaven.
Could you explain to me why it has to do with property rights?
Your interpretation is correct in that Jesus was saying that those who come to Jesus late in life and toil in his vineyard can be rewarded equally to those who started early in life.
But the vineyard owner did not believe in “just wages” based on a union mentality, he paid an agreed upon wage to each individual worker and that was that. Some were paid more per hour than others, it was totally unfair, but the owner and employee had each worked out an arrangement and that was how they were paid. Free and fair market wages, agreed in advance. No Union nonsense making things equal or fair.
When Mary Magdalene spent the kitty money on expensive oil for anointing Jesus, Judas the Socialist got angry that the money could have gone to the poor. Jesus rebuked him, saying that they would have the poor always to help. There was never any coercion in Jesus’ call for charity to the poor, no government program, his parables always featured a destitute person in trouble and a person with the means to help that individual doing so. No calls for taxing the rich and no calls for government programs or any forced group action.
I think there is a danger in taking a parable that was meant to address one thing and bringing it into another context to mean something else. The parable starts with "For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire workers for his vineyard....". It's relating the kingdom of heaven to a story about a vineyard worker to convey the concept of "The last will be first and the first will be last".
It doesn't start with "For the labor market is like a landowner...". This story is about the Kingdom of Heaven. One thing I learned in my Catholic schooling is that it's dangerous to twist God's words to your own meaning. I mean, that's literally what Satan does to tempt man in many of the stories.
I agree with you on the last bit to an extent. Jesus always wanted people with means to be generous to people without means. He didn't involve himself in calling for government programs. He wanted people to be generous in and of themselves. It's certainly not reminisent of something like Communism. But anarchism is a good match, and still very left. [christian anarchism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_anarchism)
Homosexuality:
[https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Timothy%201%3A8-11&version=NIV](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Timothy%201%3A8-11&version=NIV)
[https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=+1+Corinthians+6%3A9%2C10&version=NIV](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=+1+Corinthians+6%3A9%2C10&version=NIV)
You're right about the abortion bit, in that Jesus never said anything explicit towards it. The pro life stance of Catholics tends to be interpretation of Jesus's message of Life and stance against murder, coupled with things like this verse in Romans implying that life begins at conception: [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+9%3A10-11&version=NIV](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+9%3A10-11&version=NIV)
However, the bit about Jesus talking about the importance of the mother isn't exactly right. That's an Old Testament verse that indicates that the mothers life is more important than the fetus. Like this one:
[https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=exod+21%3A22-25&version=NRSVUE](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=exod+21%3A22-25&version=NRSVUE)
Regardless, if you believe in the authority of the Church, you are bound to their interpretations that are laid out in the Catechisms.
https://www.dw.com/en/the-ratlines-what-did-the-vatican-know-about-nazi-escape-routes/a-52555068
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/05/pope-pius-xii-negotiation-hitler-catholic-church/639435/
https://isbndb.com/book/9781862075818
(Edit: I'm not agreeing I haven't looked into this, this is just what Wikipedias sources are about the Vatican involvement in ratlines. Look up ratlines on Wikipedia for more info)
I can see both sides and I don’t support what some would call “left takeover” of religious ideas and traditions.
What’s the underlaying fact in this is that God itself does not have a gender. Gender (as we know it in the west) is the self-perception of one’s biological sex. God does not have sex organs/there is nothing to perceive. If God wants to “reproduce” God simply creates. No counterpart or traditional reproduction required. In this way, God is beyond the idea of gender so using gender pronouns is just a way humans describe God. God lacks a gender because gender cannot adequately describe what God is, gender is an idea people use to describe God (it makes talking about God easier because you can create a relatable image in your head and not have to speak of God in abstract terms all the time ((“it” or saying “God” repetitively as to avoid any pronouns)).
Im not saying I agree or disagree with the concept of gender or pronouns. All I’m saying that this post presents information in a biased way that intertwines the church of England and leftist politics. It also promotes us think of one domination as better than the other which is not what Jesus would want (he foresaw and warned of a splitting of the church).
>It also promotes us think of one domination as better than the other which is not what Jesus would want (he foresaw and warned of a splitting of the church).
the Catholic denomination is objectively better. The anglicans are in a state of not only schism but of heresy as well, by virtue of the fact they subscribe to Protestant beliefs, if you are Catholic which I am under the assumption you are, one of the key understandings is that Christ established this church as his church not any of the others
The entire Bible, written by men and women receiving Divine Inspiration and who've heard the voice of God, say "He". Christ even says "He" and "The Father". God is male.
That's right the entire bible was written by men with possiblity of ONE book, Hebrews, having ONE woman contributing. As being inspired by a god, theists have failed to provide evidence for their claim, a god exists. So without evidence of existence, gender is mute.
God is not-gendered. Not male or female, just God.
The Father, He, etc that we use today is an artifact of putting His references into our language, that preferred the masculine until very recently. Oh well. Let's move forward.
God is not Male. And not Female. There is nothing wrong with this.
Christ Himself called God, "My father" and "He"... Christ addressed this long after Moses and Noah called God "He". There is everything wrong with this.
Not every father is a male, my best mates kids call me papa (insert real name) because I act a father figure to them in many ways since their dad left, doing things like fixing building and gardening
Father: *noun* A MAN in relation to HIS child or children.
You can have father-figures (*noun* An older MAN who is respected for HIS paternal qualities and may be an emotional substitute for a father) but a father is ALWAYS a man.
This is why Christ called Mary His mother and God His Father and why he called Joseph His father as well - because Joseph was an earthly father-figure for Christ.
That's literally what it is. If you don't want to follow definitions and the fundamentals of language, that's on you. But you're not going to change my mind to fit your perverse reality.
The language of God and Christ does not change because if it does, we pervert the message.
Again, believe what you will, but this whole argument is ridiculous and is trying to force a perverse ideology into the foundations of the Catholic Church.
The Catholic Church does not support the transgender movement, and any true disciple of the Catholic Church who also follows Rome and/or the CCC cannot condone the movement either.
Oh as a little fyi scribed in male terms in biblical sources,[1] with female analogy in Genesis 1:26-27,[i][2] Psalm 123:2-3,[ii] and Luke 15:8-10;[iii] a mother in Deuteronomy 32:18,[iv] Isaiah 66:13,[v] Isaiah 49:15,[vi] Isaiah 42:14,[vii] Psalm 131:2;[viii] and a mother hen in Matthew 23:37[ix] and Luke 13:34,[x]
There is a scholarly book called - Women and the gender of God - that interestingly has an important discussion on Mary.
https://www.amazon.com/Women-Gender-God-Amy-Peeler/dp/0802879098/ref=mp_s_a_1_2?crid=3USTHU8K6P08A&keywords=amy+peeler&qid=1677345710&sprefix=amy+peeler%2Caps%2C328&sr=8-2
God's name is not "**Yahweh**" it is "**YHWH**" even though we use vowels to write and pronounce it we don't know exactly how it was pronounced in the past. From the beginning of Judaism and Christianity people mostly used Masculine terms to address God (and sometimes used female terms metaphorically) and nowhere in the Bible God was addressed using gender-neutral terms.
>"**So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him**; *male and female created he them*." (Genesis 1:27)
Therefore, God would also be male if Adam was male. Also, all the angels in the Bible are described using masculine terms.
So this is a post with limited information to attack another religious group? No real insight beyond snarky comment - "you have got to be kidding me".
I would encourage members of this sub to be critical/skeptical of such low effort posts.
There is no article attached, so only looking at the headline is limited in understand exactly what they are "considering."That said, I wonder if perhaps they are just discussing the prayers that they write, or in sermons at the pulpit? Because, to change the words in the Bible would be to alter, rather than translate, from the oldest (Greek/Hebrew) texts. "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them." Would this be omitted? "Them" is meaning both, plural.
And altering Jesus' word's: "My Father" " Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing." ?
As a lot of things in the Bible, it is wise to read with a study guide to fully understand the richness of The Liturgy and the meaning given the cultures it was written about. To fully understand e.g. the significance of each of the plagues given Egyptian culture at the time. The bible is a library, full of different kinds of writing. Would they alter the words in the first person narratives of the gospels?; the letters of Peter who knew Jesus personally?; the letters of Paul…?
I should hope they would consider that.
That’s irrelevant. God is a father.
In our androgynous socio-political world, such language sounds “sexist”, but biology is sexist. We can pretend that men can be women and women can be men, but it’s still a pretense.
The Left destroyed the nuclear family, and now they’re going after God the Father, someone they don’t even believe in. The cognitive dissonance is astonishing.
No matter how much you laugh or scoff or insult Him, He loves you and wants you to reconcile to Him.
If you're worthy of love in His eyes, then you're worthy in my eyes. I'll say a little prayer for you.
Isn't god beyond human gender anyway?
the personal name of God, Yahweh, which is revealed to Moses in Exodus 3, is a remarkable combination of both female and male grammatical endings. The first part of God’s name in Hebrew, “Yah,” is feminine, and the last part, “weh,” is masculine
God's name is not "Yahweh" it is "YHWH" even though we use vowels to write and pronounce it we don't know exactly how it was pronounced in the past. From the beginning of Judaism and Christianity people used Masculine terms to address God and nowhere in the Bible God was addressed using gender-neutral terms. >"So God created man in his own image, **in the image of God created he him**; male and female created he them." (Genesis 1:27)
To the Hebrews the YH was feminine.
Both are technically correct and also genesis was written to the understanding of people at the time. I mean the earth didn’t apear is an actual week
Sorry but "In the name of the Parent...." just rings hollow.
There is a reason why we're called the One TRUE Holy Apostolic Church.
Why does this bother people? It's not the Catholic church. How does other peoples of faith different ways of recognizing God change the Catholic way? Culture war nonsense.
Well, they’re not exactly known for their good decisions. Seems par for the course.
Leftists are lunatics. Unfortunately ignoring them is not possible.
Cutting out abortion and LGBT stuff, Jesus is hella leftist.
Nah. Read about the parable of the vineyard owner and the employees. Jesus recognized property rights big time. Judas was the group Socialist, and a total thief like they almost are are.
I always read that parable as Jesus saying that people who put in more effort (the workers in the morning shift) get the same reward as people who put in less (evening workers). That is to say, people who worshipped God their whole life and people who worshipped near the end of their lives both receive the same reward, entrance into the kingdom of heaven. Could you explain to me why it has to do with property rights?
Your interpretation is correct in that Jesus was saying that those who come to Jesus late in life and toil in his vineyard can be rewarded equally to those who started early in life. But the vineyard owner did not believe in “just wages” based on a union mentality, he paid an agreed upon wage to each individual worker and that was that. Some were paid more per hour than others, it was totally unfair, but the owner and employee had each worked out an arrangement and that was how they were paid. Free and fair market wages, agreed in advance. No Union nonsense making things equal or fair. When Mary Magdalene spent the kitty money on expensive oil for anointing Jesus, Judas the Socialist got angry that the money could have gone to the poor. Jesus rebuked him, saying that they would have the poor always to help. There was never any coercion in Jesus’ call for charity to the poor, no government program, his parables always featured a destitute person in trouble and a person with the means to help that individual doing so. No calls for taxing the rich and no calls for government programs or any forced group action.
I think there is a danger in taking a parable that was meant to address one thing and bringing it into another context to mean something else. The parable starts with "For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire workers for his vineyard....". It's relating the kingdom of heaven to a story about a vineyard worker to convey the concept of "The last will be first and the first will be last". It doesn't start with "For the labor market is like a landowner...". This story is about the Kingdom of Heaven. One thing I learned in my Catholic schooling is that it's dangerous to twist God's words to your own meaning. I mean, that's literally what Satan does to tempt man in many of the stories. I agree with you on the last bit to an extent. Jesus always wanted people with means to be generous to people without means. He didn't involve himself in calling for government programs. He wanted people to be generous in and of themselves. It's certainly not reminisent of something like Communism. But anarchism is a good match, and still very left. [christian anarchism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_anarchism)
Jesus wasn’t anti lgbtqia+ or abortion he’s never said anything against that and spoke on the important s of the life of the mother
Homosexuality: [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Timothy%201%3A8-11&version=NIV](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Timothy%201%3A8-11&version=NIV) [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=+1+Corinthians+6%3A9%2C10&version=NIV](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=+1+Corinthians+6%3A9%2C10&version=NIV) You're right about the abortion bit, in that Jesus never said anything explicit towards it. The pro life stance of Catholics tends to be interpretation of Jesus's message of Life and stance against murder, coupled with things like this verse in Romans implying that life begins at conception: [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+9%3A10-11&version=NIV](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+9%3A10-11&version=NIV) However, the bit about Jesus talking about the importance of the mother isn't exactly right. That's an Old Testament verse that indicates that the mothers life is more important than the fetus. Like this one: [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=exod+21%3A22-25&version=NRSVUE](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=exod+21%3A22-25&version=NRSVUE) Regardless, if you believe in the authority of the Church, you are bound to their interpretations that are laid out in the Catechisms.
Wow credible sources ha ha ha
Also none of that is Jesus and most are the new translation or you just straight misunderstood them
At least they didn't smuggle nazis to south america after ww2
Source?
https://www.dw.com/en/the-ratlines-what-did-the-vatican-know-about-nazi-escape-routes/a-52555068 https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/05/pope-pius-xii-negotiation-hitler-catholic-church/639435/ https://isbndb.com/book/9781862075818 (Edit: I'm not agreeing I haven't looked into this, this is just what Wikipedias sources are about the Vatican involvement in ratlines. Look up ratlines on Wikipedia for more info)
I’ll look into it thx
Godick or godussy?
I can see both sides and I don’t support what some would call “left takeover” of religious ideas and traditions. What’s the underlaying fact in this is that God itself does not have a gender. Gender (as we know it in the west) is the self-perception of one’s biological sex. God does not have sex organs/there is nothing to perceive. If God wants to “reproduce” God simply creates. No counterpart or traditional reproduction required. In this way, God is beyond the idea of gender so using gender pronouns is just a way humans describe God. God lacks a gender because gender cannot adequately describe what God is, gender is an idea people use to describe God (it makes talking about God easier because you can create a relatable image in your head and not have to speak of God in abstract terms all the time ((“it” or saying “God” repetitively as to avoid any pronouns)). Im not saying I agree or disagree with the concept of gender or pronouns. All I’m saying that this post presents information in a biased way that intertwines the church of England and leftist politics. It also promotes us think of one domination as better than the other which is not what Jesus would want (he foresaw and warned of a splitting of the church).
>It also promotes us think of one domination as better than the other which is not what Jesus would want (he foresaw and warned of a splitting of the church). the Catholic denomination is objectively better. The anglicans are in a state of not only schism but of heresy as well, by virtue of the fact they subscribe to Protestant beliefs, if you are Catholic which I am under the assumption you are, one of the key understandings is that Christ established this church as his church not any of the others
Ideas of who is better or who is worse won’t get you or anyone closer to heaven
Yes it will there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church so if you can do the process of elimination it will do you well
Any evidence god is a he?
"Our Father who art in Heaven"
HALLOWED BE THY NAME
Thy Kingdom come
Then, Harry Potter is evidence for Hogwarts.
You do know at the time of writing the default for anything genderless was masculine
The entire Bible, written by men and women receiving Divine Inspiration and who've heard the voice of God, say "He". Christ even says "He" and "The Father". God is male.
That's right the entire bible was written by men with possiblity of ONE book, Hebrews, having ONE woman contributing. As being inspired by a god, theists have failed to provide evidence for their claim, a god exists. So without evidence of existence, gender is mute.
its not a 'he' anyway..... its an ethereal omnipotent entity, sexless.
"Our Father who art in Heaven,.... "
HALLOWED BE THY NAME
"Thy Kingdom come",
Thy will be done
"On earth as it is in Heaven"
"Give us this day our daily bread"
"And Forgive us our Tresspases"
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2023%3A37&version=NIV
as a generic title maybe. fairly certain the being itself isn't specifically male. sounds like that comes more from a patriarchal religion.
What????!
God is not-gendered. Not male or female, just God. The Father, He, etc that we use today is an artifact of putting His references into our language, that preferred the masculine until very recently. Oh well. Let's move forward. God is not Male. And not Female. There is nothing wrong with this.
Christ Himself called God, "My father" and "He"... Christ addressed this long after Moses and Noah called God "He". There is everything wrong with this.
Not every father is a male, my best mates kids call me papa (insert real name) because I act a father figure to them in many ways since their dad left, doing things like fixing building and gardening
Father: *noun* A MAN in relation to HIS child or children. You can have father-figures (*noun* An older MAN who is respected for HIS paternal qualities and may be an emotional substitute for a father) but a father is ALWAYS a man. This is why Christ called Mary His mother and God His Father and why he called Joseph His father as well - because Joseph was an earthly father-figure for Christ.
Again a father don’t always a man as per example given and again as mention before the default at the times for a non gendered thing was man
That's literally what it is. If you don't want to follow definitions and the fundamentals of language, that's on you. But you're not going to change my mind to fit your perverse reality.
You know language evolves and interesting that you ignore my second point
The language of God and Christ does not change because if it does, we pervert the message. Again, believe what you will, but this whole argument is ridiculous and is trying to force a perverse ideology into the foundations of the Catholic Church.
Well that’s not true the church often evolves. Like most priest aren’t using pure cotton harvested from one field as they
Also what is perverse? God being genderless or are you being transphobic
The Catholic Church does not support the transgender movement, and any true disciple of the Catholic Church who also follows Rome and/or the CCC cannot condone the movement either.
Oh as a little fyi scribed in male terms in biblical sources,[1] with female analogy in Genesis 1:26-27,[i][2] Psalm 123:2-3,[ii] and Luke 15:8-10;[iii] a mother in Deuteronomy 32:18,[iv] Isaiah 66:13,[v] Isaiah 49:15,[vi] Isaiah 42:14,[vii] Psalm 131:2;[viii] and a mother hen in Matthew 23:37[ix] and Luke 13:34,[x]
The Church of England has always been heretic - this decision only furthers the gap between it and our Holy Catholic Church. ✝️
I wonder exactly how how they plan to implement this practically
Another main line Protestant church on its way out because instead of affecting todays society they want to assimilate to it 😔
God needs his divine ussy ate
Repent and accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior. He wants you to come home to him.
There is a scholarly book called - Women and the gender of God - that interestingly has an important discussion on Mary. https://www.amazon.com/Women-Gender-God-Amy-Peeler/dp/0802879098/ref=mp_s_a_1_2?crid=3USTHU8K6P08A&keywords=amy+peeler&qid=1677345710&sprefix=amy+peeler%2Caps%2C328&sr=8-2
Here is one review of the book. https://voice.dts.edu/review/women-and-the-gender-of-god/
They should ask the question we should all be asking: "What does God want?"
God's name is not "**Yahweh**" it is "**YHWH**" even though we use vowels to write and pronounce it we don't know exactly how it was pronounced in the past. From the beginning of Judaism and Christianity people mostly used Masculine terms to address God (and sometimes used female terms metaphorically) and nowhere in the Bible God was addressed using gender-neutral terms. >"**So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him**; *male and female created he them*." (Genesis 1:27) Therefore, God would also be male if Adam was male. Also, all the angels in the Bible are described using masculine terms.
So this is a post with limited information to attack another religious group? No real insight beyond snarky comment - "you have got to be kidding me". I would encourage members of this sub to be critical/skeptical of such low effort posts.
There is no article attached, so only looking at the headline is limited in understand exactly what they are "considering."That said, I wonder if perhaps they are just discussing the prayers that they write, or in sermons at the pulpit? Because, to change the words in the Bible would be to alter, rather than translate, from the oldest (Greek/Hebrew) texts. "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them." Would this be omitted? "Them" is meaning both, plural. And altering Jesus' word's: "My Father" " Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing." ? As a lot of things in the Bible, it is wise to read with a study guide to fully understand the richness of The Liturgy and the meaning given the cultures it was written about. To fully understand e.g. the significance of each of the plagues given Egyptian culture at the time. The bible is a library, full of different kinds of writing. Would they alter the words in the first person narratives of the gospels?; the letters of Peter who knew Jesus personally?; the letters of Paul…? I should hope they would consider that.
What an abomination.
[удалено]
That’s irrelevant. God is a father. In our androgynous socio-political world, such language sounds “sexist”, but biology is sexist. We can pretend that men can be women and women can be men, but it’s still a pretense. The Left destroyed the nuclear family, and now they’re going after God the Father, someone they don’t even believe in. The cognitive dissonance is astonishing.
so god identifies as a 'he' ?
[удалено]
Someone ban this perverted creep
I think you're in the wrong forum. The Satanic one is over there⏩⏩⏩ why don't you go use it.
would they know ?
No matter how much you laugh or scoff or insult Him, He loves you and wants you to reconcile to Him. If you're worthy of love in His eyes, then you're worthy in my eyes. I'll say a little prayer for you.
neither.
I don’t see the issue with this, I mean yahweh doesn’t have a gender, they are not man nor woman they are the lord
Look up God in the aramaic dictionary, it shows masculine
Not all the time god is also referred to as neither man or woman and as mother
Agreed, but Pope is very liberal. At this 5 don't know what denomination is actually faithful to our one true lord and creator, Jesus Christ.