Why a male supreme God?

[Pegg]

How exactly is it sexist?


What's wrong with nudity? Anyway:

"In many instances she is described as garbed in space or sky clad. In her absolute, primordial nakedness she is free from all covering of illusion. She is Nature (Prakriti in Sanskrit), stripped of 'clothes'. It symbolizes that she is completely beyond name and form, completely beyond the illusory effects of maya (false consciousness). Her nudity is said to represent totally illumined consciousness, unaffected by maya. Kali is the bright fire of truth, which cannot be hidden by the clothes of ignorance. Such truth simply burns them away."
Mother Goddess as Kali - The Feminine Force in Indian Art

since when did spirits even have bodies? Isnt it a bit odd that these gods and goddesses always appear in human form.

Its nothing but a mans imagining of the perfect woman. Lol,.

 

[Chakra]

This is not going to end well.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

since when did spirits even have bodies? Isnt it a bit odd that these gods and goddesses always appear in human form.

Its nothing but a mans imagining of the perfect woman. Lol,.

You're much too ignorant to attempt to converse about these subjects. You lack a basic understanding of religions outside of what the Watchtower tells you to think.

I'll give you a hint: It's not literal. Kali has no physical form. She is beyond all form. Depictions of Her are but symbols that should lead to deeper understanding.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I hear what you're saying. It's interesting we have different perspectives.

Originally in the Bible Eve helped Adam (no balance) and after the fall, as you say, Eve is sensitive (still no balance). Through years and years we've (America) have been trying to conform our nation to biblical laws (as we interpret them) by not allowing balance, equality, and diversity because they feel they have the proper means of how to structure society--God's Word. If I were Christian, I'd feel I have the proper way, you feel you have the proper way, and so on and so forth.

The thing is, because there is a diversity of cultures and beliefs here in America, one belief is not better or more right than the other. It isn't as in some countries where in many parts that belief system is all they know. It is a part of their culture and way of life. It's not they they tell others are wrong; it's that they might not know there are other people who think very very differently than they do.

In America, it's the opposite. We see the religious diversity and how each religion tries to put its men and women in their own respective class based on what "God" told them.

I like Anne Wilson Schaef and auther said it like this: "Why would we try to annul the rick heritage of variability we have on this planet to develop a one-party system? When a rainbow gets constricted, it becomes on color--white." (White--Christian and race)

Unless they chose to, women should not have to live under biblical laws. Especially, if it is not her belief or values.

we live in a world where men and women are not living as they were designed.

When God created Adam and Eve, he created Adam first and gave him full responsiblity for oversight of the Garden of Eden. Afterward he created Eve to be a helper for him. So she was not given full responsibility over the garden and over her husband. But she was made to be capable to assist him and when we consider the events in Eden, we can even see that she could work autonomously for when Satan approached her, she was alone at the time and doing something independently. So the womans role was certainly not a helpless one.

It was after they were removed from Eden that the roles of men and women became unbalanced. Adam became overly dominant, Eve became overly sensitive.

If men and women fill the roles they were assigned correctly, then the relationship works perfectly....and the bible explains how each can fit into such a role. When applied correctly, it works. But you have to remember that mankind went astray for a very long time and the cultures and customs which we despise today were brought about by imperfect people, not God.

 

[Pegg]

You're much too ignorant to attempt to converse about these subjects. You lack a basic understanding of religions outside of what the Watchtower tells you to think.

I'll give you a hint: It's not literal. Kali has no physical form. She is beyond all form. Depictions of Her are but symbols that should lead to deeper understanding.

Oh I see... and people choose to present her as some kind of sex symbol displaying her as a nude female. Interesting take on what you say is completely 'free of form and illusion'

Funny that.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Oh I see... and people choose to present her as some kind of sex symbol displaying her as a nude female. Interesting take on what you say is completely 'free of form and illusion'

Funny that.

You think this is a sex symbol? She has fangs, a bloody tongue, carries a severed head and a bloody sword and has a skirt made up of severed arms. "Sexy" isn't what most people think of when it comes to Kali. (Unless you're into that sort of thing.)

 

[Chakra]

I think part of the problem is that most Abrahamics have a different understanding of how God looks and try to judge everything from that.
For example, Abrahamics would probably call Bhagavan Narasimha as a demon or something like that, but they don't pay attention to the beautiful story that comes along with (which I feel is unrivaled by all of the Biblical "devotional" stories) this incarnation. Oh well. This is why Vaishnavas don't talk about God's kalyana gunas, image, form, etc with non-Vaishnavas because it's a given that someone will criticize it (and incur Bhagavad apradham on himself).

As for myself, I like to think of Kali as wearing a sari (it's probably wrong, my perception of Kali).

 

[Pegg]

You think this is a sex symbol? She has fangs, a bloody tongue, carries a severed head and a bloody sword and has a skirt made up of severed arms. "Sexy" isn't what most people think of when it comes to Kali. (Unless you're into that sort of thing.)

I cant' help but wonder if this kind of portrayal contributes to the sexual violence prevalent in the places where this god is worshiped.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I cant' help but wonder if this kind of portrayal contributes to the sexual violence prevalent in the places where this god is worshiped.

Most Hindus don't worship Kali. Nice try, but no. Shaktism requires one to reverence women. But the rape issue is another topic.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I think part of the problem is that most Abrahamics have a different understanding of how God looks and try to judge everything from that.
For example, Abrahamics would probably call Bhagavan Narasimha as a demon or something like that, but they don't pay attention to the beautiful story that comes along with (which I feel is unrivaled by all of the Biblical "devotional" stories) this incarnation. Oh well. This is why Vaishnavas don't talk about God's kalyana gunas, image, form, etc with non-Vaishnavas because it's a given that someone will criticize it (and incur Bhagavad apradham on himself).

As for myself, I like to think of Kali as wearing a sari (it's probably wrong, my perception of Kali).

Yeah, sometimes it's a waste of time to attempt to explain things to some people. You can lead a person to knowledge but you can't make them think.

 

[Smart_Guy]

I'm afraid the wold we live in is already sexist. Those in charge, the ones heard, owners of huge firms, war minds... etc., are vast mostly men. We do need those who stand for women.

But anyways, the subject is about gods' gender. How come it turned into a human sexist fight?

 

[Kirran]

@Pegg, nudity is far far less charged in the cultures associated with the worship of Kali than in many Western cultures who see nudity so rarely it's automatically associated with eroticism. This isn't the case in many places.

 

[Desert Snake]

Because the Biblical narrative makes no sense.

To you it may not. Great. That doesn't mean that your interpretation of religions is correct.

I think part of the problem is that most Abrahamics have a different understanding of how God looks and try to judge everything from that.
For example, Abrahamics would probably call Bhagavan Narasimha as a demon or something like that, but they don't pay attention to the beautiful story that comes along with (which I feel is unrivaled by all of the Biblical "devotional" stories) this incarnation. Oh well. This is why Vaishnavas don't talk about God's kalyana gunas, image, form, etc with non-Vaishnavas because it's a given that someone will criticize it (and incur Bhagavad apradham on himself).

As for myself, I like to think of Kali as wearing a sari (it's probably wrong, my perception of Kali).

What ''problem''? There is feminine in the Bible as well, just because your missing it or think that deities aren't 'male' or whatever is not a ''problem'', just your perspective. You seem to be criticizing what you don't understand; and that is never going to lead to good criticism.

 

[Robert Vincelette]

To those who worship a male supreme deity - why? What leads you to conclude that the Supreme Being is male or otherwise masculine? How do you arrive at the idea that the Creator is male? I don't see this in nature. It is the female who brings forth life in nature. The male's contribution is somewhat of an afterthought. Even fetuses start out female and only develop into males when the Y chromosome is introduced. The Bible, for instance, has this backward and has the woman being born from the male, as an afterthought when Adam couldn't find a suitable companion among the animals. How does this make any sense?

Is it only because your holy book presents your deity in masculine terms? Or did you come to this conclusion by yourself? Male supreme deities seem to be rather late in humanity's religious history, after all.

Male, and female are but symbols in attempting to describe something too advanced to need to emulate the biology of reproduction. In the end of Goethe's Faust, where we are admonished that everything worldly is but a symbol of what is eternal, God emulates characteristics that our crude language describes in male characteristics and also the highest queen of Heaven along with the eternal feminine leading us on.

 

[Maranatha]

Not sure about all that.


"Our father in heaven"

Well, you're only speaking of literalists there. No doubt the language of the Bible is in masculine form..... it is, of it's age. Human society on Earth is progressive, and it's naive to look back at times when issues of gender and equality did not even exist in common thought, and to consider that a 'sexist' aspect.

For me, as a Quaker, the divine certainly transcends gender, and/or form even. God is everything, in everyone. Dualisms are generally created in the mind, and have little basis in reality.

 

[miodrag]

What leads you to conclude that the Supreme Being is male or otherwise masculine? How do you arrive at the idea that the Creator is male?

I worship a divine couple, but still I accept dogma, which means a truth revealed by God, that He is male. So, it was never my choice. I understand that you worship Shakti, which is His energy. But if there is energy, there is also a source of energy.

In mine, God is portrayed as male, female, or neither, but anyone 'in the know' knows it's actually neither. I assume that beyond time, form and space also means beyond gender.

In my sampradaya, God is portrayed as male, female, neither and BOTH - simultaneously. We also understand that God has a form, like sat-cit-ananda vigraha, meaning an eternal form made of absolute knowledge and absolute bliss.

 

[Markella]

IMO I guess it all depends on your take of God. Most religions believe their God to be Omnipotent, there for being bound to neither male, female, or even human form. The concept of God and Gods having human form is people's way of being able to comprehend them and a way of being able to relate to them.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

To those who worship a male supreme deity - why? What leads you to conclude that the Supreme Being is male or otherwise masculine? How do you arrive at the idea that the Creator is male? I don't see this in nature. It is the female who brings forth life in nature. The male's contribution is somewhat of an afterthought. Even fetuses start out female and only develop into males when the Y chromosome is introduced. The Bible, for instance, has this backward and has the woman being born from the male, as an afterthought when Adam couldn't find a suitable companion among the animals. How does this make any sense?

Is it only because your holy book presents your deity in masculine terms? Or did you come to this conclusion by yourself? Male supreme deities seem to be rather late in humanity's religious history, after all.

Sex and gender are the means of reproduction in the material world. In a spiritual world, and especially with only One God, which is the only model for omnipotent divinity that makes sense, there would be no need for gender. Lacking a better pronoun, I refer to God as It. And, btw, the non-existence of gender would not preclude the spiritual melding of 2 to two-trillion+ souls (within God, or elsewhere?), which presents all kinds of possibilities for ecstasy....or whatever.

 

[Midget01]

To those who worship a male supreme deity - why? What leads you to conclude that the Supreme Being is male or otherwise masculine? How do you arrive at the idea that the Creator is male? I don't see this in nature. It is the female who brings forth life in nature. The male's contribution is somewhat of an afterthought. Even fetuses start out female and only develop into males when the Y chromosome is introduced. The Bible, for instance, has this backward and has the woman being born from the male, as an afterthought when Adam couldn't find a suitable companion among the animals. How does this make any sense?

Is it only because your holy book presents your deity in masculine terms? Or did you come to this conclusion by yourself? Male supreme deities seem to be rather late in humanity's religious history, after all.

Human Kind does not have the language in which to speak of their Supreme Beings in the terms they need to, Mankind began with Adam which began with a term Ishand ever since then we have referred our God as Him not because He embodies on one sex but because we don't have the words to speak of Him in any other way. If you read and learn about God of different Faiths you come to know they give Him/Her different attributes and it is only in the words that we end up breaking the sex down to 2 forms. We are limited by our knowledge and the way we express our knowledge. What is Satan is it a he or she? The knowledge we come to know is the only words we have to chose from. While knowledge is power to misguide or misuse it is wrong and should not be done to lead others to one's side or another. Truth is Truth no matter what words we use. So I guess we could say we depend on the honesty and long history that began with verbal tradition and later became written tradition. We know that modern man did not create this because history has recorded it from ancient times. If modern man has done anything He/She tries to redefine it in their way of understanding but before we accept the understanding with today's twist we must go back to what was said and spoken along with how they intended it to be or we are altering their words and giving them different definitions. woman was not an after thought but a plan of God's from the beginning since He allowed all the other creatures to pro create; He also had set this concept into motion. The doubt or questioning of why woman second came from the ancient children born from their union and then learning what caused their creation. why would Scientists call the center of life an Atom. Words do have meaning and great impact but we have to start somewhere. I am a woman and in this modern day one would say I should be upset but I know what God has planned for me and I am not concerned that Man was created first. I don't believe that I need to be equal in the sense that I am capable of doing everything that you are. I was created and made in the image of my God and the parts that I do are the parts He instilled in me; they are my gifts. I am not weaker nor less of a person because I can bare children. If I meet the right Adam then I will be complete because he is a man who incomplete without his Eve. Neither of us should have to feel like we need to Lord that over each other. That is what is lost from the Garden. In the Garden Adam and Eve knew they completed each other. There was no rivalry. They had Eros and Agape together. Today we separate these 2 types of love and wonder why we don't have good relationships. Eros is erotic love and totally misused because it was originally used to be given to the spouse only agape is seen as a stronger more permanent love to sacrifice oneself for the other a totally union. This too is in question in this society today because we have divided and torn apart the true essence of the gift of love that God gave His people in the Garden. Love today has become Lust and at times even that becomes questionable. A true creature of God understands this and doesn't let the world describe for them what the role of man and woman should be or let a society tell them who is stronger or weaker.

 

[Maya Kaath]

This is largely a matter of language. In languages that have no gendered pronouns, God is neither male nor female. The Bahá'í writings make the point that the gendering of God is a human accommodation, not reality. God has no gender and in His native languages (Persian and Arabic) there is no gendered pronoun (something many of my Persian friends struggle with when they learn English).

Krishna comments in the Bhagavad Gita that He is the Father of the Universe and even greater than the Father, He is the Mother of the Universe.

Which brings up another reason we humans tend to identify God as male—the major Prophets have all been male and some religions especially have come to identify God with His Avatar. In Hinduism, there is a blending of the male-female principles of God in the pairing of Krishna with Radha to the point that they are Radha-Krishna. In Judaism, the Holy Spirit or Shekinah is thought of as female.

Again, this is a human accommodation. We are gendered, so we recreate God in our image.