god was not created and he does not have a partner and nor does he beget. MAN was created in his image. This does note necesarily mean the physical form, but his qualities. Until the world was created and right and wrong was established, there was no need for compassion, mercy, forgivenes, love, hate, etc. God had this capacity for his creation, but the creation(the angles who have no want and desire or need- (at the time before man)) could not know them, as they would never go hungry and need to steel and so commit a sin.
God is beyond physical reality. The physical reality is something he created. So if we are stuck in reality and we are only able to imgaine in color, texture, numbers, then we cannot imagine outside this and thus we cannot imagine our creator.
There are two sides to everything. Two sides to a coin, two sides to a story, two sides to duality, yin and yang. I think that its just the word that is applied to god and how we feel more comfortable in using it in words.
God is, God is that Which Is, God has no shape, no form, no color, no fragrance, no size, and no gender. God is All Shapes, all forms, all colors, fragrances and sizes. God is both gender, and that which is genderless as well.
God is the All, the Everything, and the No Thing from which the Everything emerges.
There is nothing God created that is not God Itself. All you see everywhere around you is God expressing. God is Everything!
God is, God is that Which Is, God has no shape, no form, no color, no fragrance, no size, and no gender. God is All Shapes, all forms, all colors, fragrances and sizes. God is both gender, and that which is genderless as well.
God is the All, the Everything, and the No Thing from which the Everything emerges.
There is nothing God created that is not God Itself. All you see everywhere around you is God expressing. God is Everything!
If that is what you believe that is what it is. If you believe in God, all roads lead to him.
There needs to be a section for "I don't know". If I were to take the bible word for word, I would have to say he is a man (since Adam was created to look like him), but the truth is, I just don't know and probably won't until I make my way to Heaven.
There needs to be a section for "I don't know". If I were to take the bible word for word, I would have to say he is a man (since Adam was created to look like him), but the truth is, I just don't know and probably won't until I make my way to Heaven.
In the Bible it is said that man was created in gods image. But we must be careful in our interpertation. For the image in which relates to god is that of the mind or thought. Not body for the creator is beyond physical realm. If one truly wants to know the nature of he who is beyond, imagine all that has ever been created trees, flowers, water , sky, mankind, animals,clouds and all that has come from him is of him. Therfor the true image of the creator is beyond our comprehension and beyond our very thoughts.That is why the indians called him the great spirit. That is why to be one with god is to be one with life.
It's amazing how muddled this issue continues to be, after thousands of years of study and inspiration in the Holy Scriptures alone. First of all, Genesis quotes, "Let US make man (mankind?) in OUR image..." Hmmm. Sounds like there's more than one person involved here.
I learned some years ago that in the Hebrew the term for "Holy Spirit" is Eloheim--which is in the feminine gender!! I checked this out with a religious Jews, who confirmed it for me--even though he himself had never even realized this before!! Excitedly he told me, "This is a whole new avenue of study!" He added that the Shekinah also is in feminie gender--and showed me a Jewish commentary on the Shekinah which continusously refered to that entity with a femmine pronoun.
One might also note that in the first 7 or so chapters of Proverbs, "wisdom" and "knowledge" is continuously referred to as "she".
The upshot of all this has to be that the family unit (i. e., "man", or "mankind") must be patterned upon the Godhead, in which Jehovah is the paternal figure, the "Holy Spirit" is the feminie, and Jesus is, indeed, THEIR "first begotton Son"! I love this imagry, for since my youth I've always felt badly for women because they had not the "role model" Adam, etc. did; and as such, seemed almost totally "out of the loop". And indeed, it seems a great many women have also felt this way.
The beauty of this model is that it also gives us understanding of how husbands and wives are supposed to relate to each other, being of "one mind" as well as "one flesh". Hope this helps someone understand what's going on, after 4,000 years of muddled thought on this subject.
God has no gender. The 'we' is a royal We. The same language is used in the quran where god often refers to himself as 'We'
God also in the quran address the jewish misconceptions that the angels are his daughters. Some where this error has crept in and god is not to happy about it.
When god says he has made us in his image, it does not mean in literal physical sense, i.e. having male genitals or hormones, as anyway they would not be of any use with a spirit form. Also god does not in anyway need to eat.
What is more likely meant is that man has the qualities of god, i.e. to free think, to love, to show compassion, to hate something, to feel anger (but he has no remorse)ect. .
for us muslims there is no confusion and there has never been.
does it make sens that god created adam and begets a son from one of adams daughters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBob
It's amazing how muddled this issue continues to be, after thousands of years of study and inspiration in the Holy Scriptures alone. First of all, Genesis quotes, "Let US make man (mankind?) in OUR image..." Hmmm. Sounds like there's more than one person involved here.
I learned some years ago that in the Hebrew the term for "Holy Spirit" is Eloheim--which is in the feminine gender!! I checked this out with a religious Jews, who confirmed it for me--even though he himself had never even realized this before!! Excitedly he told me, "This is a whole new avenue of study!" He added that the Shekinah also is in feminie gender--and showed me a Jewish commentary on the Shekinah which continusously refered to that entity with a femmine pronoun.
One might also note that in the first 7 or so chapters of Proverbs, "wisdom" and "knowledge" is continuously referred to as "she".
The upshot of all this has to be that the family unit (i. e., "man", or "mankind") must be patterned upon the Godhead, in which Jehovah is the paternal figure, the "Holy Spirit" is the feminie, and Jesus is, indeed, THEIR "first begotton Son"! I love this imagry, for since my youth I've always felt badly for women because they had not the "role model" Adam, etc. did; and as such, seemed almost totally "out of the loop". And indeed, it seems a great many women have also felt this way.
The beauty of this model is that it also gives us understanding of how husbands and wives are supposed to relate to each other, being of "one mind" as well as "one flesh". Hope this helps someone understand what's going on, after 4,000 years of muddled thought on this subject.
Have we forgotten the scripture in John: God is spirit!
As a spirit in all of us it joins the family of humanity in a common thread. As a man, woman, or other description it serves to separate not incorporate. Why make gender an issue?
Gender is such a crucial aspect to humanity that to deny it would be to deny an obvious truth of our existence. Of one thing I am almost certain - if you deny the smaller truths because they may be contentious or confusing then you can never move on to understand greater truths.
It is also foundational to our understanding of any God that aspects such as masculine/feminine came from somewhere and with some reason - perhaps that God (and therefore the Universe) has always had the inherent duality, perhaps that God intentionally chose to create mankind or this Universe with these dualities, perhaps that it was an accident or mistake that we are all called to clean up after .... who knows! To deny that you experience something which you do experience is not a path to enlightenment.
If we acknowledge that we experience masculine and feminine aspects in our lives then we can do nothing other than to accept that and seek to understand it's nature.
At the same, there are those content with their understanding and those seeking further understanding to reach a state of contentment.
I don't think the path will be the same for all people.
