In our modern society, the struggle of sexism still stains the portrayal of females as subordinates for males in secular worldviews and religious ones. The religious context of God as feminine is predominantly dubious to some of the Jewish, Christian, and Islamic beliefs due to the conception of women serving as subjects to men. The Female Nature of God is a widely controversial topic that seethes both the masculine and feminine sides of humanity. Theories of God's nature as male are largely asserted, because of the patriarchs in the ancient world. According to Rosemary Radford Reuther, the feminine in the ancient scriptures are suppressed in Patriarchal Theology( 83). The prophetic Book of Isaiah based on Reuther's study of Leonard Swidler's Biblical Affirmation of Woman, details Yahweh as a mother who cries out for her child, and as a mother who will not forsake her child. It is presumed by some that the passage derived from Isaiah is a mere metaphor of God's loving Nature towards humanity, yet the context of the scripture seems to implicate the opposite. Further speculation of the nature of God arises with the birth of Christ the son of God. Many monotheistic faith traditions of Christianity use the event of Christ's birth as vindication to support God's ultimate nature as the male figure. Reuther's study also explains the Catholic thinking of God's nature a component of the trinity the Holy Spirit. God's creation in the womb of Mary seems to mediate women to the creative side of God as a result of the anthropomorphic nature of God in Mary's womb is more coherent with ''male semen''(84). Reuther further concludes that, ''The feminine in patriarchal theology is basically allowed to act only within the same limited, subordinate or mediating roles that women are allowed to act in the patriarchal social order''(84). A revolt against the patriarchal theology has occurred in the 1970s and today some feminist still oppose the patriarchal theology. Instead of God the feminist substitute Goddess and implement a nature centered approach(85). However, both the patriarchal and feminist approach contain inefficiencies. According to Reuther the feminist nature of God has been reversed instead of altered. On both spectrums of the Nature of God or the Goddess, the male is segregated and the female is as well. With both concepts containing an overall deficiency of God's nature one must look beyond the image of the patriarchal God and Feminine Goddess. Could it be that God simply mediates through male to female due to his dominant role as father? In the ancient society of Christ's existence a female figure would be powerless against the rabbinic principles of the Pharisees and Sadducees. Did God purposely create a son to operate with more efficiency in the Patriarchal society? A more dualistic approach towards the nature of God seems to deliver vindication for both males and females, but the scriptural context prohibits this from taking place if interpreted to implicate male dominance solely. Currently, both male and females generally speaking have equal rights. However, if the mindsets of a patriarchal and feminine theory of God are implemented in those rights what would occur? If a male asserts that women can't be police officers, and if a woman states that a man couldn't be a secretary what would occur? It can be presumed that in both instances the male and female would fight for the right to that occupation because it's a constituted freedom. The mindset of a particular group has nothing to do with the overall reality of the situation if people have that freedom. It all comes down to dualism and an egalitarian perspective. Perhaps God created both male and female to operate equality. We possess fundamentally different qualities, and biological features but we have the capacity to complete tasks, learn facts, and process information at the same level. When a male and female marry the marriage symbolizes and celebrates that unity as one in our society. In the ancient one it may have distributed the same idea of man and wife unified but the man in some sense would predominantly be authoritative and believe females to be subordinates. However, our society declares freedom and decrees both sides of humanity as equals. The Nature of God should be conceived as neither male or female since he created both and is viewed as a separate divine deity. It all comes down to humanity's free will of conception towards the Nature of God. Will your doctrine assert him as male, female, or neither?
Udayana states that there are seven ways to prove that God is in existence; effects, atomic combination, suspension, human skills, authoritative knowledge, Revelation, and atoms. He also calls Him the "all-knowing, imperishable God." He is imperishable God because he is the only one who could create atoms because humans are not able to. Also, humans can not break atoms or destroy them and he is stating that the only person that can do that is God because he created atoms. He mentions the difference between the cause and effect to validate if there is a God. He brings up the argument that "Things like the earth must have a cause, because they are produced by a body (101)." Some deity had to have made the earth for their pleasure. He also relies on objections to prove that God is real. Udayana does bring up good ideas to prove that God is real. The best argument to me is that he created atoms. Humans are unable to destroy atoms or to create them; so they had to be...
I agree with the fact that we have different qualities. Some things women try to take on they really should not because it was designed for men and vice versa, but there are somethings that both can do.
ReplyDelete"Perhaps God created both male and female to operate equality. We possess fundamentally different qualities, and biological features but we have the capacity to complete tasks, learn facts, and process information at the same level. "
ReplyDeleteI agree with this to a certain point. I believe that if one concludes there is a God whether this being is male or female, it would be a being of order. It is true males and females possess the same qualities in learning and task completion. It is also true that jobs usually considered gender specific can be completed quite efficiently by the opposite gender. However, we know as you stated we are biologically different. It has been proven women express themselves and their feelings easier and more often than males. Men tend to think more logically over emotionally. Its fair to say the average healthy male is physically stronger than the average healthy female. These are all qualities that are inherit. They do not dictate our intellect or over all abilities but they do suggest a plan of balance was set in order. Perhaps God designed males to be the head because of their physical strength and logical nature. Much of what we handle here on earth requires logistics over emotion and before modern advancements much of the work required strenuous physical labor . Perhaps women were created to balance that and help the head. Somethings need a "softer" touch. There is a saying, "The man is the head but the woman is the neck. Without the neck the head can't turn." The implication that God is male and therefore males are over women is one that shouldn't always be looked upon negatively but as a form of order. The role of female, wife, mother being "secondary" is not in actuality less but a very important tool that ensures our world's balance. Second is needed for first to carry meaning.