So misogyny/sexism/sociological reasons/etc aside : Why is "God" referred to consistently as a male figure? The act of creation is in itself a predominantly feminine attribute so why is it "wrong" to label Her as a female
Paternal reverence.
>The act of creation is in itself a predominantly feminine attribute
lol
>>429258
>what is giving birth
Creation is by definition feminine. See parthenogenesis.
>>429261
>Creation is by definition feminine.
lol
The developmental part of 'creation' in regards to the creation of human life is predominantly female, but conception is split.
The developmental part of life outside of the womb, and the sustaining of that life, has predominantly been contingent on male actions and creations.
The Christian Pantheon has a woman that literally gave birth to a third of God, and sits in a pretty high position. Isn't that enough recognition?
>>429268
>The developmental part of life outside of the womb, and the sustaining of that life, has predominantly been contingent on male actions and creations.
hahahahahahahahahahaha
Literally "what is childhood" the mother is BY FAR, no argument here, by far he most important part of childhood.
>>429272
>"what is childhood"
A relatively short part of life.
>>429272
uhuh
and who feeds the mother?
throughout our collective history, that is ;)
Because it's called intelligent design, not histrionic design.
A quick Google search of human history and you'll find that there's not just one God. Gods have been worshipped since Mesopotamia. Even the Christian bible mentions the greekoroman pantheon. "God" is not a proper noun, it is a title. Both male and female gods have influenced us.
>>429254
Because with the exception of some fringe elements of academia, everybody accepts that gods have always been predominantly male. Especially the leaders of pantheons.
Which is not to say that females weren't worshipped, or rather female deities. They were. And they were also associated with fertility, and largely worshipped for that purpose.
Egyptian and Cycladic fertility figures for example, are plainly sexualized to emphasis this.
That said, theres no evidence for wide spread and exclusive worship of female deities anywhere, and especially not in cultures that developed civilization.
Next, creation is not feminine. Ancients understood that it was a two person job. That is why so many creation myths (sumerian, greek, for instance) involve the impregnation of a female deity.
Egyptian creation is also via parthenogenesis, but by a male god.
Women were also associated with love, lust, and passion, in reference to their role in prorogation of the species and all of those are regarded as negative in sumerian and greek mythology for the most part.
And finally, there is the fact that while creation is a joint venture, the bulk of the work in ancient society was done by men. Abrahamic god, is also a leader, a head, patriarchic if you will to reflect the fact men were leaders of society and the household.
>>429254
The act of gestation is female. Creation is not a solo deal.
The reason god is usually male is because men are correctly perceived as more powerful than women.
Oh and stop calling things that aren't my soggy knees, my soggy knees.
In mysticism the female is the negative polarity, the receptive, passive giver of form and the principle of our earthly, material bodies. The male is the positive polarity, the active, energetic principle that provides the basic "reality-stuff" which the female structures into form. Aristotle's definition of reality as "stuff + structure" comes to mind here. The male and female are two sides of the Godhead, which is infinite and beyond all duality. Faggots who get butthurt about the divine getting misgendered are bozos
>>429254
Use a non fatty if you are going to post real pics.
>>429254
>>429254
Oh, and another thing. If the scripture of religion (Abrahamic in this case) specifies a male god, you can not change the gender of that god and then claim to worship the same god or be a member of that religion.
The Christian bible was written in Greek, and the Muslim one in Arabic, and both have feminine tenses, but neither used them. This is thus by design (presumably divine, if you believe they are the word of god/christ/his epistles) and thus a key tenant of the faith.
The for Torah at least Hebrew does not have a feminine tense, but if god were female or that was an important ideal in their culture they would have developed one.
>>429254
Basically?
Short answer: Chrsitianity is full of pricks.
There you go op
/thread
>>429294
I tend to think that monotheism predates polytheism. Greek polytheism supports my hypothesis since in that case there was one God which gave birth to all the other gods. I'm not sure about other polytheisms though.
>>429372
They don't have to be manly exclusive. You can have a supreme god or principle that emanates lesser divinities. Shintoism is Japanese animism that holds all things have spirit, but ultimately have their source in one great spirit
>>429324
>>429354
Jesus, one more thing.
Jesus was explicitly the son of god, who was the father. I mean, its so intentional, and explicit, and well constructed that the Biblical Christian god is male, that I can't even imagine the delusions you people develop to think you can label him a her.
Doing so completely shatters the foundation and the structure of the faith and of the church, it's literally heresy to call god a woman.
>>429372
That is wrong. Hesiod begins with chaos, which is nothingness, and from there night and darkness are born.
Ovid's version begins with chaos, which is all of creation unordered in a sphere of.. chaos. From there a god orders things. The god isn't specified, but it couldnt be an allusion to monotheism since, like, obviously even ovid's version of the myth has the pantheon.
Monotheists also were 100% intolerant of polytheists, and its doubtful a monotheistic society would become a polytheistic society while retaining that link.
Greek polytheism can also be traced to PIE religion, and all IE cultures were polytheists with strong parallels to each other.
>>429356
You must be from tumblr
>>429356
>>429402
>>429372
>Choas was first of all, but next appeared
>Broad-bosomed Earth, sure standing-place for all
>The gods who live on snowy Olympus' peak
>And misty Tartarus, in a recess
>Of broad-pathed earth, and Love, most beautiful
>Of all the deathless gods. He makes men weak,
>He overpowers the clever mind, and tames
>The spirit in the breasts of men and gods.
>From Chaos came black Night and Erebos.
>And Earth bore starry Heaven, first, to be
>An equal to herself, to cover her
>All over, and to be a resting place,
>Always secure, for all the blessed gods.
So I apologize. Chaos is first, but still not created. Earth, Tartarus, and Love are next, possibly out of Chaos or maybe not, they could also be original and uncreated entities.
No indication of monotheism, and no indication that Earth is somehow superior to any of the other 4.
Note how Love is male. Aphrodite is born violently out of the genitals of Ouranos. Parthenogenesis always is associated with negative traits except in Athena and arguably the generation born of Chaos and Gaia.
Aphrodite:
>Fond murmuring of girls, and smiles, and tricks,
>And sweet delight, and friendliness, and charm.
So Love tames, and Aphrodite tricks. Love is associated with the spirit, and Aphrodite with the physical. Not even getting into her larger role in mythology as being entirely negative.
And there you see the divide in male and female associations with creation and love and reproduction, and the beginnings of Greek cosmology.
>>429254
holy shit you people are fucking retarded. you spend years ripping on god because of all these fucking feelsy reasons and now you want to bitch about the majority of people not referring to someone referred to as "father" in the holy book that lays out the fucking religion as a woman? do you think about the shit that pops into your head or are you just using /his/ as a sounding board for the next great social justice campaign?
it would be like saying that muslims need to eat pork, if christians were brown then you wouldn't fucking do it.
>>429254
To the woman, there exist two types of accessible men: the lover and the confidant, the entertainer and the provider. The woman desires the most entertainment from the men whom she covets, with the fewest judgements from and responsibilities towards mostly every person from whom she cannot be satisfied, unless she has some fantasies about them: the impotent, the ugly, the destitute, the weak, the virgin. The woman seeks the ideal stability of a few relationships, more or less explicitly open, as well as the excitation of all the fun and drama by expected to be offered by superior men. In one word, the woman seeks the men providing her with the playgrounds which are the largest and safest for her to enjoy her histrionic nature.
In being turned towards pleasures, the female fantasized about the life of men which would have been nothing but about pleasures, without any hardship, or at least more enjoyable than her “enslaved” life. The female has never been “liberated”, since she was never been caged concerning her love life, even though, for millennia, knowing intuitively how she behaves without supervision until her menopause, the men expected her to control herself a minimum. Her supposed novel “liberation” was nothing but a response, full of merit and pride according to her, quite expected knowing the woman, from the contrived prudishness of the previous generation — well, not the generation of aristocrats, for those have always been liberated, therefore fighting, through their merit, against their lassitude, for decades if not centuries. After having for decades demanded from the society various perks, the woman market becomes, to those who can access it, instantly wider as well as more liquid. The questions become thus “why to enter this market?”, “how to enter this market?”.
>Religious people getting assblasted whenever they get questioned
Everytime
>>429630
The woman constantly follows her desires, especially those leading her, she expects, to many refined pleasures; thereby, the men whom she appreciate can push the limits of behaviour towards her, whereas the lesser men, the poor, the ugly, the impotent must follow rigorously what is socially expected from them in each encounter with every female; in general, those men must not interact at all, at risk of being pegged as a pervert and accused, more or less explicitly, of assault, even before they have done anything. Can be shamed, sometimes publicly, about their virility, even the men whom she does not despise beforehand, but failing somehow to please her.
Once pegged, by at least one woman, as litter, these men will be irrelevant to any other female around at the time of the pegging: her essence being sexual, the female does not hesitate to discuss, amongst her female friends, her lovers and their performances, their perks and their drawbacks wherewith they come. Indeed, in order to grade the men, with respect to their potential ability to satisfy her, a female relies on the personal experience as well as on the members of her species, by pure mimetism: when she sees another female accompanied, she believes that the man must be worth it, worthy precisely because he apparently manages to satisfy one woman; the man is viable. A man making her believe that he is her boyfriend can notice such a situation when he attaches himself to her and suddenly notice that who seeks satisfaction from him is at least one other female, possibly even more relevant than the present one. The more a man manages to make a herd of females believes that he satisfied many other such creatures in the past, the higher ranked the man is, all more so as an entertainer, by each woman.
>>429632
Her quest being to “feel the most alive”, as the industry of leisure sells it, her moaning, her orgasms being such a epileptic seizure, her little brain sparkling such as a firework, offering thus the highest hedonistic yield, it is no wonder that the female thinks sexually, wants sexually, does sexually, is sexually. This strange little creature knows thus without a doubt why she is on earth, what her nature is; she wants to feel alive, to “live her emotions” without serious danger, nor risk, nor effort. The woman blossoms the most not in pure sex, but rather, first, in the divorce-separation, second in the infanticide-abortion, then in the sex, in the birth, and lastly in the seduction.
>>429633
We see thereby that two types of woman exist: the woman public in public, the woman public in private; the one already feeling empowered in assuming her hedonism; the other one dreaming all day long about it, dreaming to be liberated by a man without any negative judgement (especially public); to be, more or less secretly, a frivolous little minx, if only in dilettante. This second woman is submissive in appearance; she is passive, fantasizing about waiting for at least one man who would reach her true self, for a few to the extend that he would irremediably unlock her, through what she would felt as a rapture. She remains the most nihilist of the two, for she wishes to live, to be woman, only on her terms and conditions, only when it suits her. Yet, she finds a few manners to live.
Indeed, the woman wishing to be more woman makes love mostly with her mouth, through the kiss, whereas the woman who is far more advanced in her being, do not hesitate to involve the rest of her body, to the same extend of her mouth, if not more. Unfortunately for her, most men fail to acknowledge how important, for her, is her mouth.
A second illustration of the crucial divide between the two happens during the separation, sooner than she expected, between her and one of her lover: for the woman existing as woman as much as she can, a early separation is sign of defect on her part, more so if the man went for another woman, leading her to wonder what went wrong on her side for him to go away so fast; for the woman dreaming to acknowledge her nature, fantasising her will to be woman, the early separation is a sign of a fault of the man, especially if he left in the first weeks of the relationship, be it due to her or another one; the woman wishing to be potent moves away rapidly from this failure in thinking that this man is nothing but a good riddance — not to worry, she will find new lovers in a blink of an eye.
>>429635
The woman lacks the reflexivity bringing a lack of equanimity as well as of efficiency about her behaviour; she is a pure actor in the world, she cannot pause, she cannot take time to stop herself in order to reflect on what she thinks, what she says, what she does. Sometimes, a sudden reflexivity comes by pregnancy, when not aborted, which remains caused by her eternal ignorance, her incapability of introspection beforehand and too often, the woman is at sea when strikes this minute observation on her existence which leads her to not be able to inquire further: to reflect on her reflections, discourses, actions, to put forth always more space between what she feels and what she believes is her self.
In being so close to what she desires and feels, the woman naturally believes that what she does is sound, coherent with her “finding herself”, “finding love”, that she is not ego maniac, or even that it is altruistic, that she searches for her happiness just as much as she wishes others to be happy: if she feels good, it can only means that others involved in doing what she does feel just as good.
Naturally, all hedonistic that she is, sooner or later, the woman faces the difficulty that is the lassitude stemming from her wealth of emotions; a difficulty undermined for a moment thanks to the easiness of obtaining a diversity of attention from the herd of most men, especially once that the she manages to pass as a powerless creature tormented by the men. By her lack of reflexivity, the female however remains in the hedonist pendulum: she swings from sheer satisfaction towards a sadness, only to swing back, once a new man in sight, towards a pleasure more or less already lived, but different enough to be worth living.
>>429638
Many men claim that, contrary to the men, the female is the least rational creature, whereas the men would be the least emotional. In reality, the exact converse holds: the woman perfectly knows what she wants; her hedonist stance is the more logical for, after all, everybody loves their pleasures just as they show aversion towards their pains; however, she fails to notice that her hedonism remains inefficient, by its fruits hardly permanent, due to her lack of reflexivity. Most men remain, on the other hand, completely emotional towards their existence in general, towards the woman in particular. They lack the notion of efficiency, if, by some miracle, they manage to know what they want.
The swan song for the woman is found in the cliché of the forty-year old divorcee, believing to emancipate herself such as in her twenties, alas remaining unable to even give men an erection, once she denudes herself in order to better spread her legs. It is not rare that, all exhausted by a few decades of living in the “present moment” in order to better live, a new life begins as the female approaching her menopause calms herself, in discovering a mild state of ataraxia blended in a longing for the golden times, believing to have reached thus a new liberation leading her to discover her truer spiritual side, less egotistical, and leaving her a bit perplex.
Even the young female taking the holy orders does so only after a few years of proud liberation where she stumbles upon a spiritual path after thinking that she is disenchanted from the men, from the emotional life.
>>429642
Does a female love a man as a man loves a female? No; the female does not love the man; at best, the woman loves to be loved as well as adores to love to be loved. Most of the men love a woman such as most of the females loving their children, up to, for too many men, talking to the female in puerile manner in public; whereby most of the men completely failing to understand that a man must take a female with detachment, such as an owner loving his dog, such as the scientist towards his experimental subject. The lovers plays along, play her game precisely for he is not egotistic, but only narcissistic.
Her lack of reflexivity renders her the most untameable creature that so many men attempt, drawn by her, to domesticate only to perish faster than a moth on a night lamp, due to their innate failure to seek a reality outwards themselves, something that the inwards attention of the female prevents her to endure. Her nudity is the force of the woman: she makes her lack of apparent shield the most powerful one, so that the woman never lies to who takes the moment to observe her, yet without hesitating to crush every man whom she judges cruelly unworthy of her. So much power appears as beauty itself but, naturally, once that the higher man reaches her, he understands at the same instant her vacuity, or rather, the debilitation of his original quest.
>>429643
The nature of the woman leads to a masculine discrimination of men with respect to their behaviours towards the female. The most common kind of men is naturally the beta, in other words, the men devoted to the female; the men seeking, from the female, some “meanings to their lives”, some faint relevance, validation of their existence, to grasp their existence by the reaction of the reality onto themselves, with sex, they think, yielding the best result for this purpose. Since the female herself seeks the men from whom she expects the most pleasures as well as the least displeasures, the first kind of men divides into three sub-kinds: the first sub-kind is the man who attempts to proudly content the female foremost via the flesh, in betting on his appearance as well as his performance, for, irrespective of her beauty or age, the woman is explicitly no longer in the habit, if she ever was, to compromise on her desire of sex; the second sub-kind is the man who attempts to satisfy the woman foremost via the mundane amusements, in betting on his finances, typically in offering her various activities; the third sub-kind is the man who tries to provide the woman with comfort, either material or emotional — the famous emotional tampon. These are the three sub-kinds of the beta man; each one of these men offers his services to the woman and wait for her to accept him or reject him; all of these men take a passive stance and completely depend on the woman each day of their lives.
>>429645
The three betas are disposable by their nature and by their number in the world: the betas are a cheap commodity which is not scarce at all. Let us be clear: the men do not enjoy sex for sex, only the female is able to do so. Every man understands perfectly that the sex is, at best, a surge to unload as swiftly as possible which is not worthy of a dedicated life. The woman appears thus, crucially, as far more: given her nature, she is the easiest manner to go beyond the surge and even though most men go beyond it, they do not go beyond the female itself; not even the seducers who long, more or less secretly, for a relationship. They are right since any territory beyond her remains uncharted; it is a field of possibilities.
The betas create themselves a hierarchy of men, which revolves around the degree of satisfaction of the woman from the betas, since those are devoted to her. These men know perfectly that the woman is sexual, which puts the kind of men seeking her sensual pleasures on the top of the hierarchy. The lowest beta is of course the one furnishing the emotional comfort, since this comfort provides the lowest one and is no longer about the direct pleasures, but about the easing of her pains.
In this hierarchy made by the betas, the beta attempting to gain the attention of the woman through her amusement lies between the first and last kind of betas. In taking for granted the striving towards the woman, therefore making it implicit, these same men believe that the explicit financial wealth of a man is what distinguishes, even more, him from its peers. They fail to notice that many financial empires have fallen due to a single woman.
>>429646
The female creates also a punishment for those men who fail her, an humiliation on the virility of the men at her disposition; for instance, in disclosing to the failures themselves, the performance of her other lovers, former or current, or more subtlety their names at the right moment, in order to keep the interested, to strengthen their dependence and the competition: they might have not met the standards expected by the woman, nonetheless she still refuses that they leave her sphere of influence.
She can prevent those men depending on her to depart towards other truths in ridiculing them about what she makes them believe is their essence, the essence to seek a relevance of their existence through her existence. No wonder why she dares to demand and generally obtains a faithfulness from most of her lovers — the woman demands the faithfulness because she is not faithful herself, thus knowing the danger, towards her interests, that this behaviour represents.
>>429649
Once ended her various love stories, until she finds new ones, the good little boyfriends-husbands-fathers must be dedicated in providing a safe net for her, in listening to her life at diner, in sharing, day after day, the chores, the bills, the rents, the care of the children and, of course, her states of hysteria, more or less pronounced. The playground provided must be the largest possible; the best boyfriends sanctify her, up to the point to being proud of, for instance, not even thinking of touching her handbag nor of manipulating her telephone. In being devoted, once in some relationship, the betas tend to think the mother-whore dichotomy; these men accept that the girlfriend-hood or the motherhood is a redemption for the female, from becoming a “sinful whore” after she looses her virginity. They equally take pride from letting the woman to act as she desires. Nonetheless, more or less consciously, a few boyfriends acknowledge what is the nature of the woman, without hesitating to share the girlfriend, notwithstanding a behaviour going from a will to be seen under a favourable light, up to a touch of bitterness taking the form of an assertion, more or less explicit, of power over her lovers, especially when those do not come form the circle of friends of the couple, rarely over the girlfriend itself. The man in free relationship thinks he has the advantage, over the temporary lover, for the he would permits the temporary lover to indeed be a lover. The boyfriend chooses to forget that if his couple itself picked up this lover, other couples and other females could easily pick up this lover as well.
>>429652
The female knows that the good lover appears as selfish towards her, in bed or not, just as much as she is towards the other men, if not more. The lover and the female match, click, the relationship sparkles to better enliven her. This new kind of man is the second and last sub-kind: the man who is not devoted to the female and even less to her sensual quest; a man having such an independence form her, that she senses it quite easily. This man belong to the alpha kind. The alpha man naturally turns the table with the woman: all indifferent that he is when he must deal with her, it is now the woman who must show that she is worthy of him, typically in hearing that she is wrong in behaving in such or such manners which makes her strive after that she thinks that the alpha man betters her; whereas, when it comes to men seeking validation through her, the betas proudly do not demand anything from the woman, the woman waits for the first men, amongst the flock of all the betas, who complete her list of requisites. If the beta dares to negate his docility suddenly, the woman will drop him or punish him. In one word, the beta is primarily devoted, the woman is primarily egotistic, the alpha is primarily narcissistic. The woman confuses the narcissism of the alpha and her egotism: she is drawn to him.
>>429654
It is with the alpha man that the woman “feels alive”, “feels like a woman” the most, by her work that she must furnish in order to be even considered. The alpha man rewards the woman when she has proved that she merited him. It is this man who gives “meaning to the life” of the woman; she knows that such a man is exceptional, thereby that he is worth it, just as the woman knows that, as she wishes, she has the power to make the three betas feel relevant in their lives. For once, she knows that a man is above her, that there is better than her, that she can be relevant towards somebody for once, only if she is good enough.
The alpha man knows that the absolute liberty plays against the liberty itself, whereas the woman only knows this through an intermittent intuition. He gives the woman a frame of restrictions wherein the woman can plays in liberty and it permits her thus to develop her faculty to enjoy herself and the world, to attain the most jouissance, to be what she thinks she is. For him, each female is, at best, a springboard for a new woman. A woman lives in a network of other women who wait to be taken. Once more, this situation goes in the opposite direction than the case of the beta males, which the woman knows that they come and go, that they are easily affordable, easily replaceable since they let her do what she wants. The beta has faith in the absolute.
>>429657
We could expect from the woman that, by her existence naturally revolving around the tragedy and the drama, she would become an artist, a creator, an inventor, but that would be missing the evidence that the female does not live through such excruciating lives. The woman remains poorly creative, precisely for she has an interest in art, for she believes that she has “something to say”. Her interest for the expression is personal, always directed inwards her.
On the contrary, the masculine angst brings some abilities, themselves leading to creativity: mostly as males who seek the feminine approval through the mundane activities as well as the comfort, the men are not interested in the drama nor the tragedy, even less when their lives are filled of events of these natures, but those few at ease with communication becomes the perfect artist, inventor or creator, which attracts, incidentally, the female. The lesser exposition towards the female of the alpha men leads those rare men naturally to a strong intellect, or for the fewest, to wisdom, foresight, in particular once equipped with equanimity.
It becomes manifest that this kind of man knows that there exists a life beyond the seduction, contrary to the first kind of beta male, knows that there exists a life beyond the entertainment, contrary to the second kind of beta male, knows that there exists a life beyond the woman, contrary to the third kind of beta male. There exists a famous saying: the difficulty is not to come in the brothel, but to come out of it. If they must apply a dichotomy towards the female, those rare men choose the whore-saint one: they take the woman for what she is, a public good, her only pure state being a virgin.
>>429660
Sometimes, gifted with reflexivity, such men have a strong degree of equanimity which permits them to appear infinitely more detached around her. These higher alpha men leave, without resentment, such a binarity as the whore-saint; happily they accept the woman for what she is; they do not expect anything from the woman, they do not blame the woman, they do not despise the woman, there would not even be a relevance to do otherwise. He understands that the female is a different creature from him, as he understands that an order between the female and the man remains unbecoming.
Contrary to the three kinds of beta males, the alpha man cherishes more his time and serenity; he leaves the woman, her quest for pleasures, her worries, to the other men passing after him; in having none dependency towards her, the alpha man understands that, as nice as it is to take a female when he desires one, it is even more delightful not to have a woman when he does not desire any. The alpha man understands that the woman is a sheer amusement.
On earth to be shared, in heat all year long, the woman is a whore, as so many say often bitterly, but the whore is equally a woman. In living so essentially for, by, as well through the histrionism, the pleasure, the frivolity, the superficiality, the woman knows why she is on earth, shows herself as she is, to such an extend that nothing remains more beautiful when she rests in her purest state, the one where the female acknowledges and strive to coincide with her nature.
>>429254
My jewish friend says hebrew has a huge bias towards masculine nouns, but other than that i have no clue
Well, Yahweh was a war god. War is associated with men, so 99% of the time people anthropomorphize war gods into males. Probably just carried over.
>>429664
tl;dr
>>429270
>gave birth to a third of God
Partialism heresy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQLfgaUoQCw
>>429254
SKY = BENIS
EARTH = BAGINA
>>429630
>>429632
>>429633
>>429635
>429635
>>429638
>>429642
>>429643
>>429645
>>429646
>>429652
>>429654
>>429657
>>429660
>>429664
You're a fucking strange person. I can tell by your painfully 'articulate' way of writing that you're a fucking fedora lord of the highest degree.
Just reading this mess makes me shiver at how odd you are.
>>429664
>blogposting a lousy, bitter dissertation
>designed to demean women with no point or evidence
>pseudo-intellectual prose with a side of masturbatory euphoria
>no subtle, hidden memejokes
Do you feel better, at least?
>>429273
>A relatively short part of life.
Do you have any idea how many people didn't survive past childhood in premodern times?
>>430069
Prepubescent deaths were indeed more common.
So were apprenticeships, and most boys were working fields at the ripe old age of 8. That's when "childhood" ended for them.
>>429356
epic...
>>429254
Same reason why almost every successful culture, nation, and people are largely patriarchal.
>>429254
How the fuck do you want to answer a sociological question without involving sociological reasons?
By the way the answer to your question is that the societies, where the Abrahamic religions you are probably referring to originate from, along with pretty much every other civilisation on Earth at those times, were very heavily male dominated.
>>429254
>using the limited and earthly concept of gender to describe a transcendental, omnipotent force.
Both "Him" and "Her" are wrong.
>>430608
>How the fuck do you want to answer a sociological question without involving sociological reasons?
Actually understanding and engaging the primary relevant material?
>>429261
>what is giving birth
plopping out a copy of yourself
>>429272
>children raised by single mothers are more fucked up than children raised by single fathers
>>429254
>So misogyny/sexism/sociological reasons/etc aside
But those are all the reasons.
Hesiod says that Gaia was the first to arise out of Chaos and birthed the other gods
>>430946
>Actually understanding and engaging the primary relevant material?
Which is?
>>430917
But that transcendental force is somehow still personal and cares about humanity?
>>431604
Are they not? Or are you stating that the child will turn out better if raised by the father. If so then i agree as long as it's not one of those cliche abuse movie dads.
>>429254
Masculinity=activity
Femininity=passivity
Woman is the soil that man produces through.
>>433740
Personal theism is a modern heresy. Classical theism doesn't treat God as a big man in the sky. God still can care though, but we have to understand this is being in a very mode than the way we do it.
http://edwardfeser.blogspot.ca/2013/04/craig-on-theistic-personalism.html
>>433782
No, I was saying they are.
>>433795
Great post.
It's such a pity that the majority of people can't seem to understand this, especially new Atheists. Anthropomorphising God is a massive fallacy.
>>429254
because he's the father and he acts like a father figure, not a mother
>>429261
God MADE earth and humankind, not gave birth to them. Making stuff is as manly an occupation as it gets. Females give birth and that's about it.
God knows I'm not sexist, but I will never envision God as a female. Closest I can go is envision God as non-gender.
>>429254
because of the age old symbol of the Sky Father and Earth Mother.
>>429254
This is terrible b8
>>431608
Tumblr pls go
>>433821
Not our fault that the majority of theists believe in a god like that.
Because it's not just creation it's also, and sometimes only, ORDERING.
because for everyone ever until quite recently man has been the default gender, the end
