Does God have a gender?

Anything to do with gender and the status of women and men.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Agent Smith
Posts: 1442
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2022 12:23 pm

Re: Does God have a gender?

Post by Agent Smith »

What happened to Jesus? :?: :!:
Belinda
Posts: 8034
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Does God have a gender?

Post by Belinda »

One of the most basic myths is that of virgin birth. Whatever the religion the virgin is female and passive whereas the god actively fertilises her.
Pantheism, where nature and god are the same , is heresy as the pantheist metaphysic kills the myth of active god and passive nature.
Gary Childress
Posts: 8117
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers

Re: Does God have a gender?

Post by Gary Childress »

Belinda wrote: Thu Mar 09, 2023 10:15 am One of the most basic myths is that of virgin birth. Whatever the religion the virgin is female and passive whereas the god actively fertilises her.
Pantheism, where nature and god are the same , is heresy as the pantheist metaphysic kills the myth of active god and passive nature.
Males not being able to give birth, it tends to make sense that a baby begot by a virgin couple would come out of the female. Unless they swap "gender" or something. I suppose that would be an option for story tellers in the 21st century and beyond. Of course there are "test tube" babies also. Maybe God could present us with a 21st Century miracle and miraculously fertilize a female egg frozen in isolation in a lab in China next time.
User avatar
Agent Smith
Posts: 1442
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2022 12:23 pm

Re: Does God have a gender?

Post by Agent Smith »

God is everywhere! Is this off/on topic?
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6659
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: Does God have a gender?

Post by Iwannaplato »

Agent Smith wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 5:15 am God is everywhere! Is this off/on topic?
All you gotta do is tie it to gender.
Like...
God is everywhere...
so God got both/all genders. Etc.

Get in there and flesh out. It's scary. Maybe you'll make a mistake. Maybe your argument will not be sound.
On the other hand you'll learn.
User avatar
Agent Smith
Posts: 1442
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2022 12:23 pm

Re: Does God have a gender?

Post by Agent Smith »

Iwannaplato wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 6:53 am
Agent Smith wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 5:15 am God is everywhere! Is this off/on topic?
All you gotta do is tie it to gender.
Like...
God is everywhere...
so God got both/all genders. Etc.

Get in there and flesh out. It's scary. Maybe you'll make a mistake. Maybe your argument will not be sound.
On the other hand you'll learn.
The man, the woman, the trans-, oh to hell with this, this, this, :o Tie it all up, as you so wisely suggested, and FedEx will get its share of ..
the bargain, no, no, pie!! :mrgreen:
User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 6268
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Does God have a gender?

Post by FlashDangerpants »

Gary Childress wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 3:41 am
Belinda wrote: Thu Mar 09, 2023 10:15 am One of the most basic myths is that of virgin birth. Whatever the religion the virgin is female and passive whereas the god actively fertilises her.
Pantheism, where nature and god are the same , is heresy as the pantheist metaphysic kills the myth of active god and passive nature.
Males not being able to give birth, it tends to make sense that a baby begot by a virgin couple would come out of the female. Unless they swap "gender" or something. I suppose that would be an option for story tellers in the 21st century and beyond. Of course there are "test tube" babies also. Maybe God could present us with a 21st Century miracle and miraculously fertilize a female egg frozen in isolation in a lab in China next time.

This isn't a sous vide lamb recipe, this lamb was grown in an artifical womb.

Image



Meanwhile this mouse was created with two daddies and no female genetic input.

Image
Gary Childress
Posts: 8117
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
Location: Retirement Home for foolosophers

Re: Does God have a gender?

Post by Gary Childress »

FlashDangerpants wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:18 am
Gary Childress wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 3:41 am
Belinda wrote: Thu Mar 09, 2023 10:15 am One of the most basic myths is that of virgin birth. Whatever the religion the virgin is female and passive whereas the god actively fertilises her.
Pantheism, where nature and god are the same , is heresy as the pantheist metaphysic kills the myth of active god and passive nature.
Males not being able to give birth, it tends to make sense that a baby begot by a virgin couple would come out of the female. Unless they swap "gender" or something. I suppose that would be an option for story tellers in the 21st century and beyond. Of course there are "test tube" babies also. Maybe God could present us with a 21st Century miracle and miraculously fertilize a female egg frozen in isolation in a lab in China next time.

This isn't a sous vide lamb recipe, this lamb was grown in an artifical womb.

Image



Meanwhile this mouse was created with two daddies and no female genetic input.

Image
Yes. Science can be beyond scary. Sometimes it's difficult to imagine what net benefit will arise from any of that. We end up doing it because it can be done.
Flannel Jesus
Posts: 2576
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2022 7:09 pm

Re: Does God have a gender?

Post by Flannel Jesus »

FlashDangerpants wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:18 am
Meanwhile this mouse was created with two daddies and no female genetic input.

Image
Holy schmokes that's amazing
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6659
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: Does God have a gender?

Post by Iwannaplato »

Flannel Jesus wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 6:25 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:18 am
Meanwhile this mouse was created with two daddies and no female genetic input.

Image
Holy schmokes that's amazing
I would have said 'creepy'. Not that those adjectives are mutually exclusive.
seeds
Posts: 2146
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:31 pm

Re: Does God have a gender?

Post by seeds »

Iwannaplato wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 8:49 pm
Flannel Jesus wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 6:25 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:18 am
Meanwhile this mouse was created with two daddies and no female genetic input.

Image
Holy schmokes that's amazing
I would have said 'creepy'. Not that those adjectives are mutually exclusive.
Assuming that we don't destroy ourselves, and assuming that we don't do anything that might severely breach the integrity of the illusion of objective (material) reality**,...

...then given enough time, human science should be able to reach a point where it can do and create pretty much anything "imaginable."

Stuff like this, for example...

Image

**(Actually, for anyone of a metaphysical leaning who's been paying attention to the philosophical implications of quantum science, the illusion has already been breached.)
_______
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6659
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: Does God have a gender?

Post by Iwannaplato »

Me:
I would have said 'creepy'. Not that those adjectives are mutually exclusive.
Assuming that we don't destroy ourselves, and assuming that we don't do anything that might severely breach the integrity of the illusion of objective (material) reality**,...
Well, we have mice that can make more mice. I don't see any reason to find other ways to make mice. And then we don't have to assume that in messing around like this we won't destroy ourselves.
...then given enough time, human science should be able to reach a point where it can do and create pretty much anything "imaginable."
It'll be corporations and governments focusing on agendas I'm not so optimistic about.

It was bad enough when governments and corporations could play around with technology that could lead to things like Chernobyl. Now they are playing with things that make Chernobyl very local.

My guess is whatever they did to make a mouse just using male mouse genes isn't that dangerous, but in general, they are taking risks right now and often for no good reason.

They also have long since taken over any government oversight.
**(Actually, for anyone of a metaphysical leaning who's been paying attention to the philosophical implications of quantum science, the illusion has already been breached.)
My sense is there are better ways to get beyond the illusion(s). And I think breach is probably a good verb for those who are doing it in ways like this.
Breach
an act of breaking or failing to observe a law, agreement, or code of conduct.
"a breach of confidence"
Similar:
contravention
violation
breaking
non-observance
infringement
transgression
neglect
dereliction
failure to observe
non-compliance with
infraction
delict
2.
a gap in a wall, barrier, or defence, especially one made by an attacking army.
"a breach in the mountain wall"
_______
Last edited by Iwannaplato on Sat Mar 11, 2023 6:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
seeds
Posts: 2146
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:31 pm

Re: Does God have a gender?

Post by seeds »

Iwannaplato wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:38 pm
seeds wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:03 pm I would have said 'creepy'. Not that those adjectives are mutually exclusive.
First of all, and I'm not meaning to be nitpicky here, but could you please try to attribute quotes to the right person. Those are your words, not mine.
seeds wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:03 pm Assuming that we don't destroy ourselves, and assuming that we don't do anything that might severely breach the integrity of the illusion of objective (material) reality**,...
Iwannaplato wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:38 pm Well, we have mice that can make more mice. I don't see any reason to find other ways to make mice.
I think it's merely a situation of the experimenters having no choice but to take baby steps in order to gain a better understanding of DNA so that they can move on to bigger and better things, like curing cancer and genetic defects (plus all of the other diseases). Or perhaps even figuring out how to regrow severed limbs or vital organs.
Iwannaplato wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:38 pm And then we don't have to assume that in messing around like this we won't destroy ourselves.
I don't understand the somewhat awkward wording of that statement, for it seems instead of "won't" you might have meant to use the word "will."

Anyway, I was talking about destroying ourselves through nuclear war or some other bone-headed means, and not from messing around with our genetics (though I suppose something could go horribly awry with that also).
seeds wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:03 pm ...then given enough time, human science should be able to reach a point where it can do and create pretty much anything "imaginable."
Iwannaplato wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:38 pm It'll be corporations and governments focusing on agendas I'm not so optimistic about.

It was bad enough when governments and corporations could play around with technology that could lead to things like Chernobyl. Now they are playing with things that make Chernobyl very local.
Well, the geniuses who come up with world-changing ideas need financial backing to pursue their theories to fruition, so, unfortunately, corporations and governments (and universities) are the main sources of that backing.
Iwannaplato wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:38 pm My guess is whatever they did to make a mouse just using male mouse genes isn't that dangerous, but in general, they are taking risks right now and often for no good reason.
Again, if there are no risks then there will be no rewards (no advancements).
seeds wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:03 pm **(Actually, for anyone of a metaphysical leaning who's been paying attention to the philosophical implications of quantum science, the illusion has already been breached.)
Iwannaplato wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:38 pm My sense is there are better ways to get beyond the illusion(s).
Such as?

Please describe the "better ways" you are thinking of.
Iwannaplato wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:38 pm And I think breach is probably a good verb for those who are doing it in ways like this.
Breach
an act of breaking or failing to observe a law, agreement, or code of conduct.
"a breach of confidence"
Similar:
contravention
violation
breaking
non-observance
infringement
transgression
neglect
dereliction
failure to observe
non-compliance with
infraction
delict
2.
a gap in a wall, barrier, or defence, especially one made by an attacking army.
"a breach in the mountain wall"
_______
I think you misunderstood what it was I was talking about being breached.
_______
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6659
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: Does God have a gender?

Post by Iwannaplato »

seeds wrote: Sat Mar 11, 2023 1:05 am First of all, and I'm not meaning to be nitpicky here, but could you please try to attribute quotes to the right person. Those are your words, not mine.
Done
I think it's merely a situation of the experimenters having no choice but to take baby steps in order to gain a better understanding of DNA so that they can move on to bigger and better things, like curing cancer and genetic defects (plus all of the other diseases). Or perhaps even figuring out how to regrow severed limbs or vital organs.
That makes sense and I am sure there are scientists who are being careful and have useful goals. On the other hand, I think there are others with less pleasant goals, and in general, I think there is a lack of care in industry.
Iwannaplato wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:38 pm And then we don't have to assume that in messing around like this we won't destroy ourselves.
I don't understand the somewhat awkward wording of that statement, for it seems instead of "won't" you might have meant to use the word "will."
I believe it works the way I intended. We won't have to assume. We won't have to assume. We won't need to just assume, because we will be more cautious in a general way.

If that seems unlcear still, I mean that it would be safer not to do this kind of research until we are more mature and until oversight is independent from industry.
Anyway, I was talking about destroying ourselves through nuclear war or some other bone-headed means, and not from messing around with our genetics (though I suppose something could go horribly awry with that also).
Ah, ok. But yes, that is one of my concerns.
seeds wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:03 pm ...then given enough time, human science should be able to reach a point where it can do and create pretty much anything "imaginable."
Well, the geniuses who come up with world-changing ideas need financial backing to pursue their theories to fruition, so, unfortunately, corporations and governments (and universities) are the main sources of that backing.
I understand that. I don't see government as independent from corporations, or better put I see them getting less and less independant. And I do not trust the current patterns of research (what gets researched, how it gets researched, and how cautious they are about the process). Not that I think it was great earlier in my life, but I think it is even worse.
Again, if there are no risks then there will be no rewards (no advancements).
Sure. But I don't think we are mature enough for certain lines of reasearch. AI, genetici modifications and nanotech are three fairly recent ones that I don't think humans are capable of developing in safe ways. For example, nanoplastics and other nanomaterials entering animal bodies and nervous systems. There is a whole large set of nanoproducts, most of which may be slightly more convenient in some way but are not curing cancer, for example, even if other scientists are working on nanocures for cancer and other diseases. I don't see us using enough caution with the current processes used by the major players.
seeds wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:03 pm **(Actually, for anyone of a metaphysical leaning who's been paying attention to the philosophical implications of quantum science, the illusion has already been breached.)
Iwannaplato wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:38 pm My sense is there are better ways to get beyond the illusion(s).
Such as?

Please describe the "better ways" you are thinking of.
Meditation, shamanic practices are a couple. Very low ecological impact.
I think you misunderstood what it was I was talking about being breached.
the illusion was what I thought you meant was being breached. I was being polemical, but I thought it was an appropriate verb for industy's actions. That they are breaching, and yes, one side effect may be that people realize there is something illusory about what we have called reality. But maybe we don't need to breach and if that is someone's goal, seeing that it is illusory can be achieved in ways that are not many of the meanings of 'breaching'.
User avatar
MagsJ
Posts: 325
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2013 6:23 pm
Location: Suryaloka / LDN Town

Re: Does God have a gender?

Post by MagsJ »

Iwannaplato wrote: Sat Mar 04, 2023 5:20 am
Iwannaplato wrote: Sat Mar 04, 2023 5:20 am
MagsJ wrote: Sat Mar 04, 2023 5:14 am Waiter.. Iwannaplato whatever he’s having..
I'm not sure what you mean here either.
‘I wanna plate o’ whatever he’s having.. a play, on words. :D
Every time I read your username, I think of that ^^^ :)

..what are you having a plate of, today? What does Iwannaplato prefer to eat..
Post Reply