A) Tend to give males automatic superiority over females?
and
B) Enable males to be lazier and more ignorant

Seriously, I'm asking what are the impacts to human genders, of assigning a male gender to A SINGLE GOD?
Whoosh! Goes the irony bird.Immanuel Can wrote:...
If God actually exists, He isn't assigned a gender by us...it's the other way around.
Sounds ridiculous, right? So why do you refer to a god as "he"?
Then where does the gender identification come from (if not from humans), and why would a god need a gender?Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:20 pm If God actually exists, He isn't assigned a gender by us...it's the other way around.
My point is just that IF the Supreme Being exists, then nobody would have "assigned" anything to Him. He would not even have "assigned" it to Himself. It would be a claim about His fundamental nature, and our conception of two genders would be a contingent product of His creating.Lacewing wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 12:37 amThen where does the gender identification come from (if not from humans), and why would a god need a gender?Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:20 pm If God actually exists, He isn't assigned a gender by us...it's the other way around.
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 2:42 amHe needed a gender so that he could rape Mary and force her to have a baby out of wedlock and thus risk being stoned to death.
Don't humans assign all kinds of ideas to things that exist?Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:32 am My point is just that IF the Supreme Being exists, then nobody would have "assigned" anything to Him.
What are you basing this claim on?Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:32 am In other words, He assigned US gender...we didn't "assign" Him anything.
So, are you saying that the imaginary things people assign ideas to, don't affect/impact anything/anyone else?Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:32 amHowever, IF it were the other way around, the way Nietzsche thought it was, for example, and God is merely a human invention, then it doesn't at all matter what gender we "assign" Him, because He wouldn't then exist anyway...
Perhaps if NO ONE believes it is real. But that's not the case is it? Therefore, all sorts of beliefs are built upon it, and affect even those who don't believe it. Correct?Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:32 amand association with the "gender" artificially assigned to this fictive creation of human culture would not impart to maleness any special status -- nor would its disassociation with the feminine represent any substantial injustice to femaleness.
Not at all. Again...this world and its people are bombarded by falseness and delusion all the time, which affects what they can be and do and think. The idea of a MALE god must surely have implications (elevating the male gender over all), moreso than a god that was neither a he or she.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:32 am So if the "maleness" of God has any "impact" at all on human genders, as your question supposes, then you would also have to be supposing God actually exists.
You seem SO infatuated with asserting that other people's statements suggest that "god actually exists", that you don't even seem to recognize how much more you're obviously ignoring/avoiding in your counter-arguments. It's like you're gloriously drunk on your beliefs, and don't even care if you're slurring or not making sense.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:32 amIf your objection has any "teeth," it can only be on the supposition that God actually exists
If, after that assignment was first given, any of the male and/or female gender then thinks that that then gives the male gender automatic superiority over the female gender, then that just shows how easily people can be led, as well as just how illogical, stupid, idiotic, and irrational human beings can really be.Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 4:50 pm Does the MODEL of a male gender assignment to a GOD...
A) Tend to give males automatic superiority over females?
Well the very reason WHY God was assigned the male gender, in the beginning, was because the male gender thought that they had automatic superiority over the female gender.
Is it really true that the male gender (all males) are lazier and more ignorant than the female gender (all females) in actually developing and demonstrating thee spiritual potential?
The impacts of assigning human genders to an obviously non gendered It are whatever the individual gives and/or allows.
They certainly do.Lacewing wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 4:23 amDon't humans assign all kinds of ideas to things that exist?Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:32 am My point is just that IF the Supreme Being exists, then nobody would have "assigned" anything to Him.
God's sovereign pre-existence. IF God exists, then inescapably, we are the contingent and created beings, and He would be the self-existent and necessary One.What are you basing this claim on?Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:32 am In other words, He assigned US gender...we didn't "assign" Him anything.
Not very much. The gender of Santa Claus or the Easter Rabbit cannot be of much consequence, if any at all. And and question about it can be offset by reference to the gender of Cinderella and Snow White.So, are you saying that the imaginary things people assign ideas to, don't affect/impact anything/anyone else?Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:32 amHowever, IF it were the other way around, the way Nietzsche thought it was, for example, and God is merely a human invention, then it doesn't at all matter what gender we "assign" Him, because He wouldn't then exist anyway...
Ah. Now we get down to it.Perhaps if NO ONE believes it is real. But that's not the case is it? Therefore, all sorts of beliefs are built upon it, and affect even those who don't believe it. Correct?
Who and/or what would deem calling God an It very disrespectful?surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 12:44 pm God is given the male pronoun because referring to him as it would be deemed very disrespectful
But not for me it is not. I find it much more simpler and easier to relate to some thing which it IS, rather than to which it is NOT.surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 12:44 pmAlso its more difficult to relate to an it than to a he and that is another reason for the preference
surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 12:44 pmBut not all gods in history were he so while the male pronoun is very common its not exclusively so