Si existiera dios sería masculino femenino bisexual o asexual? Qué opinan?
Yo pienso que si representa el todo tendría que tener los dos sexos pero porqué los separó?`porqué los diferenció? Qué piensan?Si lovemos desde el punto de vista catolico debería ser homosexual pero varon de los que odian a las mujeres no? Si en realidad fuera inteligencia pero partiendo de la nada no debería tener sexo no?
Quote from: DORADA on December 28, 2008, 11:41:31 AM
Si existiera dios sería masculino femenino bisexual o asexual? Qué opinan?
Yo pienso que si representa el todo tendría que tener los dos sexos pero porqué los separó?`porqué los diferenció? Qué piensan?Si lovemos desde el punto de vista catolico debería ser homosexual pero varon de los que odian a las mujeres no? Si en realidad fuera inteligencia pero partiendo de la nada no debería tener sexo no?
Say what in the butt?
Something about gay peoples?
Uhm,
Your question is whether God would be a guy or a girl, and what sexual orientation, yeah?
Well, I think the bible says God is without gender or sexual inclination.
Of course, that's the bible, so I dunno...
:?
Quote from: Broken AI on December 28, 2008, 12:29:39 PM
It's ok, I'll field this one:
Si dios de los católicos es verdad enemigo misogynistic de mujeres, y por lo tanto según el tao, se compone de las piezas masculinas y de la feminidad, él soporte para razonar que dios es un uno mismo que detesta a la lesbiana homosexual. si sin embargo, pues el cartel antedicho precisó, dios es de hecho genderless, podemos conjeturar, con la historia de Jesús, que dios una vez se reprodujo, y de hecho si es asexuada, que haría dios una cierta clase de ameba, asexual partiendo en el padre, el hijo y el espíritu santo. ¿no extraño de la mierda?
You speak spanish as well?
"La realidad es intrínsecamente de sentido", dice Baudrillard, sin embargo, de acuerdo a Parry, no es tanto la realidad que es intrínsecamente de sentido, sino más bien la economía, y algunos dicen que el fracaso, de la realidad. Por lo tanto, Bataille se utiliza el término 'constructivismo' para indicar la diferencia entre la clase y la identidad sexual. El tema principal de Hubbard, el análisis de la teoría dialéctica subculturales es el paradigma de la dialéctica de clase.
Its really worrying when I haven't spoken Spanish in 3 years, yet I can still understand most of Net's answer simply because of the incredible amount of post-Marxist and postmodernist books I have read recently.
Cain I ask this: if god is real what is his sex man or woman or gay or dont have sex, and if gos is a everything? all? the addition of all things an intelligences he must be bisexual and why there are? two sex and not there are humans bisex I hope you understand my bad English
The quetion not is about the woman abd her power is about the sex of god because i think he must be bisexual, the bible is a invent of humans and is not a book serious? for me , idont beleive in god too, but ,my question is if god for catholics is all it or he must be gay , or bisexual. I think this and i beleive the gays must be the most near (?) to god , and why the catholics no love the gays.
And if god dont have a woman god he dont can have godchilds , but we the huimans can have childs humans, and this is the reason of the wars , cataclism and the other forces that kill the humans, because if the science and the intelligences of humans and clones humans make we gods and can have godchilds, all this reflections insomnes tellme god want destroyd the world and not satan and lucifer too because he give us the intelligences jajaja :lulz:
Quote from: DORADA on December 28, 2008, 01:44:58 PM
Cain I ask this: if god is real what is his sex man or woman or gay or don't have sex, and if gos is a everything? all? the addition of all things an intelligences he must be bisexual and why there are? two sex and not there are humans bisex I hope you understand my bad English
Saying god is a man or a woman is a human assumption
saying god has a sexuality or does not is an assumption
saying god is everything is also a human assumption.
And saying god exists or does not is again, a human assumption.
If he/she/it exists then wait for it to speak for itself and don't ask people what they think it is.
And if it never speaks, does it really matter in any way?
Quote from: Faust on December 28, 2008, 04:38:02 PM
Quote from: DORADA on December 28, 2008, 01:44:58 PM
Cain I ask this: if god is real what is his sex man or woman or gay or don't have sex, and if gos is a everything? all? the addition of all things an intelligences he must be bisexual and why there are? two sex and not there are humans bisex I hope you understand my bad English
Saying god is a man or a woman is a human assumption
saying god has a sexuality or does not is an assumption
saying god is everything is also a human assumption.
And saying god exists or does not is again, a human assumption.
If he/she/it exists then wait for it to speak for itself and don't ask people what they think it is.
And if it never speaks, does it really matter in any way?
Indeed, if we cannot understand, or even begin to fathom "God", according to the bible, why do we even try?
Quote from: The Borderline Simpleton on December 28, 2008, 08:22:48 PM
Quote from: Faust on December 28, 2008, 04:38:02 PM
Quote from: DORADA on December 28, 2008, 01:44:58 PM
Cain I ask this: if god is real what is his sex man or woman or gay or don't have sex, and if gos is a everything? all? the addition of all things an intelligences he must be bisexual and why there are? two sex and not there are humans bisex I hope you understand my bad English
Saying god is a man or a woman is a human assumption
saying god has a sexuality or does not is an assumption
saying god is everything is also a human assumption.
And saying god exists or does not is again, a human assumption.
If he/she/it exists then wait for it to speak for itself and don't ask people what they think it is.
And if it never speaks, does it really matter in any way?
Indeed, if we cannot understand, or even begin to fathom "God", according to the bible, why do we even try?
Well, I do think its interesting to speculate, but I have ran into so many people who are preoccupied with these kind of discussions that it seems unhealthy.
I guess we need to figure out what we are before we can worry about a concept of god.
GOD IS A CRAZY WOMAN, AND HER NAME IS ERIS.
\
:fnord:
YHVH is referenced throughout the Bible as a Male. We know that the Jews, at least at some point believed in multiple gods and at least some of them were female (The Queen of Heaven for example). Depending on which Genesis creation story you look at, either "The Gods created the heavens and the earth and the critters and the humans, or YHVH created everything and then created MAN in his image. From a part of the man, he formed the woman later as a complement to the man (Complement here means "to complete").
Some scholars think that the reason there are two genesis accounts in the bible, is because one was from their polytheistic days and one from their monotheistic days. In that case, all evidence points to the writers of the Bible believing YHVH to be a male deity.
Further Christian references confirm this... Jesus was a dude, he talked about marrying his 'bride' (faithful Christians that go to heaven) etc.
IN the end, it may be misogynistic, it may be politically incorrect... but the Bible teachers that MAN is in Gods image, that Man is the sole head of the family, that the woman is in subservience to the man and that the woman is "the weaker vessel". The writers of the Bible also clearly condemned homosexuality, so I doubt that any of them believed YHVH to be boinking Archangels or anything.
The only 'androgynous' comment I recall is one by Jesus where he said to the Pharisees that those would would be ressurected would be "like the angels, neither marrying nor being given in marriage". However, that just talks about 'marriage', not about sex. The only other reference I remember is from Genesis where the angels saw the 'daughters of men', got horny and came to fuck them.
I don't know about Jewish tradition (although I would expect, given their names, they thought of Angels as male) but according to Catholic tradition Angels are sexless. Another reason heaven would suck (in the wrong way), but it may help give another context to that quote.
Quote from: Cain on December 30, 2008, 02:12:38 PM
I don't know about Jewish tradition (although I would expect, given their names, they thought of Angels as male) but according to Catholic tradition Angels are sexless. Another reason heaven would suck (in the wrong way), but it may help give another context to that quote.
I don't recall anything in the Torah or Mishna that talks about androgyny. Also, the Jesus quote came after the Saducees tried tripping him up on a "question", some Bible scholars think his response had some subtle connotations that shut them up. The Saducees didn't believe in the physical resurrection, while the Pharisees believed in the resurrection. So it might be that Jesus was making a reference to androgyny, or it may be some Jewish wit that didn't translate well. I dunno.
Here's the story:
QuoteMatthew 22:23-33; Mark 12:18-27)
27Now some Sadducees, who claim there is no resurrection, came to Jesus[h] 28and asked him, "Teacher, Moses wrote for us that if a man's brother dies and leaves a wife but no child, the man should marry the widow and have children for his brother. 29Now there were seven brothers. The first one married and died childless. 30Then the second 31and the third married her. In the same way, all seven died and left no children. 32Finally, the woman died, too. 33Now in the resurrection, whose wife will the woman be, since the seven had married her?"
34Jesus said to them, "Those who belong to this age marry and are married, 35but those who are considered worthy of a place in that age and in the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage. 36Nor can they die anymore, because they are like the angels and, since they share in the resurrection, are God's children. 37Even Moses demonstrated in the story about the bush that the dead are raised, when he calls the Lord 'the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.'[j] 38He is not the God of the dead, but of the living, because he considers all people to be alive to him."
39Then some of the scribes replied, "Teacher, you have given a fine answer." 40Then they no longer dared to ask him another question.
Didn't the angels have sex with men, and so birthed the Giants of the Nephilim (Genesis 6)?
Also the Book of Enoch. But weren't they cast down first?
Also entirely possible, Ratatosk. I was thinking more of how the Jesus quote may be percieved in the future, as opposed to the context in which it was spoken and how it would be recieved back then. Either way, I think its very likely that the Israelites and Jewish tradition see Angels as either Male, or entirely alien to human understanding.
Quote from: LMNO on December 30, 2008, 03:21:53 PM
Didn't the angels have sex with men, and so birthed the Giants of the Nephilim (Genesis 6)?
Yes, that's the bit I referenced before:
QuoteThe only other reference I remember is from Genesis where the angels saw the 'daughters of men', got horny and came to fuck them.
The key bit here is that they lusted after the daughters of men, while they were in heaven. If nothing else, it would seem the Hebrews gave spiritual entities attributes more in line with a male than female person. Almost all of their heroes are male (with a few exceptions like Rahab, Deborah, Ruth and Esther) , their legal system was based on the patriarchal family (the male inherited the land/stuff from the man's side of the family etc) and their religious system was built off of a promised seed, documented through the male side of the family from Abraham through to Joseph (or Mary depending on which way you want to go).
Even the cases where women were heroic, they were still subservient. After Deborah put a spike through the head of the King of Assryia, she went to find Barauch to let him deal with it. Rahab was a hero and was saved at Jericho. For the risks she took, she was rewarded by being allowed to marry a Jewish man (and thus got to be in the line that gave birth to Jesus if you believe the Christians). Ruth was a hero because she was hard working and a good woman that impressed Boaz with her diligent work in gleaning the fields for her mother in law after her husband died (she also got to be in the seed line according to the Christians). Esther also was a hero because she knew how to show respect to Men, both her uncle Mordicai and her husband King Ahasererus.
She saved all the Jews because she was a smart woman that showed respect to men. That is about the best you get from the X Chromosome side of the gene pool in the Bible.
Quote from: Cain on December 30, 2008, 03:40:18 PM
Also the Book of Enoch. But weren't they cast down first?
Nope, they were cast down afterward... in fact, according to the Jewish tradition, they all left their human bodies and went back to heaven for awhile.
Quote
Also entirely possible, Ratatosk. I was thinking more of how the Jesus quote may be percieved in the future, as opposed to the context in which it was spoken and how it would be recieved back then. Either way, I think its very likely that the Israelites and Jewish tradition see Angels as either Male, or entirely alien to human understanding.
Yep, like most of the bible, we don't really grok the context, nor the nuance of the actual language. The conversation seems kind of dumb to me taken at face value (how is that a 'fine answer'?!) I would agree, however, with your summation of the Jewish view.
Quote from: Ratatosk on December 30, 2008, 03:54:44 PM
Quote from: Cain on December 30, 2008, 03:40:18 PM
Also the Book of Enoch. But weren't they cast down first?
Nope, they were cast down afterward... in fact, according to the Jewish tradition, they all left their human bodies and went back to heaven for awhile.
Ah, I can never remember. I know at one point its all lusting, and at another points its all Top Secret Military Weapons and Hi-Tech exchanges (in contravention of the Iron and Writing Nonproliferation Treaty), but I never remember which one goes first.
Quote from: Cain on December 30, 2008, 03:57:08 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on December 30, 2008, 03:54:44 PM
Quote from: Cain on December 30, 2008, 03:40:18 PM
Also the Book of Enoch. But weren't they cast down first?
Nope, they were cast down afterward... in fact, according to the Jewish tradition, they all left their human bodies and went back to heaven for awhile.
Ah, I can never remember. I know at one point its all lusting, and at another points its all Top Secret Military Weapons and Hi-Tech exchanges (in contravention of the Iron and Writing Nonproliferation Treaty), but I never remember which one goes first.
:lulz:
If you follow the JW line of reasoning (I use the word loosely)... The fallen angels (demons) and Satan all were allowed to come and go in heaven as they pleased until Jesus was given the Throne. The he (as Michael the Archangel) lead a war and cast out the demons and Satan for good, making heaven pure again. Then, he started resurrecting people to life in heaven, once he 'took out the garbage', as it were.
They felt particularly justified, since they claimed that it would happen in October 1914... and then saw 5's, I mean quarters... err I mean, fulfillment of prophecy when WWI broke out. (Jesus kicked Satan out, made him live on earth for good... Satan takes it out on us with a world war).
Now sure, we might claim that WWI was started based on a trail of events far before October (or even 1914)... but who needs nuance when you have God and The Truth ;-)
There are a few other interpretations as well about when the angels took the big fall.
Interesting. Probably due to my CoE upbringing and the influence of Milton, it was always strongly intuited, if not directly said, that the War in Heaven took place before the Garden of Eden and The Fall. I suspect this had more to do with general embarassment over the existence of the Book of Revelation than anything else.
Quote from: Cain on December 30, 2008, 04:12:27 PM
Interesting. Probably due to my CoE upbringing and the influence of Milton, it was always strongly intuited, if not directly said, that the War in Heaven took place before the Garden of Eden and The Fall. I suspect this had more to do with general embarassment over the existence of the Book of Revelation than anything else.
That's interesting, I had never heard that interpretation before.
Well, what can one expect from the "Cake or Death" crowd? ;-)
The CoE is basically the Catholics without alcohol or the crazy, so their beliefs are pretty similar. I think the consensus was that Ezekiel 28:12-19 and Isaiah 14:12-14 were about Satan's Fall, and that the war was all over before the end of page one, but hidden behind the scenes.
Of course, this stuffs up the passage in Revelation no end, but Revelation is also full of crazy and never made sense anyway, so it changes little.
Quote from: Cain on December 30, 2008, 05:00:04 PM
The CoE is basically the Catholics without alcohol or the crazy, so their beliefs are pretty similar. I think the consensus was that Ezekiel 28:12-19 and Isaiah 14:12-14 were about Satan's Fall, and that the war was all over before the end of page one, but hidden behind the scenes.
Of course, this stuffs up the passage in Revelation no end, but Revelation THE ENTIRE BOOK is also full of crazy and never made sense anyway, so it changes little.
Fixed that for ya ;-)
BIBLE IZ TRU WERD OF GAWD!
\
:mullet:
The truth revealed...god is that crazy guy on the corner who mumbles to himself about MI6 beaming radio messages into his head and the Queen being a shapeshifting reptilian monster.
Quote from: Cain on December 30, 2008, 05:00:04 PM
The CoE is basically the Catholics without alcohol or the crazy, so their beliefs are pretty similar. I think the consensus was that Ezekiel 28:12-19 and Isaiah 14:12-14 were about Satan's Fall, and that the war was all over before the end of page one, but hidden behind the scenes.
The problem with their interpretation of those verses in Isaiah is the fact that they completely ignore verses three and four of the same chapter:
Quote3 On the day the LORD gives you relief from suffering and turmoil and cruel bondage, 4 you will take up this taunt against the king of Babylon:
How the oppressor has come to an end!
How his fury has ended!
The passage isn't about Satan or angels or demons or a heavenly war. It's about Isaiah waving his private parts at the oppressive royalty.
the theme wasn`t about the bible interpretation. Is about do you think, only one answer the god is crazy woman is only one discordian in thjis web?
the catolics dont appreciate woman because they form to childs and her influence is important
:kingmeh:
Dorada, you sort of have to prove God exists before you can determine if said God falls into a clear Earth Prime terran biological primate primary sexual characteristic state.
Ther reasons you're getting the answers you're getting is because:
1) You asked a Discordian forum, and
2) Your premise is flawed.
LOL I'M GOD EH
\
(http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/080303/favorite-immortals/alanis-god_l.jpg)
Also, it depends on what god you're talking about. The Christian/Hebrew deity, appears to be considered male. Eris says she's female... and she's hot enough that I'll agree. Odin, Thor, Loki, probably male. Hera, Aphrodite, Babelon, Ishtar... probably female.
My personal God?
*checks his pants*
Yep, I'm male... or else something is very wrong with my biology....
Quote from: DORADA on December 31, 2008, 01:41:03 AM
the theme wasn`t about the bible interpretation. Is about do you think, only one answer the god is crazy woman is only one discordian in thjis web?
the catolics dont appreciate woman because they form to childs and her influence is important
:kingmeh:
this
and
Quote from: Broken AI on December 31, 2008, 04:42:56 AM
Quotethat would make God a class of amoeba
I already told you that god is infact a self replicating sexless amoeba, kinda like 1950's horror movie standard, The Blob. You can ignore it but that won't make it any less true. . .
this.
because seriously, why would God have to have a sex/gender?
especially if there's only one of it, anyway?
does Gravity have a sex/gender? does Logic? does Science? does the Sun? does Energy?
if you wanna attribute a gender to God, probably better to have two of them, male and female.
or maybe better have four of them, so they can sort of have a straight/gay polygamous marriage, for political correctness and correspondence to the four elements (which are two male and two female already).
or, if we wanna be discordian about it, have Five, damnit!
I'm pretty sure the gender of God is "all".
Quote from: Nigel on January 06, 2009, 12:50:52 AM
I'm pretty sure the gender of God is "all".
No, God is a woman. I know this, because men aren't smart enough to be so sadistic that they would place primates in a garden and tell them they can have anything they want
except those apples...and then punish the monkeys when they do what monkeys were designed to do.
We'd just drop a big rock on them, giggle, and walk off looking for something to fuck.
That's true. It's just like a mother to say "You can have anything in the kitchen except those cookies. Those are for the bake sale tomorrow. OK, I'm going to go take a shower, I'll be out in a few minutes."
JJ :lulz:But if god is a woman ...¿Why we must take in our beatiful bodies a monkey 9 months?
Quote from: DORADA on January 31, 2009, 02:03:10 PM
JJ :lulz:But if god is a woman ...¿Why we must take in our beatiful bodies a monkey 9 months?
well, that's women for ya. practical as ever when it comes to DIY.
Goddess: "check it out, i invented pregnancy!"
Woman: "awesome! where's the baby?"
Goddess: "it's, eh, growing inside you!"
Woman: "umm okay ... so how does it get out?"
Goddess: "umm ... hadn't thought of that, really"
Man: ROFL
Quote from: Triple "Dave" Zero on January 31, 2009, 04:25:29 PM
Quote from: DORADA on January 31, 2009, 02:03:10 PM
JJ :lulz:But if god is a woman ...¿Why we must take in our beatiful bodies a monkey 9 months?
well, that's women for ya. practical as ever when it comes to DIY.
Goddess: "check it out, i invented pregnancy!"
Woman: "awesome! where's the baby?"
Goddess: "it's, eh, growing inside you!"
Woman: "umm okay ... so how does it get out?"
Goddess: "umm ... hadn't thought of that, really"
Man: ROFL
:mittens: