Removing the Masculinity of God

 

I recently wrote an article in which I tried to give some clarity on the different Bible versions and how one might go about choosing the right version for themselves. One of the versions that I included in those to be absolutely avoided was a gender neutral bible, and I got to thinking about why it would seem important to those who published it to create that type of a version of the Holy Scriptures. I can easily understand why there is a gay bible; they are trying to legitimize abominable sexual practices and the only way they can do that or claim a clear conscience while claiming to worship God, is to remove all negative references to their sexual deviancies. But what is gained by removing references to God as a male figure? I have come up with four ideas for the possible reasoning for this, but as I start writing this article, I still do not know what they really hope to gain from this. Maybe it will be made clear to me as I continue writing.

The first reason that I can think of for writing a gender neutral version of the Bible is to try to gain legitimacy for the LGBT+++ movement. If the "God of the Bible" is non gender conforming (man, I hate using their language), this gives people who engage in lifestyles that are against the True God's will a basis upon which to claim that "god"; their god, not the real God, does not care about how humans relate to each other romantically or sexually. If god himself is gender neutral, then there can be no basis upon which to limit mankind's physical interactions with each other, and if this idea can be spread among the tolerant christian left, in particular, then the stance of the true church can be undermined through public and political pressure. It is unfortunate for these people that the Truths of Scripture are never changing and that true Believers are not swayed by public or political pressure. But that won't stop them from trying.

Another reason why I think that the gender neutral bible was created may be based on the ideas of feminism. Feminism has been around for a long, long time. There may have been some legitimate grievances behind the first waves of feminism, but those grievances have long been addressed. In a perfect world, those grievances would not have existed because mankind would be living according to God's standards. 

In Genesis 3:16 we see the curse that God placed upon women due to Eve's role in the fall of man. This is done at the same time that God curses the serpent and man; all three had a role to play in the fall of mankind. God tells Eve that she, and all women after her, will have pain in childbirth, but then He continues. He says that, "In pain you will bring forth children; Yet your desire will be for your husband, And he will rule over you.” 

I find that phrase interesting; the woman's desire will be for her husband. The woman will experience pain bearing her children, and we know how protective a Momma bear can be about her kids, yet she will still desire after her husband, more than her kids. That word 'desire', is H8669 in Strong's Concordance, and it is used only three times in the Bible. There are three definitions of this word, these being desire, longing, craving. This desire is further broken down as the desire of a man for a woman, and the desire of a woman for a man.

According to the Bible, God has placed the man over the woman, but this was never meant to be exercised in an abusive or controlling manner.Ephesians 5:22-29 gives us the picture of how God sees a healthy marriage relationship, with the man as the head and the woman desiring of him; "Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. 24 But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything. 25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her, 26 so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she would be holy and blameless. 28 So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself; 29 for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church,".

If a man exercises his authority over his wife in the way that the Bible instructs him to, I have no doubt that his wife will desire after him. What argument can be raised against this? While I have not been perfect in my fulfillment of God's instructions to me as the husband, I am fortunate that I have a Godly wife who does desire after me. It is the nature of a woman to want to be drawn to the side of a man who will protect and care for her. The man is the larger and stronger of the two, prone to want to protect as the woman is prone to want a protector. Some like to say that, as God opened up the side of man and took a rib from man to create woman, the natural desire is for the man to draw his rib back to himself, and for the creature that holds that rib to also be drawn back to the man. This makes sense to me somehow, yet man is a fallen creature.

My wife recently told me of something that she came across online where a young married woman was asking about her husband constantly "beating" her with just verse 22 above. She is married for three years and the husband seeks to control her using the Bible as his weapon. This is an absolute abuse of the authority that God gave to that man. It was pointed out to this woman that the Scriptures don't stop at commanding her submission, but continue to tell the husband how he is to treat his wife; as Christ treats His church. The husband is to love his wife, be willing to give his life for her, looking to bring her to God as a clean and virtuous woman, caring for her physical and spiritual needs, presenting her blameless before God, having nourished and cherished her in the same way that Christ does for His church. This poor woman's husband has failed to grasp the entirety of God's commands for marriage, and as a result, that couple is now headed for a divorce. Hopefully, some spirit-filled Believers will come alongside that couple and counsel them in what a healthy relationship looks like and possible save that marriage.

Unfortunately, man is a fallen creature, and we have failed to live according to God's plan to a very large degree. Just as the above mentioned woman has entered into a relationship with a man who is abusing his authority over her, so have many men abused their God-given authority over woman. It is likely partially for this reason that the gender neutral bible was prepared; to try to throw off the shackles of the worldly man's control over women. The theory behind this could be that if God is not a man, then the argument that God has given man authority over women is gutted of it's legitimacy. Removing God's masculine authority over mankind seems to be akin to removing man's God-given authority over women.

We may also be witnessing the results of another reason for removing God's masculinity in the feminist "toxic men" movement that we have been witnessing for the last several years. We have seen how toxic liberal women have been trying to emasculate men by arguing that women are every bit as able to do what men do, but that women are less dangerous than men are. There is some truth to this in the physical sense, but there are also severe limitations to that truth as well.

Men are just built different than women. In general, men have superior strength and endurance, both physically and mentally. Men can achieve more in all physical aspects, but can also endure more physical, mental and emotional hardships than women can. This is necessary for the God-given responsibility for men to protect, care for and provide for women. Removing the masculinity of God removes the basis for the "patriarchy", undermining the natural qualities and giftings of men. It's like the feminist movement has understood that women will never actually be able to outperform men, so they think that men need to be degraded and brought down to their level of abilities and competency. 

Again, this is a losing strategy among real men who know their place under God, but the feminists are gaining too much ground among the soy-boy men who support feminism as their own affront to God. The really funny thing is that when the feminist eventually comes to the realization that she wants to settle down with a man, she will almost never choose the soy-boy, and if she does, she quickly rejects that choice. Of course, by this time, all of the good men have already settled down with their chosen mate, so the pickings are pretty slim unless they find some divorced alpha male, which comes with it's own pitfalls.

And of course, we have seen the human tendency to weaponize everything that is gained when we see "trans women" in sports. By arguing that women are equal to men in all things, the feminists cannot argue against self proclaimed girly-boys competing against real women in women's sports and repeatedly annihilating the women, not due to their impressive athletic abilities, but simply because of their natural, God-given capabilities. Most men will have to train very little to beat virtually every woman in any sporting event, whereas these same men cannot compete against the top men, or even the middle men, in the same event. This is just the world reaping the effects of denying the masculinity of God taken to the nth degree.

Finally, I think that removing the masculinity of God seeks to remove the strength and judgment aspects of His nature. Women are naturally more tender and nurturing, so they are more likely to alter their own beliefs in order to accommodate the beliefs of others. Men, real men, are more likely to call B.S. when we see it. Men have laid aside our authority by allowing all of these far left ideas to take root in society. By removing the masculinity of God from their bible, the writers are trying to remove the judgment and punishment that are due to those who reject God's Word. It may be that even though the Bible still speaks against the things that they support, they are hoping that by softening the law-and-order nature of God through the removal of His masculinity, they are hoping to side-step or soften His coming judgment. Maybe they think that they will be able to negotiate a lighter punishment, appealing to God's more "feminine" nature. They are in for a rude awakening.

God is never changing. His nature is immutable, meaning that it is unable to be changed. The Bible repeatedly refers to God using male descriptors: King, Father, Judge, Husband, Master, and the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. These are indicative of His protective nature, His guiding nature, His leading nature, His just nature. These aspects of God's nature cannot ever be changed, especially just by changing some words in His Word. Honestly, we should not want to change God's nature. It is largely because of His unchangeable nature that Christianity has been able to survive for the last 2000 years. If our faith was placed in a God that could change His mind on things, we would have no firm foundation upon which to found our society.

This is also why our society has gone amok. We have chosen to reject everything that God does and always has stood for. It is only by living under His design for us that we can truly have the joy and fulfillment that He so badly wants for us. As we continue to reject God's nature and His rules, we will continue to fall apart as a society. Alternatively, if we can turn society back towards God's plan for us, we will again see peace, prosperity and growth that we used to enjoy in this country. I'm not saying the turn around would be easy, but I can guarantee that it would be worth it if we can achieve it.

So, I don't know that I have been able to glean one single purpose for the removal of God's masculinity, and maybe there isn't one single purpose to find. Each of the above reasons have their own basis for existing, and while there is a little overlap, there only seems to be one common goal; the rejection of the idea that humans answer to God. People don't want to be responsible to anyone else, never mind an all-knowing God who will determine if we have lived according to His standards. Yet this is not a purely human nature, because if it was, we would not have so many people living according to so many religious rules all around the world. So I guess the reason isn't denying the existence of "a" god, it's just denying the existence of "The" God.