Moreover, S/he is either androgynous or intersex. The rabbis supposedly had a whole debate about it, and androgyne with two faces like Janus won, but there are good arguments on either side, assuming this story is real and/or not lifted from other traditions around the same time, since all the religions seem to borrow liberally from each other, including philosophies that aren’t officially religions, like Buddhism or Taoism.
I always wondered about the sex of monotheistic gods. Like… if there’s only one, then why the implied sex organs? They presumably don’t reproduce or could do so just by willing it. It seems pointless to even have any sex-linked traits if you’re the only if your kind, eternal, and omnipotent.
Everything is a reflection of the infinite, and the infinite a reflection of everything. So both asexual, asexual reproduction must be reflected in the all.
You’d have to go deep into both Hermetic and Jewish Kabbalistic lore to understand it, but the shattering of the vessels (mazel Tov!) and trees of life and death are as good a place as any.
I guess that makes sense. It still seems like a contrived question that just needed an answer. Any answer that would fit, like a scientist actively looking for results that confirm a theory.
I don’t mean that in a derogatory way, btw, just that it always seemed naive to me.
I know you didn’t. Council of Nicea had an emperor’s whims to justify and imperialism to uphold, so cutting out about half of the debates (because that’s what judeocristian scriptures were, before they were made into the infallible word and will of the Omniscient, Omnipresent, Omnibenevolent, One True.
This is around the first century, and checking other religions for borrowed ideas was a little more time and labor intensive. I just don’t take claims at face value and go with the deeper psychological and psychosocial (if any) value of the message. Storytelling with rich language helps lessons stick, and psychology wasn’t always a science and has it’s own issues and agendas. Human needs, psychological and physical, are real.
Careful not to misgender God. It might bring about the end times. (Big old /s)
Moreover, S/he is either androgynous or intersex. The rabbis supposedly had a whole debate about it, and androgyne with two faces like Janus won, but there are good arguments on either side, assuming this story is real and/or not lifted from other traditions around the same time, since all the religions seem to borrow liberally from each other, including philosophies that aren’t officially religions, like Buddhism or Taoism.
I always wondered about the sex of monotheistic gods. Like… if there’s only one, then why the implied sex organs? They presumably don’t reproduce or could do so just by willing it. It seems pointless to even have any sex-linked traits if you’re the only if your kind, eternal, and omnipotent.
Everything is a reflection of the infinite, and the infinite a reflection of everything. So both asexual, asexual reproduction must be reflected in the all.
You’d have to go deep into both Hermetic and Jewish Kabbalistic lore to understand it, but the shattering of the vessels (mazel Tov!) and trees of life and death are as good a place as any.
I guess that makes sense. It still seems like a contrived question that just needed an answer. Any answer that would fit, like a scientist actively looking for results that confirm a theory.
I don’t mean that in a derogatory way, btw, just that it always seemed naive to me.
I know you didn’t. Council of Nicea had an emperor’s whims to justify and imperialism to uphold, so cutting out about half of the debates (because that’s what judeocristian scriptures were, before they were made into the infallible word and will of the Omniscient, Omnipresent, Omnibenevolent, One True.
Rather than edit, I will add:
https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/646205
This is around the first century, and checking other religions for borrowed ideas was a little more time and labor intensive. I just don’t take claims at face value and go with the deeper psychological and psychosocial (if any) value of the message. Storytelling with rich language helps lessons stick, and psychology wasn’t always a science and has it’s own issues and agendas. Human needs, psychological and physical, are real.