The gods and goddesses of the ancient world were sexual beings. Images of these mythological deities emphasized their genitals and myths emphasized their sexual exploits. The creation of the heavens and the earth were sexual acts. The gods and goddesses of the ancient world often had sex with humans. It is here that the uniqueness of the God of the ancient Hebrews is revealed.
The Genesis creation narrative challenges the polytheism of the ancient near east. Whereas, many ancient cultures deified the sun, moon, and stars, and the great beasts of the land and sea; the Genesis narrative insist that the sun, moon, and great beasts are not deities. The heavens are not populated by gods and goddesses; there is only one God who pre-exists all creation. Creation is not a sexual act, but an act of divine speech. The oneness of God presents us with a profound distinction in divine nature – God is not sexed or gendered. The people of Israel were explicitly prohibited from envisioning Yahweh as male or female because God has no form (Deuteronomy 4:12-16).
In the Genesis creation narrative, humanity is created in the image of God as male and female. The image of God means that male and female humans are unique among all creation in that only they are recipients of God’s breath/Spirit, only humans can bear the divine glory. The sexual distinctions within humanity are part of the created order and do not reflect the nature of God. God is not an androgynous being. God is not a sexed being. God is utterly other, utterly distinct, from the created order. Nothing in creation – no images, no words – can adequately represent the divine being. Hence, the prohibition against constructing an idol, image, or likeness of God (Exodus 20:4). God transcends creation.
Even so, in an effort to talk about God the ancient Hebrew theologians often attributed created and/or human characteristics to the divine being – theophanies and anthropomorphisms. God was revealed to Moses through the burning bush, but that certainly doesn’t mean that God is a burning bush. Theophanic manifestations include light and lightening, thunder, fire, and other forms of creation. Throughout scripture, the inspired authors utilized anthropomorphisms often referring to the hand/arm of God, the nostrils of God, the eyes of God, and the feet of God. But this doesn’t mean that human likeness is inherent to the divine image. The divine substance transcends the spatial and temporal created order.
In agreement with classic Christian dogma, the Declaration of Faith of the Church of God states that we believe “In one God eternally existing in three persons; namely, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost”.
The attribution of masculine pronouns to God should be understood as anthropomorphic metaphors. The gods of the ancient world had corresponding female cohorts with whom they copulated. The Greek god, Uranus, was thought to have copulated with his goddess mother, Gaea, and their children were the Titans. The Canaanite god, Baal, was said to have copulated with his goddess wife, Asherah. The Egyptian god, Atum, was said to have copulated with his goddess wife, Iusaaset. Throughout the Hebrew scriptures there is no female counterpart to Yahweh. To speak of God as “Father” does not imply sex or gender. Yahweh does not copulate with a corresponding female deity who births divine children. Rather, God is Father by virtue of being Creator who speaks the cosmos into existence. Also, God is Father by virtue of the eternal generation of the Son and the eternal procession of the Spirit.
The ancient theologians insisted that God is not gendered. Arnobius of Sicca (4th century) explained, “When we speak of God, we use a masculine word, but let no thoughtless person accuse us of saying that God, is a man. It is not gender that is expressed but rather his name, its customary meaning and the way in which we habitually use words. The deity is not male, even though his name is of the masculine gender” (Against the Nations 3.8).
Within the Holy Trinity, the Son is eternally and uniquely generated by and from the Father. There is no sexual act, and no creative act. The eternal generation of the Son is essential to the nature of the Triune God. The Father does not exist prior to the Son; Father and Son are eternally one. To speak of God as Son does not imply that the eternal Word/Son is gendered. However, Jesus Christ, as the Son of the Living God, is the union of uncreated divinity and created humanity. In Jesus Christ, the uncreated and ungendered eternal Son is united with created and gendered humanity. Jesus Christ is male. The maleness of Jesus is not a metaphor; it is a historical fact. Here, we must insist that the maleness of Jesus Christ does not suggest masculine superiority. Both male and female are created in the divine image, and exist interdependently (1 Corinthians 11:11-12).
Within the Holy Trinity, the Holy Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father and the Son. Father, Son, and Spirit share a singular and eternal divine substance and divine will. The first mention of the “Spirit of God” is found in Genesis 1:2 – “and the Spirit of God was hovering over the surface of the waters” (emphasis added). The imagery of hovering is reminiscent of a mother bird hovering over her nest (cf. Deuteronomy 32:11). This is reinforced by the image of the Spirit descending like a dove on Jesus (Matthew 3:16). The Hebrew word rūaḥ (spirit) is grammatically feminine. This has led some to suggest that the Holy Spirit is the divine “She”, the feminine counterpart to the masculine Father. However, throughout the Bible the pronouns used in reference to the Spirit are masculine. Furthermore, just as it is improper to insist that the Father and Son are ontologically masculine; it is improper to suggest that the Holy Spirit is ontologically feminine (or masculine). The Holy Spirit is no more female than Spirit is a dove. Just as the image of the dove is a theophany, the language of Father and Son (and divine She) are mere anthropomorphisms and do not reflect the divine nature.
Perhaps the story of the virginal conception and birth of Jesus Christ is helpful. Gabriel declared, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you” (Luke 1:35). Mary’s conception did not involve sexual intercourse. The ancient world had many legends of the gods descending from the heavens, taking physical form, and having sex with humans. Even the Bible suggests the possibility of heavenly beings and humans engaging in sex and procreating children (Genesis 6:1-4). However, the conception of Jesus in the womb of Mary is not due to sexual intercourse. Mary is not the consort of Yahweh. Mary virginally conceived because the Holy Spirit will “come upon” and “overshadow” her. This moving and hovering of the Spirit is reminiscent of the Spirit of God moving over the primeval waters as a powerful creating presence (Genesis 1:2). The conception of Jesus is neither a heterosexual act (sex with the masculine “Father”), nor a homosexual act (sex with the Spirit as divine She). The conception of Jesus is an asexual act effected by an ontologically ungendered God.
In recent years, some theologians have suggested that the terms Father and Son are vestiges of male hierarchy and should be substituted with non-gendered terms. According to this view, an alternative Trinitarian confession might be “we believe in one God in three persons; the Creator, the Child, and the Spirit”. Others insist that since the Hebrew word rūaḥ (spirit) is grammatically feminine, then it is proper to assign female pronouns and metaphors to the Holy Spirit. Let’s address the grammar first. Hebrew is a language that employs grammatical gender, but that does not always imply that a noun is actually male or female. For example, the Hebrew word for sun (šemeš) is sometimes in the masculine form, and at other times in the feminine form; but at no time did the speaker believe the sun is a gendered object. So, although an over literal translation might allow for rūaḥ (spirit) to be assigned female pronouns, it is a profound mistake to assume that the Holy Spirit is female (or male).
Second, since the terms Father and Son are anthropomorphic metaphors, is it acceptable to replace them with more suitable gender-neutral terms like Creator and Child? In my judgment, the terms Father and Son are divinely-inspired anthropomorphic metaphors that speak to intra-trinitarian relationships and divine-human relationships. To speak of God as Father, Son, and Mother is not consistent with the language of sacred scripture, but is more consistent with pagan notions of gendered deity. Speaking of the Triune God as Father, Son, and Spirit is the language of divine revelation and should be affirmed. Even so, a proper understanding of these terms as non-gendered metaphors is essential to a faithful confession of faith in the Triune God.
