(August 24, 2012 at 5:09 am)Rayaan Wrote: If YHWH has pagan roots, then perhaps He was not the original god of the Jews, at least.

LOL, why? I'm honestly amused here, why would a god having pagan roots preclude him from being anyone's "original god"...lol?

Quote:As for Allah being a male, again, my point was that the word "He" is used only in a figurative sense, just like when sometimes people talk about nature or the earth with a "she." Also, the verses that I quoted on the first page in this thread negates the idea that Allah has a gender or that He is a male, specifically. In fact, it shows that we cannot understand His nature at all.

People actually call the earth a "she" (when they do) because of a long-stanging cultural narrative of femininity regarding the earth. Yes, it's figurative...and yes, it arises from a "literal" understanding of the "spirit of the earth" being female. Such is also the case with your god. No one has seen your gods dick, granted, but it;s assumed he has a pretty big one. The Koran is an awfully long list of thigs to do with this gods nature for a book that "cannot understand His nature"....don't you think?

Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of that. Nothing follows from "we cannot understand". No proclamations, no nothing...because -we cannot understand-. I wish everyone would run with it....

Quote:You mean, that's what you believe, right?

No,a stated belief,[even a negative one] is also a positive claim. Implicit in my statement is "as far as can tell,due to a lack of any credible evidence to the contrary". A skeptic, I do my best to avoid truth claims to simply opine. My apologies for not expressing myself more clearly.

I'm aware we have very different opinions on this matter and have no problem agreeing to differ. The simple reasons are I like and respect the person you show here.

However, according to myth, the guy did make Mary pregnant....


Even the Myth does not claim that the god made MARY pregnant SEXUALLY
and in fact - genetically - this part of the story cannot be true.

And of the many things that are comical in the bible - this particular VIRIGN conception is one of them

First - if you know the time period - the common perception was that the FATHER supplied a "SEED" (Not a sperm - but the whole basis for the being) - and the woman was simply the dirt the seed was planted in - and was not actually related to the child. THAT is why ancient bloodlines ONLY go through the father.

We NOW know that is not true - and it is the real reproductive method of humans that exposes this for nonsense.

IF a god did exist - we have to assume the god IS NOT A HUMAN BEING - something even theists have NO problem admitting. Genetics shows us that to produce a human male child - one needs a HUMAN MALE sperm - and a "Y" human chromosome - neither of which would be present in a NON-human. While it can be claimed that an ALMIGHTY god can whip up such a male human chromosome - it still would NOT BE from itself - it is not human.

Worse - when two different species procreate - they do not produce either one - but an intermediate species. So - if the god actually impregnated Mary - the result would be like that of a Horse and a Donkey producing a mule - and the result would be female - as well as infertile.

You know that idea persisted for quite some time, up to and including the hilarity of imagining sperm as little guys with umbrellas and dapper sport-coats.

(August 25, 2012 at 9:39 am)ThomM Wrote: Horse and a Donkey producing a mule - and the result would be female - as well as infertile.

This little fella might have something to say
Jesus f1 hybred is a nice idea though, Mr Icke has made a fortune from it

Christ doesn't qualify for F1.

"The offspring of distinctly different parental types produce a new, uniform variety with specific characteristics from either or both parents.

Jesus is neither new, uniform, or possessing any specific characteristics. Also, the little shit clearly had reproductive ability, despite having no increased resistances to disease, rot, mold, or pests....In this case, the heirlooms are clearly superior.

I didn't read all six pages but just in case a deist didn't sound off on this OP I'll take the liberty.


For the most part, deists don't assign any kind of human characteristic to the creator. For all I know, God is a supermodel tyrannosaurus rex with a computer for a brain and mad alien scientist for a father. His sex/body is of no consequence. I guess I kind of assume that if my God is still alive, he's more ethereal and evanescent than skin and bone. But shit -- who really cares?

The truth is I'd probably be pleased as punch to find out that my God was a female. After all, I rather like women.