I have often said that if God really were a woman, I would have to be an atheist. Belief in God implies strong trust, and I can't have that with a female.

This is fascinating, CD. I'm glad you posted it.

I do have to say, though, 4 or 5 years ago I spent a year attending Wicca classes and actively participating in the local Pagan/Wiccan community (they were mostly Wiccan, but not all of them). I only really know that one group, but they always made it a point to acknowledge that Wicca was a new religion, based perhaps loosely on ancient traditions, but really based more on Gardnerian principles.

This group was pretty serious about their religion, and the god was every bit as important as the goddess. It was more about the duality of life and the divine than so-called "goddess worship". The other big thing with them was that "all the gods are one god and all the goddesses are one goddess". In other words, the various deities were really just representations of different aspects of god (or God, depending on who you talked to). Even further, they weren't seen really as literal deities, but as representations of the different energies available in the universe. They were used to focus your own energy more than anything else.

Thanks CD,
This is the historical revisionism that is set on us from all sides. This paticular one is what HN has set its sights on dealing with. Shortly we will be unveiling a counter to this revisionism in history. You may find it to your liking.

These damn feminists are so damn crazy that they have to invent history to justify themselves and their stupid theories of female supremacy. And getting so angry at men that they have to change the gender of God to suit themselves just proves how crazy they are.

Here's another great article from Robert Sheaffer:

"Feminism, the Noble Lie"

He gets it quite wrong on one point though:

However, on close inspection it turns out that, even though some women sometimes become very influential there, the great majority of the influental persons are men (exactly as in our society).

He is incorrect in saying that, in the space of the next 30 years and already among younger age groups, that men are the majority of influencial people. In actual fact, the majority of influential positions in a short number of years, will overall will be held by women. And their dominance in the workplace, the professions, and senior jobs is already in place among younger age groups, e.g. 20-30.

The ERSI's recent employment market report told us that:

By 2012, women are forecast to form the majority of business, financial and legal professionals, and the proportion of managers who are women will almost reach the proportion of women in the workforce as a whole. Also, the current forecasts imply that the educational attainment gap between male and female workers will widen further.

And in the US, most women aged 20-30 are on an equal earning as their male peers, an in areas such as New York and Dallas, they earn up to 20% more than men of the same age and qualification.

Reuters: For Young Earners in Big City, a Gap in Women’s Favor

In the UK, women in their 20s earn marginally more than men overall.

And let's not forget Matriarchal Divorce and Family Law.

The next 30 years are going to be a total wipeout of male socio-economic power, and men will take their place as an economic underclass which the rich in society (women) can use and abuse as they wish.

His assertion in that article and also the one above, that we are essentially a Patriarchy, is also incorrect. We are living in the world's first wide-scale Matriarchy.

You've seen all those pictures of Angels, that women like. Long robes, wings, long hair. Well the Devil used to be one. The very first women's myth was that Lucifer was a male. Hah!

The Princess of Lies now shows her true colours.

God remains a chap (an Englishman at that!) but the devil is definitely a woman.

Quote from Percy

God remains a chap (an Englishman at that!) but the devil is definitely a woman.

I believe Lucifer to be a androgynous evil essence, more detrimentally effective (i.e. destructive) under the "guise" of a 'alluring' female/s.

The "devils ways" find a natural trojan horse masked by the 'innate trickery' of women, validated/lubricated by the female roles accepted/enforced within society!

but the devil is definitely a woman

No, I believe the devil is a primeval androgynous entity, which (currently) has embraced feminism as the shortest route to the destruction of man (is there any other more destructive ideologies - that absolute evil could embrace to fasten it's agenda?), who just happen to be female, it's the most cost effective approach! Right?

As easy as it would be to ascribe the negative connations solely to women, and conclude satan has primarily female traits (mostly true).

If you sought to overwhelm anything, surely you'd exploit the weakenesses that already existed (just like any good general) by the same token evil seeks to exploit the weakness of men, which, as always has been sexual. Therefore the best/only facilitators of this most efficient means would be women. Hence the historical conception of female affiliation with the devil.

Do I believe women are 'more' morally vacuous and mostly incoherent regarding honour, respect and pride? Yes, resolutely!

However, I don't attach evil to something females have been genetically predisposed and programmed to fulfill since the beginning of time. The evil of men is more obvious, and females less so, I think this is what primarily grinds the faux sensibilities of the middle-classes. Moral transparency?

As for God? He's still on my shit list!

Spiritual beings really don't have genders, IMO, at least not as we know it. Most of what we think of as the gender of G-d or the Satan is just an artist's conception. In Jewish teaching, G-d is actually thought of as androgynous in a sense, having both male and female *traits* (i.e., G-d is spoken of as being "a man of war", yet at other times, He is spoken of as "gathering Israel as a hen gathers her chicks"). Both male and female imagery is used.

The ancient rabbis also believed that Adam was originally created as an androgynous being, since it says in the Book of Genesis that G-d "created him male and female", so I guess the theory is that G-d somehow created Adam as androgynous, and this is how He was able to take Eve out of him later to create a separate being that was still one flesh. This is why in Judaism, a man is not considered "complete" unless he is married; because marriage is simply the restoring of that "one being" with the two halves of male and female.

As for the horned guy, in Judaism Satan is not portrayed as a being to rival G-d in power; to us, that would be a form of dualism.

To grasp the authentic Jewish understanding of Satan, read the Book of Job. Satan's role is to act as an adversary, with the ultimate goal of actually bringing the person closer to G-d and His Will.

Quote from Annette1313

I have often said that if God really were a woman, I would have to be an atheist. Belief in God implies strong trust, and I can't have that with a female.

I'd rather a benevolent female God over a shitty mangina one. I'm an atheist any way, so it doesn't concern me.

Quote from Feminist_Scum

I'd rather a benevolent female God over a shitty mangina one. I'm an atheist any way, so it doesn't concern me.

No way is G-d a mangina! Remember what happened with the story of the Ten Plagues and the Exodus from Egypt? Between Pharoah and G-d, that was a pure testosterone battle going on there, on BOTH ends!

Spiritual beings really don't have genders, IMO, at least not as we know it. Most of what we think of as the gender of G-d or the Satan is just an artist's conception. In Jewish teaching, G-d is actually thought of as androgynous in a sense, having both male and female *traits* (i.e., G-d is spoken of as being "a man of war", yet at other times, He is spoken of as "gathering Israel as a hen gathers her chicks"). Both male and female imagery is used.

Maybe the problem Annette (or should I say 'Jean D'Arc - given that impressive new avatar) is monotheism. Having just one god, especially one that reflects human characteristics, begs the question of whether those traits that God shares with humans are predominantly male or female.

In the Graeco-Roman pantheon the work of the gods depended on their area of expertise. The godesses took care of love, fertility, harvests and such. They were usually pleasant when appeased but could turn very bitchy when crossed.
The gods too were generally an affable bunch that helped people along most of the time but were prone to start hurling thunderbolts if they were in a bad mood.

Modern science has largely debunked the notion that natural events are a result of the gods being pernickety. Things happen according to rules that are observable and predictable. But it still doesn't explain why quarks or galaxies behave in very specific ways. Why can't they just do whatever they like whenever they feel like it?

Discovering the underlying rules of human behaviour is much more tricky because we can never be impartial observers. We use religion and social studies much less effectively than the scientists use astrophysics and string theory and the results are even more unreliable.

Our best guide is trial and error - what works and what doesn't.

Feminism doesn't work. The short term benefits for the priveleged few far outweigh the losses to society. It's defunct.
Rich and educated amoral women don't even replace themselves. Poor amoral women breed irresponsibly and expect 'The State' to take the responsibility.
Anybody want to invest in that?

The matriarchal fantasy is like believing in Atlantis or ancient astronauts, fun but not seriously plausible. The difference is that universities allow this feminist pseudo-history to be taught as if it were real scholarship.

I came to the conclusion that God must be male because females have no mercy

Is it just me, or has this forum become a depressing repetition of subserviant excuses, and a pandering to retarded destructiveness?

Point being, so many members here colluding with a negative element that seeks only ill?

I watch, I see.

Quote from Billy

Since I know of few women who are kind or show any form of goodwill to men the thought of God as a female is disturbing. Sure God has been strict with his covenant people but were women treated better? I don't think so.

I've had my fair share of bad experiences with women. I've been abused by many physically and mentally, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't meet my fair share of good women too. I'd much rather have a benevolent female Goddess who cares for everyone over some piece of shit male feminist.