The Gender of God: What if God is Female? (Part 3 of 4)

If you missed Part 1 or Part 2 of, “The Gender of God: What if God is Female?” 

What if God is female?

Honestly, who would have thought so much complexity could arise from referring to God as he? God transcends gender. There is a theological function and biblical context in the use of gendered language. The Godhead (Trinity) is the basis for reconstructed use of gendered language. Biblically, God is portrayed as Father and by the masculine pronouns. One might contest this hermeneutically (which was addressed earlier in this discussion). One may contend that masculine language for God emanates from a male-dominated biblical culture. Nevertheless, there is a redemptive hermeneutic (interpretation) in this biblical language and it should not be ignored.

In reality, God’s fatherly depiction (when understood properly) is meant to present an alternative image of what a father should be. It is not the distorted portrait of a father that has already been discussed. God the Father is loving, forgiving, just, redeeming, and gracious. God is the father to the fatherless (Ps. 68.1-10). God steps in as the surrogate father to the abused and abandoned. Redemption is the champion argument in favor of God as father. One is redeemed in Christ’s work of the cross (death and resurrection). This is the promise of God.

As the divine, God transcends gender, but it is evident that language is important. What if God is omnigender? What if God is female and male? The Godhead is three persons and one God. The Holy Spirit takes on two forms in biblical language, feminine (Hebrew) and neuter (Greek). But, linguistic gender (he, she, masculine, feminine, and gendered language) and physiological gender (whether one perceives God as a male or female being) are different matters. These distinct definitions have, unequally, influenced the interpretation of divine gender issues.  

The discussion continues, “The Gender of God: What if God is Female?”(Part 4 of 4).

The Bible Says, but What if Mine Doesn't?

Exegesis is not for the timid or the lazy. What do we do when our two major English formal translations (NASB and NRSV) have very different content? In Proverbs 11, there is a verse that could alter interpretation of the whole passage depending on which translation we use. Why were the versions different? In the passage at hand, the NRSV uses an ancient Syriac Greek manuscript. Conversely, The NASB, NIV, KJV, and other English translations rely only on the Hebrew Massoretic Text. However, this is not a case of majority rules.

Many of us have heard the phrase, “The Bible says,” but what if yours or mine doesn’t say something? In the case of Proverbs 11, v.16 has the ability to change how we read the rest of the chapter. Not to worry, there’s nothing wrong with the Massoretic Text (Hebrew). But, there’s nothing wrong with the Syriac Greek text either; in fact, it may predate the Hebrew in this case.  

Hebrew based translation: “A gracious woman attains honor, And ruthless men attain riches” (Proverbs 11:16, NASB). 

Greek based translation: “A gracious woman gets honor, but she who hates virtue is covered with shame. The timid become destitute, but the aggressive gain riches” (Proverbs 11:16, NRSV).

As you can see, these two versions of the same verse are a more than a little different.

           

Honestly, the main reason that the Greek manuscript could change the meaning of the chapter’s context is that the NRSV uses the word timid, which means hesitant and/or afraid; whereas, the word lazy might make more sense (as used in the Good News paraphrase). The flow of parallelism in Proverbs 11 and elsewhere is very important to its interpretation. English translations of Proverbs using the Massoretic or Greek text don’t tell us that one Bible is right and the other Bible is wrong. Instead, they tell us that we need to ask questions as we read the biblical text in any translation because there is always more to good exegesis than, “The Bible says….”