Why is God Described with Masculine Pronouns in the Bible?
Time to read: 12 minutes
The discussion behind the usage of masculine terminology to describe God, including male pronouns such as "he," "him," and "his," has been a subject of ongoing debate and argument within the body of Christ for centuries. These debates have recently been heightened due to new information of prominent Christian institutions voting on whether they should adopt gender-neutral terminology in their liturgical addresses to God to promote ‘inclusivity’ to those who identify as anything other than than ‘male’.
Some may argue that the liturgical use of masculine pronouns reinforces patriarchal cultural norms. Which, consequentially, supports the notion that God is literally male. Others may then argue that the usage of masculine language to describe God in scripture does not have to be seen as a theological justification for the promotion of patriarchal norms.
Although most Christians commonly agree that God is neither male nor female in a literal sense, one question is still to be answered. Why is God always described with masculine pronouns all throughout scripture? That is why I wrote this piece; to present an insight, that can alternatively be understood concerning God’s nature, which is inclusive yet non-dualistic. I pray that this text provides you with an illustration which correctly portrays a biblically accurate, yet orthodox narrative.
God and 'His' People
My first argument would be that using masculine pronouns to describe God in the scriptures reflects the image of God as 'king'. Throughout the Bible, God is described as a king who rules over his people and judges the nations. This image of God as king is reflected in the use of masculine language to describe God, which is essential for understanding the nature of God and his relationship with his people. In this context, the use of male language to describe God can be seen as a way of expressing the power and authority of God, rather than promoting patriarchal ideas. Remember, for the descendant of Abraham, God literally ruled over the people of Israel through His appointed judges prior to the reign of King Saul, the first king of Israel. So even if we were to take scripture in context, the descendants of Israel addressed God in a literal sense as ‘king’ over their nation.
Since God is often referred to as King of Israel within the Old Testament; in the New Testament - Jesus, the incarnation of God - is referred to by both angels and humans alike as the 'King of Kings' and the 'Lord of Lords'. This image of God as the king has been central to the Christian understanding of God's nature and relationship to his people, and the use of these masculine terms within these paradigms has been used to fittingly describe God as a reflection of this particular image.
The consistency of Christian Tradition
Another argument is that the use of masculine language to describe God is rooted in tradition. From the early days of the church, Christians have used masculine language to describe God in their prayers, hymns, and liturgies. This use of masculine language has been a central part of Christian worship and has played an important role in shaping the faith and spirituality of generations of Christians. Those who argue for using a masculine pronoun for God point to this tradition as a reason for continuing to use it.
Using masculine language to describe God does not necessarily equate to the belief that God is male. Most Christians believe that God transcends all human categories - including gender. From a biblical viewpoint, the use of masculine terminology to describe God is perceived as a symbolic way of expressing the relationship between God and humanity, instead of a definitive statement concerning the gender of God. Take for example the doctrine of the Trinity. It holds that God is one being in three persons and that each person of the Trinity is fully divine. While the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are often referred to using masculine language, it is not seen as a literal statement about their gender. Still, it is a poetically expressive way of describing their relationship with one another and humanity.
The Bible contains approximately 170 references to God as the 'Father'. That’s quite a lot of times. Having such a significant number of times where God is addressed with the use of gender-specific terms such as a fatherly figure, echoes the symbolic imagery that the Bible uses as a linguistic vice to depict the significant depth of God’s never-ending love for His creation, as a Father who loves his children equally. This God takes an interest in His creation in a deep and nurturing manner just as a truly loving father is intrinsically invested in the lives of his family and offspring. In both the Old and New Testament books, a majority of the time, God is described using male terms not to reinforce male superiority - but to instead reinforce terminology which can come close to justifiably personifying God’s transcendent nature, yet includes a view which explains God’s desire to have an intimate relationship with all that dwells within all the constellations which He has made.
Then, in an analysis of the New Testament letters, which go from the book of Acts to the book of Revelation, we have almost 900 verses where the masculine term "theos" is used to refer to God, instead of “Thea”; which is the feminine term in Greek for a goddess. Hermeneutically, if there was any theological necessity for the emphasis on God as a gender-neutral entity, most authors in scripture would have logically adapted their linguistic terminology to encourage these concepts and would have used the terms ‘Theos’ and ‘Thea’ interchangeably to reflect this. However, it seems that this isn’t the case, as the authors who God inspired to write scriptures (see 1 Timothy 3:12) continuously felt the need to use masculine terminology to address God given the characteristics respectively revealed about Him throughout the Bible.
Christ the ‘Groom’, and the Church, His ‘Bride’
Then my last argument will be that scripture frequently uses masculine terminology to portray God as an influential, authoritative figure who commands respect and admiration. This portrayal of God as a male figure has been abused to reinforce traditional gender roles and patriarchal power structures and has sadly contributed to the marginalization of women in religious contexts for centuries due to a gross manipulation of texts to feed the greed of men. However, there are several instances in the New Testament where the church is described as the ‘bride of Christ’. This view of the church as God's bride and God as the groom offers us a refreshing alternative way of thinking about God’s deep longing to show His love to humanity.
In this powerful metaphor, the church is depicted as a feminine entity, presented through qualities such as beauty, grace, and vulnerability. Christ, the incarnation of God, in turn, is portrayed as a masculine figure who provides protection, security, and love. By depicting the relationship between God and the church in these terms, just as He was likened to a father figure in the Old Testament; the New Testament offers a new model of symbology concerning God and humanity that intends to portray a relationship which is based on authentic communication and mutual respect, rather than a relationship which revolves around masculine domination and female submission.
This bride/groom metaphor also highlights multiple implications for the way in which Christians should therefore understand their own relationships with their loved ones. If the church is seen as the bride of Christ, then believers are encouraged to adopt a submissive, servant-like attitude toward God, putting his needs and desires above their own. This goes for all who are under Christ, regardless of gender indenture. However, this does not necessarily mean that the church is powerless or voiceless in this reciprocal relationship with God. Instead, the metaphor of the bride and groom suggests to us that the church has a vital role to play in the world that God has created. By embracing this metaphor, we are able to strive to embody the qualities of both the bride and groom, seeking to be both beautiful and strong, graceful and protective, in our interactions with one another and the wider world.
In thought of C. S. Lewis' recommendation for us to spiritually deepen our perspectives towards gender, he argued that 'God is so masculine that we are all feminine in comparison to Him'. Ironically, that would be an exciting way to explain why the church is referred to as the 'bride of Christ'.
Biblical Masculine Terminology and Non-Dualism
Scripture using masculine terms to address God is not intended to encourage the concept of non-masculine inferiority but is rather a symbolism used which suitably expresses the parental nature of God’s compassion for His people. In the sight of this, a non-dualistic understanding of God requires us to take an intellectual step to move beyond the idea that the paternal nature of God described in scripture is intended to cause division between people. The masculine pronouns used in scripture serve as a reminder that we are all God’s creation. This understanding of God helps us to see beyond these patriarchal cultural expressions and allows us to truly experience God in new and more profound ways which are beyond the usual framework of societal normalities which continually change throughout history.
In contemplation of the arguments presented, we must seek to observe a view which affirms the symbolically correct representation of the relationship dynamic between a transcendent God and finite human beings. The non-dualistic perspective concerning the masculinity of God offers a new sight of understanding the biblical use of masculine pronouns to describe God.
The use of masculine language is not seen as a statement regarding the literal and complete nature of God. Still, it must instead be seen as a symbolic usage of masculine terms as the poetic expression of the relational dynamic between us and God. From a non-dualistic perspective, God is understood as transcendent of all human categories, including gender. The use of masculine language is simply a convention of cultural expression coherent with the attributes ascribed to God within scripture.
A non-dualistic view towards God’s character naturally emphasizes the unity and interconnectedness of all living things that God has created and encourages us to reject dualistic thinking that separates the world through divisive thought structures such as gendered attributes. This perspective sees all things as interconnected and interdependent and recognises that God is present in all things, rather than being limited to a particular gender or form.
Another scholar, Elizabeth Johnson, also explores the development of a non-dualistic perspective towards the masculinity of God. She argues that the use of masculine language to describe God is a cultural expression that has been shaped by patriarchal systems, but that this language can be reinterpreted and transformed in light of a non-dualistic understanding of God. Johnson argues that this transformation can help us to experience God in a more inclusive and liberating way, and to understand God's presence in all things, regardless of gender.
Non-dualistic perspectives on the masculinity of God offer a different way of understanding the use of masculine language to describe God and suggest that this language can be transformed and reinterpreted in light of a non-dualistic understanding of God's nature and relationship to humanity.
Fighting Oppressive Patriarchal Ideologies
Despite there being arguments both for and against the use of gender-neutral terms to describe God, it is important to recognise that the biblical usage of masculine pronouns does not promote a sense of patriarchy, but rather of relationship. Patriarchy is a complex social and cultural system that is not limited to language. Changing the terminology we use to describe God within our liturgical (or spiritual) practices will not necessarily challenge or dismantle patriarchal structures that might currently be in place within our cultures. Rather, it is vital to address the root causes of patriarchy and work to create a more equitable and just society for all people, regardless of gender.
Those that manipulate the biblical usage of masculine terminology to describe God as reasonable grounds to justify and promote their hatred and oppression towards those who do not fit within traditionally perceived 'masculine paradigms'. Nevertheless, we must also understand that the misuse of the biblical text by manipulative minds must not ignite for us a desire to re-design scripturally cohesive terminology to suit secular demands. We must consistently shape our perspectives in conjunction with the Bible, and not with what others may wrongly interpret about the scriptures.
In conclusion, the debate about using masculine terminology to describe God is a complex and ongoing one, and there are valid arguments for and against using a male pronoun for God. This is because, even though God is not a man, He chose to show himself in this form to people. Jesus Christ also called masculine titles and nouns, took on a male body when He lived on earth. Both the Old Testament prophets and the New Testament apostles refer to God and Jesus Christ using masculine words and titles. Regardless of our perspective, it is crucial for us all to engage in thoughtful and respectful conversation about this issue and for us to work together towards a more inclusive and just understanding of God and His relationship with humanity.