Discussion about this post

User's avatar
The Nurses Collective NZ's avatar

Dear Tess

The desire to empower women—especially those who have felt marginalized by predominantly male imagery for God—is both understandable and important. However, questions arise when authors like Anne Baring in pretending to be christian, support a 'Myth of the Fall' concept or the idea of a 'Goddess as consort to Yahweh', since none of these ideas are rooted in scripture.

Embracing such perspectives around gender often involves adopting human-made images of God that may emphasize spiritual connection at a mystical level, but risk overshadowing the central Christian belief in Jesus’ unique role as Savior. For a faith tradition grounded in biblical revelation, it is essential to honor the full range of scriptural metaphors for God—both masculine and feminine—without redefining core theological truths or diminishing the significance of Christ’s redemptive work which is essentially is what Barings work does.

Throughout history, there have been a variety of metaphors to describe God—some masculine, some feminine, and many that transcend human categories altogether. The Hebrew word for Spirit, ruach, is grammatically feminine, and scripture contains maternal images of God, such as a mother comforting her child or an eagle sheltering her young. Early Christian writers, especially in the Syriac tradition, often used maternal language for the Holy Spirit. Others have drawn on the feminine personification of Wisdom (Chokmah in Hebrew, Sophia in Greek) to explore the feminine aspects of the divine.

However, it is crucial to recognize that all human language about God is metaphorical and limited. The use of gendered pronouns in scripture reflects the constraints of language, not the essence of God. God and the Holy Spirit is not male or female; rather, they transcend human categories of sex and gender. The familial terms “Father” and “Son” are meant to convey relationship and intimacy, NOT to define God’s being in human terms.

While it is valuable to highlight the feminine images of God found in scripture, we should be careful not to simply replace one set of limiting metaphors with another. The goal is not to remake God in our own image—whether male or female—but to allow the full range of biblical imagery to expand our understanding of the divine. Overemphasizing any one aspect, or using contemporary categories to redefine God, risks distorting the relational and mysterious nature of God as revealed in scripture and reminds us that God’s love and presence are not confined by human boundaries or expectations

Scripture consistently warns about the consequences for those who mislead others in matters of faith. Jesus himself cautioned that “if anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea” (Matthew 18:6, NIV). Throughout the New Testament, misleading others away from the truth of the gospel is described as a serious offense, with spiritual consequences for both the individual and those they influence. This we understand includes those in positions of leadership who draw people away from the truth.

You can't have it both ways Tess. You can't pick and choose from a faith tradition grounded in biblical revelation, and honor the full range of scriptural metaphors for God—both masculine and feminine—without redefining core theological truths or diminishing the significance of Christ’s redemptive work. Those who teach or promote ideas contrary to scripture are called to reconsider their position, knowing that spiritual leadership carries great responsibility and accountability; as such we ask you to reconsider your stance on this important doctrinal principle and defer from undermining the very faith you profess to hold.

We have been followers of the WCH and the WCH New Zealand since its inception. We have however, following your posts, decided that we can no longer support your egregious and offensive comments. We have therefore resigned from membership of both the WCH and the WCH NZ where I was Secretary.

Kind regards

Deborah Cunliffe

No posts

Ready for more?