Recently I was asked this question at a congregation located in a town with a population of 75 people. They are the only church in town, so the congregation represents a wide variety of theological viewpoints and denominational backgrounds.

It’s a good question. And a fair question. Others in the congregation had similar thoughts: When did it become necessary for us to use any other pronoun than “he” for our triune Father, Son and Holy Spirit? Didn’t Jesus himself teach his followers to pray, “Our Father in heaven?” What right do we have to change the Bible? One man told me, honestly and simply, “This is just the way we were brought up to understand God.”

These questions deserve a thoughtful response, rather than soundbites. What follows are my thoughts, in simple, straightforward language, for those who might be less familiar with theological discourse, biblical interpretation, and gender studies. I write not as a bishop, but as a person who has loved the Bible since childhood, and has studied and taught the Bible for nearly four decades. I pray that this humble submission is helpful and informative. I welcome dialog.

Language

The Bible hasn’t changed, but language has. Language is always shifting. Words emerge, disappear, and change in meaning. If you don’t believe me, try reading Chaucer:

Whan that Aprill with his shoures sote 
The droghte of March hath perced to the rote…

Language only has meaning when we all share common understanding of the words. The Bible must be translated and retranslated as language changes.

It might be easier to start this conversation with a similar issue. For example, the word “men” has changed. “Men” sometimes referred to all people, male and female, and other times referred to just men, male humans. take this example from the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Did the authors intend to mean all people (mankind) are created equal, or specifically males? The language is not clear. At first brush, we might assume they meant all people. This would be a legitimate interpretation given the use of the word “men” in the English of the day. Others have pointed out that women did not have the right to vote, and so the framers may have meant mail human beings. Still others point out that slaves were not allowed to vote and did not have liberty, and so “men” could have meant white males. The solution became obvious. When you mean all people, then say “people,” or “humans.”

Genesis 1:26 in the Bible was often translated, “And God said, ‘Let us create man in our own image.'” We will come back to the plural pronoun in a bit. For now, let us ask: Did the author mean God created all people (mankind) in the divine image, or just men?

This is a far more complex question than the use of “men” in the Declaration of Independence, because the Declaration of Independence was written in English only 250 years ago. Genesis was written in Hebrew 2,400 years ago.

The Hebrew word translated “men” in Genesis 1:26 is actually אדם “adam.” The Hebrew word “adam” is sometimes the proper name for the first human, sometimes refers to a man or some men, and other times means humanity. The translator has a big job, deciding how to translate “adam” when it comes up in a text. If it has a definite article, like “the adam” (ha-adam) the translation is usually “the man.” Without the article, translators render it as a proper name: Adam. Other times it will be translated, “mankind, humans, mortals, or people.” Modern translators prefer the clarity of “humans,” rendering Genesis 1:26: “Then God said, “Let us make humans in our image…”

No one is changing the Bible. They are translating the Bible into modern English in a way that is most faithful to the author’s intended meaning.

Fortunately, the author in this case helps immensely, by saying, in the next verse, “So God created humans in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.” The author tells us that God created adam male and female. This makes it clear that the author meant all human beings.

When the Old Testament used adam, quite often it really means all people. Hebrew has another word that means specifically “men” (ish). There is a word for women too (ishah). If the author wants to be very specific, and remove all ambiguity, the author uses those words.

This is just one tiny example of challenges Bible translators face in virtually every single one of the 31,000 verses of the Bible.

Now, when we turn to God, we have another challenge. How does one talk about God, who is beyond our comprehension? God is the creator of the universe, not part of creation itself. Both Jewish and Christian theology holds that God is not a literal male or female. God transcends gender, an aspect of humans and animals.

But using neuter pronouns for God makes God an “it.” In Judeo-Christian thought, God is understood as a personality, so personal pronouns are used. Most often those pronouns are masculine. Neither Jews not Christians believe God has a body, as if God were a created being. God does not have genitalia. So, we have anthropomorphized God. We understand life is human beings, so we sometimes conceive of God in human terms.

The word “Yahweh” (YHWH) is how God self-identifies to Moses in Genesis 3 at the burning bush. It means, “I am.” God is not a being. God is BEING itself. It can also mean, “the one who brings everything into being.” God is the magnum mysterium, beyond the cosmos, whi created the universe, who was before the bringing of time and space.

For many, reducing God to gender is practically heretical. For Jews, even mentioning the name of God limited God, and so, when YHWH appeared the Bible, it was substituted with Adonai (Lord), Elohim (gods) or Ha Shem (The Name).

So, God is not considered to be a man, but masculine singular pronouns are used by convention, due to the limited nature of our language. At times, plural pronouns are used. This takes us back to Genesis 1:26, “Let us create adam in our own image…”

Some believe this plural language for God comes from an era before monotheism took hold. This referred to the council of the gods. Monotheism eventually evolved, but pre-Jewish religion was almost certainly monotheistic. Even biblical Judaism believed in heavenly beings, such as angels and archangels. The Nephalim in Genesis 6:4 were heavenly beings (sons of God) that impregnated humans, giving birth to giants.

Others believe that this is the “royal we,” often used by kings, queens, and popes: “We decree…” English retained this for a long time. Originally, “thou” was singular and “ye” (you) was plural. Later you became common for both one person and many. Fortunately, in Texas we use “y’all” for clarity, when we want to denote you plural. 🙂

Feminine images for God in the Bible

Without question, most images of God in the Bible are male. This make sense, as the various authors of the Bible, writing from many cultures and times, over a thousand years, in three languages, lived in a patriarchal age, when women rarely if ever were permitted to hold positions of authority, serve in public office, own property, inherit land, vote, or do much else without permission from their husbands. The idea of a powerless female as God would have seemed odd.

However, the fact that the Bible most frequently uses male pronouns for God does not keep it from using expansive feminine imagery for God as well.

For example, in Hosea 13:8 God says, “I will fall upon them like a bear robbed of her cubs and will tear open the covering of their heart; there I will devour them like a lion, as a wild animal would mangle them.” In the Bible, God describes herself as a mother bear. Here are some more examples:

  • “Can a woman forget her nursing child, and not have compassion on the son of her womb? Surely they may forget, yet I will not forget you.” (Isaiah 49:15).
  • “As a mother comforts her child, so will I comfort you; and you will be comforted over Jerusalem.” (Isaiah 66:13). 
  • God is a rock who gives birth. (Deuteronomy 32:18)
  • God is a woman in labor. (Isaiah 42:14)
  • God is a nursing mother who calms and quiets our souls. (Psalm 131:2)

The Holy Spirit is often represented in the Bible as Holy Wisdom, with feminine pronouns. An example is Proverbs 1:20 and following:

Wisdom cries out in the street;
    in the squares she raises her voice.
At the busiest corner she cries out;
    at the entrance of the city gates she speaks:
“How long, O simple ones, will you love being simple?
How long will scoffers delight in their scoffing
    and fools hate knowledge?
Give heed to my reproof;
I will pour out my thoughts to you;
    I will make my words known to you.

Wisdom 9 says that humans were created by God’s Word and God’s Wisdom. Both are personified. Christians understood God’s Word to be Jesus and God’s Wisdom to be the Holy Spirit. Wisdom is personified with feminine pronouns. It should also be added that the Hebrew word for “spirit” (ruach) is feminine.

God Jesus uses female images as well. In Matthew 23:37 (and also Luke 13:34) Jesus says,

Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often have I desired to gather your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing!

God is a mother hen.

In Luke 15:8-10, God is a woman searching for a coin, who rejoices when the lost is found.

What do you believe about God?

Is God a man? No. Is God a woman? No. God is beyond gender and other human categories. There is no heresy in masculine, feminine or even androgynous images for God. Perhaps what comes closest to heresy would be limiting images for God, since God is so infinitely beyond our limited human perspective.

So, to the question: When did it become necessary to refer to God with feminine pronouns? I would say, nothing in the Lutheran Confessions or our governing documents requires or prohibits the use of any particular pronouns for God. We don’t have canon law, and our liturgy books speak for themselves. Our Scriptural translations render male images male, female images female, and where the gender is unclear or intentionally broad, they are rendered as such.

While expansive language is not required, it is however permitted. The many feminine images for God in the Bible serve as a testament to this. There is nothing that prohibits us from using feminine images for God. Those who think feminine images for God are heretical have limited God to a human understanding of gender. God is not to be contained.

And, while expansive language for God is neither required nor prohibited, it may be recommended. Do we want people to have limited perceptions of God? Do we really think that God is a man, living in a male body? If not, what do we think we mean if we only use male images for God?

If our girls believe that God is a man, will they see themselves as created in God’s image? Are God’s power and majesty only expressed in masculine terms? What does that mean anyway? Are things our culture defines as “feminine” not expressions of the divine also? Why are we afraid of the feminine attributes of God?

Do we want our children to think of God as an old man in the sky with a beard and a cane? Or will they come to see God as the Source of all being, the Love that will not let us go, the Magnum Mysterium, the One beyond all knowing, revealed in Jesus of Nazareth, immortal, invisible, the great I AM, the Alpha and the Omega, who was, and is, and is to come?

God is the name of the blanket we throw over the mystery to give it shape.

—Barry Taylor