In the Bible, God is male, correct? He is ever "He" and "Father."
Should we not expect (and I am serious here) that he is not a eunuch (which are not even allowed to approach him because they offend his sensibilities) but rather has a penis and scrotum (presumably above average in size)?
Presumably when God made man in his image, he also sported an ugly appendage.
Presumably, the equipment was functional, and not just there "for its good looks."
So since God did not call himself into being (most people claim that he always existed and has never changed) who decided that he should have a penis and why? Is there any rationale that posits that God of necessity should exist as male when there is no female deity with which to do the Hokey Pokie?
Most people relegate the Biblical description of God as a male as anthropomorphism. Ie: that God is not ACTUALLY a male but is easier for us to understand thus. But is that really fair to the text? I mean, since Adam was made in God's "image" and "likeness" as a male, I think we can't really pretend this embarrassment away.
So what to say? Doesn't something seem amok with this notion of God?
Bill
