Are God’s Race, Gender, and Nationality Contextual…?
I mean, it definitely doesn’t work the same or, what I mean to say is that it’s not as catchy…
If culture is ever-changing and symbolic meanings change with and over time then God’s race, gender, and nationality should also…
For instance, the banner on this post… “I met God, she’s black…” I’m obviously not the first person to say this – but, the person who did first say this, I don’t think that they thought God was literally black.
Again, not to ruin the weight of this but, it needs to be said, this here, is allegorical.
You see, the color, nationality, and gender of God are ontologically symbolic – it points to God’s true nature and character.
It’s the ability to avoid anthropomorphizing God (did I spell that right?) in the literal sense; while also acknowledging the intentions of anthropomorphizing God, in the allegorical sense.
Jesus being born in a manger, out of wedlock, as a Palestinian Jew was Gods way of making it known that He is a God of, for and with the oppressed.
After all is not all theology contextual?
James Cone, I think, says it best:
“Theology is not universal language about God. Rather, it is human speech informed by historical and theological traditions, and written for particular times and places. Theology is contextual language—that is, defined by the human situation that gives birth to it. No one can write theology for all times, places, and persons. Therefore, when one reads a theological textbook, it is important to note the year of its publication, the audience for whom it was written, and the issues the author felt compelled to address. A Black…”
This does bring up the question of whether or not God is also “a poor, white, farmer, and living in a U.S. ‘flyover state’…”?