We welcome all truth seekers to contact us.

72. Why has God been incarnated as a female in the last days? What is the significance of this?

A Hundred Questions and Answers on Investigating the True Way

Solid Colors

Themes

Font

Font Size

Line Space

Page width

Array

No results found

`

72. Why has God been incarnated as a female in the last days? What is the significance of this?

The Answer from God’s Word:

Each stage of work done by God has a real significance. When Jesus arrived, He was male, and this time He is female. From this, you can see that God created both male and female for His work and with Him there is no distinction of gender. When His Spirit arrives, He can take on any flesh at will and the flesh represents Him. Be it male or female, both represent God as long as it is His incarnate flesh. If Jesus arrived and appeared as a female, in other words, if an infant girl, not a boy, was to be conceived by the Holy Spirit, that stage of work would have been completed all the same. If so, this stage of work would have to be completed instead by a male and the work would then be completed all the same. The work done in both stages is significant; no work is repeated or conflicts with each other. At the time of His work, Jesus was called the only Son, which indicates the male gender. Then why is the only Son not mentioned in this stage? This is because the needs of the work have necessitated a change to the gender different from that of Jesus. With God there is no distinction of gender. His work is done as He wishes and is not subject to any restrictions, particularly free, but every stage has a real significance. God became flesh twice, and it goes without saying that His incarnation in the last days is the last time. He has come to reveal all His deeds. If in this stage He did not become flesh to personally do work for man to witness, man would forever hold on to the notion that God is only male, not female. Before this, all believed that God could only be male and that a female could not be called God, for all regarded man as having authority over woman. They believed that no woman could take on authority, but only man. They even said that man was the head of woman and that woman must obey man and could not surpass him. When it was spoken in the past that man was the head of woman, it was said in regard to Adam and Eve who had been beguiled by the serpent, and not to the man and woman created by Jehovah in the beginning. Of course, a woman must obey and love her husband, much as a man must learn to support his family. These are the laws and decrees set forth by Jehovah by which mankind must abide in their lives on earth. Jehovah said to woman, “your desire shall be to your husband, and he shall rule over you.” This was said only so that mankind (that is, both man and woman) could live normal lives under the dominion of Jehovah, so that the lives of mankind would have structure and not lose order. Therefore, Jehovah made appropriate rules for how man and woman should act, but these only referred to all the creation living on the earth and not to God’s incarnate flesh. How could God be the same as His creation? His words were directed only toward the mankind of His creation; they were rules set forth for man and woman so that such mankind could live normal lives. In the beginning, when Jehovah created mankind, He made both male and female; therefore, His incarnate flesh was also differentiated into either male or female. He did not decide His work based on the words He spoke to Adam and Eve. The two times He became flesh were determined entirely in line with His thinking when He first created mankind. That is, He completed the work of His two incarnations based on the male and female that had not been corrupted. If man applies the words spoken by Jehovah to Adam and Eve who had been beguiled by the serpent to the work of God’s incarnation, should not Jesus also have to love His wife as He ought? Is God still God then? If so, can He complete His work? If it is wrong for God’s incarnate flesh to be female, would it not also have been a great error when God created woman? If man still believes that for God to be incarnated as female is wrong, would not the incarnation of Jesus, who did not get married and therefore could not love His wife, be as much an error as the present incarnation? Since you use the words spoken to Eve by Jehovah to measure the truth of God’s incarnation this day, you must use Jehovah’s words to Adam to judge the Lord Jesus who became flesh in the Age of Grace. Are these two not the same? Since you judge the Lord Jesus by the male who had not been beguiled by the serpent, you cannot judge the truth of the incarnation this day by the female who had been beguiled by the serpent. That is unfair! If you make such a judgment, then this proves your lack of rationality. When Jehovah twice became flesh, the gender of His flesh was related to the male and female that had not been beguiled by the serpent. Twice did He become flesh in accordance with such male and female not beguiled by the serpent. Do not think that the maleness of Jesus was the same as that of Adam who was beguiled by the serpent. He is completely unrelated to him, and they are two males of different natures. Surely it cannot be that the maleness of Jesus proves He is only the head of all women but not that of all men? Is He not the King of all the Jews (including both men and women)? He is God Himself, not just the head of woman but the head of man as well. He is the Lord of all creatures and the head of all creatures. How could you determine the maleness of Jesus to be the symbol of the head of woman? Is this not blasphemy? Jesus is a male that has not been corrupted. He is God; He is Christ; He is the Lord. How could He be a male like Adam who had been corrupted? Jesus is the flesh worn by the most holy Spirit of God. How could you say He is a God possessing the maleness of Adam? Then would not all of God’s work have been wrong? Could Jehovah incorporate within Jesus the maleness of Adam who had been beguiled? Is not the incarnation at present another work of God incarnate different in gender from Jesus but alike in nature? Do you still dare say that God incarnate could not be female since it was woman who was first beguiled by the serpent? Do you still dare say that as woman is the most unclean and the origin of the corruption of mankind, God could not possibly become flesh as a female? Do you still dare say that “woman shall always obey man and may never manifest or directly represent God”? …

If only the work of Jesus was done without the complement of this stage in the last days, then man would forever hold onto the notion that Jesus alone is the only Son of God, that is, God only has one son, and that any who comes afterward with another name would not be the only Son of God, much less God Himself. Man has the notion that He who serves as a sin offering or who assumes power for God and redeems all mankind is the only Son of God. There are some who believe that as long as He is a male who comes, He can be deemed the only Son of God and a representative of God. And there are even those who say that Jesus is the Son of Jehovah, His only Son. Is this not a serious notion of man? If this stage of work was not done in the final age, then all mankind would be shrouded in a shadow when it comes to God. If so, man would think himself to be of a higher status than woman, and women would never be able to hold their heads high. At such time, no female would receive salvation. People always believe that God is a male, and He always loathes woman and would not give woman salvation. If so, then is it not true that all women created by Jehovah and also corrupted would never have the opportunity to be saved? Then would it not have been pointless for Jehovah to have created woman, that is, to have created Eve? And would not woman perish for eternity? Therefore, this stage of work in the last days is to save all mankind, not just woman but all mankind. This work is for the sake of all mankind, not just for woman. If any think otherwise, then they are fools all the more!

… Jesus and I come from the same Spirit. Though Our fleshes have no relationship, Our Spirits are one; though what We do and the work We bear are not the same, We are alike in essence; Our fleshes take different forms, and this is because of the change in era and the need of Our work; Our ministries are not alike, so the work We bring forth and the disposition We reveal to man are also different. That is why what man sees and receives this day is unlike that of the past; this is so because of the change in era. Though the gender and form of Their fleshes are different, and though They were not born of the same family, much less in the same time period, Their Spirits are one. Though Their fleshes share no blood or physical relationship in any way, this does not deny that They are the incarnate fleshes of God in two different time periods. It is an undeniable truth that They are the incarnate fleshes of God, though They do not share the same bloodline or a common human language (one was a male who spoke the language of the Jews and the other is a female who speaks only Chinese). It is for these reasons that They do the work They ought in different countries, and in different time periods as well. Despite the fact that They are the same Spirit, possessed of the same essence, there are no absolute similarities at all between the outward shells of Their fleshes. They merely share the same humanity, but the appearance and birth of Their fleshes are not alike. These have no impact on Their respective work or the knowledge that man has of Them, for, after all, They are the same Spirit and none can separate Them. Though They are not related by blood, Their entire beings are directed by Their Spirits, so that They undertake different work in different time periods, with Their fleshes not sharing a bloodline. Similarly, the Spirit of Jehovah is not the father of the Spirit of Jesus, much as the Spirit of Jesus is not the son of the Spirit of Jehovah. They are the same Spirit. Just like the incarnate God of this day and Jesus. Though They are not related by blood, They are one; this is because Their Spirits are one. He can do the work of mercy and lovingkindness, as well as that of righteous judgment and of chastisement of man, and that of bringing curses on man. In the end, He can do the work of destroying the world and punishing the wicked. Does He not do all this Himself? Is this not the almightiness of God?

from “The Two Incarnations Complete the Significance of the Incarnation” in The Word Appears in the Flesh

God’s wisdom, God’s wondrousness, God’s righteousness, and God’s majesty shall never change. His essence and what He has and is shall never change. His work, however, is always progressing forward and always going deeper, for He is always new and never old. In every age God assumes a new name, in every age He does new work, and in every age He allows His creatures to see His new will and new disposition. If people do not see the expression of God’s new disposition in the new age, would they not forever nail Him to the cross? And by doing so, would they not define God? If He were only incarnated as a male, people would define Him as male, as the God of men, and would never believe Him to be the God of women. Then, men would believe that God is of the same gender as men, that God is the head of men—and what of women? This is unfair; is it not preferential treatment? If this were the case, then all those whom God saved would be men like Him, and there would be no salvation for women. When God created mankind, He created Adam and He created Eve. He did not only create Adam, but made both male and female in His image. God is not only the God of men—He is also the God of women. God is doing new work in the last days. He will reveal more of His disposition, and it will not be the compassion and love of the time of Jesus. Since He has new work, this new work will be accompanied by a new disposition. So if this work were done by the Spirit—if God did not become flesh, and instead the Spirit spoke directly through thunder so that man had no way to have contact with Him, would man know His disposition? If only the Spirit did the work, then man would have no way of knowing His disposition. People can only behold God’s disposition with their own eyes when He becomes flesh, when the Word appears in the flesh, and He expresses His entire disposition through the flesh. God truly lives among man. He is tangible; man can truly engage with His disposition and what He has and is; only in this way can man truly know Him. At the same time, God has also completed the work of God being the God of both men and women, and has achieved the entirety of His work in the flesh.

from “The Vision of God’s Work (3)” in The Word Appears in the Flesh

Previous:In God’s appearing in the flesh, why doesn’t He appear as a great or imposing image?

Next:When God became flesh in the Age of Grace it was in the image of a Jewish man, so why has God of the last days appeared as an Asian person?

You Might Also Like