God is male/female

[BlessedPeace]

Jesus? We beheld the glory of Jesus? Did we?


Or....


He sprouted up like a twig before God, like a root out of parched soil;
he had no stately form or majesty that might catch our attention,
no special appearance that we should want to follow him.

Which was it?

Now the Word became flesh and took up residence among us. We saw his glory—the glory of the one and only, full of grace and truth, who came from the Father.

If you don't make a distinction between Jesus the man, and the LIFE that was within him. Between the container of flesh and the LIGHT that was put in that jar.... you'll never get it.

In him was life, and the life was the light of mankind.

“I saw the Spirit descending like a dove from heaven, and it remained on him."

Jesus was God. Period. If we deny that we lose the whole of the Gospels import and why it exists and how it came to exist so to redeem humanity.

 

[Mr E]

Jesus was God. Period. If we deny that we lose the whole of the Gospels import and why it exists and how it came to exist so to redeem humanity.

I have no problem with those who think of Jesus as God or the son of God. He's not God the Father. They are not one and the same.

I'm inviting folks to think in different terms. Forget about the Trifecta for a moment, even if you are convinced you understand it-- just set it aside for a minute to consider the idea that there is something above that needs to be recognized. Something not physical, but spiritual in nature. And I'd invite you to think deeply about why the spiritual son was sent, this word that became flesh.

 

[BlessedPeace]

I have no problem with those who think of Jesus as God or the son of God. He's not God the Father. They are not one and the same.

I'm inviting folks to think in different terms. Forget about the Trifecta for a moment, even if you are convinced you understand it-- just set it aside for a minute to consider the idea that there is something above that needs to be recognized. Something not physical, but spiritual in nature. And I'd invite you to think deeply about why the spiritual son was sent, this word that became flesh.

I think we know by now, in a forum everyone has a different view.

When Jesus was God, he could be none else than God the Father. Because there is no other God that exists. All others worshipped as god's or goddesses for that matter, are idols.

When God tells us He was Jesus, opining otherwise is an errant opinion. It is not a fact supported in scripture.
Isaiah 43

 

[Berserk]

Dooood. You're wrong. Take the L. Go home.

I could spoon feed you, or you could man up and look into it. You'll learn more if you do the work.

You're relying on wrong sources. I actually read Hebrew and have a Hebrew Old Testament that reads "ish" in Hosea 11;9.
You don't know what your're talking about.

 

[Mr E]

You're relying on wrong sources. I actually read Hebrew and have a Hebrew Old Testament that reads "ish" in Hosea 11;9.
You don't know what your're talking about.

There is no such thing as a Hebrew Old Testament. There is the Tanakh and in the Tanakh the form used is enosh, or enowsh if you prefer.

If you actually do read Hebrew as you claim, you’d immediately recognize this and admit your error, but I suspect you are either too ignorant or too arrogant to humble yourself as is now required after doubling and tripling and now quadrupling down on your claim.

If you do read Hebrew you’d recognize the form used is enowsh, a derivative of anash— which specifically means mortal as opposed to “ish” which simply means man.

But thanks for playing.

Here’s a hint. Check Strong’s 582

 

[amigo de christo]

What a wonderful world it would be, eh?

If everyone thought and believed and taught just like you.

I have an idea. Start a cult.

Already have my friend . Yet NOT I , but CHRIST and the apostels began IT FIRST . BIBLE TIME PATNAH

 

[BlessedPeace]

Jesus? We beheld the glory of Jesus? Did we?


Or....


He sprouted up like a twig before God, like a root out of parched soil;
he had no stately form or majesty that might catch our attention,
no special appearance that we should want to follow him.

Which was it?

Now the Word became flesh and took up residence among us. We saw his glory—the glory of the one and only, full of grace and truth, who came from the Father.

If you don't make a distinction between Jesus the man, and the LIFE that was within him. Between the container of flesh and the LIGHT that was put in that jar.... you'll never get it.

In him was life, and the life was the light of mankind.

“I saw the Spirit descending like a dove from heaven, and it remained on him."

Where do you imagine the " container of flesh" came from? God!

 

[Wick Stick]

Why does the Bible consistently refer to God as "Father?"

If you can answer this question, then you will also have the answer regarding God's gender.

 

[amigo de christo]

Already have my friend .

 

[amigo de christo]

Why does the Bible consistently refer to God as "Father?"

If you can answer this question, then you will also have the answer regarding God's gender.

all i know is TRANSGENDERISM is of the devil . the sooner we realize this the better . so as none
will ever support it . just a friendly reminder to all .

 

[Marvelloustime]

Already have my friend . Yet NOT I , but CHRIST and the apostels began IT FIRST . BIBLE TIME PATNAH

Praise be to the glorious LORD JESUS CHRIST. Stay well read daily in those KJV bibles. That’s right. Let the LORD be praised and thanked.

 

[Berserk]

There is no such thing as a Hebrew Old Testament. There is the Tanakh and in the Tanakh the form used is enosh, or enowsh if you prefer.

The standard Hebrew Bible is "Biblia Hebraica," edited by Rudolph Kittel. Jews call it Tanakh.

If you do read Hebrew you’d recognize the form used is enowsh, a derivative of anash— which specifically means mortal as opposed to “ish” which simply means man.

But thanks for playing.

Here’s a hint. Check Strong’s 582

I knew you didn't own a standard Hebrew Bible. btw, Young's Concordance also reads "ish" just like Biblia Hebraica for Hosea 11:9.
Readers can expose Mr.E's ignorance on this matter by consulting the online Hebrew-English interlinear Bible which of course reads "ish" in Hosea 11:9:

Hosea 11:9 Interlinear: I do not the fierceness of My anger, I turn not back to destroy Ephraim, For God I am, and not a man. In thy midst the Holy One, and I enter not in enmity,

biblehub.com

 

[BlessedPeace]

Why does the Bible consistently refer to God as "Father?"

If you can answer this question, then you will also have the answer regarding God's gender.

No, you'll have to arrive at the realization a patriarchal system made spirit in their image and likeness.

 

[Wick Stick]

No, you'll have to arrive at the realization a patriarchal system made spirit in their image and likeness.

I see that you made no attempt at doing so.

 

[Mr E]

The standard Hebrew Bible is "Biblia Hebraica," edited by Rudolph Kittel. Jews call it Tanakh.

I knew you didn't own a standard Hebrew Bible. btw, Young's Concordance also reads "ish" just like Biblia Hebraica for Hosea 11:9.
Readers can expose Mr.E's ignorance on this matter by consulting the online Hebrew-English interlinear Bible which of course reads "ish" in Hosea 11:9:

Hosea 11:9 Interlinear: I do not the fierceness of My anger, I turn not back to destroy Ephraim, For God I am, and not a man. In thy midst the Holy One, and I enter not in enmity,

biblehub.com

No wonder you call yourself Berserk... "Biblia Hebraica"is Latin for printed copies of the Tanakh-- which is Hebrew.

YOUR link points right to Strong's H582. "enosh" It is NOT H376 "ish" as in either case in verses like Gen 2:23. Do you understand the different forms and uses?

Then the man (adam) said,
“This one at last is bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
this one will be called ‘woman,’
for she was taken out of man.” (ish)

It's an entirely different form in Hosea 11:9. 582. אֱנוֹשׁ (enosh)

But I hope you have a lovely day, wallowing. I'll see you around perhaps, but I won't engage with you. It's entertaining, but not satisfying.

 

[Berserk]

No wonder you call yourself Berserk... "Biblia Hebraica"is Latin for printed copies of the Tanakh-- which is Hebrew.

You just admitted that you never looked up Hosea 11:9 in the Hebrew Bible. Biblia Hebraica is the Latin title of an all Hebrew Old Testament.
Except for the title, no other language is present. Obviously, you didn't look up or didn't understand the Hebrew-English interlinear I posted for you.

 

[BlessedPeace]

I see that you made no attempt at doing so.

The OT authors did that. Which is what is being discussed .

 

[Wick Stick]

The OT authors did that. Which is what is being discussed .

I'll just give you the answer. And then you'll reject it. And then you'll be without excuse.

From ancient times, creation was understood in terms of two roles, one female role and one male role...

The first is best described as instantiation - the creation of material. This is the female role of creation.
The second may be called formation - giving shape to the material. This is the male role of creation.

God is called Father because He fills the latter role - He forms things. All the material is created in the first two verses of Genesis 1... but it's unformed at that point. The rest of Genesis 1 concerns itself with how God FORMS that material. And the rest of the Bible concerns itself with how God FORMS man and nature, gradually working on them to achieve His will.

It has nothing to do with sexual organs. It has to do with how God works... He molds the creation to His will.

 

[TLHKAJ]

What a wonderful world it would be, eh?

If everyone thought and believed and taught just like you.

I have an idea. Start a cult.

Believing the scriptures 100% as truth doesn't make a cult. In eternity, everyone will know the Truth, for we will see Him as He is. We will all be like-minded. If you think that's a cult ....well, maybe you don't want to be there. There won't be a thousand sects of Christianity in eternity all believing their own versions of "truth."

 

[TLHKAJ]

I'll just give you the answer. And then you'll reject it. And then you'll be without excuse.

From ancient times, creation was understood in terms of two roles, one female role and one male role...

The first is best described as instantiation - the creation of material. This is the female role of creation.
The second may be called formation - giving shape to the material. This is the male role of creation.

God is called Father because He fills the latter role - He forms things. All the material is created in the first two verses of Genesis 1... but it's unformed at that point. The rest of Genesis 1 concerns itself with how God FORMS that material. And the rest of the Bible concerns itself with how God FORMS man and nature, gradually working on them to achieve His will.

It has nothing to do with sexual organs. It has to do with how God works... He molds the creation to His will.

God created man (mankind) in His own image ... He created them male and female. He created the male to reflect certain attributes of Himself. And He created the female to reflect certain attributes of Himself. WE have gender. God created this so male and female will come together as one flesh ...and there you have the complete image of God.

Genesis 1:26-27
[26]And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
[27]So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.