Is God male?

[michaelvpardo]

That's because you're reading it in the wrong context. Jesus was the spiritual light, in comparison to the physical light in Gen 1
The point is, like any writing, one has to be able to see the style, not just assert it. Basic rules of grammar apply.

Sure StanJ, so that text isn't metaphorical (on planet bizzarro.) Keep on holding to whatever it is you're holding on to and have a nice life.

 

[michaelvpardo]

.

 

[StanJ]

Sure StanJ, so that text isn't metaphorical (on planet bizzarro.) Keep on holding to whatever it is you're holding on to and have a nice life.

As I said, the text has mutiple styles, but if you can't properly identify what they are, then it really doesn't matter what you think.

 

[StanJ]

Is this still a thread about God being male? Its really difficult to tell.

Well, you know how some people just love to muddy the waters?

 

[michaelvpardo]

As I said, the text has mutiple styles, but if you can't properly identify what they are, then it really doesn't matter what you think.

Only in the world according to StanJ.

 

[StanJ]

Only in the world according to StanJ.

Also in the world of linguistics and grammar Michael, but now all you're doing is getting personal, and as I have been recently reminded by the mod team here, that is a no no, so unless you have an actual refutation, please move along.

 

[michaelvpardo]

Also in the world of linguistics and grammar Michael, but now all you're doing is getting personal, and as I have been recently reminded by the mod team here, that is a no no, so unless you have an actual refutation, please move along.

Stan, there is nothing more personal than telling the children of God that their understanding of their Father is flawed, which you engage in with every single soul who disagrees with you. The truth of the matter is that there is no living soul who has something more than a flawed understanding of God, including you. If I believed that linguistics and grammar were the "way" to gathering an accurate understanding of scripture, then I would have the same trouble that the better educated atheists have in their approach to the study of the bible. It was such scholars that rejected Christ in the first place and sought to put Him to death. Its not that I don't appreciate scholarship from spiritual people, but there is no gift of the Spirit manifested in the church that challenges or attacks faith, these are works of the flesh.

 

[StanJ]

Stan, there is nothing more personal than telling the children of God that their understanding of their Father is flawed, which you engage in with every single soul who disagrees with you. The truth of the matter is that there is no living soul who has something more than a flawed understanding of God, including you. If I believed that linguistics and grammar were the "way" to gathering an accurate understanding of scripture, then I would have the same trouble that the better educated atheists have in their approach to the study of the bible. It was such scholars that rejected Christ in the first place and sought to put Him to death. Its not that I don't appreciate scholarship from spiritual people, but there is no gift of the Spirit manifested in the church that challenges or attacks faith, these are works of the flesh.

Sorry you can't tell the difference between the two, but there it is. You can either refute what I post or accept it. Resorting to personal denigration is not acceptable. Jesus confronted and attacked erroneous oerception, and Paul tells us to do the same in 2 Tim 3:16.
All Scripture is inspired by God and is profitable for teaching, for rebuking, for correcting, for training in righteousness

I suggest you learn what gifts of the Spirit actually are, compared to teaching and properly exposition Gid's written word.

 

[michaelvpardo]

Sorry you can't tell the difference between the two, but there it is. You can either refute what I post or accept it. Resorting to personal denigration is not acceptable. Jesus confronted and attacked erroneous oerception, and Paul tells us to do the same in 2 Tim 3:16.
All Scripture is inspired by God and is profitable for teaching, for rebuking, for correcting, for training in righteousness

I suggest you learn what gifts of the Spirit actually are, compared to teaching and properly exposition Gid's written word.

I don't believe that its necessary to learn to define what you already have, but when I figure out who Gid is, I'll try to learn how to properly exposit what he's written. Well all things considered, the world needs parrots too.

 

[StanJ]

I don't believe that its necessary to learn to define what you already have, but when I figure out who Gid is, I'll try to learn how to properly exposit what he's written. Well all things considered, the world needs parrots too.

God and His will is made known through His written word. Psalm 119:105

 

[michaelvpardo]

God and His will is made known through His written word. Psalm 119:105

I've already responded to the post as did at least one other courageous soul, but apparently we were edited out. I don't know where the bias is coming from toward your posts, but in the end God wins, so have a nice life and keep up the good works.

 

[StanJ]

I've already responded to the post as did at least one other courageous soul, but apparently we were edited out. I don't know where the bias is coming from toward your posts, but in the end God wins, so have a nice life and keep up the good works.

Well I'll ask, but it's not a good idea to throw aroud accusations against CB mods or admins.

 

[lforrest]

Well I'll ask, but it's not a good idea to throw aroud accusations against CB mods or admins.

I'm not sure there was an accusation. I rarely edit posts but when I do, I provide notice within the post. It is also common practice for mods to hide posts rather than delete them, and there are no hidden posts in this topic.

 

[jaybird]

the Essene traditions teach the Father is male but male means spiritual form and not "male / female" as we know it.
i thought it was pretty interesting

 

[KingJ]

Wouldn't surprise me, Barrd.

We know Jesus changed His appearance after the resurrection.

BTW, I know a WOF minister that claims Jesus has appeared to him on several occasions. And the guy seems soooo sincere and legit.

If he can say that I wonder what else comes out. Oh wait I know. Positive confession makes God jump.

 

[iakov]

Hi Michael....no I don't. Moses spoke to a physical manifestation of the WORD. Joshua was a very common name then and it is today. My first son is named Joshua. Joshua and Jesus are NOT the same, even though they sound similar in Hebrew. Melchizedek was a manifestation of the WORD. Jesus was/is our high priest IN THE ORDER OF Melchizedek. He is the WORD incarnate. Melchizedek was a physical manifestation of the WORD.
Logas and Logos are not the same. John 1 is NOT metaphorical at all, anymore than Genesis 1:1 was. John 1 connects the NT back to the OT by showing who God IS. Jesus Christ did not exist until He did. The WORD has always existed as and with God.

So you think that Melchizedek was another instance of the Logos being incarnate. You think that the second person of the Trinity was incarnate as Melchizedek and ruled a a kingdom called Salem and was also the high priest in his kingdom.
Have I got that right?
I've never heard that before.
It seems to me to be nonsense.
Maybe I don't understand what you mean.

 

[StanJ]

So you think that Melchizedek was another instance of the Logos being incarnate.
You think that the second person of the Trinity was incarnate as Melchizedek and ruled a a kingdom called Salem and was also the high priest in his kingdom.
Have I got that right?
Maybe I don't understand what you mean.

Nope.
Nope.
Nope.
Yep....read it slowly. I didn't say incarnate now did I?