A Healing Priestess and Feminist Christianity

[Zoii]

I wasn't assigning biology to the Father. I'm just saying he revealed himself as Father, not Mother, in how he relates to his people.

OK - Then you can understand my point that saying HE or FATHER is well justified in saying its a gender attachment simply because we personify God; when in fact he is neither male or female. People write he or she when referring to inanimate objects so....I think you can cut that church a little slack for adopting that view - God has no gender or could just be easily a female identity - you dont have to agree with it but I am a little astonished at the thread's reaction to it.

 

[Sketcher]

OK - Then you can understand my point that saying HE or FATHER is well justified in saying its a gender attachment simply because we personify God; when in fact he is neither male or female. People write he or she when referring to inanimate objects so....I think you can cut that church a little slack for adopting that view - God has no gender or could just be easily a female identity - you dont have to agree with it but I am a little astonished at the thread's reaction to it.

No, I can't cut that church slack. Jesus told us about the Heavenly Father, not a Heavenly Mother.

 

[Phantasman]

Yeah, that ^ is Gnosticism. Just in case anyone wasn't sure.

Such a bad word, isn't it? I see the stones being gathered as they were 3 years ago when I was frequent here. I thought I was in the proper area by the Forum title. I've made about a dozen posts with no debate, just "one line" responses.

Time to move on, as I learn nothing here and feel the storm of chaos brewing.

 

[Paidiske]

This is an area where you're allowed to post Gnostic ideas. I'm not seeking to stop you, or to attack you for it. But I also am free to point it out when you do.

 

[2Timothy2:15]

God took the rib bone and made Eve; Adam didn't make Eve - and Eve wasn't just made of Adam's rib. Really, context is everything. (And this is coming from someone who isn't a feminist, especially in the secular modern sense...I'm just a believer that God values all equally - both men and women. In Him, there is neither male nor female, Jew nor Gentile, etc. Besides that - adam in Hebrew is either man or mankind - which includes both male and female. Context shows that Genesis 1:26 references mankind, not just men).

I never said Adam made Eve, but Eve was made from Adam and this is a fact. Neither male or female nor Jew nor Gentile has nothing to do with church hierarchy that is established. That is more about the kingdom and salvation being for all.

 

[ToBeLoved]

OK - Then you can understand my point that saying HE or FATHER is well justified in saying its a gender attachment simply because we personify God; when in fact he is neither male or female. People write he or she when referring to inanimate objects so....I think you can cut that church a little slack for adopting that view - God has no gender or could just be easily a female identity - you dont have to agree with it but I am a little astonished at the thread's reaction to it.

Not when God gives us His Word that says He. And when JESUS specifically prayed "Our Father".

That is in direct conflict with the teaching and words Jesus instructed us to use. Then that would be directly and knowingly presenting God some other way.

 

[2Timothy2:15]

Being referred to with masculine titles within the bible or anywhere else for that matter makes sense - we all do that when we are personifying something that isnt physically human - But God isnt human and so the reality of God having a gender simply makes no sense at all.

Jesus on the other hand was human and so of course had to adopt a gender. Good choice to be male as the culture of the time was very much patriarchal and so Jesus words would have carried authority.

But its a far stretch then to use the pronouns said by people of the time in reference to God to suddenly assign a gender to a spiritual entity.

There is the issue, "we" did not come up with this, GOD did.

 

[2Timothy2:15]

OK - Then you can understand my point that saying HE or FATHER is well justified in saying its a gender attachment simply because we personify God; when in fact he is neither male or female. People write he or she when referring to inanimate objects so....I think you can cut that church a little slack for adopting that view - God has no gender or could just be easily a female identity - you dont have to agree with it but I am a little astonished at the thread's reaction to it.

Again, people did not "write" this. Jesus said it directly several times referring him as the Father. Jesus could have said the creator, or some other ambiguous term but he didn't he said the Father. God the Father also refers to himself as he several times, not men. Not sure how anyone can even argue this.

 

[All4Christ]

I never said Adam made Eve, but Eve was made from Adam and this is a fact. Neither male or female nor Jew nor Gentile has nothing to do with church hierarchy that is established. That is more about the kingdom and salvation being for all.

God used part of Adam when He made Eve. It is a beautiful part of how we are united together as man and woman, but again, it doesn't mean that we aren't made in God's image. You are interpreting it that way. Your opinion certainly isn't clearly stated in that passage. All that is stated is that God used part of Adam as He created Eve - key portion here is part, just the rib - and that it never says that He created Eve in Adam's image.

My Church doesn't allow women to be ordained, but we don't use this as a reason for it. We are all made in the image of God. Scripture is very clear about that fact.

 

[Zoii]

Again, people did not "write" this. Jesus said it directly several times referring him as the Father. Jesus could have said the creator, or some other ambiguous term but he didn't he said the Father. God the Father also refers to himself as he several times, not men. Not sure how anyone can even argue this.

Meh thats semantics of the day. Why would God have a gender and for all either of us know the dialect of the day could include creator. Its just common sense though - how on earth is a spiritual body possessing a penis and Y chromosome. And if you agree that God doesnt then how exactly do u determine his maleness as opposed to anything human. The words used for "He" is just the words we use for personification - IMO anyway.

 

[2Timothy2:15]

Meh thats semantics of the day. Why would God have a gender and for all either of us know the dialect of the day could include creator. Its just common sense though - how on earth is a spiritual body possessing a penis and Y chromosome. And if you agree that God doesnt then how exactly do u determine his maleness as opposed to anything human. The words used for "He" is just the words we use for personification - IMO anyway.

So you think scripture is full of semantics? I think there are more issues with doctrine here than the gender of the Lord.

 

[Zoii]

So you think scripture is full of semantics? I think there are more issues with doctrine here than the gender of the Lord.

Yes agree it is a case of semantics - but you didnt answer how you see god as male - what does God do that makes God male without God having anything physical or tangible that defines God as male.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Meh thats semantics of the day. Why would God have a gender and for all either of us know the dialect of the day could include creator. Its just common sense though - how on earth is a spiritual body possessing a penis and Y chromosome. And if you agree that God doesnt then how exactly do u determine his maleness as opposed to anything human. The words used for "He" is just the words we use for personification - IMO anyway.

You can look at it that way, but if you believe that you will stand before God on Judgement Day and account for EVERY word that comes forth out of your mouth, then your playing Roulette with God and I think in the end, He will win, not you.

I would rethink that position, saying it is only semantics. This is what God says about anyone who teaches something that is not true that puts a stumbling block in front of one of His own.

Matthew 18:5-7
Stumbling Blocks
“And whoever receives one such child in My name receives Me; but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea. 7 “Woe to the world because of its stumbling blocks! For it is inevitable that stumbling blocks come; but woe to that man through whom the stumbling block comes!

Romans 14:13-23
Do Not Cause Another to Stumble
13 Therefore let us not pass judgment on one another any longer, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother.

1 Corinthians 8:9
9 Be careful, however, that your freedom does not become a stumbling block to the weak. 10 For if someone with a weak conscience sees you who are well informed eating in an idol’s temple, will he not be encouraged to eat food sacrificed to idols?

Give it some thought. God seems to take it very seriously.

God bless.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Yes agree it is a case of semantics - but you didnt answer how you see god as male - what does God do that makes God male without God having anything physical or tangible that defines God as male.

Why would we evaluate what God does and how we think when God Himself tells us who He is? It is His revelation to mankind. He is telling us who He is.

It is not "well ponder this in your own mind sometime". No. It is God telling us, human beings who He is.

Does not God's Word say "your ways are not my ways". God doesn't tell us to use our own interpretation. God states who He is. period.

 

[2Timothy2:15]

Yes agree it is a case of semantics - but you didnt answer how you see god as male - what does God do that makes God male without God having anything physical or tangible that defines God as male.

I am not agreeing it is semantics, not sure you read my post carefully. Anyhow, I already put the case back a few posts.

 

[JoeP222w]

The word Christian and Christianity has been twisted so much, it's hard to know what either means. If you don't do this or that, you're not a Christian. If you do this or that, you are. Orthodox belief is that only the Bible is truth, the Word of God.

The Bible is the sole infallible rule of faith for the Christian. God has clearly defined His standards. Rome is not the author of the Bible, nor did Rome create the Bible, define the canon of the Bible.

I would never say such ignorant words because I don't know, and neither do you or anyone else.

God has given us His word, you choose to accept the truth or reject it. I was not setting myself as the standard, but God's word.

The Codex Sinaiticus includes Barnabas, Shepherd of Hermes and Revelations is in the middle, not the end.

The Christian faith is not based in Codex Sinaiticus. Although Codex Sinaiticus may contain scripture, not all that is contained in Codex Sinaiticus is scripture. If I write a letter and stick it in a Bible, my letter does not become scripture.

Just saying "the Bible says so" doesn't work with me, nor does it for any other Christian seeker who experiences truth beyond the Catholic creed.

My standard is not the Roman Catholic creed, it is God's word. He says that there are no God Seeker apart from His work of grace.

Romans 3:10-12 as it is written: "None is righteous, no, not one; (11) no one understands; no one seeks for God. (12) All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one."

More all Bible's are a product of 1st and 2nd century books (Gospels, letters, Apochraphons, etc.). If the Catholic Bible, instituted in third century is the only word(s) of God, I feel sorry for all those Christians killed, murdered and died in the first and second century that just didn't have the Catholic truth like we do.

You are not correct in this and that is not how the Bible was composed.

Male, female is physical. Think spiritual.

God has revealed Himself to be male. Choose this day whom you will serve, your imagining of God or how He has revealed Himself.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Yes agree it is a case of semantics - but you didnt answer how you see god as male - what does God do that makes God male without God having anything physical or tangible that defines God as male.

Is it just a koinkidink that God made "man" in His image?

That Jesus Christ was born a "man" and that God refers to ALL of Himself as He. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit?

Why do we need something tangible in your words to say God is male? Aren't you just looking for a way out of your own non-biblical views?

You are 'creating' a God you would like to have. And missing in that, finding out who God is. God doesn't change so you on are on a futile journey, but whatever floats your boat.

 

[Paidiske]

God created humanity - male and female - in His image.

And in Scripture, the Holy Spirit is female in Hebrew and neuter (neither male nor female) in Greek. So I'm not sure we can make a blanket statement for the comprehensive maleness of all persons of the Trinity, based purely on Scripture.

Part of the issue here is, what does it mean to be male or female? Is maleness more or different than male biology (Y chromosome, male reproductive organs, beard etc)? If so, of what does that difference consist? Is it personality traits? Or something else? If one wants to argue that God has male personality traits, first we might need to establish what those are, to work out what significance that would have... but since we are not clear about that, even for humans, I'm not sure it's going to get us very far!

 

[ToBeLoved]

God created humanity - male and female - in His image.

And in Scripture, the Holy Spirit is female in Hebrew and neuter (neither male nor female) in Greek. So I'm not sure we can make a blanket statement for the comprehensive maleness of all persons of the Trinity, based purely on Scripture.

Part of the issue here is, what does it mean to be male or female? Is maleness more or different than male biology (Y chromosome, male reproductive organs, beard etc)? If so, of what does that difference consist? Is it personality traits? Or something else? If one wants to argue that God has male personality traits, first we might need to establish what those are, to work out what significance that would have... but since we are not clear about that, even for humans, I'm not sure it's going to get us very far!

Well why don't we discuss it then if you say the Holy Spirit is neuter in Greek.

Please show me that in the Greek.

Also, that the Holy Spirit is female in Hebrew.

Because Jesus calls Him, He so then Christ has no idea.

So, I'd like you to prove that premise with the languages, Hebrew and Greek. I'm sure you wouldn't say it unless you were speaking the truth here.

 

[Paidiske]

I am not a Hebrew scholar; for Hebrew I rely on the work of others, so someone else will need to weigh in on that.

But in Greek...

Okay. There are three genders in Greek; male, female, and neuter. The Father and the Son are consistently referred to in the NT with male articles, pronouns etc (ὁ πατήρ - ho pater for the father, ὁ υἱὸς - ho huios for the son; eg. Matthew 11:27); but the Spirit has neuter articles, pronouns etc (τὸ πνεῦμα - to pneuma; eg. Matthew 10:20).

So if you look at a verse like John 14:17, where our English translations tend to say something like "This is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him." In the Greek, if the "him" were masculine, it would be written auton; but as neuter, what the text says is auto. Since it would be strange in English to call the Spirit "It" we tend to translate as "him," but the underlying Greek is not masculine.

A disclaimer: of course, grammatical gender is not the same as ontological gender, exactly. But if one wants to make the argument that God is exclusively masculine because the grammar of Scripture always refers to all three persons of the Trinity as masculine, that is quite simply incorrect.