|
|
Post by melvin59 on Jul 5, 2009 13:20:10 GMT -8
Some say the Holy Spirit,the Holy Ghost and the Comforter is actually the female side of God or the Goddess. I do know the Kabbalah,the Tree of Life does talk about the female as the Binah( the womb) and the Shekinah. so now if we read Lukes story about how God came down,saw a beautiful virgin,had sex with Her and a child was born out of wedlock.then according to Luke the Holy Ghost.the Mother Goddess,went into the virgin Mary first and God made Love to the Queen of Heaven and used the virgin Mary to deliver the child thru Immaculate Conception then the Birth makes sense. some Islam and Jewish people do not accept the birth of Christ as being Legal. The Virgin Mary was promised to another man(Joseph) the Law was for both to be stoned to death. Did God break His own Law by doing the same as Genesis chapter six? Is the Holy Ghost the Female side of God?
|
|
Tyler
Junior Member
Posts: 64
|
Post by Tyler on Aug 15, 2009 10:50:28 GMT -8
There is NO Scriptural basis for assigning any gender to the Holy Spirit. Why? Precisely because He is Spirit and not flesh. Maybe He is LIKE a mother. But He is also LIKE a father - in fact He is called the Spirit of the Father. And Yeshua can also be said to be LIKE a mother (He did compare Himself to a mother hen that longed to gather its chicks), but it's ridiculous to call Yeshua a woman. And it's ridiculous to call the Holy Spirit a female. You speak as if God was made in the image of man - assigning genders and talking about Mary committing adultery with God. What a foolish thing to say! You've clearly baffled any wisdom you possess in this matter with the lies of Islam and Kabbalah. Go and read the Bible! Get saved or born-again and become a true disciple of Yeshua HaMashiach. Yeshua was begotten not made. This means that He already existed before Mary conceived Him in the flesh. The Scriptures clearly make it plain that Mary was a virgin when she delivered Yeshua. This means that she had never had sex when she gave birth to Yeshua - not with Josef, not with any man, and certainly not with any deity! She never had any sinful or adulterous relationship and she only lost her virginity with her husband Josef AFTER Yeshua was born and AFTER her period of purification according to the  . So how did God do it? How did Mary conceive? A miracle of the Holy Spirit. Can God do this? Of course! Didn't He breathe life into clay and call him Adam? Wasn't that a miracle? He didn't have sex with the clay to create life so why do you think that He has to have sex with Mary? |
|
|
|
Post by yeshuafreak on Sept 3, 2009 15:44:37 GMT -8
the gender of God: he is omnigender. he cannot be limited to one gender. he is all of them, none of them, only male, and only female.
some do say that the Sh'kinah is the personification that explains the more female principle of YHVH.
as for the virgin birth, i do not think that this is what the Nazarean Codicil records. The female principle of God is involved with all miraculous births because who gives births? females- mothers.
But the idea that the sh'kinah is the female personification of God is found mainly in kaballah and early church fathers. most rabbis accept that fact.
some scholars beleive that the female goddess was the original God of the hebrews. They beleive that the God turned male-like when Judaism was founded on more patristic, rather than matristic, foundations. They believe that the female principle never died out completely, and as put all in the doctrine of the sh'kinah. while i do not completely believe this view, it does have some relevance. now is not the place to discuss that relevance. however, i will say that the hebrew culture has always understood God as masculine simply because of its patristic backgound. before this, it may have viewed God in more maternal terms. This is likely. however, the God never changed.
shalom
|
|
Sanil
New Member
Posts: 29
|
Post by Sanil on Sept 12, 2009 10:54:50 GMT -8
There is NO Scriptural basis for assigning any gender to the Holy Spirit. Why? Precisely because He is Spirit and not flesh. Maybe He is LIKE a mother. Not exactly the original topic, but would you have a problem then with people using "she" to talk about God? I just found it interesting that you said there is no basis for assigning a gender, then immediately assigned one, showing that you DO think of God as male even to the point that you have to speak of HIM being like a mother, a clearly feminine role. |
|
|
|
Post by lawrenceofisrael on Sept 12, 2009 12:03:48 GMT -8
In English or German we have to assign a gender to the Almighty. That´s not the case in hebrew. We neither use male or female gender in hebrew when refering to him.
What is the problem when talking about the Lord being a female. Firstly we are not supposed to give him any characteristics that he didn´t give himself because we never saw him and thus do not know.
Secondly he is called the Father but never the Mother. Thirdly quite a lot of feminists try to create the image of the Lord being a woman.
Also bible says that he created men in his image and women in the image of men so he cannot be a woman and anyway he doesn´t have a gender. Why? Because he is not a human being.
The Brother Tyler is absolutely right. It is riddiculous to say that the Holy Spirit is something female. He is the Spirit of the Lord that´s all we have to know. There´s no need to philosophy about him and what he may be. Also remember the sin of blasphemy against the spirit brothers and sisters.
Let us be careful what to say about him in case we don´t know.
Let us not assume something and talk about it without knowledge but rather let us mention the excellence of him.
May peace and blessings be upon us all.
|
|
|
|
Post by yeshuafreak on Sept 12, 2009 15:04:12 GMT -8
the point is that God can have female and male attributes that are personified through sh'kinah and such.
each culture and individual person sees God in a different way. we must understand that no person can fully understand God but instead understands imperfect representaions and symbols of him in his head. in other words, God is not a women, but a matriarchal society might view him in a more matriarchal way which is in NO WAY something horrible as long as they realize that that representation is simply a representation, not his true self which we can never fully understand.
that is the point of people assigning a"female aspect" to YHVH through the sh'kinah.
now, because english has no "non-gender" pronoun than we use "he" like almost every other language, when referring to something that has not gender and is living. ("it" is used for something without a gender and non-living, or sometimes living things with a gender that are considered "lower beings" like a beetle.) so, thats why we use "he" to refer to God. to say "she" would be asiging God a gender, which the pronoun "he" was never used for- "he" was not used to assign God as a male, but as a being who we know not the gender, has none, has all of them, ... we dont know! but to refer to God as "she" is directly assigning him a gender within the english language and cultre, which i why i look down upon it.
if you have a problem calling God "he" than just dont use prononuns.
but we must realize that peple like the Native Americans referrred to God as "he" and "she" depending on what actions he did. when creating the world, God is seen as a "she" because life comes from females, and God was creating life. but when God did more brutish things, he was seen as a "he"...
language only means what the speakers say the words mean. it is used to communicate ideas, and sometimes fails. so we will just have to deal with our imperfect language
and theologically, it is repungant to assign God a gender, but calling the sh'kinah the "female aspect" of God is NOT assigning him a gender. this is not what the idea is supposed to convey.
shalom
|
|
|
|
Post by lawrenceofisrael on Sept 12, 2009 22:41:15 GMT -8
I agree. The Almighty may have characteristics (like the protective wings of the eagle) which we believe or know to be aspects of a woman.
That´s absolutely true.
Just what i wanna say is that the Almighty is not like us so everytime we say this is a female or male characteristic this is very unprecise.
Cause he is always different. He is above our imagination.
But your right on what you say.
May peace and blessings be upon us all.
|
|
|
|
Post by yeshuafreak on Sept 13, 2009 11:08:54 GMT -8
exatly why we descibe him in this way- we cannot understand him so we make symbols and have a "language ofspiritual roots" to represent him as a concept we believe in.
and i am always right... but youll figure that out. lol jk :-)
shalom
|
|
Sanil
New Member
Posts: 29
|
Post by Sanil on Sept 25, 2009 12:50:46 GMT -8
In English or German we have to assign a gender to the Almighty. That´s not the case in hebrew. That's actually not true, in English at least. There is no need to choose a gender pronoun. "It" is an option, or no pronoun at all, as was suggested by someone else above this comment. I understand this argument, except that if you argue that in the Hebrew there is no gender language, you are doing the same by choosing "he" over "she". If you say there is no gender to God, you can't in the next breath choose one yourself. I didn't copy that part, but you also say as an argument that a lot of feminists try to create the image of the Lord being a woman. That is probably true, just as it's true that men w/an interest in reinforcing patriarchy have created the image of God as a man. It's really not an argument that should have any bearing on the issue. |
|
|
|
Post by yeshuafreak on Sept 26, 2009 7:53:55 GMT -8
what would one do if i called god "it"... exactly. "it" is used for nonliving things. english and german and other languages assume that all living things are "he" or "she." and in every language, french especially, "he" is used if the gender is not known or if there is a group of both genders.
by calling god "he" we arent really assigning a gender to him. but by calling him "she" we are assigning a gender because we are blatantly going against grammar (which states that the masculine form is to be used if there is multi gender or unknown gender) in making a theological staatement. now, to insist that god IS a he is just a fallible, but using the pronoun "he" is just following language's rules, not necessarily insisting he's a he.
and if you think that Yehsua is God, than how exactly can God not be a he? i am not insisting that Yeshua is not God (although i have no such belief), but how can one state that Yeshua is God and then state God has no gender?
shalom
|
|
Sanil
New Member
Posts: 29
|
Post by Sanil on Sept 26, 2009 10:34:03 GMT -8
Hm, I don't agree that's true necessarily...certainly not anymore, when gender-inclusive language is such a big thing in a lot of circles. I'm not for being ultra-PC and if that's your reasoning I understand people using "he" instead. I'm not trying to force a change, but I do think that people need to be aware that using that language does make an assumption and does automatically exclude more than half the population. Women aren't property anymore, patriarchal male-focused language doesn't make sense in our culture and can be very alienating to women. I disagree with but understand your objection to "it"...what about "they"? "Us" and "our" are used by God in Genesis, a plural non-gendered pronoun make sense to me.
Yeshua is not God. Yeshua comes from God and that's understood in a lot of different ways. In my opinion, he is either certain aspects or all aspects of God in a human body. That could be any human body, but if he'd been a woman in that culture he wouldn't have had the opportunities he had to establish his ministry. Being in human form does mean there had to be a gender in that case, but forcing that on all of God makes about as much sense is saying God was born in Bethlehem and has the hair/eye/skin color Yeshua had. Yeshua (and humanity, for that matter) has God's attributes, not the other way around.
|
|
|
|
Post by yeshuafreak on Sept 26, 2009 17:13:39 GMT -8
those are some very good points. and i like your response on the language argument.
my point is that we could change how we use language, and evolve the religious language used for God, but "she" is just as exlusive as "he", and yet, even more exclusive, because "he" was at one point the proper grammar.
bnut yes, language does evolve. so i guess what i can say now after realizeing your points, is that though we can evolve religious language to being more accepting and open, we need not become more exclusive. we also need to realize that the use of "he" should not be offensive for any people that have not gone through that linguistic evolution and they simply are referring to God in the only way they know how.
but to say "she" is to make a theological statement while saying "he" doesnt necessarily mean such. although now, it does mean alot, and the lagnuage does have to evolcve like you pointed out.
shalom
|
|
.
