Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)

[knpraise]

 

 

One reasoned excuse after another. 

 

 

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Taylor

To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org

Sent: 2/9/2006 12:06:40 AM

Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Rightousness (jd 2 cd)

Dean insists  >  To have a masculine quality is to be a male.

 

Dean, are you willing to put your proposition to the test?

cd: That is the very reason I am here Bill-if my propositions fall then they are not of God and I learn.

 

 Isaiah 42.13 says that "the LORD shall go forth like a mighty man; He shall stir up His zeal like a man of war. He shall cry out, yes, shout aloud; He shall prevail against His enemies." Does this verse stand as indisputable proof that God is a male? It certainly attributes masculine qualities to him: after all, one cannot dispute the fact that this verse likens him to a mighty man and a man of war. If your proposition is correct, Dean, we would have to conclude, based upon this verse alone, that God is indeed male.

cd: Actually other supporting verses do come in handy for this conclusion.But yes this can stand alone without support.

 

But what if the Bible attributes feminine qualities to God: by the same logic, wouldn't that make God female, also? While you're considering that question, let us read the very next verse: " I have held My peace a long time, I have been still and restrained Myself. Now I will cry like a woman in labor, I will pant and gasp at once." The Lord groaning like a woman in labor: surely there isn't anything more feminine than the cries of a woman in labor.

cd: To cry is also a male action-is it not?God is comparing His dept of pain to the severity of a women's pain in childbirth- He is not saying that this pain is only a female quality.If I stabbed myself with a knife in the stomach and I say:L" This hurts as much as having a Baby"-I am not being feminine by any means-I would be only stating that this really hurts.Pain is a universal feeling.If I were you I would focus on what make God cry in that manner-sin? When did his nature change to where he no longer reacts to sin in such a manner Bill?

 

Or how about this: "As a mother comforts her child, so I will comfort you" (Isa 66.13). Surely you would agree with me, Dean, that to be like a mother who comforts her child is to display certain feminine qualities.

cd: I believe God to be showing a deeper love by using the love of a mother as an example-which I have found to be deeper than my love for my Children.I wish my mother was like this.This also does not make God feminine-but does show he has the greater love.

 

 Or what about this: "You neglected the Rock who begot you, and forgot the God who gave birth to you" (Deu 32:18). Dean, the verb (chayal) used of God's giving birth in this verse is otherwise used in Scripture only of women in labor.

cd: Are you suggesting God gave birth to us as a women does from the open womb?Or do you think He may be speaking of His creative handiwork?

 

So what do you think, Dean: Do these feminine qualities make God female? May I answer for you? Of course it does not. These are similes, comparisons. They speak not of God's gender or sexuality but his relationship with creation. God is not male, just as he is not female. AND to claim one in abstention to the other is to neglect the other as being every bit as truthful and descriptive of our God. I am saying, let those comparisons depict his relationship with humanity and not his gender. In Deuteronomy 4.15-16 God tells his people what he thinks of them creating him in their image: " Take careful heed to yourselves, for you saw no form when the LORD spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire, lest you act corruptly and make for yourselves a carved image in the form of any figure: the likeness of male or female." We need to be careful, too, lest in our language for God we make of him something he is not...

cd: True, God did not appear in these forms and we aren't to make images of those forms but if what you say is true why isn't there a "she" in the Bible for usage to God if all thing are equal?If God  could go either way why is the "He" ,"Himself" , "Father"..etc, there? Surely you must see this gives weight to the Masculine identity? I feel more safe referring to Him as a He than a She-you are the one who should be careful as you are only one step away from be in this situation below.

Jer 44:25 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, saying; Ye and your wives have both spoken with your mouths, and fulfilled with your hand, saying, We will surely perform our vows that we have vowed, to burn incense to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her: ye will surely accomplish your vows, and surely perform your vows.

Jer 44:26 Therefore hear ye the word of the LORD, all Judah that dwell in the land of Egypt; Behold, I have sworn by my great name, saith the LORD, that my name shall no more be named in the mouth of any man of Judah in all the land of Egypt, saying, The Lord GOD liveth.

Jer 44:27 Behold, I will watch over them for evil, and not for good: and all the men of Judah that are in the land of Egypt shall be consumed by the sword and by the famine, until there be an end of them.

cd: If you are not sure who the Queen of Heaven is ask any Catholic. By the way no big deal for a Christian to behave in such a manner as this-God has changed and they get to go to heaven anyway. huh?

 

Dean, please do not think when I defend Friesen that I think of God as being in the least bit female, or both male and female, as opposed to male only. I do not.

cd:That is not what I am hearing you say.You wrote above"God is not male, just as he is not female".I think you need  the growth that comes from our view-that being David Judy and I. If you have gone past that to a higher third view that I cannot understand (higher than Armin.& Calvin.) Who is not to say there isn't a 4th and 5th view that you cannot understand that could be correct-and you would suffer a loss. The point is our views only stand if the are in harmony with the entire Bible.You view cannot explain Re. 1-6 that in itself should show error.I speak this to you benefit not for harm.

 

When we read that God created humans both male and female in his image, this is not a reference to God's gender; it speaks instead to his nature as a relational being, a being-in-communion: the Father with the Son and the Son with the Father, in and through the Holy Spirit. That being so, there is no "image of God" in humanity apart from relationship: the image of God is persons in relationship with others persons and God himself. It is that which reflects his glory. 

 

cd: Nowhere in this below do I see that God said he created male and female in his image. It states that He created man in his image then goes on this state he also created the female-but it does not state he created females in his image.You are adding to this verse. If it did say what you claim then there would be disharmony with 1 Cor.11:7. If you can show me one place in the bible where God created women in his image we would at least have grounds to debate-I find none.

Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

1Co 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.

---------------------------------