Human existence: the gender of God

waybread

Well-known member
Petosiris, re: your post 389.

By historical evidence, I mean evidence as a professional historian would use it, notably one trying to learn the facts more than trying to build a case for one side or another of a contentious issue. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_method Historical method actually works a lot like detective work or legal research.

Because in biblical studies were looking at languages no longer spoken, for the most part, we also rely on philologists. Experts in ancient languages learn about the different forms of a given language at different times and locations. Just for example, Josephus wrote in the common Greek of his day and place, yet if a portion of his text in a later edition was written in a form of Latin that only appeared later and in a different part of the Roman empire, we question its authenticity.

The parts of Josephus's super-brief mentions of Jesus that seem authentic say nothing about him as the Messiah. To be "called the Christ" doesn't mean Jesus is the Messiah. Monk on this forum sometimes calls me "Lady Waybread" but that doesn't mean I have an official aristocratic title.

Your logic escapes me about Jesus' brother dying during his ministry to the Ninevites. All kinds of preachers around the globe from many different faiths attest to religions that you would firmly reject.

Then, yet again, I don't take the Bible literally. I think you pick and choose what you take literally and what you don't. Do you believe in talking snakes or plagues of frogs and blood? Do you put a fence around your rooftop? What about those fringes on the corners of your garment? Why haven't we seen pigs infested by demons and jumping off cliffs? Do you own two or more coats? Jesus said to give all but one away to the poor.

If you find that Christianity gives you joy and meaning in your life, and makes you a more ethical loving person, I'm not here to say that Christianity is wrong and you shouldn't profess it. If this is your Christianity, I congratulate you. I am here to suggest that the soul of Christianity does not live in proof texts, but in faith and actions.

I think you'd see any source as biased that did not confirm your Christian beliefs.

Obviously, Jews have been martyred professing their faith-- with the Shema on their lips. There is a Jewish teaching that anything necessary to save a life is permitted. Sometimes one has no choice, however.

Re: your post #390: John 10:30. "I and the Father are one." You could also read the opening lines of John in this light.

I don't know what you make of the trinity.
 

waybread

Well-known member
Jesus died a cursed death forsaken by God in order to heal the nations. Only when your nation accepts him in the greater tribulation of the last seven years of this age, will the dead rise from their sleep. Not even Jesus knew the day or the hour of his coming, so I don't see how ''True Believers'' would know it.

Thanks Petosiris. I'm not afraid of burning in hell.

Of course, we might ask why the Son of God felt forsaken as the Romans tortured him to death.

I don't know what you think my "nation" is. I happen to be an American-born adoptive Canadian dual citizen, and a religiously inactive Jew by choice. An ultra-Orthodox rabbi probably would not accept my conversion as kosher, incidentally.

I find the idea of the dead rising from their sleep to be the stuff of fictional horror films, not of a pure, loving, and binding faith.

True Believers, whether Christians or Jews, look for signs supposedly set forth in their scriptures. We might call them omens.

I believe that God is love, Petosiris, not arguing bits of doctrine.
 

petosiris

Banned
I never said that Josephus thought Jesus was the Messiah. I don't believe that. I only claimed that Josephus recorded how James, the brother of Jesus, (along with some of Jewish Christians there) died by stoning at the hands of the Jews a few years before the siege of Nineveh (for it followed exactly 40 days from the preaching of Jonah). I also said that they were not ordinary religious martyrs, because they were eyewitnesses of the resurrection, unlike most martyrs who are believers in something they haven't seen.
 

petosiris

Banned
Re: your post #390: John 10:30. "I and the Father are one." You could also read the opening lines of John in this light.

I don't know what you make of the trinity.

''1. There is no reason to take this verse to mean that Christ was saying that he and the Father make up “one God.” The phrase was a common one, and even today if someone used it, people would know exactly what he meant—he and his father are very much alike. When Paul wrote to the Corinthians about his ministry there, he said that he had planted the seed and Apollos had watered it. Then he said, “he who plants and he who waters are one” (1 Cor. 3:8 – KJV). In the Greek texts, the wording of Paul is the same as that in John 10:30, yet no one claims that Paul and Apollos make up “one being.” Furthermore, the NIV translates 1 Corinthians 3:8 as “he who plants and he who waters have one purpose.” Why translate the phrase as “are one” in one place, but as “have one purpose” in another place? In this case, translating the same phrase in two different ways obscures the clear meaning of Christ’s statement in John 10:30: Christ always did the Father’s will; he and God have “one purpose.”

2. Christ uses the concept of “being one” in other places, and from them one can see that “one purpose” is what is meant. John 11:52 says Jesus was to die to make all God’s children “one.” In John 17:11, 21 and 22, Jesus prayed to God that his followers would be “one” as he and God were “one.” We think it is obvious that Jesus was not praying that all his followers would become one being or “substance” just as he and his Father were one being or “substance.” We believe the meaning is clear: Jesus was praying that all his followers be one in purpose just as he and God were one in purpose, a prayer that has not yet been answered.

3. The context of John 10:30 shows conclusively that Jesus was referring to the fact that he had the same purpose as God did. Jesus was speaking about his ability to keep the “sheep,” the believers, who came to him. He said that no one could take them out of his hand and that no one could take them out of his Father’s hand. Then he said that he and the Father were “one,” i.e., had one purpose, which was to keep and protect the sheep.'' - https://www.biblicalunitarian.com/videos/understanding-john-10-30

I would also add in relation to the OP, that the Greek ''one'' there is neuter gender ἕν (implying one purpose) rather than masculine gender εἷς (which would imply one God as in Mark 12:29). Jesus agreed on the Shema with the scribe.

I read the personified ''word'' in John 1 like the personified ''wisdom'' in Sirach 24.

''Wisdom praises herself,
and tells of her glory in the midst of her people.
In the assembly of the Most High she opens her mouth,
and in the presence of his hosts she tells of her glory:
“I came forth from the mouth of the Most High,
and covered the earth like a mist.
I dwelt in the highest heavens,
and my throne was in a pillar of cloud.
Alone I compassed the vault of heaven
and traversed the depths of the abyss.
Over waves of the sea, over all the earth,
and over every people and nation I have held sway.
Among all these I sought a resting place;
in whose territory should I abide?

“Then the Creator of all things gave me a command,
and my Creator chose the place for my tent.
He said, ‘Make your dwelling in Jacob,
and in Israel receive your inheritance.’
Before the ages, in the beginning, he created me,
and for all the ages I shall not cease to be.
In the holy tent I ministered before him,
and so I was established in Zion.
Thus in the beloved city he gave me a resting place,
and in Jerusalem was my domain.
I took root in an honored people,
in the portion of the Lord, his heritage.

“I grew tall like a cedar in Lebanon,
and like a cypress on the heights of Hermon.
I grew tall like a palm tree in En-gedi,
and like rosebushes in Jericho;
like a fair olive tree in the field,
and like a plane tree beside water I grew tall.
Like cassia and camel’s thorn I gave forth perfume,
and like choice myrrh I spread my fragrance,
like galbanum, onycha, and stacte,
and like the odor of incense in the tent.
Like a terebinth I spread out my branches,
and my branches are glorious and graceful.
Like the vine I bud forth delights,
and my blossoms become glorious and abundant fruit.

“Come to me, you who desire me,
and eat your fill of my fruits.
For the memory of me is sweeter than honey,
and the possession of me sweeter than the honeycomb.
Those who eat of me will hunger for more,
and those who drink of me will thirst for more.
Whoever obeys me will not be put to shame,
and those who work with me will not sin.”

All this is the book of the covenant of the Most High God,
the law that Moses commanded us
as an inheritance for the congregations of Jacob.
It overflows, like the Pishon, with wisdom,
and like the Tigris at the time of the first fruits.
It runs over, like the Euphrates, with understanding,
and like the Jordan at harvest time.
It pours forth instruction like the Nile,
like the Gihon at the time of vintage.
The first man did not know wisdom fully,
nor will the last one fathom her.
For her thoughts are more abundant than the sea,
and her counsel deeper than the great abyss.'' - NRSV
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Sirach+24&version=NRSV

The wisdom isn't a second person nor did God literally ''incarnate'' or ''inbooked'' in the Torah. It is poetic metaphor like wisdom in the book of Proverbs. Jesus is in the same sense the word and wisdom of God.
 
Last edited:

petosiris

Banned
Then, yet again, I don't take the Bible literally. I think you pick and choose what you take literally and what you don't. Do you believe in talking snakes or plagues of frogs and blood? Do you put a fence around your rooftop? What about those fringes on the corners of your garment? Why haven't we seen pigs infested by demons and jumping off cliffs? Do you own two or more coats? Jesus said to give all but one away to the poor.

If you find that Christianity gives you joy and meaning in your life, and makes you a more ethical loving person, I'm not here to say that Christianity is wrong and you shouldn't profess it. If this is your Christianity, I congratulate you. I am here to suggest that the soul of Christianity does not live in proof texts, but in faith and actions.

If the Bible is not source of truth, then which faith and works I should have? One can come up with anything.
 

petosiris

Banned
Christianity, in particular, Roman Catholicism, venerate jesus' mother the Virgin Mary stating she had a baby by the act of God. This was borrowed from Roman and European paganism of a mother Earth goddess deity either had or didn't have s*x.

No one outside Roman Catholicism, Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches ''venerates'' Mary. God said he would beget the Messiah in Psalm 2 of the Hebrew Scriptures. It has nothing to do with s*x, as God unlike other gods is invisible, incorporeal and uncreated spirit. He can't do something that is contrary to his perfect nature.
 
Last edited:

petosiris

Banned

Opal

Premium Member
Didn't Nietzsche go insane towards the end of his life? Poor guy. That sounds like an insane proposition.

Just because a person has mental issues, does not negate their studies. Most people have had some kind of mental health issues. We are human. Not to be confused with humane.
 

waybread

Well-known member
Thanks for sharing your beliefs, Petosiris.

I don't see Rabbinic kosher conversion in the book of Ruth. So I believe you are a Biblical Jew.

With all due respect, Petosiris, Jewish conversion requirements have changed since the 5th century BCE.

Judaism, like Christianity, did not end with the codification of their respective Bibles. Religions are loaded with subsequent centuries of exegesis, doctrines, creeds, books of prayer, hymns, histories, and post-biblical writings. Think of the catechism of the Catholic church, or the writings of the Church Fathers. The Book of Mormon. Or something like Martin Luther's banns.

Similarly, the requirements for conversion to Judaism changed and became more stringent with the times. Orthodox rabbis were advised actually to turn away would-be converts, as a means of testing their sincerity.

Would-be converts are warned that they are asking to join a group that has experienced serious discrimination. They are told that Judaism does not need converts who join for a while and then revert to another faith.

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/the-conversion-process/

https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/so-you-want-to-convert-to-judaism-1.5312365

Ruth's personal decision to join her mother-in-law's people would not be a kosher conversion today. Nor would a marriage between a Jewish man (Mahlon) and non-Jewish woman (Ruth.) However, the character of Ruth is set up as an exemplar for converts.

My conversion involved a period of study, a Bet Din, a mikveh, and acquiring a Hebrew name (for religious, not civil purposes.) So it wasn't so simple as Ruth's. However. because the supervising rabbi was Conservative, an Orthodox rabbi might not accept it as valid.

This would only matter if I somehow wished to become involved in a Orthodox congregation, or if I wished to claim the "right of return" to immigrate to Israel and claim Israeli citizenship. This is because the chief rabbinates of Israel are Orthodox. (You probably know that most Israelis are secular.)

A common pitfall for Christians is that their knowledge of Judaism basically ends with the early centuries CE. And then what they do learn about Judaism is often highly filtered through Christian lenses.
 

waybread

Well-known member
If the Bible is not source of truth, then which faith and works I should have? One can come up with anything.

Petosiris, I'm not here to answer such a question you.

I would point out that some people derive deep truths from writings that are not literally, factually correct. The Bible itself is full of poetry, allegory, metaphors, parables, and riddles. I might argue that in many, many places the authors of the Bible did not take themselves literally. Rather, a parable would be used to teach a lesson, and point to a deeper truth.

In the original Hebrew of the OT, meaning is often derived from wordplay, with homonyms, something often lost in English translation.

You might enjoy reading the books by biblical scholar Robert Alter, like The Art of Biblical Narrative. One of his contributions was showing how the Bible uses type scenes, in which a familiar plot line is varied by different characters, but is basically the same plot. The well and the tree theme would be one such example. Also, Alter's Art of Bible Translation.
 

waybread

Well-known member
No one outside Roman Catholicism, Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches ''venerates'' Mary. God said he would beget the Messiah in Psalm 2 of the Hebrew Scriptures. It has nothing to do with s*x, as God unlike other gods is invisible, incorporeal and uncreated spirit. He can't do something that is contrary to his perfect nature.

We know from the Bible that God can take on human forms. He has a back, a strong right arm, and hands. He walks in His garden in the cool of the day. Of course, these would be literal interpretations of the text.
 

david starling

Well-known member
There seems to be some agreement among historians that Zeus was in large part based on the Hebrew One God. However, the Greeks thought having only one god to worship was too limiting.
 
Top