ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

What Is Apophtatic Theology

I've been asked about apophtatic theology.

This is simply saying what God is NOT.

For example, while the Bible uses masculine terms to describe God, He is beyond how maleness is expressed in this fallen world. (Don't let the pretty boys on bicycles fool you.)

Join Our Free Chat and Take The Who Is Jesus Bible Quiz
 ---Cluny on 7/6/17
     Helpful Blog Vote (2)

Post a New Blog



Jerry6593:

The Father and Son are one - NOT one and the same. Jesus said, "Why do you call me good? Only God is good". The Father did not pray at Gethsemane to the Holy Spirit. At Jesus's Baptism, the Father did not pray to the Holy Spririt to send down Jesus.

Why does Jesus react to many situations (which I described earlier) differently than God had, if the same yesterday, and today, and forever, unless they are different persons, i.e. "God in THREE persons"?

The mixed multitude.

And who, exactly, were in that "mixed multitude" other than Israel? Which gentiles went with them into the desert for 40 years?
---StrongAxe on 8/21/17


ax: You don't understand your own religion. You think the God of the Old Testament was different than the God of the New. He was not!

Heb 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

Joh 5:39 Search the scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

Luk 24:27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.


"Just which gentiles were fed mana in the desert?"

The mixed multitude.

Num 11:4 And the mixt multitude that was among them fell a lusting: and the children of Israel also wept again, and said, Who shall give us flesh to eat?

---Jerry6593 on 8/21/17


Jerry6593:

1st Corinthians was written to the Church in Corinth - which was originally formed from the Jews in Corinth. Otherwise, "our fathers" makes no sense - the ancestors of the Jews passed through the Red Sea, but the ancestors of the Greeks didn't. The whole passage you quoted referred only to Jews.

You wrote: Moreover, the Sabbath Commandment was taught to THE PEOPLE (Jews & Gentiles) in the lesson of the manna PRIOR to reaching Mt. Sinai.

Just which gentiles were fed mana in the desert? I don't recall any.
---StrongAxe on 8/20/17


Cluny:

Considering Jesus's forgiving attitude towarsd sinners (e.g. the woman taken in adultery, tax collectors, prostitutes, the woman at the well, etc.) vs. God's Old Testament "one strike and your out" policies (e.g. The Fall, Cain, Moses rejected from the promised land, Sons of Aaron, Uzzah and the Ark, etc.), it's hard to imagine it's the same person in both instances, ESPECIALLY since God said "I change not".

That can be debated, but this is not the blog for it.

Why not? This blog (like most other blogs) has wandered far off the original topic anyway.
---StrongAxe on 8/19/17


ax: "They were given to Moses by the Father, not by the Son."

You are incorrect.

1Co 10:1 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea,
1Co 10:2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea,
1Co 10:3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat,
1Co 10:4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was CHRIST.

Moreover, the Sabbath Commandment was taught to THE PEOPLE (Jews & Gentiles) in the lesson of the manna PRIOR to reaching Mt. Sinai.


---Jerry6593 on 8/19/17




\\The Ten Commandments were given to Moses on Mount Sinai, thousands of years before Jesus was born. They were given to Moses by the Father, not by the Son.\\

That can be debated, but this is not the blog for it.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 8/18/17


Jerry6593:

The Ten Commandments were given to Moses on Mount Sinai, thousands of years before Jesus was born. They were given to Moses by the Father, not by the Son.

The Law of which He spoke was indeed the Ten Commandment Law, as he mentioned several of them.

Yet he also mentioned other commandments from the Law of Moses. Why do you keep insisting that we keep the Ten but not the other 600? You are being inconsistent.
---StrongAxe on 8/18/17


ax: If I understand your position correctly, you claim that the two love commandments are Christ's but the Ten Commandments are not. If you would rightly divide the Word of Truth, you would find that Christ was the author of the Ten Commandments on Mt. Sinai, and that He quoted the two love commandments from the Old Testament. He further said that the two love commandments "summarized" the Ten Commandments. In Matt 5, Jesus states that the Law would not change while heaven and earth last. The Law of which He spoke was indeed the Ten Commandment Law, as he mentioned several of them.

Your position is without merit.


---Jerry6593 on 8/18/17


Jerry6593:

John 15:15: If ye love ME, keep MY commandments.

Note that this was Jesus speaking. What commandments did HE mention? Love God, Love your neighbor, and a new one - love each other as I have loved you.

Again - are the Laws of Moses God's commandments or not? If they aren't, why did Jesus put them on the same level? And if they are, why don't YOU put them on the same level?
---StrongAxe on 8/17/17


ax: "If you keep insisting that we are required to obey the Ten Commandments because they are God's Law"

Joh 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.

1Jn 5:2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.
1Jn 5:3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

1Jn 2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

Pro 28:9 He that turneth away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer shall be abomination.


---Jerry6593 on 8/17/17




Jerry6593:

If you keep insisting that we are required to obey the Ten Commandments because they are God's Law, but we aren't required to obey the Law of Moses, because that is man's law, let me remind you that when Jesus was asked what the greatest commandments were, he did not mention any of the Ten, but instead, quoted two from Moses: Love God, and Love Your Neighbor. Apparently Jesus DID think the Law of Moses was the Law of God, and he DID think it was important.
---StrongAxe on 8/16/17


Jerry6593:

You wrote: Then you aren't a Christian either.

Please show chapter and verse where Christians are required to keep the Law. Gal 3:29 mentions nothing about it.

Do you really keep your wife in the garage? That's not part of the Ten Commandments.

Women are to be kept out of the house during their time of the month. That is part of Jewish law. Why don't YOU keep it?

What denomination are you?

I do not promote any specific denominational views here, because what I personally believe has no bearing on what others ought to believe. What the bible actually says (or doesn't say) does.
---StrongAxe on 8/15/17


ax: "I am not a Jew, so Jewish law does not apply to me."

Then you aren't a Christian either.

Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.


Do you really keep your wife in the garage? That's not part of the Ten Commandments. What denomination are you?


---Jerry6593 on 8/15/17


Jerry6593:

There are "Christians" who believe they are free to lie, cheat, and steal, because they are not under the law. I am not one of those.

I am not a Jew, so Jewish law does not apply to me.

Do you make your wife live in the garage once a month? Do you stone your neighbors to death if they dare to work on Saturday? If not, what denomination are you that you feel no obligation to keep God's Law?

I have lived most of my life in this country. I am subject to its laws. I am subject to its economic and political trends. About the only thing that separates me from being an American citizen is that I am not allowed to vote, and I can be deported if I am convicted of a felony.
---StrongAxe on 8/10/17


\\Obamacare already sets up boards on who to let die.


---Jerry6593 on 8/8/17\\

Please give specific examples of this. Where are thesse "death boards"? Who is on them? Who established them?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 8/10/17


ax: "I am NOT an antinomian. We are not obligated to 'thou shalt not steal' "

You ARE self-contradictory. Not being subject to the Ten Commandment Law is the very definition of antinomianism. What denomination are you that you feel no obligation to keep God's Law?

Why is a foreigner like you so concerned about our American tax and spend policies?


---Jerry6593 on 8/9/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Settlements


Jerry6593:

These REPUBLICANS suggest robbing you of what you paid - talking about cuts to Social Security and Medicare, raising retirement age, etc. to pay for other programs, forgetting Social Security is independent of other federal funds. The only way that works is by raiding the Social Security fund. Also note illegal immigrants cannot collect Social Security. You consider the disabled robbers who don't play by the rules? I am now disabled, but I paid into the system for years. This is how insurance works - you pay when you don't need it, and collect when you can't afford it.

What boards did Obama set up to make people die? TRUMP Care will deprive 23 million of health insurance, and kill tens of thousands. Pot, kettle, black.
---StrongAxe on 8/8/17


Jerry6593:

I am NOT an antinomian. We are not obligated to "thou shalt not steal" because the Law NEVER applied to us, as we are not Jews - but we ARE obligated to because "love thy neighbor" DOES apply to us.

You are not robbed by the poor either, since you are not obligated to give money to them. If you call social programs robbery because your tax dollars go to the poor without your consent, remember that MUCH larger federal subsidies go to corporate subsidies and tax breaks - also without your consent.

Deregulation, which Republicans constantly push, benefits big corporations, while harming the environment, which hurts us all (Remember Flint, and fracking?)
---StrongAxe on 8/8/17


Sam: I have never been robbed by a rich man, but I have been robbed by poor men. James is talking about rich men in authority - i.e., government people. Social Security and Medicare are not gifts or freebies from the government. We paid into the system and get back in proportion to what we put in. Unfortunately, government bureaucrats (Democrats) robbed the SS Trust Fund and added the disabled and illegal immigrants to the SS recipients, thus robbing us who played by the rules.

Obamacare already sets up boards on who to let die.


---Jerry6593 on 8/8/17


Jerry one of the biggest entitlement spending is Social Security. Do you want to get rid of Social Security?

Ninety percent of Entitlement Benefits Go to Elderly, Disabled, or Working Households.

Many of them retired military. So are you saying the Government should set up boards on who to let die? Or just say the poor need to die so the rich can not pay taxes?

Read James The rich will steal from the poor. You say stealing is wrong. But seem to support that it is okay for the rich to do.
---Samuelbb7 on 8/7/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Internet Services


ax: "who covet and steal more - the rich, or the poor?"

Now you descend into moral relativism. If you were not an antinomian, you would understand that All theft and covetousness are SIN. It IS black and white. The rich corporatists are often advanced by corrupt politicians like Hillary and B.O. I am not robbed by corporatists because I still have the freedom to choose where to put SOME of my money. (I shop at Dollar Tree rather than Nordstroms.) The government robs me at gunpoint (figuratively), and I have NO choice as to whether or not I pay taxes.

Your understanding of federal revenue expenditure is faulty. Entitlement spending is by far the greatest drain on our economy.


---Jerry6593 on 8/7/17


Good points Strong Ax.

My problem Jerry is that you're making assumptions that I don't see. I make enough and get by. I don't depend on the Government to support me. I pay my taxes. But we pay over $800 a month for insurance. Which is very hard. Our insurance could get taken away by new laws. How is that fair.

Many friends who are teachers. Work hard. But they often pay more taxes the millionaires. Should not everyone pay their fair share?

I know many working poor. I don't know any leeches. I keep hearing about them. But don't see or hear real facts.

The only person I have known on welfare. Was a mother on two special need children. Whose husband left her. So do you think she is a leach and should not receive help?
---Samuelbb7 on 8/7/17


Jerry6593:

The question then is, who covet and steal more - the rich, or the poor? Look at the federal budget - the amount dedicated to social programs like welfare, food stamps, and public health care is a very small percentage (in the single digits), while corporate welfare (subsidies to rich corporations) is larger, and the military is largest of all. Yes, some poor may "rob the rich", but the rich rob the poor far more. The Bible never condemns the former, but it DOES condemn the latter (e.g. joining land to land, moving boundary marks, etc.)

If Marxism (which we don't have here) is theft, unbridled capitalism (which we do) is even worse theft.
---StrongAxe on 8/5/17


Sam: I also grew up poor and worked my way through college. Isn't America great? No one said that you were a parasite, I said that the government leeches are parasites - they contribute nothing and rob us of our life blood. I know that you believe in the Ten Commandments, so that when you accept the Marxist doctrine of class warfare - wanting what the rich have - you are breaking "thou shalt not covet".


---Jerry6593 on 8/5/17


Locate Church Jobs


Interesting Jerry. Have you read James lately.

Never been a Marxist. But I don't believe in laws that steal from the poor to give to the rich. Like the Sheriff of Nottingham.

I grew up poor. Worked hard and made it to a point of being comfortable. My wife is ill. But you believe even though we have worked often two jobs that some how I am a lazy parasite. That it should be easy to declare we should die because we are poor.

Many republican say that Obama care would have death panels. They have skipped that. If you are poor you should die is what they propose.

This is way off the topic. But I cannot vote for those who are stealing from the poor.

True politics is muddy.

GOD loves everyone.
---Samuelbb7 on 8/3/17


Jerry6593:

You wrote: Sin vs. righteousness is indeed a black/white issue. No SDA should join the muddy waters gang.

Yes, I'm sure if you were there when Jesus was confronted with the woman taken in adultery, YOU would have educated him in the proper punishment about adultery, and thrown the first stone, because after all, adultery is either black or white - like all other sin, there can be no middle ground, can there be?

We are to care for the poor through our churches - not through government parasites.

How many church bake sales does it take to treat one person for cancer?
---StrongAxe on 8/3/17


Sam: "Jerry. Sin is sin. But we live in a sinful world. Caring for the poor and helpless is correct. Wanting them to die to make the lives of the wealthy easy. That is wrong."

Sin vs. righteousness is indeed a black/white issue. No SDA should join the muddy waters gang. You sound like a Marxist with the class envy mantra. The elite political class living off the toil of the overtaxed and wanting them to die from ineffective government health care is wrong. We are to care for the poor through our churches - not through government parasites.


---Jerry6593 on 8/3/17


\\Cluny: Now you are illustrating ax's gray-area thinking. It is as if you think you can avoid believing parts of the Bible if you can muddle the issue enough to conclude that it's not understandable.\\

Et reliqua.

I noticed, Jerry, that you didn't actually answer my question. You simply indulged in ad hominem rhetoric, your usual technique when you're forced to think about things you don't think about.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 8/1/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Online Stores


Well Strong ax we get to agree from time to time. Good points.

Jerry. Sin is sin. But we live in a sinful world. Caring for the poor and helpless is correct. Wanting them to die to make the lives of the wealthy easy. That is wrong.

Matthew 25 and James are in the Bible for a reason. Read them.
---Samuelbb7 on 8/1/17


Jerry6593:

You have such one-dimensional thinking. No wonder extreme thinkers like you (both left and right) frequently throw the baby out with the bath water.

Yes, there is definitely right and wrong, but things are rarely 100% black or 100% white. Even when God sent the flood to wipe out most of the earth, he saved Noah and his family, and a couple of animals from each species. If God used such black and white thinking as you do, he would just have wiped the slate clean and started from scratch.

I do not muddy the waters. I merely make people see that the water is ALREADY slightly muddy. To expect distilled water from the lake is delusional.
---StrongAxe on 8/1/17


ax: Still muddying the waters, I see. It is no wonder you lefties are so confused. Nothing is black and white, good or bad, right or wrong with you. You walk about in a fog of uncertainty, unable to see issues clearly. No wonder you end up on the wrong side of most issues.



---Jerry6593 on 8/1/17


Jerry6593:

You wrote: It is as if you think that the fourth Commandment need not be kept because the length of days is unclear.

Yet another useless straw man to demolish. When have Cluny and/or I ever suggested that the lengths of creation days has anything to do with whether or not the fourth commandment should be obeyed?

Exo 20:8-11 is perfectly clear, written to humans by Jesus Himself and defining the human days of the week.

What do "human days of the week" have to do with Genesis 1? For most of that week, humans didn't exist, and for part of it, neither did the sun (which is how we NOW measure days), so it's clear that the way that WE now measure days was inadequate for the first few.
---StrongAxe on 7/30/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Business Training


Cluny: Now you are illustrating ax's gray-area thinking. It is as if you think you can avoid believing parts of the Bible if you can muddle the issue enough to conclude that it's not understandable. It is as if you think that the fourth Commandment need not be kept because the length of days is unclear. Exo 20:8-11 is perfectly clear, written to humans by Jesus Himself and defining the human days of the week. It is a black and white issue - not a fuzzy, whatever you want it to be one.


---Jerry6593 on 7/29/17


Jerry, were the days of Creation six DIVINE days or six HUMAN days?

Were they human days as we experience time now, or human days as they were before the fall?

Are all days in the Bible only 24 hour post-lapsarian days? If so, does this mean the "day of the Lord" is only 24 hours, or the day of Christ that Abraham rejoiced in only 24 hours?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 7/28/17


Jerry6593:

You wrote: You seem to want to make every issue cloudy, confused, unclear and debatable, so that when you violate God's word it doesn't seem so bad.

Please show me WHERE I "violate God's word".

Look at the woman taken in adultery. Mosaic law was clear: she was to be stoned. Did Jesus cast the first stone? He could have. Yet he didn't, because the situation was more nuanced. Why was the man she was with not also being stoned? Nobody ever asks THAT question. Clearly the fact that the Pharisees were stoning her and not him indicates that something else was going on.

Genesis says creation took 6 days, but not now long those days were. WHERE did I say he didn't mean "thou shalt not?".
---StrongAxe on 7/27/17


True Jerry GOD means what he says. I am very sure Strong Ax knows that. He just disagrees with us.

We need to follow Jesus.
---Samuelbb7 on 7/27/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Software


ax: "That is black-and-white thinking."

You (and all the other lefties) could use a little B/W thinking. You seem to want to make every issue cloudy, confused, unclear and debatable, so that when you violate God's word it doesn't seem so bad. You apparently think that God was confused when He said that He created the heavens and the earth in 6 days, or that He didn't really mean it when He said "Thou shalt not". Get a clue! You are not smarter than God, and He means what He says.


---Jerry6593 on 7/27/17


Strong Michael. Good interesting points. Thank you.
---Samuelbb7 on 7/27/17


michael:

That is black-and-white thinking. If manuscripts are mostly reliable, and translations are mostly accurate, then the Bible is mostly the inerrant Word of God. Is that not sufficient? Paul said we see through a glass darkly. If we look through a blurry glass at something, no matter how perfect it is, our vision will be imperfect. If the original is slighty imperfect, it doesn't impact our already imperfect vision. If you are old and hard of hearing, a cassette sounds as good as a CD. If you're dying of thirst, dirty pond water tastes as good as distilled. People insist on unattainable perfection here, yet in every other aspect of life, imperfection is not only acceptable, it is the norm. The world is not a black and white place.
---StrongAxe on 7/21/17


True Bible believers know the issue in Bible translation is preservation.
Without preservation there is no such thing as an inerrant Bible on any bookshelf anywhere.
Has God preserved his words throughout history and languages, or not?
If he has, then we should look for the right Bible that is accurate and inerrant in history.
If he has not, then we can never be sure the Bible is completely without error, or completely error,
---michael on 7/21/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Advertising


The problem is Scholars differ.

For instance Edward Fudge is a Protestant Scholar who teaches hell is not eternal. That the wicked are consumed. But other Scholars say he is wrong and have books to counter his books. His book is "The Fire that Consumes"

Martin Luther debated this for some time.

Scholars debate between Covenant understanding of the Bible and Dispensationalist understanding of the Bible.

So yes while we can learn from Scholars and I like to hear both sides. We must make up our own mind. Through Prayer and Bible study.
---Samuelbb7 on 7/21/17


\\Study the Word "rightly divided"
---michael_e on 7/20/17\\

On what basis do you say that YOU are the one who "rightly divides?"

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 7/21/17


\\No scholar has more authority than you. You have the manifold wisdom of God! Eph 3:10\\

Are you saying that the scholars who have pored over God's word for years, if not decades, are dummies?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 7/20/17


michael_e:

Yes. You can't properly study Genesis 1:1 unless you can reliably know the original said "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth" and not "In the middle, Bob roasted weenies and beans" - both because the Hebrew words are essentially what existing manuscripts said they are, and that the Hebrew words there mean what scholars for thousands of years have said they mean. If we can't know "Elohim" means "God", for example, how can we possibly study this?

Note that scripture makes us wise by our studying it - not the other way around. We must FIRST know what scriptures actually are and what the words mean, before we can understand them.
---StrongAxe on 7/20/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Eating Disorders


Do we determine Gods words by "Original" manuscripts. Languages or scholars?
Is final authority, degrees, professors or seminaries?
No scholar has more authority than you. You have the manifold wisdom of God! Eph 3:10
Scripture is able to make you wise - 2 Tim 3:15
Study the Word "rightly divided"
---michael_e on 7/20/17


\\What I find fascinating, is the reaction of KJV supporters when they find out that the Textus Receptus/LXX/Septuagint was derived from "copies" and not from an original MSS.\\

Whoever said otherwise? I knew that back in Baptist Sunday School before I reached the 7th grade.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 7/20/17


Dear Jerry. No. You didn't hurt my feelings. On some discussion sites I am a Satan following false teaching the doctrine of demons as a cultist. Knowing Jesus is correct I ignore them.

Your snowflake comment seemed general.

I am not leftist. I am middle of the road.

But one important main point. We are a minority. If we don't stand up for minority people to defend the rights of all. Are we not working against ourselves. You know that the Government will turn against us. Trump works to make that easy.

Love thy neighbor is especially to poor and persecuted. All who are persecuted we need to help.

Agape
---Samuelbb7 on 7/19/17


If you don't have an original Greek or Hebrew MSS, how do you know that what you call "my Bible" is accurate?
---Cluny on 7/18/17

What I find fascinating, is the reaction of KJV supporters when they find out that the Textus Receptus/LXX/Septuagint was derived from "copies" and not from an original MSS.

It nearly blows their mind.

What is also fascinating is when they learn that the reference of Jesus to a "jot or tittle" is about the practice of Scribes copying the Scrolls of the Tanakh to continue and preserve them and it is this practice that the church fathers patterned their copying of MSS after.
---Mark_Eaton on 7/19/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Travel Packages


\\The secret that most know but no one talks about is that there is not a single original writing from any apostle, prophet, or tablet of stone exists today. \\

What's so secret about it? I hear about it all the time, especially on here.

What is amazing is not that the surviving ancient MSS do not differ--they do--but that they are so much in agreement.

This issue was raised in St. Augustine's time, who said that different MSS and translations comment upon each other.

Jerry: If you don't have an original Greek or Hebrew MSS, how do you know that what you call "my Bible" is accurate?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 7/18/17


michael_e:

Google bible manuscripts and you should be able to find all you want to know about existing manuscripts.

The manuscripts have been copied many times, but despite this, and the slight differences between copies, the differences are surprisingly few. If one finds (say) a copy of a manuscript of the Gospel of John, it will be very close to identical to other existing manuscripts of the Gospel of John. As far as the Old Testament scriptures go, the Jews had very strict protocols for copying scripture. They counted the number of copies of every letter on every page, and double-checked that count on each copy. Copies in which even a single letter did not add up were destroyed as unreliable.
---StrongAxe on 7/18/17


Jerry6593:

You wrote: Sometimes overthinking a plain "thus saith the Lord" can lead to erroneous conclusions, as is the case with most higher criticism.

My position is not that "Spirit is feminine in Hebrew. Therefore, the Holy Spirit is a woman". Rather, it is that "Spirit is feminine in Hebrew. Therefore, absence any other definitive evidence, it is premature to say that the Holy Spirit is a man". I.e. that it is wrong for OTHERS to overthink it.

This is the same as my argument about the day length in Genesis 1 - I'm not saying it definitely isn't 24 hours, merely that the Bible does not dogmatically assert that it is.
---StrongAxe on 7/18/17


Apparently, there are some here that have "copies" of the originals, that are "fairly" accurate. Could you share these "copies"?
The secret that most know but no one talks about is that there is not a single original writing from any apostle, prophet, or tablet of stone exists today. How many times have the "copies been copied?
---michael_e on 7/18/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Credit Repair


Sam: When did I call you a snowflake? I was commenting on Cluny's "(Don't let the pretty boys on bicycles fool you.)" comment (which I find humorous). Do you think he was referring to you? I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings, but maybe you should reconsider your leftist leanings, as they are in conflict with our Biblical beliefs.



ax: Sometimes overthinking a plain "thus saith the Lord" can lead to erroneous conclusions, as is the case with most higher criticism.


---Jerry6593 on 7/18/17


Few things have caused more damage in churches than when pastors say things like:
---michael_e on 7/17/17

I must disagree.

The most damage has been caused by people not searching the Scriptures for themselves.

When I study the Scriptures, their truth form a protective screen around my brain that error cannot penetrate. No matter how nicely wrapped the error is, it hits the truth screen and it stops dead.

People without this screen can easily be influenced and persuaded by false teachers of all kinds.

Saying we have no definitive manuscripts is the start of the same dangerous path that led Bart Erhman into error.
---Mark_Eaton on 7/18/17


michael_e:

While we no longer have original manuscripts, we DO have copies that are fairly close. When we rely on those copies in the original languages, it's true we rely on the faithfulness of those copies, and our understanding of the languages involved.

However, when we rely on modern translations (like KJV - a 400 year old translation of documents thousands of years older), we rely on those PLUS the biases of the translators.

When you translate from one language to another, there is always some information loss. For example, since English is a language almost without gender (i.e. it now exists only on 3rd person singular pronouns and nowhere else), most gender information from original sources is lost.
---StrongAxe on 7/17/17


Jerry I am far from a snowflake. Born in 1952 in a poor neighborhood. In the Southeast side of Houston, Texas. I know what being hit and hitting others feels like.

But I by the Grace of GOD became a Christian. Jesus gave the Commandment to love everyone. You don't seem to do that. As a Seventh day Adventist I am to love and care for all people. Especially the poor.

You in your words don't convey love or caring.

Let us look to Jesus the author and finisher of our faith. Read the SOP.

GOD is love.
---Samuelbb7 on 7/17/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Products


Few things have caused more damage in churches than when pastors say things like:
In the originals, the word here really means_____
The Greek word for this is______
A better rending of the originals would be_____
Churchgoers have heard these sayings for so long they have now become calloused to it! This is a real problem.

There are no originals, to compare your Bible to.
When the pastor says, in the originals, What he said was misleading.
---michael_e on 7/17/17


Jerry6593:

You wrote: First of all, there is NO extant original Greek and Hebrew text.

No, but there are many copies that are fairly reliable.

I am saying however that the Textus Receptus of the KJV is MUCH MORE RELIABLE than the Sinaiticus, Vaticanus or Latin Vulgate source of the more modern translations. I thought you knew that.

So, tell us, what gender is "Holy Spirit" in the Textus Receptus?
---StrongAxe on 7/16/17


Cluny: "Jerry, are you saying that your English translation of the Bible is more authoritative than the original Greek and Hebrew texts?"

First of all, there is NO extant original Greek and Hebrew text. I am saying however that the Textus Receptus of the KJV is MUCH MORE RELIABLE than the Sinaiticus, Vaticanus or Latin Vulgate source of the more modern translations. I thought you knew that.


---Jerry6593 on 7/16/17


\\My Bible says:

Joh 16:13 Howbeit when HE, the Spirit of truth, is come, HE will guide you into all truth: for HE shall not speak of HIMSELF, but whatsoever HE shall hear, that shall HE speak: and HE will shew you things to come.

Seems pretty clear to me.

(Don't let the feminist snowflakes fool you.)\\

Jerry, are you saying that your English translation of the Bible is more authoritative than the original Greek and Hebrew texts?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 7/14/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Divorce


Cluny:

You wrote: Then why in Greek is "Agio Pnevmati" neuter?

Because different languages use different genders for the same word. Spirit is feminine in Hebrew, neuter in Greek. In German, "The table [she] is flat. The girl [it] is beautiful." because of grammatical rules.


Jerry6593:

Joh 16:13 Howbeit when HE, the Spirit of truth, is come...

Spirit is neuter in Greek. English translators changed it to masculine, but that is the bias of the translators, NOT of the original scripture. Original beats translation every time. Do you ever read the originals when questions of translation arise?
---StrongAxe on 7/14/17


Seems pretty clear to me.
---Jerry6593 on 7/14/17

why in Greek is "Agio Pnevmati" neuter?
---Cluny on 7/13/17

First, Jerry. As Cluny can attest, the word "He" in John 16:13 denoting the Holy Spirit is not in the Greek text. A form of the pronoun "ekeinos" is included which refers to the noun "pneuma" which Cluny rightly says is neuter. Therefore, the pronoun could rightly be rendered "he" or "she".

Second, Cluny, the Greek language renders the HS as neuter. The Syriac versions render the HS as feminine. "Ruach" in Hebrew is feminine, and the HS in Latin, is definitely masculine. I believe our God is neither masculine or feminine but contains both.
---Mark_Eaton on 7/14/17


My Bible says:

Joh 16:13 Howbeit when HE, the Spirit of truth, is come, HE will guide you into all truth: for HE shall not speak of HIMSELF, but whatsoever HE shall hear, that shall HE speak: and HE will shew you things to come.

Seems pretty clear to me.

(Don't let the feminist snowflakes fool you.)



---Jerry6593 on 7/14/17


\\Ruach Ha Kodesh is the third person in the trinity and the Holy Spirit is feminine. \\

Then why in Greek is "Agio Pnevmati" neuter?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 7/13/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Marriage


In Hebrew, ruach (wind or spirit) is ALWAYS feminine. ---StrongAxe on 7/11/17

Thank you for stating this.

We, the Body of Christ, have lost track of who our God is.

If God created them "male and female" and we were created in God's image, there MUST be femininity in our God. Why are we so shocked to see or admit it?

Femininity is in our God and His word confirms it.

Ruach Ha Kodesh is the third person in the trinity and the Holy Spirit is feminine.

The Holy Spirit is the creative force in our God. She is the creative force behind all music, all art, all beauty, every good thing that we think man has created, Our God is the originator.
---Mark_Eaton on 7/12/17


john9346:

The Word of God no where states that the Blesses Holy Spirit is a female

In Hebrew, ruach (wind or spirit) is ALWAYS feminine. Look at ANY OT verse.
E.g. Genesis 1:2 "... and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."
Hebrew: "veruach (and [the] spirit of) elohim (God) marhefet (SHE moved) al-pnei (before, lit. '
to [the] face of') hamayim (the waters)".

the Lord God doesn't have a womb

God is frequently depicted as "giving birth". Males beget. Females give birth, and only with a womb.

Sir, with the utmost respect to you, do you really read the Word of God??

Yes, I do. Have YOU ever read it in the ORIGINAL languages?
---StrongAxe on 7/11/17


\\The Word of God no where states that the Blesses Holy Spirit is a female how blasphemous\\

Actually, in Greek, Holy Spirit/Ghose is NEUTER.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 7/11/17


strongaxe:

Sir, If you read the verses, the verses are not, "Direct." is identifying God, its describeing an action.

For example, if you and I were playing football and I said to you, "You throw like a girl." am I saying your a woman of course not. I am saying the act or action of you throwing is an act of a girl throwing a football but i'm not at all saying your a woman, but the action is.

The Word of God no where states that the Blesses Holy Spirit is a female how blasphemous... And the Lord God doesn't have a womb...

Sir, with the utmost respect to you, do you really read the Word of God??
---john9346 on 7/10/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Consolidation


john9346:

Many languages (such as Hebrew and French) totally lack a neuter gender, and even objects have a gender. In all such languages that I know of (even English), the accepted practice is that when referring to a group of people of mixed gender or a group or individual of unknown gender, the masculine is always used. Thus, "she" is always feminine, but "he" can be either (e.g. "The driver of a vehicle must fasten his seatbelt").

God is sometimes referred to in a feminine context (Mt 23:37, Lk 13:34). The Holy Spirit has feminine gender. God has a womb and gives birth.

God says "I am not a man, that I should lie" but never says "I am not a woman" (per blog topic).
---StrongAxe on 7/10/17


All of the names of God, Yahweh or Jehovah, Adonai, Elohim, Yehoshua, Iesous, Kurios, and theh'-os are masculine.

These are, "Direct." names of God...
---john9346 on 7/9/17


faithforfaith states, ""NEITHER MALE NOR FEMALE" means NO GENDER."

Gal 3:28 is speaking of men and women having equality in salvation and not denying the uniqueness of men and women. Also this is not addressing whether God is male.

faithforfaith states, "...SPIRITS have no gender.""

Not according to the Word of God, see, Num 23:19, Eze 1:26, and Col 2:9, and Jn 14:9.

Its fallacious to assert that spirits cant be male nor female.

Isa 62 is to Israel see vs 1.

Rev 2 and 3 doesn't address whehter God is a man or not its addressing the problems of those churches and the promises to those who persever...

Isa 62:2 is to Israel see vs 1.
---john9346 on 7/8/17


"NEITHER MALE NOR FEMALE" means NO GENDER.

...SPIRITS have no gender.

There are a lot of REAL truths to be discovered about scripture, but if you can't accept this without arguing, you will never know the "NEW NAME" or any other truth (your choice).


Isa 62:2 and you shall be called by a new name


Rev 2:17 with a new name

Rev 3:12 and my own new name.
---faithforfaith on 7/8/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Refinancing


Just because God is an Eternal Spiritual Being it is an error to say he has no, "Gender." since the Word of God from Gen-Rev is clear when depicting God as male.

The Word of God when directly describing God identifies him as male never female.

When feminine terminology is used it is in making a comparison, but personal direct descriptions of Yahweh is male.
---john9346 on 7/7/17


WE HUMAN BEINGS with physical bodies think and speak in terms of GENDER, but "spirit" has no gender (as in Galatians 3:28, "neither male nor female").

Since God is SPIRIT, He has no gender.

It's simply that God created MANKIND (humanity) and He specifies that He created THEM both male and female.

The traditional teachings taught in Sunday school and by scholars have not educated us properly about scripture.
---faithforfaith on 7/7/17


Please understand It's impossible to adeequately treat a matter upon which books have been written in the 50 words allowed to make an initial post here.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 7/6/17


Copyright© 2017 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.