Is the holy spirit a female?

[Audie]

No reason to believe the great flood didn't happen. World is full of evidence for it. (Modern continents, vast sediment formations, marine fossils on high mountains, oil, gas, coal fields and stories in almost all cultures around the world).

I think Bible explains well what it means. If it doesn't mean something literally, it is shown in the text.

Honestly, people in America!

 

[Shaul]

Hmm. Is the Ruach just grammatical feminine or in physical/biological meaning as well?

It is grammatically feminine. It is an anthropomorphism.

 

[Shaul]

Really? Then why is the bat a "bird"?



Nope. They are legs. Definitely not arms. Insects do not have arms. Or hands. You have been watching to many kiddie cartooons.



So God could not tell the difference between an asteroid and a star? Wow! And people think that I insult God at times.

A bat isn’t a bird. You are mistranslating the text. The text talks about winged creatures. Both bats and birds have wings even though they are of different types.

Torah never says that insects have only four legs. It says locusts can be identified as having four regular legs, four wings and two leaping legs. Hebrew has a special word for the leaping legs.

It is apparent you got this from some source of supposed “flaws” of the Bible. They aren’t flaws and have simple explanations.

 

[firedragon]

It is grammatically feminine. It is an anthropomorphism.

Okay. Thanks for the information. So your contention is the exact opposite of what Rival said. I don't know Hebrew so that's why I asked.

But your second statement came as a surprise to me. It's the first time I have heard a Jew tell me it's anthropomorphism.

 

[Truth in love]

Is the holy spirit a female? Is the real name of the holy spirit - Sophia?

Sophia = is the greek word of wisdom

I've seen various speculation on this for years.

From a Christian Perspective the most definitive bit we have int he Bible is the Gods (plural in Hebrew) making man and women in their image.

 

[Subduction Zone]

A bat isn’t a bird. You are mistranslating the text. The text talks about winged creatures. Both bats and birds have wings even though they are of different types.

Torah never says that insects have only four legs. It says locusts can be identified as having four regular legs, four wings and two leaping legs. Hebrew has a special word for the leaping legs.

It is apparent you got this from some source of supposed “flaws” of the Bible. They aren’t flaws and have simple explanations.

No, this is merely apologetics that you are quoting. Those were written by people willing to lie for the Bible. What makes the back two legs of a beetle different from a grasshoppers? The "leaping" claim is a difference without a distinction.

 

[soulsurvivor]

Is the holy spirit a female? Is the real name of the holy spirit - Sophia?

Sophia = is the greek word of wisdom

The Holy Spirit has no gender - it is neither male nor female. However, when the Holy Spirit enters matter, it becomes the Mother.

 

[Ashoka]

If modern people invent new wrong definition for a bird, it does not make the old wrong.



It is true, most insects are four legged, the another two are arms that modern "scientist" wrongly call legs.



It can mean for example a shooting star, meteorites falling from sky. It is also possible that modern idea of stars is very wrong. So no, you failed miserably, sorry, but thanks for trying.

Did you pull anything from the stretch you just made?

1. Bats are mammals. Not birds. The Bible is wrong.
2. Insects do not have hands. They have six legs. The Bible is wrong.
3. There's no such thing as a shooting stars. They don't fall. The Bible is wrong.

How exactly did I fail, again?

 

[danieldemol]

Is the holy spirit a female? Is the real name of the holy spirit - Sophia?

Sophia = is the greek word of wisdom

Does it have a vagina?

Or is this like asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin with no demonstrable answer?

In my opinion.

 

[PruePhillip]

Is the holy spirit a female? Is the real name of the holy spirit - Sophia?

Sophia = is the greek word of wisdom

Next you're going to be asking does the holy spirit have black skin or belongs to some oppressed minority.
Quit the rubbish.

 

[PruePhillip]

Did you pull anything from the stretch you just made?

1. Bats are mammals. Not birds. The Bible is wrong.
2. Insects do not have hands. They have six legs. The Bible is wrong.
3. There's no such thing as a shooting stars. They don't fall. The Bible is wrong.

How exactly did I fail, again?

The bible is not a science book. The bible does not tell us how the heavens go but rather, how to go to heaven - as Galileo put it.
Neither is the bible a history book, but it does give us accurate stories within stories. Thus the bible never mentioned multiple Jewish exoduses from Egypt, or the fact that all over the Middle East whole nations were on the move. Same with Shiloh, we have the story of the Ark taken, but the bible ignores the Phillistine destruction of the tabernacle at Shiloh - recently found.
But the first of the two accounts of creation in Genesis 1 is fairly accurate in terms of the sequence of events.

 

[1213]

Nope. You are wrong in all of your claims. Do you want to have a discussion?

I have nothing against it. But I don't think it is useful, when you can't give any good reason to believe what you say.

 

[1213]

Really? Then why is the bat a "bird"?

I don't know why in ancient era it was called a bird, maybe because it has wings and it flies.

Nope. They are legs. Definitely not arms. Insects do not have arms. Or hands. You have been watching to many kiddie cartooons.

Really? It seems to me that only reason for you to think so is that then Bible could look wrong.

So God could not tell the difference between an asteroid and a star? Wow! And people think that I insult God at times.

Again, if modern people have a different definition for some word, it doesn't make the old wrong.

 

[1213]

...
How exactly did I fail, again?

By using wrong definitions. Everything can be made to look wrong by defining words in a new way. It is ridiculous and stupid to give new meanings for old words and then claim the old is wrong.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I have nothing against it. But I don't think it is useful, when you can't give any good reason to believe what you say.

Of course I can support my claims. I am sure that I have done so with you before on this topic. If you want to discuss it I can explain how we know that there was no flood of Noah.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't know why in ancient era it was called a bird, maybe because it has wings and it flies.

Then most insects would be birds too.

Really? It seems to me that only reason for you to think so is that then Bible could look wrong.

No, that is pure paranoia on your part. It is only one small example of the Bible being wrong. Like it or not they are legs.

Again, if modern people have a different definition for some word, it doesn't make the old wrong.

Correct, one is not necessarily wrong, but in this case since insects do obviously have six legs then the Bible is wrong. This is also an honesty test for Christians. When the Bible is obviously wrong can they admit it? Or is their faith so weak that they are afraid that if they admit to one error that they know that they could not stop.

There are still many Christians that do not think that God is a liar. They take the Old Testament for what it is and now what fundamentalists try to make it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

By using wrong definitions. Everything can be made to look wrong by defining words in a new way. It is ridiculous and stupid to give new meanings for old words and then claim the old is wrong.

And that is now what is being done.

 

[Ashoka]

By using wrong definitions. Everything can be made to look wrong by defining words in a new way. It is ridiculous and stupid to give new meanings for old words and then claim the old is wrong.

...

Do you know what a mammal is?

 

[Shaul]

No, this is merely apologetics that you are quoting. Those were written by people willing to lie for the Bible. What makes the back two legs of a beetle different from a grasshoppers? The "leaping" claim is a difference without a distinction.

Tripe. The TaNaKh was written in Hebrew and we Jews know what it says. The back legs of certain insects such as locusts have a jointed hind leg designed for jumping which have a special name in Hebrew וקרצולים. Some other insects, including some beetles, have similar hind legs. Which is why the Scriptures include multiple characteristics that the kosher insects must have. An insect is only kosher that has all of the characteristics. You are arguing from ignorance. The Jews have had these Scriptures for thousands of years and understand them quite well. They would have discovered if there was an inconsistency or error long before you came around to point it out.

 

[Shaul]

Okay. Thanks for the information. So your contention is the exact opposite of what Rival said. I don't know Hebrew so that's why I asked.

But your second statement came as a surprise to me. It's the first time I have heard a Jew tell me it's anthropomorphism.

It is like saying the Almighty has an arm or a face. It is figurative. Likewise a spirit is feminine. Not to be sexist, but feminine is usually associated with nurturing. Likewise a spirit nurtures its child. Of course the Hebrew word for spirit is an overloaded term and also means breath.