Well how many fathers do you know who have no gender?i believe in tranquility said:^^^ my post was to squirt not nutshell
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Well how many fathers do you know who have no gender?i believe in tranquility said:^^^ my post was to squirt not nutshell
Another goofball trying to teach us a language he doesn't understand. The first sentence in Hebrew already has a verb conjugated in the masculine and a personal name that is masculine. To add the pronoun "he" would render the syntax a joke. The "he" is there for the sentences that refer to the previous subject, but don't use the subjects name. You have to put in a pronoun in order to clarify who the subject is. The Hebrew word for "he" isn't used because, in Hebrew, the verb conjugation already clarifies it. It is pure idiocy to think a totally literal translation will reveal something different than a translation that conveys the full meaning of the Hebrew.i believe in tranquility said:NOW WHEN TRANSLATING THIS TEXT INTO ENGLISH, THE ONLY WAY TO MAKE THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION TO MAKE GRAMMATICAL SENSE IS TO REPLACE THAT (3rd person masculine singular) WITH "he". NOTE: the WORD "HE" in Hebrew is:
הוּ
English would be like so: Hu
THIS WORD IS NOT In THIS PASSAGE OF THE BIBLE, THEREFORE we can assert that when we read Genisis 1:27- So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.
Take out the he/his and you get no gender. THAT IS WHY I SAY THAT GOD HAS NO GENDER.
Perhaps it would be in your best interest if you took a year off of this site, went to Israel or a college, studied Hebrew, and finally come back before you your pitiful attempt to explain why "who" isn't their in the text. As I stated on page 5, it is either conjugated either M or F, there is no Non-gender. However, if you want to believe in idiocy, i believe in tranquility, then more power to you, although the tooth fairy is just as believable as your knowledge of Hebrew...i believe in tranquility said:ok sry bout taking a couple days...stuff happens
Didn't you read my earlier post? Hu is on first!i believe in tranquility said:NOW WHEN TRANSLATING THIS TEXT INTO ENGLISH, THE ONLY WAY TO MAKE THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION TO MAKE GRAMMATICAL SENSE IS TO REPLACE THAT (3rd person masculine singular) WITH "he". NOTE: the WORD "HE" in Hebrew is:
הוּ
English would be like so: Hu
You are correct in saying that he(who) is not on first(rishon) base, but you fail to explain the verb conjugations...i believe in tranquility said:THIS WORD IS NOT In THIS PASSAGE OF THE BIBLE, THEREFORE we can assert that when we read Genisis 1:27- So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.
Woul dyou like a list of reasons why I think my IQ dropped from reading this post of yours? or will this do?i believe in tranquility said:Take out the he/his and you get no gender. THAT IS WHY I SAY THAT GOD HAS NO GENDER.
No problemo.i believe in tranquility said:ok sry bout taking a couple days...stuff happens
Dan, first off there is no reason to mock. I agree with you, but what I am saying is that he is added by English translators. If you are in disagreement with me, then please do not lash out, but speak with a peaceful heart and mind.Another goofball trying to teach us a language he doesn't understand. The first sentence in Hebrew already has a verb conjugated in the masculine and a personal name that is masculine. To add the pronoun "he" would render the syntax a joke. The "he" is there for the sentences that refer to the previous subject, but don't use the subjects name. You have to put in a pronoun in order to clarify who the subject is. The Hebrew word for "he" isn't used because, in Hebrew, the verb conjugation already clarifies it. It is pure idiocy to think a totally literal translation will reveal something different than a translation that conveys the full meaning of the Hebrew.
Duet, again, there is no reason to mock me. I wasnt "attempting" to explain why "who" isnt in the Hebrew text... IM SAYING THAT THE WORD IS NOT THERE. I HAVE NO USE FOR EXPLAINING WHY, BECAUSE IT IS NOT THERE. Again I agree with you that every word is either M of F (i know that), so to give an example: the word for hand in hebrew is F, so we can assume that God's hand is female. Do you see what i'm asserting? Im trying to understand these text and talk with fellow human beings about them, not be ranted on. The whole reason of me doing this is because I believe that God is Male NOR Female, one because the Jews said that God is indescribale to the human mind, two because I dont think that God is Male AND Female, and because I dont beilve that God is MALE OR FEMALE. When God becomes associated with gender, a clash appears and the opposite group of people feel like that are under control.Perhaps it would be in your best interest if you took a year off of this site, went to Israel or a college, studied Hebrew, and finally come back before you your pitiful attempt to explain why "who" isn't their in the text. As I stated on page 5, it is either conjugated either M or F, there is no Non-gender. However, if you want to believe in idiocy, i believe in tranquility, then more power to you, although the tooth fairy is just as believable as your knowledge of Hebrew...
I'm not a dude, dude.i believe in tranquility said:thats the whole point dude
I think God is a Father for several reasons. First of all, the scriptures tell us that He is the "Father of Spirits." Secondly, Jesus referred to Him both as His Father and as our Father constantly....what makes you think God is a father. The "BEGINNING" is where the whole concept starts. That kind of why I used Genesis 1
Dan and I would both agree that HaShem has no gender, but the reasons you give to support your claim are idiotic and untrue.i believe in tranquility said:yes i agree, but remeber that just because the masculility of the word doesnt mean that the word itself is masculine. Like I said before, if you want to say that God is male, then you have to assert that God's hand is female, because the word for hand in hebrew is feminine. thats all im saying...
Dan wouldn't.Deut 13:1 said:Dan and I would both agree that HaShem has no gender, but the reasons you give to support your claim are idiotic and untrue.
I don't know anything about God's "wife." I do know, though, that Mary was Jesus' mother and that God was Jesus' father. I also know that mothers are female and that fathers are male. Why would Jesus have constantly -- I mean over and over and over again -- called God "Father" if He wasn't His Father. He could have just called Him "God" and been entirely accurate. Why did He refer to His Father by the pronouns "He" and "Him" instead of "It." "It" is not such a horrible word. If God has no gender, why didn't Jesus use that word instead? I'm only going by what the Bible says; what are you going by?i believe in tranquility said:squirt: sorry about the "dude", but since you insint that God is male, Who is God's wife, since life is only possible with the joining of a male and female...
EXACTLY^^^I don't know anything about God's "wife." I do know, though, that Mary was Jesus' mother and that God was Jesus' father. I also know that mothers are female and that fathers are male. Why would Jesus have constantly -- I mean over and over and over again -- called God "Father" if He wasn't His Father. He could have just called Him "God" and been entirely accurate. Why did He refer to His Father by the pronouns "He" and "Him" instead of "It." "It" is not such a horrible word. If God has no gender, why didn't Jesus use that word instead? I'm only going by what the Bible says; what are you going by?
Yes, but (as I already pointed out) that reasoning is flawed, because christ called God our fathers as well.i believe in tranquility said:EXACTLY^^^
God is JESUS's FATHER, BUT you me and every other human here ALREADY HAVE OUR OWN FATHERS. For me to call "God" my father would be incorrect, for me to call "God" my teacher, my giude, my loving, caring supporter would be more accurate.