No speculation to it.
For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven.
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
-
Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
No speculation to it.
For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven.
Atonement
Member
Greetings to you in the love of Jesus
How does this agree with anything but one's position on this subject? I'm having a hard time understanding. I've read all your post(s) on this thread, and all the Scriptures you have cited so no need to do all that again, but I'm just asking how does what you say, not speculate anything about the role of God? It's all speculation to us because we have no doctrinal proof. Again I believe it's one's belief and how one will interpret Scriptures. I'm not saying you are right or am I saying that you are wrong, but one can not say there is no speculation by citing a verse and basically saying - by this verse here we see . . . In God's role, as male/female/neutral .. That is speculation
Claudya
Member
Atonement, I think JLB's last post was refering only to angels that are according to Matthew 22:30 don't get married. And whithout marriage (and procreation) what need would there be for a gender? Thus some people interpret that verse to be a proof of gender neutral angels. If you interpret Mt 22:30 in that way there would be no further speculation about the angles' gender.
But basically most Bible interpretation beyond the very basics involves some kind of speculation and assumption.
Sometimes I think God must be so annoyed with us, all the speculating and hassling about silly unimportant details like the gender of angels, as if we were Pharisees; all while neglecting our real tasks as disciples.
But basically most Bible interpretation beyond the very basics involves some kind of speculation and assumption.
Sometimes I think God must be so annoyed with us, all the speculating and hassling about silly unimportant details like the gender of angels, as if we were Pharisees; all while neglecting our real tasks as disciples.
Atonement
Member
Greetings to you Claudya in the love of Jesus
You are right Claudya, he is probably referring to angels..
Last edited by a moderator:
Seems to me that something other than "angels" must be under discussion when Jesus corrected the Doctrine. What or Who could He [Jesus] have meant when he says, 'they' are 'like' angels [in that fashion]. It must be something other than angels themselves or the entire language and meaning of words seems to fall away.
"When possible, strive to accept the face value of words," is what my Pappy used to say.
There is everything we need to know in the scriptures that relates to this matter.
It is up to us to "see" them.
Let's begin at the beginning.
26 Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth."
Here we see it is Us who created in Our Image.
The first truth is The Godhead created in Their Image.
The Godhead said let them have dominion...
The Us creates the them.
27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.
The Godhead created man in their Image and in Their likeness.
The Godhead created male and female in Their Image and in Their likeness.
Conclusion: Somewhere within the Godhead there is a female, if both male and female are created in the Image and likeness of the Godhead.
Paul said -
"For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh."
This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
Who is the Father and Mother that Christ leaves to be joined to His wife.
Who is the Father and Mother that Adam leaves to be joined to his wife.
They are the same Father and Mother.
JLB
Atonement
Member
Greetings to you tonight in the love of Jesus JLB
I see what you're writing, and notice the Scriptures you are citing.
Post #26
Post #49
Post #51
Post #54
and finally Post #67
You have put much emphasization on your position here by reciting the same Scriptures; but what does this show us though? I guess my question is, are you basing your position on this? And what exactly is your position? Whatever it may be, I would have to say that you are basing it on the cited above because not once, not twice, not three times, but rather five times you have cited the same. Am I wrong for suggesting this at this point? Let us first agree that God created the man first? You agree? Afterwards God then saw that he (Adam) was alone and therefore He created a woman to be with man, but why not create them both at the same time as He did with the animal kingdom and commanded them to be fruitful and multiply? Genesis 1:22.. Or why not create the female first, whoa just a thought, but that's an insubstantial point if I say so myself. However, God created the laws of nature - The animal kingdom have both male/female, in the plant kingdom, one produces seeds and one produces buds etc. It's in God nature to have a balance in nature. If it were all male how would the earth populate itself and vise versa. These are attributes of God, that's all I see in the point you have been trying to make - attributes, but I'm not finding where it's based on gender or no gender for that matter? In no way do I see with these cited verses that clarify the gender of God or a "mother" in the Trinity. Image does not refer to gender here, in fact when we look this word up in it's use in the original Hebrew we find that 'image is Strongs #6754 actually refers to: illusion, resemblance, figure, representative. Meaning we are not a part of the animal kingdom nor the plant kingdom nor in their image, but rather in God's resemblance. And this was the point God was making that you have so kindly been pointing out. This is all I see, I don't see anything but God pointing out a fact.
My daughter is a image of me does that make her a male or masculine? Certainly not, she's but an image of her father as we are, just a resemblance. People say I look more like my mother then my father, does that mean I'm feminine? Certainly not, but emphasizing about this "image" is making an inconsequential point. At least to me, I can't speak for everyone.
Only in speculation to me, but this would be like saying that God is evil because God created Satan and God knew that sin would abound and because knowing this, God is evil for allowing it to happen.. Do you believe God is evil? I don't, it's just an obscured ideology because of a creation by God through nature (flesh) in a fallen world.
Was it you that also brought up angels? Well in any case
The Nephilim - Genesis 6:4 "There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bore children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown."
I don't see them coming down as women to take the sons of men? Why would these sons of God come down as men? Who are these sons of God?
The ‘sons of God’ of verses 2 and 4 are fallen angels. These angels married women of the human race (either Cainites or Sethites) and the resulting offspring were the Nephilim. The Nephilim were giants with physical superiority and therefore established themselves as men of renown for their physical prowess and military might. This race of half human creatures was wiped out by the flood, along with mankind in general, who were sinners in their own right (verse 6:11,12).
But again, this only implies if you believe in the Nephilim and who the sons of God were. Some have a Despot Interpretation - however, since angels have been brought up, I thought it would be a good discussion for others to speak on in reference to the evidence that has been cited on this thread thus far.
As I said, it's all speculation until we enter our Glory in Heaven..
God Bless you
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, I am glad someone decided to actually discuss what the scripture says.
Now maybe we can go on and discuss the other scriptures that point to the topic of this thread.
Wow, did you create her from nothing. No you reproduced. You begat her.
Begat does not mean create does it. Otherwise Jesus would be considered created, and we know His is not created, He is begotten.
Do you have a point you are trying to make. I would like to hear what you have to say, however it would be nice if you would use some scripture to validate whatever point you are trying to make.
Maybe you like to comment on this that I quoted earlier.
Would you be willing to answer the question I posted.
Paul said -
"For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh."
This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
Who is the Father and Mother that Christ leaves to be joined to His wife.
Who is the Father and Mother that Adam leaves to be joined to his wife.
Are they the same Father and Mother?
Thanks for your response.
JLB
Atonement
Member
It sounds obscured huh? But used very elegantly here, I'm using the same form of "image" that God used in the Genesis passage you have kept citing, you are the one using "image" in your post over and over again as previously stated. But when put in perspective; it looks a bit different, however the word is used perfectly in the same manner. You now want to play on the word "create" vs begat.. Like I've said it's one's interpretation of Scripture and belief.
Not really, I just had some questions that you obviously didn't or couldn't or wouldn't answer.. No biggy
Hope you have a blessed evening
Last edited by a moderator:
Brother, you did not create your daughter in your image and in your likeness.
If you want to be reasonable and use scripture, then we have a basis for a good biblical discussion.
Again, here is what the scripture says -
So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him;male and female He created them.
Based on this scripture, as well as other scriptures, I am inclined to believe that there is a female within the Godhead.
If you don't, then share why you don't believe this, and give the scripture for your belief.
Sure, ask away. If you don't want to comment on what I have written, that's okay.
If you would prefer to ask me some questions then ask, I will try to answer using the scriptures.
Ask your wife my question and see what she says.
Ask her if she believes that Eve was created in the image and likeness of God.
Thanks JLB
Deborah13
Member
Your probably quite right about that. I like your new avatar I just wish the little white pawn had a big White King standing beside him/her. But then God is spirit.
I don't try and make a doctrine out the many scriptures that are written about this subject.
I rarely discuss them with anyone, as it seems to be so controversial.
However, when i come across a thread about this subject, I do share the scriptures that are related to this subject.
You have a blessed week brother.
Remember, Spirit gives birth to spirit,
and, Wisdom is known by her children.
JLB
My thought is there is one way to say this. God is all in all.
The problem that I have with the whole "female side of God," doesn't stem from an insistence that man is superior. Adam's just first is all. There is no "better" or "worse" to first. Especially when two walk hand-in-hand. The other problem is that we just don't know and I'm okay with that admission. In fact, I wouldn't have it any other way. Too often our thinking is locked into the ol' black-n-white dichotomy. The limits found within binary thinking. I blame Rush Limbaugh and his ilk, entertainers who profit by attempting to train all into polarized thinking. What? You disagree? Here, then! Let me dig my trench deeper and further establish the blinders that have been placed in front of me... (sorry, bad Sparrow going off track like that).
Being male, I do appreciate the role that is typically defined within my culture regarding the loving elements of manhood. Provider. Protector. Staunch defender. Yes, even Teacher is seen by me as male but this concept is a mixed one, being that of Teacher/Guardian.
But that's just me. The only thing that I would object to, is something that I've not heard here: the concept that we shall grow into a role of "husband" to our Lord. This will never be. Sorry, but Jesus is first begotten Son of many and that is that. "For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers." English Standard Version (©2001)
So I don't think men need to get their pants all tied up in a knot about such things, but rather would do well to hear what the Lord has said to us specifically. You know that one, "Husbands..." The letters and directives that are given directly to an entire class of people must be understood by those to whom they were given. The rest? Yes, as the Lord reveals and yes, as the Saints of God are given revelation by the Holy Spirit in truth and also as He confirms, then also yes.
Cordially,
Sparrow
There is a concept that is not found in Scripture but is very ancient. It is the thought that we are not made "whole" and that there is a "perfect match" in heaven for us? Something along those lines. That somehow the Lord took what was to be one soul and cut it into half and that we are to go about looking for a soul-mate. A 'b'sheirt' if you will. It is term used by match-makers. The word is pronounced as 'besheirt', and it also means the 'intended', one chosen by God for the purpose of marriage. It is a seductive thought. I don't follow it.
Yahoo Answers provides some light: "Both "nefesh te'oma" [נפש תאומה- lit. twin soul] and "chaver nefesh" [חבר נפש- lit. soul mate]/ "yedid nefesh" [ידיד נפש- lit. soul mate] are possible equivalents to the English term "soulmate". The first option is somewhat stronger than the latter. In Hebrew you may have many "chavrey/ yedidey nefesh" (lit. soul mates), but only one "nefesh te'oma". (Source: How to translate "soulmate" into Hebrew?)
I love the Scripture that is found written through John, the Beloved. He's the one who says things like, "little children, be not confused..." and I need that type of thing so often. The Word that came through Him regarding the Revelation of Jesus that was given is simple:
The Spirit and the Bride say, “Come.” And let the one who hears say, “Come.” And let the one who is thirsty come; let the one who desires take the water of life without price.
There is nothing in me but that big hallelujah which comes as a response to this.
G
Guest
Guest
I always thought when they mention church in the gospels, their talking about the body of Christ - male and female born again christians. The bridegroom is Jesus and the church/male and female is the bride. the body.
G
Guest
Guest
Show me the scripture.