|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Feb 20, 2017 16:54:20 GMT
I thought God was referred to as a he in the bible. This is true, although a couple of times (in Genesis) God speaks of Himself in the plural. So perhaps it is two or three men? lol How does one speak to himself in the plural?
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Feb 20, 2017 17:12:02 GMT
If any monotheistic God exists I'd find it very strange if God was gendered. We know the polytheistic ones are gendered and apparently quite horny.
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Feb 20, 2017 19:38:28 GMT
Hermaphrodite
|
|
|
Post by awhina on Feb 21, 2017 5:43:37 GMT
Are you saying that spermatozoa are not 'sex cells'? NO clown, I am saying the opposite. :sigh:
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 21, 2017 11:55:37 GMT
Charming as ever I see. But, as ever, I forgive you.
Well then, we both agree. But this does not effect my original observation.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 21, 2017 11:59:38 GMT
This is true, although a couple of times (in Genesis) God speaks of Himself in the plural. So perhaps it is two or three men? lol How does one speak to himself in the plural? Like this:
Genesis 1:26 : “Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.’” Genesis 3:22 “And the LORD God said, ‘The man has now become like one of us.’”
It is also interesting to note that Elohim, one of the primary titles of God in the Old Testament (occurring over 2,500 times), is in the plural form.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Feb 22, 2017 2:55:07 GMT
How does one speak to himself in the plural? Like this:
Genesis 1:26 : “Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.’” Genesis 3:22 “And the LORD God said, ‘The man has now become like one of us.’”
It is also interesting to note that Elohim, one of the primary titles of God in the Old Testament (occurring over 2,500 times), is in the plural form.
So if I said that statement you would think I was talking to myself in plural? Language Arts has failed me.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 22, 2017 11:00:10 GMT
Like this:
Genesis 1:26 : “Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.’” Genesis 3:22 “And the LORD God said, ‘The man has now become like one of us.’”
It is also interesting to note that Elohim, one of the primary titles of God in the Old Testament (occurring over 2,500 times), is in the plural form.
So if I said that statement you would think I was talking to myself in plural? Language Arts has failed me. Yes I would. 'Us' being the subject, is plural. Some apologists have sought to explain the plurality here as God speaking about Himself with the angels. But the angels were not made in His image.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Feb 22, 2017 12:17:42 GMT
So if I said that statement you would think I was talking to myself in plural? Language Arts has failed me. Yes I would. 'Us' being the subject, is plural. That answer makes no sense so I'll re-ask. Are you saying that if you heard me say "let us go fly a kite", you would think I was speaking to ONLY myself in the plural rather than assume my kids were standing next to me? Wat Why wouldn't they be? What does God and people have that angels do not? And to be clear, your argument has nothing to do with the trinity, this is simply a grammar & logic question.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 22, 2017 12:59:38 GMT
That answer makes no sense so I'll re-ask. Are you saying that if you heard me say "let us go fly a kite", you would think I was speaking to ONLY myself in the plural rather than assume my kids were standing next to me? But God is not flying a kite. He is creating everything else that is - an entirely different proposition entirely. Given His exalted status, I think one can reasonably make the case that the Almighty is using a royal 'we' here. As already said, it is that Angels do not have an existence based on God's image, so are excluded from consideration by the specific terms of 1:26 "Let us make man in our image." Or course even with this, it may well be that some apologists are right, just as (presumably) you think; but my observation is the standard answer given to such an argument, i.e. that God is not here speaking of all the heavenly host, Himself included. Simply, that the Bible nowhere states that angels have the same “image” or “likeness” as God. That description is given to humanity alone. Well, it is true that the trinity is also another 'we' so thanks for mentioning that. So yes, another explanation by apologists is that the Genesis verses here simply represent a conversation between the trinity. Presumably just as, later God the Son speaks to God the Father. Or something. (The only other alternative is that there is more than one God - which might, say, explain the tonal and doctrinal differences in the OT and NT if they are 'inspired' by Gods A & B respectively, while the OT God actually warns against other gods. But I doubt if you would let that wash, lol.) Ultimately, if you are a believer, you are naturally entitled to tweak the exegesis just as suits your personal philosophy. All I have done is point out that God explicitly speaks in the plural in Genesis. As an atheist I don't hold a candle either way.
|
|