UnderGround Forums
 

HolyGround >> does G-D have a wife?


12/3/09 9:20 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 17601
oh man! I'm such a literalist even when talking about metaphorical brides...i feel like a dunce!
12/4/09 8:05 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Robert Wynne
72 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 4899
  ^ What do you mean by 'wife?'

an actual wife..like i have..marriage..kids the whole none yards.  Do any of you..have any evidence that shows that God does not have an actual female wife?
12/4/09 10:09 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 17603
I guess Robert you would first have to offer evidence that he had an actual female wife.

There are some issues with that.

"in the beginning God..."

Before anything there was only God...no wife.

He speaks metaphorically of His people as His wife.

God is Spirit. If God is an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent Spirit what need does He have as an incorporeal being that is everywhere to have a literal physical wife?
12/4/09 12:51 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Grakman
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/21/08
Posts: 2083
Robert Wynne -   ^ What do you mean by 'wife?'

an actual wife..like i have..marriage..kids the whole none yards.  Do any of you..have any evidence that shows that God does not have an actual female wife?

 Do you have any evidence for God?
12/4/09 1:16 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
770mdm
12 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/24/08
Posts: 1051

Once this conversation goes from theological to practical it becomes stupid. 

Unless, of course, your talking about the whole Dan Brown thing where Jesus (Whom Christians consider G-d himself) marries Mary Magdelin..?

Is that where you're going?

 

12/4/09 6:35 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Grakman
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/21/08
Posts: 2085
 I think he is being a contrarian for it's own sake. ;-)
12/5/09 8:20 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Robert Wynne
72 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 4901
 NO....i go by all the available readings and evidence..where as..most here go by only one book...one story...
which is your choice....not mine...and don't bother asking too see all the writings i go by...because unless your a Mason..you dont get too see...sorry..

770md...you should realize that alot of your ancestors writings are not in your peoples possession..when my ancestors was in control of  Israel..they kept and took with them..the writings found at the temple built by Solomon....it always amazes me..that the Jewish paople have not asked us Templars for them back..not that we would give them...but i would think that your history experts would want to read them..at least.
12/5/09 8:22 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 17605
RW: NO....i go by all the available readings and evidence..where as..most here go by only one book...one story...


me: you do realize that the bible is not only "one" book. Neither the OT or the NT or both combined are "one book" but a compilation of many books.
12/5/09 2:00 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Robert Wynne
72 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 4903
 i agree....but in essence, it is now one book..for we carry it as a singular book...not as many books.










"Solomon knew it all"
12/5/09 2:01 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Grakman
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/21/08
Posts: 2089
Robert Wynne -  NO....i go by all the available readings and evidence..where as..most here go by only one book...one story...
which is your choice....not mine...and don't bother asking too see all the writings i go by...because unless your a Mason..you dont get too see...sorry..

770md...you should realize that alot of your ancestors writings are not in your peoples possession..when my ancestors was in control of  Israel..they kept and took with them..the writings found at the temple built by Solomon....it always amazes me..that the Jewish paople have not asked us Templars for them back..not that we would give them...but i would think that your history experts would want to read them..at least.
Dude, you're not going to convince anybody of anything when all you have is secret evidence that you can't show anyone. Why even bother bringing this up?
 
12/5/09 4:30 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 17607
Robert, the reason we carry it as one book, as a singular book because of a consistency in theme in presenting God, man, our need of a saviour, etc.

Why did you put, "solomon knew it all". Solomon was not omniscient. Only God knows it all.
12/6/09 10:25 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Robert Wynne
72 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 4904
 Grakman...because its not secret if you look for it. It's out there..in libraries right now.


Rooster..we carry it as one book..because the Church of England and their descendents, set it that way....Christ carried no books with him..but his place as the right hand of God was not lessened...the book is nothing...oneness with God, is everything.

Solomon knew this...he also knew, we are not limited in what we can do...i.e....magic...contacting the spirit world,knowing whether or not God has a wife,etc...but todays churches teach the exact opposite..control of the population through fear and provocation.

I cannot be Gods wife..nor can i be the Elect Ones wife..i'm a guy....no matter what any individual or group says..if it doesnt align with the story as a whole..it is incorrect.

and Solomon knew this.
12/6/09 2:11 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Grakman
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/21/08
Posts: 2094
 Robert, you don't sound like any Baptist I ever met. You sure you want to wear that label? lol

I don't even know what I should be looking for, can you help me out?
12/6/09 3:42 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 17608
RW: Rooster..we carry it as one book..because the Church of England and their descendents, set it that way....

me: no they didn't. The Law the the Prophets (the OT) was quoted oft by Jesus and the disciples to validate who He was and His ministry. It was read in the temple, etc. They didn't quote a bunch of other writers to validate who they were and certainly before the King James Version interpretation there was many "bibles" before that, these were not filled with a bunch of outside books.

RW: Christ carried no books with him..but his place as the right hand of God was not lessened...the book is nothing...oneness with God, is everything.

me: WEll Jesus is the Living Word. He was the One who inspired the Prophets in the OT to write what they did.

1Pe 1:10 Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace [that should come] unto you:

1Pe 1:11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

RW: Solomon knew this...he also knew, we are not limited in what we can do...i.e....magic...contacting the spirit world,knowing whether or not God has a wife,etc...but todays churches teach the exact opposite..control of the population through fear and provocation.

me: who are you talking about teaching through fear and provocation? How do you know Solomon knew this? How can you say we are not limited?!?!

Also magic is expressly condemned in the bible.

http://www.bibleplus.org/witchcraft/witchcraft.htm


you: I cannot be Gods wife..nor can i be the Elect Ones wife..i'm a guy....no matter what any individual or group says..if it doesnt align with the story as a whole..it is incorrect.

and Solomon knew this.

me: it's metaphorical dude. Just like when John the baptist called Jesus the Lamb of God or when Jesus said He was the Bread from heaven! Metaphorical!
12/6/09 5:07 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Grakman
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/21/08
Posts: 2103
 rooster, I think Robert just wants to believe that God has a literal wife, like 'real' people. I just hope God can handle the nagging better than the mere mortals of his creation.
12/6/09 9:48 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Robert Wynne
72 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 4914
 lol.......it would explain a few decisions...history reports him making.


Grakman...search Templar writings..."records". or become a FreeMason?..or a Templar?

by my count..i'd estimate some 400 writings or parchments..that they hold in utmost regard.

Rooster...i don't see in the writings in revelations, that the bride is a  metaphorical bride..i see a real bride..for the Elect One...i also see the Elect One as a literal Sacrifical Lamb for Our Fathers purposes, including being the bread for our spiritual side. Thus if Gods Elect One will have a bride...and from my beliefs..the idea of a man and woman joined in wedlock is Gods idea and design, then wouldn't it make sense that Father has a wife of his own???
12/7/09 9:50 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 17610
RW:
Rooster...i don't see in the writings in revelations, that the bride is a metaphorical bride..i see a real bride..for the Elect One...i also see the Elect One as a literal Sacrifical Lamb for Our Fathers purposes, including being the bread for our spiritual side. Thus if Gods Elect One will have a bride...and from my beliefs..the idea of a man and woman joined in wedlock is Gods idea and design, then wouldn't it make sense that Father has a wife of his own???

me: Revelations is a book that in it's entirety is full of symbolism, metaphors, etc. If God called His people throughout the OT his Bride, I have to assume that the idea of marriage is a shadow of God's relationship with HIs people.

Rev 19:7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.

also:

Eph 5:31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.

Eph 5:32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

Paul writes in ephesians that marriage is a type or shadow of Christ and His church. So the wedding feast in which Jesus and His people are married is like a natural wedding and then of course, unlike it. We are bonded to Christ and made one with Him in a SUPER natural way for eternity. It's a great mystery.
12/7/09 5:52 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Robert Wynne
72 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 4917
 but God did not write the old testament or the new testament..thats a fact!
12/7/09 10:52 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
the rooster
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 17615
sure he did. The scriptures declare that God either told the prophets what to write or that they were divinely inspired by His Spirit.

The prophecies concerning Jesus are evidence that it's of divine origin. Or checkout the names of the patriarchs. They tell the gospel message (Adam to Noah). very cool
12/8/09 8:51 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Robert Wynne
72 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 4921
 ok..peace
12/8/09 9:04 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
770mdm
12 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/24/08
Posts: 1055
 G-d is the Torah, Moses just wrote it down.
12/27/09 8:57 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
RoninBT
5 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 12/9/05
Posts: 7
I was surprised to find out that the Ruach Hakodesh (Holy Spirit) is in the feminine gender. The church has taught us for some time that the heavenly family of God consisted of 2 Father and a Son.
12/28/09 11:07 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
770mdm
12 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/24/08
Posts: 1112

Spiritual stuff is male and physical stuff is female.  This is so because physicality is infused with spirituality.  So Ruach Hakodesh is male not female.  Father and son are both male figures no femine aspects there. 

12/28/09 8:55 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
RoninBT
5 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 12/9/05
Posts: 9
770mdm
I understand the concept you are proposing but it is theological. Linguistically speaking the Ruach Hakodesh is feminine. What the implications are??????
12/29/09 11:08 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
770mdm
12 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/24/08
Posts: 1117

From the website Creation Ministries International I found a paper written by Charles Taylor PHD:

Though ruach, ‘spirit’, is normally a feminine noun, when it refers to God it is coupled with Elohim and partakes of its grammatical and semantic properties.

Thus in 1 Kings 22:24: Which way did the Spirit of the Lord go…? the word Ruach takes a masculine verb abar, ‘went’.

As far as the grammatical implications of the Hebrew language go, there’s no warrant for claiming that the Bible teaches a non-masculine element in the make-up of the Deity.


Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.