From Father God to Mother Earth

In scripture God is constantly referred to as HE , FATHER .
Mark, if God Himself calls Himself HE and Jesus calls Him HE , then it is not us, but God who says He is a HE . Anyhting else is adding to scripture.
Kelly, do you really think males and females are 100% the same except sexual organs? Not hardly.

 

Amen (or Should that Be AWOMEN )
Just to make it P.C.

John

 

The only thing that is universally true about all men and all women is the type of sexual organs they have. For any generalization you can make about what women or men are like can be immediately disproven with examples of people who don't fit the stereotype.

Joshua

 

Amen (or Should that Be AWOMEN )
Just to make it P.C.

It should be A-Wo-Person.

Oops, that has the word "SON" in it.

It should be A-Wo-Per-Sibling.

 

HEE hee HAH hah!!!
You know it sounds silly. But the People who would try to Make God a Her. Use a lot of the same type of reasoning. Like "God does not have sex organs so he can go both ways very silly. They try to bring God down the human level.

God Is Not a Man, but He is a He. At lest that what He says.

[ October 29, 2002, 12:34 PM: Message edited by: John3v36 ]

 

I'll stick with scritpure, and it calls God Father, no where does scripture call God mother. Anything else is a devation from what scripture really says.

 

I would rather someone be comfortable with referring to God as "she" rather than having the person not call upon God at all.

 

But, suppose I said "I'd rather someone called John V "jerk" than not talk to him at all". (I'm not sayiing it or implying it, just trying to make a point here )

That might be my preference, but you might prefer not to be called a jerk.

So, the question is now what you or I would rather have someone call God, but what He has chosen to call Himself. Knowing who He is, I'd be careful about calling Him something other than what He has chosen. And he clearly has chosen the masculine gender.

 

Of course, your example, Jim, uses a word that in our culture has negative connotations. So unless we're saying that "she" has negative connotations, the example you used doesn't work.

Although, in some of our cultures, "she" does have negative connotations, so maybe the example does work.

 

I thought of that as I was writing. But, my point still stands, I think. I am a "he" and would not appreciate being called a "she". Women are great and wonderful, but I'm not one. Same goes the other way around...what woman wants to be called "he"?

What blasphemous arrogance, then, to call God "she", when He has clearly identified Himself in many ways as "He".

 

Helen,
How do you always find a perfect link at the exact time needed? You do better research than all the lawyers I know put together. You could make a fortune with a simple book called 'Helen's Links'.

 

Oh, I know, Jim. I understand exactly what you were saying.

The way you put it here:

is better, I think.

Although I'm sure there are arguments against that logic, too. But that's maybe not for this thread.

 

LOL

Awhile ago, on another forum, I ran into a fellow who was a walking encyclopedia of links. For any who might be reading this who were at CARM, I'm referring to "Thumper." He was an evolutionist but one of the nicest ones I have met and very civil and well-read. I learned a lot about how to work search engines from him and that has helped a lot.

Secondly, but before that in time, I used to love to browse bookshops for sales. "Two Babylons" was on sale years ago, hardback, for about $4. I bought it out of curiosity and was quite blown away by the research involved, even if the reading was a bit sticky. I researched some of the research itself and found the man was hitting the nail on the head every time I was able to check him. I was delighted when I later found someone had put this book on the web.

A second book that I reference to people constantly was written FOR the web and involves just as much research and is almost equally as informative regarding the early church. Here:

http://www.robibrad.demon.co.uk/Contents.htm

Enjoy...

 

If someone called me a "jerk", it would probably be because I displayed "jerky" qualities, so, while I'd be hurt, I'd wonder why they think of me as a jerk.

However, "she" is contemporary circles is anything but an offensive or hurtful term. So if you'd liken it to a man of 6' 4" referring to me as the "short" guy, or a man of 4' 11" referring to me as the "tall guy" it would still be me, and i'd be neither offended nor disrespected in either situation. Of course, since I'm 5' 10", I generally describe myself as neither tall nor short, but slightly taller than average.

 

He was an evolutionist but one of the nicest ones I have met and very civil and well-read.

But, Helen, I thought I was the nicest one you ever met

 

JohnV, your last post made little sense in light of the discussion, IMO. It did not answer the point that I was making. Of course there is nothing negative about being called "she", if you're a woman. Of course if you're a jerk you should expect to be called one. Of course if you're 6 feet tall you're taller than someone 5"11" and shorter than someone 6"6". So what?

 

Like I said before, only the most rebellious would dare disobey the clear instruction of our God-man, King Jesus.

Russ &lt;&gt;&lt;</font>[/QUOTE] Amen

 

And, since God is neither male nor female, why does one presume negative connotations with referring to God as "she"?

 

Because you're wrong. He IS male!!! "HE" means "HE"!!!