i was hoping for you to be able to point me to a TaNaCh version that states that God is a she. my assumption is that there is none, that this is just some made up theory. unless, it is like you say, that the jewish translators were biased? thanks anyways...
No, it's not about G!d being translated as a she. It's about the actual gender and meaning of some of the words used for G!d. You can't see that unless you actually go to the Hebrew. Judaism doesn't consider any translation official for a reason. Any translation is going to assert things that the original text does not. If you could understand Hebrew, then you'd know that G!d is referred to using feminine language and symbolism as well as masculine language and symbolism. Also, Judaism's not sola scriptura and I don't understand why you assume it should be. And the whole tanach, as well as all sacred texts, are essentially made up theories, to use your words. Jesus is just another dying god like so many mythical figures before him.
well, at least we have the tetragramatton or Adonai...
That's not much of a response to what I said.
where can i find the chapter and verse for the mayyim chayyim?
Mayyim chayyim is mentioned many times in the Tanach as well as later Jewish scripture. I thought I had that particular passage bookmarked but do not. When all of the stuff from my old computer has been recovered and sent to me, I may have it in some notes I took from a class.
well, lets take a moment to annalyze the souls that are across the sea from us. somewhere like lets say africa, where children are starving or dying of thirst. do you think that perhaps if you were in their situation, would you still feel the same? that God doesn't give or that we recieve at all?
Honestly, I don't see the connection. And I said at a higher level G!d doesn't give or receive. Your literalism astounds me. Of G!d at that level, nothing can be said. But at a lower level, G!d both gives and receives. I'm beginning to understand how you so readily gulp down that kool-aide.
Are you thinking about the atheist in the foxhole now? That's not a proof of G!d, just an aspect of human psychology. If you must know, I've suffered more than most of the people I know, and those people would agree with me. I claim it's just as likely G!d doesn't exist as it is that he does because subjective experience is by nature fallible and biased. It's like filtering light with a with a prism. We can't see the light that's going in and when we do see it it's been distorted into multiple colors.
At the same time, you are advocating a particularist view of G!d to which I would say that any particularist view of G!d is just as likely, as well as the possibility that none of the particularist views are correct. I don't let my subjective experiences cloud my mind. I own them and value them, but I do not then claim that they are some sort of absolute truth.
And on suffering, I know of people who have suffered much and for that precise reason do not believe in G!d, though I myself do not fall into that category.
but we can say things about God. many say that He is a big mystery. that is completely false. His works are all around us so that we can behold with our eyes and then judge for ourselves. He wants to be seen. He wants us to find Him. that is the ultimate reward. for us to let Him lift the veil off of our faces so that we can see Him clearly, in all His Glory and Might.
You are making baseless assertions, and some of it is quite illogical. First of all, you can't establish that we actually see G!d's works. Second, if you see G!d's works, that doesn't mean you see G!d. That means you see His works. If you visit an area that's just been struck by a tsunami, you don't see the tsunami. You see the devastation it caused. To confuse an effect with a cause is just not logical.
Also, it doesn't seem like you're interested in people judging for themselves unless they agree with you, and it seems you assert your own judgement as more accurate than that of others, despite its particularist and subjective nature.
really? which texts am i limiting myself to? i know that dominate is an ugly word. but it is true, we eat off of the land and live off of it. if God didn't want for us to have any food or water, He just wouldn't let us have it, but it is there for the taking. even the air we breath is given to us. He is both merciful with the righteous and the wicked. no matter how we treat this planet, it was given to us. but not all are treating the earth badly, some are actually doing what they can to protect it, though it is for naught, some people actually do good here....
The bible.
Animals also eat and live off the land. Animals also eat and drink. Animals also breathe. How does the human condition differ from that of animals in such a way as to imply we are meant to dominate? There are other animals who are more numerous than humans. There are beings on this planet that can easily kill a human, that we are defenseless against even with our technology. Viruses and bacteria keep pace with our technology. Insects are more numerous and cover more territory than we do.
i don't idolize the bible. those verses have been corrupted in many ways. so i tread the ground i walk on very carefully. what i do do i rely heavily on analyzing God's works.
I don't see that at all. What I see is you relying a) on your own subjective experience and b) on the bible whenever it agrees with your own subjective experience or disagrees with another person's subjective experience. That is the same old claims to Truth and in a sense even more particularlist because it is based only on your own experiences. You're making an idol of your subjectivity.
stop making it seem like i know the truth. i am merely seeing what is presented to me in my face.
I'm not making it seem like you know the truth. I'm asserting that you've convinced yourself that you do, and the second statement above is evidence of that. If I may put what you said in different words. "I'm not saying I know the truth. I just see the truth all around me and say what it is."
That's entirely illogical.
and i don't blame you for thinking the way you do, because these times suck...
I don't think these times suck more than most other periods of history. I love the time that I live in. And whether or not it sucks has got nothing to do with whether or not we're meant to dominate the world.
well, then, dauer, you explain to me who is giving you the air you breath, or the home you live in, or the clothe you have on your back?
Why do you assume it was given, and why do you assume, even if it was given, that the giver has any resemblance to what you call G!d?
if i don't look at God's works, what should i look for then, "o mighty one"?
Look at the world around you without assumptions. If you have an experience that others do not, question it. If you and some you know have one experience, and others have a very different one, question the experience you had.
and i know that you will never see what i see or feel what i feel, but i know in my heart that years from now, we will all be one with God in the new world.
You don't know. You believe blindly despite the lack of proof. There is a huge difference.
and another thing, lets not make this about me, please...
"milking the prostate" are we, dauer? to each his own.
I'm extremely offended by your blatant hypocrisy. You ask me not to make it about you, and then you make assertions about what I do privately based not on any claims of my own, but only because of my knowledge of human physiology. Then, instead of addressing the points I made, I'm assuming because you have no way to do so, you just dismiss them, as you did above regarding Shaddai. I would suggest that because you do not have answers for me, you instead resort to attempts at attacking me, my credibility, and my character which is very low indeed.
The above, however, is a good example of the way your mind works. You jump to conclusions based on limited evidence. This helps me to understand more why you would come to believe in a metaphysic so lacking in objective evidence.
as i mentioned, i find nothing wrong with any of these things you mentioned, though i myself wouldn't do some of these things, it doesn't mean i will do it with the same sex. if you do it with someone you love and are going to spend the rest of your natural life with that person, then do it, just as long it isn't with the same sex. these are just my thoughts. please don't be offended...
As long as they are only your thoughts and you don't act on them. Otherwise you'd be just as bad as the folks who treated black folks in the US differently. It's important for us to come together and support each other when we see xenophobic tendencies in man hurting our fellows. There is a History of Jews doing as much, like Heschel marching with King.
it is not about my experience but about analyzing my environment. His works. how would you know that a schizo's hallucinations aren't real? are you God? do you see all? or don't tell me, they just have a chemical imbalance in their brain, right? i completely disagree with chemical imbalances. man can't even figure out how the brain produces thoughts or memories, let alone they are authorized to think for us about what is wrong with our brains. bullcrap if you ask me.
You're not analyzing the environment. You're confusing your subjective experience of the environment with the environment. That's like confusing a video taken of a vacation with the vacation.
And no, I've not asserted anything about the schyzophrenic's hallucinations except that your experiences are no more likely to be true than theirs. Instead of saying whether you agree or disagree, you have again jumped to conclusions based on lack of evidence. So I ask you, do you agree with me that it's just as possible the schyzophrenic is correct and you are wrong?
what ever gets us there, right, dauer?
And now you are dismissing me again, instead of answering me. Do you agree with me then, that it's okay if two men are in love or two women are in love and they act upon their love? If not, why don't you just address the issues I've raised instead of playing games?
thanks for being patient with me, bro. i will continue to talk about the subject as long as you don't point the finger at me and i can assure you that i will not point the finger at you, as well.
You already have pointed your finger at me multiple times and I've pointed out one time that you did it above. You're being a hypocrite.
just messing with you. you are right, though, only time will tell if we will ever truly understand both sides of the fence without truly crossing it. i fear God too much to do such a thing.
