All Angels Are Male!!!

Quote: Nareed

Oh, there's no doubt: it never happened.

Hmm. Well, I don't know enough about it to take the other side, but I'd be interested to see this hashed out in more detail.

Who is our resident expert on Judaism?

Quote: FrGamble

Ha, of course God the Father is not a male.

Ha, really.

"Scripture contains approximately 170 references to God as the “Father.” By necessity, one cannot be a father unless one is male. If God had chosen to be revealed to man in a female form, then the word “mother” would have occurred in these places, not “father.” In the Old and New Testaments, masculine pronouns are used over and over again in reference to God.
Jesus Christ referred to God as the Father several times and in other cases used masculine pronouns in reference to God. In the Gospels alone, Christ uses the term “Father” in direct reference to God nearly 160 times. Of particular interest is Christ’s statement in John 10:30: “I and the Father are one.” Obviously, Jesus Christ came in the form of a human man.. Like God the Father, Jesus was revealed to humanity in a male form. Scripture records numerous other instances where Christ utilized masculine nouns and pronouns in reference to God."

"The New Testament Epistles (from Acts to Revelation) also contain nearly 900 verses where the word theos—a masculine noun in the Greek—is used in direct reference to God. In countless references to God in Scripture, there is clearly a consistent pattern of His being referred to with masculine titles, nouns, and pronouns."

The Christian god is male. The angels are
male. All of Jesus' apostles were male. Jesus
was male. All the clerics of the Church are
male. You can try and be PC all you like, the
Christian god is about as female as John Wayne
was.

Quote: AZDuffman

Yes, if you have no interest in the Church or religion

But I obviously have a huge interest in
religion, always have. Especially the
Eastern religions like Hinduism. I find
Christianity fascinating because it's
so widely believed and so obviously
flawed. Whenever you take religious
beliefs literally, instead of metaphorically,
you're in deep trouble. People end up
being forcefully converted and some
end up dying violently. Look at modern
Islam and the history of the Church.

Quote: Wizard

Hmm. Well, I don't know enough about it to take the other side, but I'd be interested to see this hashed out in more detail.

There was some discussion in one of the religion threads.

The point is there are no Egyptian records mentioning anything remotely like the Exodus or a large slave population of exclusively Israelite origin. Not a scrap. Nor are there any records about it from any of the many other nations at the time which traded and/or fought with Egypt, such as the Mittani, the Hittites, the Myceneans or even any of the Canaanite peoples. Nor is there any archaeological evidence at all, either in Egypt or the Sinai.

It comes down to "the Bible says so, and there's no evidence to refute it."

By that logic, we could conclude any legends recorded by any people are true, as there is no evidence to refute it.

Quote: Nareed

There was some discussion in one of the religion threads.

The point is there are no Egyptian records mentioning anything remotely like the Exodus or a large slave population of exclusively Israelite origin. Not a scrap. Nor are there any records about it from any of the many other nations at the time which traded and/or fought with Egypt, such as the Mittani, the Hittites, the Myceneans or even any of the Canaanite peoples. Nor is there any archaeological evidence at all, either in Egypt or the Sinai.

It comes down to "the Bible says so, and there's no evidence to refute it."

By that logic, we could conclude any legends recorded by any people are true, as there is no evidence to refute it.

This is of course not the whole truth. The Egyptians in particular were not keen on keeping records of defeats or anything embarrassing to them. We know that many different groups of people found themselves coming to Egypt during famine times because they had resources. They also had slaves and were sometimes frightened of these foreign peoples growing strong and taking over. There is some archaeological evidence but not always in the places that make sense, partly because sometimes the ancient buildings and their materials were cannibalized to build somewhere else.

So despite Nareed's claim that absence of evidence is evidence of absence the Exodus even happened but most likely not in the numbers of people that the Bible reports.

Quote: FrGamble

but most likely not in the numbers of people that the Bible reports.

Most likely not at all. There isn't even
evidence that any Jews lived in
Egypt during the time of the exodus,
and for a long time afterwards. There
is a huge amount written on this
subject, by the Jewish people themselves.
They very much wanted the exodus
myth to be true.

Evenbob, are you arguing that the word we use to describe the first person of the Most Holy Trinity is masculine or that the first person of the Trinity is actually a man? I have no qualms with saying that historically the term "Father" has been used to describe God, by Jesus and others. However, if your image of God is an old guy with a beard sitting in Heaven you are woefully mistaken. God is as we have discussed many times is the spiritual, eternal, all-powerful, all-knowing, non-contingent, first cause, unmoved mover, and loving creator of all that exists. Therefore "He" is not a man. You could just as well say, "God our mother" however we don't do that because of historical tradition, theological significance, convenience, and because of the prayer that Christ taught us. I hope I make myself clear.

Also, when you get a chance read about radical was Jesus' inclusion of women at the time. How he forgave the adulterous woman, ate with prostitutes, had many women disciples, had women as the first witnesses of the Resurrection. This is not to mention that from the beginning of Christianity Mary was held as the example of the greatest Christian. Then the Church was the first to educate women, advocate for their civil rights, gave them freedom to govern themselves and run huge convents and monasteries, establish schools, etc.

Quote: FrGamble

Evenbob, are you arguing that the word we use to describe the first person of the Most Holy Trinity is masculine or that the first person of the Trinity is actually a man? .

It's not anything, it's a myth. It doesn't
exist. The point is, you WANT it very
badly to be male in nature. You can
say all you like that it's sexless and
genderless, it doesn't change the fact
that the authors of the OT and NT tried
at every juncture to convey that Yahweh
has a male nature and not a female one.

The word 'father' has extreme male symbolism
in every culture. You yourself are referred to
as father. The word is significantly a male
oriented word. Wiseness, protection, caring
are all associated with the father figure.

Michelangelo was commissioned to paint the
Sistine Chapel ceiling by the pope himself.
He portrayed god as a VERY imposing bearded
father figure for a reason. This is what the Vatican
wanted him portrayed as, the ultimate patriarch.
The painting was very well received then and still
is to this day by the Vatican.

You can yada-yada all day long about god being
genderless. Out of the other side of the Church's
mouth it's obvious they think of him as male.

Okay, look you think about it however you want in your own twisted way. However, I will again say that God is not a man but I readily recognize that traditionally we refer to God as male. This is because He is the creator the one who begins everything. We are receptive of God's creation, life, intelligence, freedom, and Grace. He is also all-powerful and that tends to be best expressed in masculine terms. It is an analogy that expresses God's action and characteristics but it is not meant to be a statement that God is male or actually has a beard (a symbol of his all-knowing nature). Yikes you sure are taking this too far.

Quote: FrGamble

It is an analogy that expresses God's action and characteristics but it is not meant to be a statement that God is male or actually has a beard (a symbol of his all-knowing nature).

Ok, here's what really happened. A cardinal
visited the painter one day and put his arm
around his shoulder. Listen, Mike. I can call
you Mike, right? The pope wants you to tone
down the masculinity of god in your painting,
ok? The grandfatherly figure, the bearded
wise man, the huge biceps. Does god work
out, or what. The pope wants a more metro-
sexual look, god is genderless, you know.

Yeah, that didn't happen. He portrayed god
exactly the way the Vatican wanted, a strong
virile male wise grandfather, who watches
over everybody. At least Mormons and Muslims
don't beat around the bush, their god is 100%
for sure a male deity. Myth that he is..