Author Topic: Heaven is sexist.  (Read 5199 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline wheels5894

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4578
  • Darwins +294/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #29 on: May 10, 2015, 02:09:29 PM »
Um, lulwut?

Quote
Since they [angels] do not reproduce I think it highly unlikely they actually have gender, hormones, sexuality, or sexual parts.  The ones in scripture are treated as masculine but that doesn't mean they are sexually male.

The Nephilim were the offspring of these angels and humans.  It does appear they all became men (the fallen angels), but there are other good reasons they may have chosen men.  They also wanted to have power and influence.  A man of that time would have been more able to gain it.

Whaaaaat? Can angels have sex or not? Make up your mind! Pick one lie and stick with it why don't you?

Did you miss this part?   "It does appear they all became men" [rather than women].  Once they took on flesh and blood then they were able to produce flesh and blood offsping.  However that is not actually reproduction because they are not actually human.  They had to become something they are not to produce offspring and then the offspring was not of their kind.

It's just like if they had taken on the form of a dog and mated with dogs and had dog offspring would you count that as the reproduction of an angel?  I don't.  It is no different with humans.  In order to reproduce they must produce offspring of their own kind.

... and the bible supports this view in which verse?
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3771
  • Darwins +95/-183
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #30 on: May 10, 2015, 04:04:58 PM »
Um, lulwut?

Quote
Since they [angels] do not reproduce I think it highly unlikely they actually have gender, hormones, sexuality, or sexual parts.  The ones in scripture are treated as masculine but that doesn't mean they are sexually male.

The Nephilim were the offspring of these angels and humans.  It does appear they all became men (the fallen angels), but there are other good reasons they may have chosen men.  They also wanted to have power and influence.  A man of that time would have been more able to gain it.

Whaaaaat? Can angels have sex or not? Make up your mind! Pick one lie and stick with it why don't you?

Did you miss this part?   "It does appear they all became men" [rather than women].  Once they took on flesh and blood then they were able to produce flesh and blood offsping.  However that is not actually reproduction because they are not actually human.  They had to become something they are not to produce offspring and then the offspring was not of their kind.

It's just like if they had taken on the form of a dog and mated with dogs and had dog offspring would you count that as the reproduction of an angel?  I don't.  It is no different with humans.  In order to reproduce they must produce offspring of their own kind.

... and the bible supports this view in which verse?

Quote
It does appear they all became men" [rather than women].

"the sons of God saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. " (Gen 6:2)

There is no record any of them took men as mates.

Quote
Once they took on flesh and blood then they were able to produce flesh and blood offsping.

Angels are spirits and not human.  (Hebrews 1:14)
Those in heaven do not have flesh and blood.  (1 Cor 15:50)
Since they are not physical creatures but spiritual creatures they must manifest a body that we can see.

Since they took women as mates (Gen 6:2) and their offspring were human (Gen 6:4), the only reasonable conclusion is that they manifested, and they manifested as men.  They because flesh and blood.  They did not just impregnate these women but took them as wives (Gen 6:2).  They were living as humans and reproduced as humans.  They did not reproduce other spirits.
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5611
  • Darwins +184/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #31 on: May 10, 2015, 04:50:10 PM »
Did they lose angelic powers?
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline Foxy Freedom

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2940
  • Darwins +327/-14
  • Why is it so difficult to say you don't know?
    • Foxy Freedom on Doctor Who
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #32 on: May 10, 2015, 05:05:36 PM »

"the sons of God saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. " (Gen 6:2)

There is no record any of them took men as mates.

Angels are spirits and not human.  (Hebrews 1:14)
Those in heaven do not have flesh and blood.  (1 Cor 15:50)
Since they are not physical creatures but spiritual creatures they must manifest a body that we can see.

Since they took women as mates (Gen 6:2) and their offspring were human (Gen 6:4), the only reasonable conclusion is that they manifested, and they manifested as men.  They became flesh and blood.  They did not just impregnate these women but took them as wives (Gen 6:2).  They were living as humans and reproduced as humans.  They did not reproduce other spirits.

I thought you said that your god communicates with you through scripture ! ! !

Your interpretation is complete nonsense based on ignorance of historical development of the text.

The original Hebrew says this:

"the sons of the gods saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they took as wives any of them they chose. " (Gen 6:2)

The story comes from a polytheistic tradition when gods did have sons and daughters. They were already male and did not "manifest" as male.

Christianity in the New Testament is a different religion which has different ideas about the inhabitants of heaven. It is not relevant to quote Christian ideas of heaven when talking about the Old Testament.
The Foxy Freedom antitheist website is http://the6antitheist6guide6.blogspot.co.uk

The 2nd edition of the free ebook Devil or Delusion ? The danger of Christianity to Democracy Freedom and Science.       http://t.co/2d1KcJ9V

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3771
  • Darwins +95/-183
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #33 on: May 10, 2015, 06:12:25 PM »
Your interpretation is complete nonsense based on ignorance of historical development of the text.

No, it's not.

Quote
"the sons of the gods saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they took as wives any of them they chose. " (Gen 6:2)

It says, "the sons of elohim". 

"The plural form of the noun here in Hebrew is the plural of majesty or excellence. (See NAB, St. Joseph Edition, Bible Dictionary, p. 330; also, New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. V, p. 287.) It conveys no thought of plurality of persons. In similar fashion, at Judges 16:23 when reference is made to the false god Dagon, a form of the title ’elo·him is used; the accompanying verb is singular, showing that reference is to just the one god. At Genesis 42:30, Joseph is spoken of as the “lord” (’adho·neh?, the plural of excellence) of Egypt.
 
The Greek language does not have a ‘plural of majesty or excellence.’ So, at Genesis 1:1 the translators of LXX used ho The·os? (God, singular) as the equivalent of ’Elo·him. At Mark 12:29, where a reply of Jesus is reproduced in which he quoted Deuteronomy 6:4, the Greek singular ho The·os? is similarly used."

wol.jw.org/

Quote
The story comes from a polytheistic tradition when gods did have sons and daughters.

No, it does not.

Quote
Christianity in the New Testament is a different religion which has different ideas about the inhabitants of heaven.

Christians were given both the Hebrew scriptures and the Greek scriptures.

Quote
It is not relevant to quote Christian ideas of heaven when talking about the Old Testament.

Yes, it is.


« Last Edit: May 10, 2015, 06:14:54 PM by Jstwebbrowsing »
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline Foxy Freedom

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2940
  • Darwins +327/-14
  • Why is it so difficult to say you don't know?
    • Foxy Freedom on Doctor Who
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #34 on: May 10, 2015, 07:08:10 PM »
Your interpretation is complete nonsense based on ignorance of historical development of the text.

No, it's not.

Where is your knowledge of historical development. I don't see it. You said your god communicates with you through scripture. Does your god only communicate false information to you?

Quote
Quote
"the sons of the gods saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they took as wives any of them they chose. " (Gen 6:2)

It says, "the sons of elohim". 

"The plural form of the noun here in Hebrew is the plural of majesty or excellence. (See NAB, St. Joseph Edition, Bible Dictionary, p. 330; also, New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. V, p. 287.) It conveys no thought of plurality of persons. In similar fashion, at Judges 16:23 when reference is made to the false god Dagon, a form of the title ’elo·him is used; the accompanying verb is singular, showing that reference is to just the one god. At Genesis 42:30, Joseph is spoken of as the “lord” (’adho·neh?, the plural of excellence) of Egypt.
 
The Greek language does not have a ‘plural of majesty or excellence.’ So, at Genesis 1:1 the translators of LXX used ho The·os? (God, singular) as the equivalent of ’Elo·him. At Mark 12:29, where a reply of Jesus is reproduced in which he quoted Deuteronomy 6:4, the Greek singular ho The·os? is similarly used."

wol.jw.org/

Yet another example of theological distortion when translating a text. The Greek translation is an irrelevant piece of wishful thinking by the Greek translator hundreds of years after the original was written. Am I surprised that a Jehovah Witness website gives false information?

It does not say "the sons of elohim." It says the sons of the gods. Why have your quotes conveniently ignored what the Hebrew says in order to get the translation they want? Not one of your quotes mentions the fact that the text does not actually say Elohim but says "the gods".

And why do you think they invented this idea of plural of majesty? Where do you think the plural came from?

See below for the real answer.

Quote

Quote
The story comes from a polytheistic tradition when gods did have sons and daughters.

No, it does not.

Yahweh is a composite god constructed from EL, Baal and other Canaanite gods. The bible mentions Yahweh is a son of EL.

Quote
Quote
Christianity in the New Testament is a different religion which has different ideas about the inhabitants of heaven.

Christians were given both the Hebrew scriptures and the Greek scriptures.

What do you mean given? That sounds like delusion that a god gave it.

The early followers of Jesus had to base Christianity on the OT to avoid persecution by the Romans for manufacturing a false religion.

Quote
Quote
It is not relevant to quote Christian ideas of heaven when talking about the Old Testament.

Yes, it is.

No, Christianity sets Jesus and his composite Canaanite god within the framework of Zoroastrianism dualism. Christianity is a different religion. This shows you have no idea of historical development and your god has communicated false information to you.

Worship me. I am more reliable. Worship some of the others on this site too and get value for your time here.
The Foxy Freedom antitheist website is http://the6antitheist6guide6.blogspot.co.uk

The 2nd edition of the free ebook Devil or Delusion ? The danger of Christianity to Democracy Freedom and Science.       http://t.co/2d1KcJ9V

Offline Nick

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 13322
  • Darwins +399/-9
  • Gender: Male
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #35 on: May 10, 2015, 07:16:41 PM »
Christians, Why are there no female angels?

Why do you think heavenly angels are males?
Their names?
Yo, put that in your pipe and smoke it.  Quit ragging on my Lord.

Tide goes in, tide goes out !!!

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3771
  • Darwins +95/-183
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #36 on: May 10, 2015, 07:25:55 PM »
Yet another example of theological distortion when translating a text. The Greek translation is an irrelevant piece of wishful thinking by the Greek translator hundreds of years after the original was written.

No it's not.

Quote
It does not say "the sons of elohim."

Yes it does.

Quote
It says the sons of the gods.

No it does not.  It is not even written in english.

Quote
Not one of your quotes mentions the fact that the text does not actually say Elohim but says "the gods".

Do you really not understand that "the gods" is english and the Hebrew scriptures were written in Hebrew.  The text says "elohim".

Quote
Yahweh is a composite god constructed from EL, Baal and other Canaanite gods.

No he's not.

Quote
The bible mentions Yahweh is a son of EL.

No it doesn't.

Quote
The early followers of Jesus had to base Christianity on the OT to avoid persecution by the Romans for manufacturing a false religion.

No they didn't.  And Christians were persecuted.

Quote
No, Christianity sets Jesus and his composite Canaanite god within the framework of Zoroastrianism dualism.

No it doesn't.

Quote
Christianity is a different religion.

Different than what?

Quote
This shows you have no idea of historical development and your god has communicated false information to you.

You statements don't prove anything other than you can type.

Quote
Worship me. I am more reliable.

No.  You doing it is more than enough.



Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline natlegend

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2748
  • Darwins +167/-4
  • Polyatheist
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #37 on: May 10, 2015, 07:30:08 PM »
Wow.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

"Ray, when someone asks you, if you're a god, you say YES!!"

Offline Foxy Freedom

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2940
  • Darwins +327/-14
  • Why is it so difficult to say you don't know?
    • Foxy Freedom on Doctor Who
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #38 on: May 10, 2015, 07:33:47 PM »
Where is your evidence for anything. You have just given a list of " no no no".

I can read Hebrew fluently and the Hebrew says "the gods".

Prove me wrong or worship me.

« Last Edit: May 10, 2015, 08:01:47 PM by Foxy Freedom »
The Foxy Freedom antitheist website is http://the6antitheist6guide6.blogspot.co.uk

The 2nd edition of the free ebook Devil or Delusion ? The danger of Christianity to Democracy Freedom and Science.       http://t.co/2d1KcJ9V

Offline The Gawd

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1655
  • Darwins +147/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #39 on: May 10, 2015, 07:36:24 PM »
the dishonesty is staggering.

Offline natlegend

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2748
  • Darwins +167/-4
  • Polyatheist
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #40 on: May 10, 2015, 07:37:57 PM »
the dishonesty is staggering.

I know, right? But the mental gymnastics is impressive...
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

"Ray, when someone asks you, if you're a god, you say YES!!"

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5033
  • Darwins +354/-39
  • Gender: Male
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #41 on: May 10, 2015, 08:15:34 PM »
Jst-

Despite the fact that nothing you have said about the mating habits of angels can be substantiated in the Bible and you have refused to disclose your source of information....all you have done so far is establish my premise as a fact.

Heaven is sexist in the classic male chauvinist tradition. All the angles came down and assumed a form with a penis. They did not choose to materialize a form with a womb. They wanted power and dominion so they chose the dominant form....at least in the minds of whomever wrote the bullshit narrative you bought into and are trying to sell us. 

If any of the angels did assume a female body...noman saw fit to write about it did they?
I am not sure how to describe the intricacies of this Hell, so I chose to begin with the most common or prominent theme of Hell, which is uncertainty.

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3771
  • Darwins +95/-183
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #42 on: May 10, 2015, 08:26:05 PM »
Where is your evidence for anything. You have just given a list of " no no no".

I can read Hebrew fluently and the Hebrew says "the gods".

Prove me wrong or worship me.

You haven't given me an argument to refute.  All you've done is make a lot of claims.   And once again, it is not my job to prove your claims wrong. 

And I can fluently read the word "elohim" and that's what the text says.  You can't find one english word in the Hewbrew text.
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3771
  • Darwins +95/-183
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #43 on: May 10, 2015, 08:30:04 PM »
the dishonesty is staggering.

What is staggering is that you cannot see is all I have done is reject her unsupported claims.  I do not need to prove them wrong.  Your inability to recognize that shows your bias.  There is not one dishonest thing I have had.  If there is then quote it and demonstrate how it is dishonest.
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3771
  • Darwins +95/-183
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #44 on: May 10, 2015, 08:31:05 PM »
the dishonesty is staggering.

I know, right? But the mental gymnastics is impressive...

No gymnastics needed.  I'm not the one making up stories expecting someone else to disprove them.  Your bias is showing too.
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3771
  • Darwins +95/-183
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #45 on: May 10, 2015, 08:34:43 PM »
Despite the fact that nothing you have said about the mating habits of angels can be substantiated in the Bible

"18Then the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. 19“Teacher,” they said, “Moses wrote for us that if a man’s brother dies and leaves a wife but no children, the man must marry the widow and raise up offspring for his brother. 20Now there were seven brothers. The first one married and died without leaving any children. 21The second one married the widow, but he also died, leaving no child. It was the same with the third. 22In fact, none of the seven left any children. Last of all, the woman died too. 23At the resurrectionc whose wife will she be, since the seven were married to her?”
 
24Jesus replied, “Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God?25When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven."  (Mark 12:18-25)

Angels do not marry or have children.
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5033
  • Darwins +354/-39
  • Gender: Male
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #46 on: May 10, 2015, 08:44:16 PM »
Despite the fact that nothing you have said about the mating habits of angels can be substantiated in the Bible

"18Then the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. 19“Teacher,” they said, “Moses wrote for us that if a man’s brother dies and leaves a wife but no children, the man must marry the widow and raise up offspring for his brother. 20Now there were seven brothers. The first one married and died without leaving any children. 21The second one married the widow, but he also died, leaving no child. It was the same with the third. 22In fact, none of the seven left any children. Last of all, the woman died too. 23At the resurrectionc whose wife will she be, since the seven were married to her?”
 
24Jesus replied, “Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God?25When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven."  (Mark 12:18-25)

Angels do not marry or have children.

So, your thesis is that if an angel wants to get a little amorous they have to put on a meat bag and travel to earth to do it. When people die and go to heaven...will they have the same freedom to take little sex vacations or are they just stuck in heaven where the only thing you are authorized to do is praise God?
I am not sure how to describe the intricacies of this Hell, so I chose to begin with the most common or prominent theme of Hell, which is uncertainty.

Offline Foxy Freedom

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2940
  • Darwins +327/-14
  • Why is it so difficult to say you don't know?
    • Foxy Freedom on Doctor Who
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #47 on: May 10, 2015, 09:06:13 PM »
Where is your evidence for anything. You have just given a list of " no no no".

I can read Hebrew fluently and the Hebrew says "the gods".

Prove me wrong or worship me.

You haven't given me an argument to refute.  All you've done is make a lot of claims.   And once again, it is not my job to prove your claims wrong. 

And I can fluently read the word "elohim" and that's what the text says.  You can't find one english word in the Hewbrew text.

What are you talking about? Why would I want to find an English word in the Hebrew text?

Look up the text. It does not say Elohim.

Exodus 18:11 yahweh is greater than all the gods.

This is the same plural word used in Gen 6:2 the sons of the gods saw that the daughters of men were beautiful

You might want to make excuses why this is a plural word meaning "the gods" but you cannot deny that it is a plural word meaning "the gods".

You are trapped in your delusion about the OT and NT which prevents you from seeing that the books were made up from many sources using different traditions about the gods of Israel and Judah.

The god which communicates with you in your head has given you false information.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2015, 09:13:47 PM by Foxy Freedom »
The Foxy Freedom antitheist website is http://the6antitheist6guide6.blogspot.co.uk

The 2nd edition of the free ebook Devil or Delusion ? The danger of Christianity to Democracy Freedom and Science.       http://t.co/2d1KcJ9V

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3771
  • Darwins +95/-183
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #48 on: May 10, 2015, 09:42:41 PM »
This is the same plural word used in Gen 6:2

And what plural word is that?  Because a form of the same plural word was used for Dagon in Judges 16:23.  The same plural word applied to one individual.

Also at Genesis 42:30, Joseph is spoken of as the “lord” (’adho·neh, the plural of excellence) of Egypt.  Again, a plural word being applied to a singe individual.

Clearly you do not understand as much of the historical development as you think or you would know that the words can and do have different applications.

Quote
Look up the text. It does not say Elohim.

http://biblehub.com/interlinear/genesis/6-2.htm

Why the dishonesty?
Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline Foxy Freedom

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2940
  • Darwins +327/-14
  • Why is it so difficult to say you don't know?
    • Foxy Freedom on Doctor Who
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #49 on: May 10, 2015, 10:18:44 PM »
This is the same plural word used in Gen 6:2

And what plural word is that?  Because a form of the same plural word was used for Dagon in Judges 16:23.  The same plural word applied to one individual.

Also at Genesis 42:30, Joseph is spoken of as the “lord” (’adho·neh, the plural of excellence) of Egypt.  Again, a plural word being applied to a singe individual.

Clearly you do not understand as much of the historical development as you think or you would know that the words can and do have different applications.

Quote
Look up the text. It does not say Elohim.

http://biblehub.com/interlinear/genesis/6-2.htm

Why the dishonesty?

It says haelohim, not the same form used for Dagon.

Now at last you have admitted that the word is actually a plural, you can try to make excuses why Genesis does not mean "the sons of the gods" and why a people who slowly developed the idea that their god Yahweh was the only god, could not escape from their polytheistic roots in calling him "gods" or "the gods", since he is also called god of gods in the singular, and this sentence clearly refers to a time when gods were thought of as having families.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2015, 10:28:01 PM by Foxy Freedom »
The Foxy Freedom antitheist website is http://the6antitheist6guide6.blogspot.co.uk

The 2nd edition of the free ebook Devil or Delusion ? The danger of Christianity to Democracy Freedom and Science.       http://t.co/2d1KcJ9V

Offline sun_king

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 461
  • Darwins +44/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • We see things not as they are, but as we are
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #50 on: May 10, 2015, 11:34:22 PM »
I don't know.  Since they do not reproduce I think it highly unlikely they actually have gender, hormones, sexuality, or sexual parts.  The ones in scripture are treated as masculine but that doesn't mean they are sexually male.   

Since they Jesus do did not reproduce I think it highly unlikely they Jesus actually have has gender, hormones, sexuality, or sexual parts.  The ones Jesus in scripture are is treated as masculine but that doesn't mean they Jesus are is sexually male.   

Offline Foxy Freedom

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2940
  • Darwins +327/-14
  • Why is it so difficult to say you don't know?
    • Foxy Freedom on Doctor Who
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #51 on: May 10, 2015, 11:39:11 PM »
There is not one dishonest thing I have had.  If there is then quote it and demonstrate how it is dishonest.

There is too much to quote, but I am wondering about how you deal with so much cognitive dissonance.

Here are some examples. You say below you can read fluently a single word. Is that what "fluently" means or are you being dishonest?

Is the word really "Elohim" or are you being dishonest because you don't know what you are reading?

You told me I cannot find one English word in the Hebrew text. Are you being dumb or dishonest when I just told you below that I can read the Hebrew?

All that in one little quote. Do you really know what you are saying or is your god communicating so much false information to you that you cannot keep up, and you just garble the false information in a tissue of Jehovah's Delusion.

Where is your evidence for anything. You have just given a list of " no no no".

I can read Hebrew fluently and the Hebrew says "the gods".

Prove me wrong or worship me.

And I can fluently read the word "elohim" and that's what the text says.  You can't find one english word in the Hewbrew text.
The Foxy Freedom antitheist website is http://the6antitheist6guide6.blogspot.co.uk

The 2nd edition of the free ebook Devil or Delusion ? The danger of Christianity to Democracy Freedom and Science.       http://t.co/2d1KcJ9V

Offline Jstwebbrowsing

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3771
  • Darwins +95/-183
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #52 on: May 11, 2015, 12:16:44 AM »
It says haelohim, not the same form used for Dagon.

"Of elohim"...."Of God".  The word is 430[e] in Strong's Hebrews.  There we find:
 
"Original Word: ????????
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: elohim
Phonetic Spelling: (el-o-heem')
Short Definition: God"

http://biblehub.com/hebrew/430.htm

Quote
Now at last you have admitted that the word is actually a plural

What?  "Now at last"?  What did I already post SEVERAL posts up in #34?  Let me remind you:

"The plural form of the noun here in Hebrew is the plural of majesty or excellence"

Your dishonest accusation is a fail.

Quote
you can try to make excuses why Genesis does not mean "the sons of the gods"

I don't need to.  I understand the application of the word as it has already been explained to you.  And you have been show specific examples of plural nouns being applied to single individuals and it was explained why it is done so.

Quote
and why a people who slowly developed the idea that their god Yahweh was the only god, could not escape from their polytheistic roots in calling him "gods" or "the gods", since he is also called god of gods in the singular, and this sentence clearly refers to a time when gods were thought of as having families.

No, I don't need to show why your wild stories are false. 

Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 43:10

Offline Mrjason

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2234
  • Darwins +170/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #53 on: May 11, 2015, 08:13:06 AM »
Christians, Why are there no female angels?
Look at how they treated women in the bible. yahweh hates women so he chose to surround himself with his boy toys. I mean, you really have to look at this guy yahweh for a moment. He made a man and tried to introduce him to other animals before finally caving in and making a woman. Does this sound like a heterosexual male?

God supposedly existed on his own. Then he made other beings. That were not recreations of him. And he has the nerve to criticise kill Onan for spilling his seed on the ground...

Offline wheels5894

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4578
  • Darwins +294/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #54 on: May 11, 2015, 10:22:15 AM »
Thoughts on Elohim....

Jst, what do you know about the origins of El? It certainly wasn't the case that El was the god of Israel. In fact, Elohim  seems to have been the Canaanite pantheon of gods. The fact that it is in the bible reflects the multiple sources that have been redacted together to create the text we know today.

Let's go further. The multiple gods in Canaan are still in the bible - Asherah, Baal, El Shadai and so forth. All of these were separate gods. YHWH was, it seems, worshipping in the Exile in Babylon but he c ame with the consort Asherah.

Put it this way, El / Elohim is not the same god as YHWH even though they have been conflated later. The origins of the bible are polytheistic and a monotheistic religion wasn't really areality for quite a few centuries.
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Offline Foxy Freedom

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2940
  • Darwins +327/-14
  • Why is it so difficult to say you don't know?
    • Foxy Freedom on Doctor Who
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #55 on: May 11, 2015, 12:41:39 PM »
It says haelohim, not the same form used for Dagon.

"Of elohim"...."Of God".  The word is 430[e] in Strong's Hebrews.  There we find:
 
"Original Word: ????????
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: elohim
Phonetic Spelling: (el-o-heem')
Short Definition: God"

http://biblehub.com/hebrew/430.htm


So why have you not included the "ha" at the beginning of the word. This "ha" means "the" as in "the gods" and it is the identical word used in Exodus 18:11 "Yahweh is greater than all the gods"

It is not Elohim, it is haelohim.

This dodge of yours is not the sign of someone who is communicating with a real god as you claim you are.

If you think the word does not have its natural meaning of "the gods", where is your evidence?

Quote
Quote
Now at last you have admitted that the word is actually a plural

What?  "Now at last"?  What did I already post SEVERAL posts up in #34?  Let me remind you:

"The plural form of the noun here in Hebrew is the plural of majesty or excellence"

Your dishonest accusation is a fail.

You have been trying to claim that the plural is not really a plural but just a means if respect. You can see from Exodus 18:11 "Yahweh is greater than all the gods", that this is not so. It is a real plural.

Your word twisting and insults are not the sign of someone who is communicating with a real god as you claim you are.

Quote
"The plural form of the noun here in Hebrew is the plural of majesty or excellence. (See NAB, St. Joseph Edition, Bible Dictionary, p. 330; also, New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. V, p. 287.) It conveys no thought of plurality of persons. In similar fashion, at Judges 16:23 when reference is made to the false god Dagon, a form of the title ’elo·him is used; the accompanying verb is singular, showing that reference is to just the one god. At Genesis 42:30, Joseph is spoken of as the “lord” (’adho·neh?, the plural of excellence) of Egypt.
 
The Greek language does not have a ‘plural of majesty or excellence.’ So, at Genesis 1:1 the translators of LXX used ho The·os? (God, singular) as the equivalent of ’Elo·him. At Mark 12:29, where a reply of Jesus is reproduced in which he quoted Deuteronomy 6:4, the Greek singular ho The·os? is similarly used."

wol.jw.org/

I hope you can now understand why this quote is nonsense. This quote does not refer to Gen 6:2 which says "the sons of the gods saw that the daughters of men were beautiful". In the first place the quote uses the word elohim which is not the form used at Gen 6:2. Second they are claiming that a false god is being given a title of majesty. Obviously the form developed from polytheistic references to gods and not from their majesty, just as people casually refer to "the gods" today. Third the sentence in Gen 6:2 does not have a singular verb so haelohim is not defined as singular. So that quote you gave is completely irrelevant to Gen 6:2.

Quote
Quote
you can try to make excuses why Genesis does not mean "the sons of the gods"

I don't need to.  I understand the application of the word as it has already been explained to you.  And you have been show specific examples of plural nouns being applied to single individuals and it was explained why it is done so.

None of your examples apply to Gen 6:2.

Your false understanding of the bible and amateur translations are not a sign of someone communicating with a real god as you claim you are.

Quote
Quote
and why a people who slowly developed the idea that their god Yahweh was the only god, could not escape from their polytheistic roots in calling him "gods" or "the gods", since he is also called god of gods in the singular, and this sentence clearly refers to a time when gods were thought of as having families.

No, I don't need to show why your wild stories are false.

Jos 22:22 El elohim Yahweh

Yahweh is the god of gods. No plural of majesty is needed.

It is your job to prove yourself wrong, not to prove me wrong. No one has any responsibility for your thoughts except you. The fact that you dodge, spread so much false information on every thread, and behave so irresponsibly in checking the accuracy of your own thoughts and in trying to prove yourself wrong, proves that there can be no doubt that you are deluding yourself when you claim to be communicating with a god.
The Foxy Freedom antitheist website is http://the6antitheist6guide6.blogspot.co.uk

The 2nd edition of the free ebook Devil or Delusion ? The danger of Christianity to Democracy Freedom and Science.       http://t.co/2d1KcJ9V

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 15326
  • Darwins +1178/-40
  • Gender: Male
  • We stand on the shoulders of giants
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #56 on: May 11, 2015, 01:40:09 PM »

Quote
It does appear they all became men" [rather than women].

"the sons of God saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. " (Gen 6:2)

There is no record any of them took men as mates.

Quote
Once they took on flesh and blood then they were able to produce flesh and blood offsping.

Angels are spirits and not human.  (Hebrews 1:14)
Those in heaven do not have flesh and blood.  (1 Cor 15:50)
Since they are not physical creatures but spiritual creatures they must manifest a body that we can see.

Since they took women as mates (Gen 6:2) and their offspring were human (Gen 6:4), the only reasonable conclusion is that they manifested, and they manifested as men.  They because flesh and blood.  They did not just impregnate these women but took them as wives (Gen 6:2).  They were living as humans and reproduced as humans.  They did not reproduce other spirits.


Do you know what explanation requires the least amount of explaining?
What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 15326
  • Darwins +1178/-40
  • Gender: Male
  • We stand on the shoulders of giants
Re: Heaven is sexist.
« Reply #57 on: May 11, 2015, 02:06:45 PM »
And what plural word is that?

el.  elohim is plural of el. 
http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H430&t=KJV

Just like Nephilim is a plural.  And goyim is a plural.  And Harradrim.  And Rohirrim.[1]

http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Grammar/Unit_Four/Plural_Nouns/plural_nouns.html
http://www.wikihow.com/Pluralize-a-Word-in-Hebrew

And the context is often used as a plural.  And the verb usually associated with it is a plural. 

References you find that deny this are religious references that have a strong motivation to interpret it as a "royal we" which did not exist until the 12th century CE

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_we
Quote
Secular scholars consider these forms to be holdovers from early Israelite/Canaanite beliefs, before the development of monolatrism/monotheism.


Because a form of the same plural word was used for Dagon in Judges 16:23.  The same plural word applied to one individual.

You are cherry picking, Hoss.  That is a form of confirmation bias, wherein you select items that confirm what you want to believe and magically ignore all the items that falsify it.



jst, sorry man, but this is either totally dishonest or totally incompetent on your part:

Quote
"Of elohim"...."Of God".  The word is 430[e] in Strong's Hebrews.  There we find:
 
"Original Word: ????????
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: elohim
Phonetic Spelling: (el-o-heem')
Short Definition: God"

http://biblehub.com/hebrew/430.htm

you source says:

Quote
Brown-Driver-Briggs
noun masculine plural (feminine...

1 plural in number.
a. rulers, judges, either as divine representatives at sacred places or as reflecting divine majesty and power...
b. divine ones, superhuman beings including God and angels...
c. angels Psalm...
d. gods...

 1. okay, that one's from Lord of the Rings, but Tolkein was a linguist and cribbed his stuff from real sources
What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.