Peshitta Forum

Full Version: Romans 1:17 query
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Akhi Paul, please do not get upset or angry over such nonsense. I gave already examples from German to back up your case but it seems to be ignored.

In German, the word "cat", katze, is feminine. It therefore uses the "feminine the" which is die (die, der, der, die - das, des, dem, den etc). The subject itself is not feminine. The word is not gramtically feminine because all cats are female or because female women may prefer cats. it is grammatically feminine because of the structure of the word. As a general rule, in German, if a word ends in "e", it is feminine. This doesn't mean that the subject is feminine. You can still have male cats.

Same goes for lemonade, li-mo-na-de, which is totally neutral (and enjoyed by all genders) but is considered to be a feminine word grammatically.


Again "die katze" does not refer to "she the cat" or "the she cat", it can refer to a male or a female cat.
Oh Chris get off it. The understanding is there in the OT for a reason.

What are you worried about it for anyways, last time you were chirping up about the OT, you didn't trust the Hebrew texts and was wanting to head towards the LXX as your preference since it agreed more with your theological bias.

Were not talking about german or any other language difference. Such figurative understanding is given in many places within the Hebrew OT about the gender of The Spirit of God. A real good one is proverbs. If that is not talking about The Holy Spirit when it mentions wisdom, how "She" does this and does that for mankind,...then people are completely blind here.

With such grammatical and "figurative" understandings throughout the OT blatantly given to us, that syriac text in Acts 1:4 is nothing short of complete theological corruption. I'm not here just to upset people, I refuse to accept someone blurbing out that this is original when such heresy is blatantly obvious.
Just stay out of it Chris, it was between Paul and I, you ignore me any other time, just continue to do so.
Akhi Chris,

Don't bother. The (female) voice Dave hears in his head tells him he is always right - the Holy Spirit is a girl, you know.

All internet boards have their resident clowns. In the meantime, on with the mission soldier. <!-- s:biggrin: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/biggrin.gif" alt=":biggrin:" title="Big Grin" /><!-- s:biggrin: -->
You see Paul, what we do is provide proof like I did, all you did was just say, "The Holy Spirit is a He!" without any proof other than your word. I loaded a grand amount on you but you provided nothing to dispute it. You can't actually, all of it was correct. I don't see how you could.

Here is another one:

Genesis 1:27

"And God, He created the man in the image of Him, in the image of God He created him, male and female He created them.


Male and Female is the image of God. So what are we saying here? That The Father is both male and female? Afraid not.

All the proof that was provided pointed towards the feminine side of the Godhead, which would only be The Spirit of God. The proof is evident and answers the questions. It is also quite evident that The Father is masculine, there is too many places that account for Him being such in the old testament.

So, I don't know where you would right this off so fast other than you are caught red-handed with a bias of some sort.

You know what, sorry if the truth hurts Paul, but someone has to bring it out to the light.

I bet that if we go back to the DSS and look amongst the tattered bits there that we would find corrections to the areas that are either uncertain or would fix the small 10 to 11% chance that The Holy Spirit is masculine.
Look at the numbers again:

Quote:Actual breakdown:

9 out of 89 occurrences of the Spirit of God are masculine.

44 out of 373 occurrences of spirit (of whatever sort) are masculine.

9/89 = 10.1 % masculine

44/373 = 11.8 % masculine

The numbers don't lie here.
""The (female) voice Dave hears in his head tells him he is always right ""

omg (oodness) if it isn't so tragic to see someone so deceived (or is it a purposeful sham like those Landover Baptists?) I would be lauging my butt off

I sincerely hope (if Dave is deluded rather than having a big joke) that he will abandon his belief in "the goddess" and will turn back to the Peshitta and it's Alaha.

Shlama,

Chris

ETA: Just finished praying for him
Quote:ETA: Just finished praying for him

I didn't feel anything. Go back and try again there Chris.


I don't see anyone even attempting to prove the sections in the OT as being wrong. I know for a fact that one particular person seen those numbers and is most likely looking at it.

Why not get past the mental gymnastics here and start looking at if the study is wrong. I mean with an honest approach. I don't think you guys want to simply because it throws your text in a bad light and your afraid of it.

God chose bold people to make the greatest discoveries. Utilizing individuals was always God's way of doing things, and those individuals did amazing things. That principle has not changed either.
Quote:God chose bold people to make the greatest discoveries.
= "The biggest loud mouth wins".
Right, Dave ?
Test the numbers Dave:

Quote:Actual breakdown:

9 out of 89 occurrences of the Spirit of God are masculine.

44 out of 373 occurrences of spirit (of whatever sort) are masculine.

9/89 = 10.1 % masculine

44/373 = 11.8 % masculine


Are you and the others afraid here? I think I found the chink in the armour with you guy's text here (one of serveral) and you would rather just blow me off instead of take it serious and see if the study was right.
Dave, if you had a book on Hebrew grammar and would read it, you would see how you have proven that the gender of a Hebrew verb generally agrees with the gender of the subject, and that there are many exceptions to the rule. "Ruach" is grammatically feminine, always. So is "Eretz"-"Earth" ; does that mean earth is a woman ?
Enan- "Clouds" is masculine; does that mean clouds are men ?
Every noun in Hebrew is either masculine or feminine; does that mean everything is a man or woman ?

Every abstract idea is feminine in Hebrew: Love, truth, mercy, freedom, joy, hope, beauty, wisdom, etc. . The same applies to Greek and Aramaic, generally. Every country and city is feminine grammatically; does that make every place a woman ?

By the way, "Pneuma" - "Spirit" in Greek, is neuter. Does that mean the Holy Spirit in the NT is an "It", while the Holy Spirit in the OT is a "She" ?

You don't know how ridiculous your arrogance comes across when you presume to lecture Paul on Aramaic and the rest of us on Hebrew. If you really had an interest in learning, you would ask questions, not lecture on things you need to learn.

The Spirit of wisdom has yet to come upon you, Dave. I would never have guessed you were 40 years old; I thought you were about 23.

The Holy Spirit has directed me to say these things to you, Dave; you are not right in God's sight. You must repent and seek forgiveness ; otherwise you will grow worse and worse and descend into Hell and become a demon, blaspheming the very Spirit Whom you claim to know and love.
Matthew 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, My Lord, my Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name cast out demons? and in thy name wrought many works of power?
23 And then will I declare to them; I never knew you. Depart from me, ye doers of evil.


In the Spirit of Truth,


Dave
Quote:Dave, if you had a book on Hebrew grammar and would read it, you would see how you have proven that the gender of a Hebrew verb generally agrees with the gender of the subject, and that there are many exceptions to the rule. "Ruach" is grammatically feminine, always. So is "Eretz"-"Earth" ; does that mean earth is a woman ?
Enan- "Clouds" is masculine; does that mean clouds are men ?
Every noun in Hebrew is either masculine or feminine; does that mean everything is a man or woman ?

The study was important. The conclusion was also important, in that it gave some sort of idea on the overall usage of the gender towards The Holy Spirit.

It boils down to correctness. I'm being particular in an area where others move over it or around it, or just avoid it altogether.

Was the study wrong? Obviously not. You, Paul, and others have yet to prove it wrong. I'm not being hardheaded, I threw this flag up here but have yet to see anyone prove otherwise or correct it.

Quote:By the way, "Pneuma" - "Spirit" in Greek, is neuter. Does that mean the Holy Spirit in the NT is an "It", while the Holy Spirit in the OT is a "She" ?

I don't read greek, and God has no plans for me to at the moment, but the study did not say the greek was wrong. In fact, the aspect of the greek being neutral was not, in their eyes, completely wrong. The syriac, on the other hand, does not have that luxury. It has to say one way or the other. When it does go into the masculine, it should align with the OT usage of the masculine towards The Holy Spirit, but in Acts 1:4 it didn't. I had a problem with that simply because we are talking originality. Everyone and their grandmother's entertainer on here promotes originality of the syriac text and how accurate the "scribes" were who wrote it. I beg to differ, particularly in this area.

Quote:The Holy Spirit has directed me to say these things to you, Dave; you are not right in God's sight. You must repent and seek forgiveness ; otherwise you will grow worse and worse and descend into Hell and become a demon, blaspheming the very Spirit Whom you claim to know and love.

Hmmmm, I'm going to become a demon huh? Hehe, yea ok.

I'm not going to persue asking guestions about your Sprit-filled life here unitarian, since you have already put that down as something completely wrong, but I will concede on a few things you point out;

Yes, I'm quite arrogant, I'm quite bold, and I'm happy about that since I'm also completely in tune with what God wants done. My ambitions have Him perfectly centered in my thoughts and actions. I'm one of His Chosen of His church and He chose me on pedictability. Would I hold His interests as foremost and true or would I later on persue my own forsaking His? Where would my heart be over time?

My ambitions are completely towards The Almighty Dave, so you have no reason to worry on my current state of salvation or my progress in santification. He's been working with me all this time through thick and thin and knows how to handle me when I'm stepping out too much on my own, and will also bring me back into the fold whenever I do.

Will I change any time soon? I highly dought that. I'm like a pitbull when it comes to getting something done for Him, and He doesn't see anything wrong with it. And unless I start claiming that all actions are proceding from me instead of Him, I'm not too worried about the outcome because it will always be good.

My wilderness is almost complete Dave, and a grand annointing awaits those who go through that sort of fire. It's been costly, but the end result will be worth it completely. To those who desire much, much will be required. Why? So that you appreciate what is given to you and you keep Him in rememberance of it all the time.

No one holds you back Dave, you can stay comfortable where your at or desire more, it doesn't matter to me. You can do all the scripture studies you want in whatever language you want, but it will boil down to one thing, ask and ye shall receive. Some things are a work of faith, there is just no way around it. We have to take an action of faith to find out at times.

Anyways, enough on that.
Quote: I'm not going to persue asking guestions about your Sprit-filled life here unitarian.

I am not a Unitarian, have never been a Unitarian and never will be a Unitarian !

Maybe you don't know what "Unitarian" means either.

You really need a good education, Dave. Your "Spirit-filled" experience isn't doing the job.
Dave Wrote:We have to take an action of faith to find out at times.


Do you mean like saying "No!" at the not-so-subtle invitation to recite the creed which constitutes the acceptance of Islam, while a Mullah is reciting verses from the Quran and someone is holding a knife to your throat?

Is that an action of faith, Dave, or is that the type of person you were speaking of who are just thrown to the dogs by God, having obviously done something wrong?
Sorry Dave, I unintentionally overwrote your post instead of replying to it. I didn't realize I had that kind of editing ability! <!-- s:nervous: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/nervous.gif" alt=":nervous:" title="Nervous" /><!-- s:nervous: -->
Pages: 1 2 3 4