| Subject: Glad to meet you. |
Author:
Diane
| [ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 13:30:54 01/14/02 Mon
In reply to:
Samoria
's message, "Re: We're on the same page Karen" on 05:26:40 01/14/02 Mon
>I'm just asking questions for discussion... no
>pointing finger from me.. I hope. =)
I don't take offense easy. No worries.
>Why is a female God necessary? If anything is
>possible with God, then couldn't He make Jesus and do
>everything He does without a female Mother God?
~~~~~~~~~~~~If that were the case, why couldn't have done everything without a Father? Or a Son?
Father always implies Mother. Son does too.
>Bible says 'man' was created in His image... I don't
>see where it says 'woman' was created in His image.
>I'm just curious as to where you get your 'proof' or
>evidence of this claim..?
~~~~~~~~~~~It says that man (that is, mankind) was created in his image, male and female (Gen 1:27). There is no 'man' without both genders. So God's image is male and female - collectively called 'man'. And that's fine, as long as women don't care.
So if man was made in His image... and you say Adam
>was male/female at first, then split... then does this
>support your claim of there being a Mother God?
>Wouldn't that just show that God has a motherly side
>to Him, and doesn't mention a seperate Mother God..?
~~~~~~~~~~~Paul mentions our mother, "But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother." (Gal 4:26). Is he not talking to all Christians in this letter? She is the mother of all of us, and Paul knows it.
>I think the only way she can be called 'Mother' Mary
>is when speaking of the physical birth of Jesus. I
>don't believe in the 'real Mother' as you mention in
>being a Mother God though. I just don't see any
>evidence of her. =P
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I agree with you as far as Mary is concerned. But as above, you are missing some very important statements and clues in the Bible. Paul brings us back to Isaiah 54 within his passage in Galatians (Gal 4:27). She is the 'barren woman' who (at first at least) cannot have children.
Reading further we see...we are like Isaac, in that we are children of promise. Isaac was a son born by the power of the Spirit. And Sarah of course represented our Spiritual mother who was free - while Hagar represented the slave mother (4:28-31). Now we are not sons/daughters of Sarah literally - neither was Paul. But we ARE children of the free woman - our Spiritual Mother - our Mother above - if we believe. Sarah represented our mother in God, just as Abraham represented our father in God. There is always a mother if there is a father, for no birth can take place without her.
And we have a much bigger birth to come that was prophesied, do we not?
>>The Mother in God is spoken of a lot in the Bible -
>>but her work is given as credit to the male - just as
>>it happened in the human couple. Even today, women
>
>Where is this? May I see some quotes please?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~As above. And also in Proverbs, you will see that the Lord always had a partner by his side (Prov 8:30), and that she was the first of his works (v 8:22), having been in existence since before the world began (v 23).
But as a 'tree of life to those who embrace her' (Prov 3:18), she was hidden in the Garden behind the Sword (Gen 3:24). And this sword is a spiritual sword, also called the Word of God (Eph. 6:17).
Life/wisdom was hidden behind the Word from the beginning. That is why women generally take the man's name when marrying - because these spiritual beginnings are manifested throughout our physical world. What is happening in this world is happening in God. We are a pattern of the one to come - only reversed.
>May I ask what evidence you have to claim God has a
>Mother God with Him that is His 'craftman'? Also, how
>can God have a 'partner' Mother God, if the Bible
>clearly speaks that God knows of *no other* God?
>Please clarify..?
~~~~~~~~~~~~As Karen has already stated, and as above. 'God is One'. They are not seperate - they work together always, and that is why it is so hard to see the difference. But Jesus said that husband and wife also are 'one' and from the beginning there was one woman and one man. Jesus has had to go through the same things spiritually that Adam had to go through physically. He had to be a son, just as he had to become a father together with his own Eve, our mother.
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all one also. Each one has a part of the other two inside them. But the Son came first in this world, and then split into two, just as Adam did.
Adam was still Adam after the split, but now he was two people in truth that had to come back together and be 'one' again, only this time as husband and wife.
The female inside him has been hidden behind his name - doing her work from that position, just as women have been doing it throughout history. She goes by his name in order to stay hidden, for that is its purpose. The truth had to be hidden from the children for a time, so she could have the time she needed to grow and come into her own.
So, if God is never more than one, then he wouldn't refer to himself in the plural either, as he does in Gen 1:26 and 11:7, or in the trinity as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Each one of these three takes over as the need arises, just as a husband makes decisions in some areas of family life, and a wife takes over in other areas. The Son has had all power and authority for a time as well.
Diane
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
] |
|
Feedback: 