Is the Holy Spirit Female?

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

What a mess. IF you had even a remedial understanding of Hebrew, you would already know why supporting this from your interlinear is absurd.

And then there's the huge gap in understanding gender as it pertains to ancient cultures in creation stories.

And the failure to understand the Mind-Spirit-Word metaphor of the Godhead.

I mean, it's not an easy topic at all, but you are even farther from the truth of the matter than the church, and they have all but thrown up their hands and declared it a "mystery."

As pertains to Jesus, Mary is the mother, and fills the female role. Duh. At a macroscopic level, humanity fills the female role, while God fills the male role.

Ponder for a minute why the root word of "material" is the same as "mother." That might lead you to the answer.

You sound like your beating around the bush. Where is this 'proof' you're vaguely alluding too. The OP has the proof for you to read in the Hebrew and its translation, here is just one of them, can you explain to everyone why it say 'she' and why it shouldn't?:

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineI...Tpdf/job33.pdf

Job 33:4

רוּח
ruch
spirit-of

אֵ ל
al
El

עָ שָׂ תְ נִ י
oshth·ni
SHE made me

וְ נִ שְׁ מַ ת
u·nshmth
and breath of

שַׁ דַּ י
shdi
Who Suffices

תְּ חַ יֵּנִ י
thchi·ni
SHE is keeping alive me

 

[Wick Stick]

What a mess. IF you had even a remedial understanding of Hebrew, you would already know why supporting this from your interlinear is absurd.

And then there's the huge gap in understanding gender as it pertains to ancient cultures in creation stories.

And the failure to understand the Mind-Spirit-Word metaphor of the Godhead.

I mean, it's not an easy topic at all, but you are even farther from the truth of the matter than the church, and they have all but thrown up their hands and declared it a "mystery."

As pertains to Jesus, Mary is the mother, and fills the female role. Duh. At a macroscopic level, humanity fills the female role, while God fills the male role.

Ponder for a minute why the root word of "material" is the same as "mother." That might lead you to the answer.

You sound like your beating around the bush. Where is this 'proof' you're vaguely alluding too. The OP has the proof for you to read in the Hebrew and its translation, here is just one of them, can you show everyone where it does not say 'she' and why?:

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineI...Tpdf/job33.pdf

Job 33:4

רוּח
ruch
spirit-of

אֵ ל
al
El

עָ שָׂ תְ נִ י
oshth·ni
SHE made me

וְ נִ שְׁ מַ ת
u·nshmth
and breath of

שַׁ דַּ י
shdi
Who Suffices

תְּ חַ יֵּנִ י
thchi·ni
SHE is keeping alive me

Did you recycle this response from someone else? I didn't say anything about proof.

Anyway, chair already refuted you roundly on page 1, with multiple citations from grammar books, so I don't need to do it again.

Besides, it's ridiculous to have to prove basic grammar. DO you also want me to prove that and is a conjunction?

I posted to (a) give you the right answer, (b) give you topics to study to prove it for yourself, and (c) take away your excuses for having it so wrong, when you fail to believe (a), or do (b).

Consider yourself de-nuded of excuse.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

Did you recycle this response from someone else? I didn't say anything about proof.

Anyway, chair already refuted you roundly on page 1, with multiple citations from grammar books, so I don't need to do it again.

Besides, it's ridiculous to have to prove basic grammar. DO you also want me to prove that and is a conjunction?

I posted to (a) give you the right answer, (b) give you topics to study to prove it for yourself, and (c) take away your excuses for having it so wrong, when you fail to believe (a), or do (b).

Consider yourself de-nuded of excuse.

Actually I've been waiting nearly a week for Chair to respond to my post #37 Just like I am still waiting for to also explain your alleged proof I asked you for in post #81.

Your half answer; 'DO you also want me to prove that and is a conjunction?' is no answer, so come on what is this conjunction idea you have?:

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineI...Tpdf/job33.pdf

Job 33:4

עָ שָׂ תְ נִ י
oshth·ni
SHE made me

תְּ חַ יֵּנִ י
thchi·ni
SHE is keeping alive me

 

[chair]

Well I don't speak Hebrew (or live in Israel) I am very envious of you on both counts. I've read the introduction and looked at the chart but I will not pretend that I understand it fully. I may well go find someone who does speak Hebrew and ask them (although this won't be easy). I can see the prefix 'ni' but am only guessing the jot or tittle ' is what makes it a female pronoun?:

עָ שָׂ תְ נִ י
oshth·ni
SHE made me

תְּ חַ יֵּנִ י
thchi·ni
SHE is keeping alive me

I haven't answered till now because I think this is nearly hopeless. Hebrew grammar is very different than English grammar.

In any case:
The suffix "ni" makes the action refer to the person it is being done to. That is the me" in English. But the pronoun does not appear here- it is the structure of the verb that tells you that it is being done to "me", and the structure also tells you that tells you that a female is performing the action.

Here is a phrase from Psalm 22, which I think Christians are aware of:
אֵלִי אֵלִי, לָמָה עֲזַבְתָּנִי

My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? (KJV)

The word עֲזַבְתָּנִי includes the information that a male has done an action to me (in the past).That is: "hast thou forsaken me". Many words in English are required in order to get the meaning of one Hebrew word across.

I will repeat something I've said before: All nouns in Hebrew have gender. Including inanimate objects.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

I haven't answered till now because I think this is nearly hopeless. Hebrew grammar is very different than English grammar.

In any case:
The suffix "ni" makes the action refer to the person it is being done to. That is the me" in English. But the pronoun does not appear here- it is the structure of the verb that tells you that it is being done to "me", and the structure also tells you that tells you that a female is performing the action.

Here is a phrase from Psalm 22, which I think Christians are aware of:
אֵלִי אֵלִי, לָמָה עֲזַבְתָּנִי

My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? (KJV)

The word עֲזַבְתָּנִי includes the information that a male has done an action to me (in the past).That is: "hast thou forsaken me". Many words in English are required in order to get the meaning of one Hebrew word across.

I will repeat something I've said before: All nouns in Hebrew have gender. Including inanimate objects.

You say; "and the structure also tells you that tells you that a female is performing the action."
Again proving the Holy Spirit is Female.

I am beginning to think either your Hebrew isn't very good or your bluffing that you can even speak Hebrew. Are you sure you want to carry on with your assertion?

 

[chair]

You say; "and the structure also tells you that tells you that a female is performing the action."
Again proving the Holy Spirit is Female.

Everything has a gender in Hebrew. "Wind" or "Spirit" RUACH is female. I have never said otherwise. but this does not mean that RUACH is a person. Inanimate objects have gender. Tables, rocks- everything.

I am beginning to think either your Hebrew isn't very good or your bluffing that you can even speak Hebrew. Are you sure you want to carry on with your assertion?

Your arrogance is born of ignorance and an unwillingness to learn. This is why I didn't bother answering your previous post (#37) for so long.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

Everything has a gender in Hebrew. "Wind" or "Spirit" RUACH is female. I have never said otherwise. but this does not mean that RUACH is a person. Inanimate objects have gender. Tables, rocks- everything.

Again with the awful accusation that the Third Person of the Trinity is no more than an inanimate object! What you you think She or God thinks about that? Arrogant and ignorant come to mind.

Your arrogance is born of ignorance and an unwillingness to learn. This is why I didn't bother answering your previous post (#37) for so long.

Yeah like it has nothing to do with the fact you can't prove your grammar theory. :jolly:

 

[chair]

Again with the awful accusation that the Third Person of the Trinity is no more than an inanimate object! What you you think She or God thinks about that? Arrogant and ignorant come to mind.

Again, I am not a Christian, and I don't care about your "third person". Or your second, for that matter. I am just pointing out the facts regarding Hebrew. How many times do I need to say this?

Yeah like it has nothing to do with the fact you can't prove your grammar theory. :jolly:

It is not a theory. It is simple fact. I provided plenty of proof of this early on in this thread. Post #12. Apparently it disturbs you that somebody else knows more about a particular subject than you do. Get over it and learn something.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

Again, I am not a Christian, and I don't care about your "third person". Or your second, for that matter. I am just pointing out the facts regarding Hebrew. How many times do I need to say this?



It is not a theory. It is simple fact. I provided plenty of proof of this early on in this thread. Post #12. Apparently it disturbs you that somebody else knows more about a particular subject than you do. Get over it and learn something.

Yeah and this was my response to post #12:

'None of those links prove your argument, in fact all of them prove the Holy Spirit is indeed female. Just posting links about how Hebrew pronouns are male and female will only strengthen the fact the Bible says the Holy Spirit is female.

You will not find a credible citation proving your point.'

You have nothing and you biggest problem is that you are not saved too.

 

[chair]

Yeah and this was my response to post #12:

'None of those links prove your argument, in fact all of them prove the Holy Spirit is indeed female. Just posting links about how Hebrew pronouns are male and female will only strengthen the fact the Bible says the Holy Spirit is female.

You will not find a credible citation proving your point.'

What do you think is my point?

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

What do you think is my point?

You gave your point in your first post in this thread, post #7:

"There is no pronoun "she" in those verses ( I only checked the first few- but I see where your error is). In fact, there is no pronoun at all.

What you are running into is the fact that in Biblical Hebrew, as in many languages, both ancient and modern, all objects have gender. A table is either male or female. Likewise a chair, or a cup- or the wind/spirit. English is an unusual language in not having this feature, so an English speaker might read more into this than there really is.

So the wind or spirit has the feminine gender,which affects what form of the verb is used, but does not imply that the inanimate object is "male" or "female".

You will notice that the translations do not put the word "she" into the text. The translators knew how Hebrew works, so they avoided that mistake.

You may consider studying Biblical Hebrew.

Chair"

Did you forget.

 

[chair]

You gave your point in your first post in this thread, post #7:

"There is no pronoun "she" in those verses ( I only checked the first few- but I see where your error is). In fact, there is no pronoun at all.

What you are running into is the fact that in Biblical Hebrew, as in many languages, both ancient and modern, all objects have gender. A table is either male or female. Likewise a chair, or a cup- or the wind/spirit. English is an unusual language in not having this feature, so an English speaker might read more into this than there really is.

So the wind or spirit has the feminine gender,which affects what form of the verb is used, but does not imply that the inanimate object is "male" or "female".

You will notice that the translations do not put the word "she" into the text. The translators knew how Hebrew works, so they avoided that mistake.

You may consider studying Biblical Hebrew.

Chair"

Did you forget.

No, I did not forget. That is exactly my point. I have nothing to say about the Holy Spirit being a "person". I am just pointing out some grammatical facts. I gave several links that explain this as well. But for some reason you think I am making this up.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

No, I did not forget. That is exactly my point. I have nothing to say about the Holy Spirit being a "person". I am just pointing out some grammatical facts. I gave several links that explain this as well. But for some reason you think I am making this up.

Your going round in circles. I've answered all your previous posts and everyone can see that you have nothing further to add as you can't find this mysterious grammar rule to prove she means he. :kookoo:

 

[chair]

Your going round in circles. I've answered all your previous posts and everyone can see that you have nothing further to add as you can't find this mysterious grammar rule to prove she means he. :kookoo:

Dern it, I am NOT and never have been, trying to prove that she means he. That is why I asked you what you thought my point is.


Ruach is in the feminine. If it was a person, it would be a female. But the fact that it is a feminine noun does not, in any way, show that Ruach is a person, or a female person.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

Dern it, I am NOT and never have been, trying to prove that she means he. That is why I asked you what you thought my point is.


Ruach is in the feminine. If it was a person, it would be a female. But the fact that it is a feminine noun does not, in any way, show that Ruach is a person, or a female person.

And because you're not a Christian that is why you don't believe the Holy Spirit is a person, (a female person). As I said that is your biggest problem. Seriously; what do you think happened to Jesus body after He died? http://creately.com/diagram/gzqv8c5z2/knxGs5iaraoQgyinDk3jxQMEYQA=

 

[chair]

And because you're not a Christian that is why you don't believe the Holy Spirit is a person, (a female person). As I said that is your biggest problem. Seriously; what do you think happened to Jesus body after He died? http://creately.com/diagram/gzqv8c5z2/knxGs5iaraoQgyinDk3jxQMEYQA=

So, you understand that the feminine noun in itself does not indicate that the Holy Spirit is a female person?

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

So, you understand that the feminine noun in itself does not indicate that the Holy Spirit is a female person?

I recognise first and foremost that the Holy Spirit is a Person. Any Christian or Jew would tell you that. I then also believe that when it says she is a she, that she is a she and not a he.

 

[Wick Stick]

Again with the awful accusation that the Third Person of the Trinity is no more than an inanimate object! What you you think She or God thinks about that? Arrogant and ignorant come to mind.

:jump: "Inanimate" is an ironic choice of word. Thanks for the laugh.

Yeah like it has nothing to do with the fact you can't prove your grammar theory. :jolly:

Grammar theory, lol. There's another theory that adding s to the end of a word pluralizes it... I suppose you will want mathematical proof of that one, too.

 

[chair]

I recognise first and foremost that the Holy Spirit is a Person. Any Christian or Jew would tell you that.

Jews would not tell you that. Nor would many Christians.

I then also believe that when it says she is a she, that she is a she and not a he.

In Hebrew a cup is female, and a house is male. That does not make either of them a person.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

Jews would not tell you that. Nor would many Christians.

Yes they would.

In Hebrew a cup is female, and a house is male. That does not make either of them a person.

She certainly is mysterious, there are very few verses that describe her. Typical women.