God Is A Man
- Thread starter trust_in_the_name
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
No offense, but I'm guessing you don't know the Hebrew language.
Man in Exodus 15:3 is Ish (H376), which means a male individual, as opposed to mankind. It is NOT adham (H120), which is mankind. It can mean male, husband, mate, possesor of manliness, soldier, inhabitant, citizen, person, someone, anyone, each, every. It usually refers to individuals, and the basic idea being conveyed by the word is maleness, masculinity, virility. Its root is enosh (G582), which means the same, but is utilized when depicting weakness, and indicates someone who is specifically mortal.
Such expressions as "man of war", "man of blood", "man of the earth" are a favorite way in Hebrew to attribute a quality to someone. It's not literal.
Though I never posted on your last thread, I've looked at each rendering from scripture you gave. There's nothing substantial to even hint that the various references mean God is a man. Only a casual modern English reading would suggest such a conclusion.
If I said of a group of like-minded co-workers, "Birds of a feather flock together.", it doesn't mean they are literal avian with plumage.
God [is] a Spirit. -John 4:24
Man in Exodus 15:3 is Ish (H376), which means a male individual, as opposed to mankind. It is NOT adham (H120), which is mankind. It can mean male, husband, mate, possesor of manliness, soldier, inhabitant, citizen, person, someone, anyone, each, every. It usually refers to individuals, and the basic idea being conveyed by the word is maleness, masculinity, virility. Its root is enosh (G582), which means the same, but is utilized when depicting weakness, and indicates someone who is specifically mortal.
Such expressions as "man of war", "man of blood", "man of the earth" are a favorite way in Hebrew to attribute a quality to someone. It's not literal.
Though I never posted on your last thread, I've looked at each rendering from scripture you gave. There's nothing substantial to even hint that the various references mean God is a man. Only a casual modern English reading would suggest such a conclusion.
If I said of a group of like-minded co-workers, "Birds of a feather flock together.", it doesn't mean they are literal avian with plumage.
God [is] a Spirit. -John 4:24
M
No offense, but I'm guessing you don't know the Hebrew language.
Man in Exodus 15:3 is Ish (H376), which means a male individual, as opposed to mankind. It is NOT adham (H120), which is mankind. It can mean male, husband, mate, possesor of manliness, soldier, inhabitant, citizen, person, someone, anyone, each, every. It usually refers to individuals, and the basic idea being conveyed by the word is maleness, masculinity, virility. Its root is enosh (G582), which means the same, but is utilized when depicting weakness, and indicates someone who is specifically mortal.
Such expressions as "man of war", "man of blood", "man of the earth" are a favorite way in Hebrew to attribute a quality to someone. It's not literal.
Though I never posted on your last thread, I've looked at each rendering from scripture you gave. There's nothing substantial to even hint that the various references mean God is a man. Only a casual modern English reading would suggest such a conclusion.
If I said of a group of like-minded co-workers, "Birds of a feather flock together.", it doesn't mean they are literal avian with plumage.
God [is] a Spirit. -John 4:24
Man in Exodus 15:3 is Ish (H376), which means a male individual, as opposed to mankind. It is NOT adham (H120), which is mankind. It can mean male, husband, mate, possesor of manliness, soldier, inhabitant, citizen, person, someone, anyone, each, every. It usually refers to individuals, and the basic idea being conveyed by the word is maleness, masculinity, virility. Its root is enosh (G582), which means the same, but is utilized when depicting weakness, and indicates someone who is specifically mortal.
Such expressions as "man of war", "man of blood", "man of the earth" are a favorite way in Hebrew to attribute a quality to someone. It's not literal.
Though I never posted on your last thread, I've looked at each rendering from scripture you gave. There's nothing substantial to even hint that the various references mean God is a man. Only a casual modern English reading would suggest such a conclusion.
If I said of a group of like-minded co-workers, "Birds of a feather flock together.", it doesn't mean they are literal avian with plumage.
God [is] a Spirit. -John 4:24
Well put. In addition, Ex 15:3 is part of a song and as such is poetic language designed to evoke an image of God as a warrior, not reveal He is a man. That would be stretching the purpose of the verse far beyond breaking point.
"The Lord is a man (ish) of war; The Lord is His name." -Exodus 15:3
The Hebrew word used for man here is ish (H376), as was mentioned.
but also scripture says...
"...For I am God, and not man (ish), The Holy One in your midst..." - Hosea 11:9
The Hebrew word used here is also ish (H376).
So one scripture says God is a man of war...the other one says He's not a man. Ish can be translated as different words, so what's the correct translation??
Philipians 2:6-8 gives us a peek into how these verses above should be translated:
6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, 7 but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross.
Philipians shows us that Jesus before He came to earth was in the form of God. Well what did that form look like? It didn't look like a man, because it goes on to show that Jesus took on the form of a man and was found in appearance as a man.
So to follow all that through...
"God is not a man", is a correct translation of Hosea 11:9
So, Exodus 15:3 can't be saying God is an actual man, because that would run contrary to scripture. In the context you see God guarding Israel as a husband would. Maybe Husband of war would be a better translation communicating that God can be trusted to fight for Israel as a husband would. Exodus 15:13 really sells that translation and imagery to me and would be a translation that doesn't run contrary to the other scripures.
The Hebrew word used for man here is ish (H376), as was mentioned.
but also scripture says...
"...For I am God, and not man (ish), The Holy One in your midst..." - Hosea 11:9
The Hebrew word used here is also ish (H376).
So one scripture says God is a man of war...the other one says He's not a man. Ish can be translated as different words, so what's the correct translation??
Philipians 2:6-8 gives us a peek into how these verses above should be translated:
6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, 7 but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross.
Philipians shows us that Jesus before He came to earth was in the form of God. Well what did that form look like? It didn't look like a man, because it goes on to show that Jesus took on the form of a man and was found in appearance as a man.
So to follow all that through...
"God is not a man", is a correct translation of Hosea 11:9
So, Exodus 15:3 can't be saying God is an actual man, because that would run contrary to scripture. In the context you see God guarding Israel as a husband would. Maybe Husband of war would be a better translation communicating that God can be trusted to fight for Israel as a husband would. Exodus 15:13 really sells that translation and imagery to me and would be a translation that doesn't run contrary to the other scripures.
A
lol its nice to see that scholarship is still alive and active in the Christian community.
here's a song if you want to take a break from the books thanks for the information everyone.
YouTube - Who Am I - Casting Crowns
YouTube - Michael W. Smith - Step by Step
YouTube - All Of Creation - Mercyme
God is the God of all of creation. I think I'll spend the rest of the day enjoying His creation Blessings to all my brothers and sisters in Christ
here's a song if you want to take a break from the books
thanks for the information everyone.YouTube - Who Am I - Casting Crowns
YouTube - Michael W. Smith - Step by Step
YouTube - All Of Creation - Mercyme
God is the God of all of creation. I think I'll spend the rest of the day enjoying His creation
Blessings to all my brothers and sisters in Christ
M
I don't think there is anything in Scripture to suggest that God is a sexual being. (Never heard of a Mrs. God.) Having said that, He is always refered to by a masculine pronoun and it is written that man is "the image and glory of God: but woman is the glory of man." 1 Cor 11:7 (That is not a put down to the ladies...man is not independent of woman.) Perhaps refering to God in the masculine is a headship thing.