- Topic
yes it's strange on how the people who comment say their son/daughter goes there but they don't. If it is such a good thing, why not jump in the wagon.
I can’t believe someone said his wife is a missionary but he is not a member because he has his own beliefs. Well if its such an upstanding place why haven’t you tried a bible study or become a member? Just strange. They must be on the wmscog payroll because something doesn’t sound right about that at all. Well I’m sure there will be more comments posted tomorrow after they discuss it today in zion.
Yeap, I saw that one, did you see this one, look at what this one said…….why she does not believe in God….no wonder……How can the testimony of someone who does not believe in God be valid.
My son's a member
My son is a member of that church for over 8 years now , and I’m proud of him being a member. I’m 65 and I’ve seen a lot in my days, and even dealt with many Protestant churches and Pastors who’ve destroyed the lives of people, heck even I was swindled by one. But I think that church does a lot of good for the community and my son actually works harder and even tells me he loves me more and more these days. He says he is happy at the church so as a parent, if being with that group makes him happy then I’m happy for him. I don’t personally believe in God any longer, for personal reasons. I’ve heard a lot of rumors about the church but that’s all they are just rumors. The Church of God is a good church and I’m proud my son is in there.
I read a lot of people commenting on how their loved ones are in the church but THEY THEMSELVES don't believe in what the church teaches. I don't have anything against them personelly either but they are lying and distorting the scriptures. So sad…..
It's also true that they do baptize people immediately whether the person really knows what they are getting themselves into or not and then turn around call it a talent, it so deceptive and like a sales tactic. People do really start going to that church and then once they learn what they got themselves into they leave. It's also true that there are not as many members in these churches as members would have other people believe. The members are mostly women and few men. I think it's just because women are attracted to the idea that God could be a woman. The last sentence is just my opinion though, I hope no one gets upset….= )
x wms brother wrote:
It's also true that they do baptize people immediately whether the person really knows what they are getting themselves into or not and then turn around call it a talent, it so deceptive and like a sales tactic. People do really start going to that church and then once they learn what they got themselves into they leave. It's also true that there are not as many members in these churches as members would have other people believe. The members are mostly women and few men. I think it's just because women are attracted to the idea that God could be a woman. The last sentence is just my opinion though, I hope no one gets upset….= )
I'm sure that many people are baptized under 'false' understandings, yet when they come to realise the teachings, decide to leave or just not continue. I also know from personal experience and just general awareness of people, that many of all ages are very attracted to the idea of a female God, or at least a recognition that God could be female as well as male – which can lead to a very easy way of accepting God the 'Mother' and God the 'Father'. ie. "I want it to be so, therefore it's very easy to persuade me that it is so." Females want/need to have validation of their being. Males want to have a loving, caring 'Mother' in charge. (And yes, I know that is an over-simplification!) My understanding is that 'God' is neither male or female. That we are created in God's image as male and female is simply an aspect – and a very tiny aspect – of God's way of being. The idea of God's image/creation being limited to male and female is simply laughable. Nothing of God is limited.
I have to agree with you on this comment, Justasitis. As you said, “That we are created in God’s image as male and female is simply an aspect – and a very tiny aspect – of God’s way of being. The idea of God’s image/creation being limited to male and female is simply laughable. Nothing of God is limited. ”
The idea of a mother God sounds feasible based on our limited knowledge in thinking that for there to be a male there ought to be a female. But, does that have to apply in heaven? So far, I’m yet to find a female angel in the Bible, though the male-like angels are still uniquely different from the human specie. I’m not saying that is the reason a female God doesn’t exit either. However, If God wants us to know about a mother God, I believe that even Jesus would have made that clear. There is no clear reason why that would be a secret. The bible is not Hollywood in a book. It is a Holy book – one that is phenomenally different from any other book ever written.
I find no reason to believe God or angels have gender (male or female or both) at all. They don't participate in sexual reproduction.
The fallen angels did do such. I’ll get into that debate another time.
Justasitis, great point…Sarah 2 thumbs up, well said…Simon actually Jesus said Our Father in heaven, and Father why have you forsaken me, so yes he is shall I say…..Male?
its defining god by human terms with the limits of human linguistics
Simon: Not so sure what your last comment is in response to.
kims .statement to me
Thank you Kim. It is God who executes any atom of wisdom I may have. What do I know.
I guess God isn't wonderful, jealous, of love, or anything because these are all human terms Simon.
Those words don't do God justice either no
I kind of agree with Simon about God's gender. I believe He created male and female to complement each other and collectively share His characteristics. God does not have gender in the way we humans have. Refering to him as male is for linguistic convenience. The idea that males are created in the image of the male god and females in the image of a female god is not scriptural.
Well Simon's and Emil's views are not biblical either, and not concrete, it's a view or concept. God is refered to as Father and it is said we are made in the his image and likeness, but to what extent is not specified in the bible. God can have a gender, I don't believe he has genitals but gender he can You don't know maybe he is like a shape shifter but his original form no one has seen it.
So to say God does not have gender in the way we humans do, emil is wrong you should say "I believe" because the bible does not support your claim. Also In heaven God does say we are Bothers and Sisters, Sons and Daughters. So the bible does refer to us with gender.
You are telling me that the bible does not support my claim and yet it supports your claim of a female God? Why is it wrong to say "I believe" when you take exactly the same verses of Gen 1 to try and claim the female deity which is strictly proscribed in the bible?
Show us exactly how the idea of female deity is mentioned in the bible other than in the case of Astarte and her various other names?
fromtheotherside wrote:
Also In heaven God does say we are Bothers and Sisters, Sons and Daughters. So the bible does refer to us with gender.
How is that relevant to what I said? I never claimed that we don't have gender. I said God does not have gender. Then again, with regard to what you say, Jesus explained to the Sadducees that in heaven there is no concept of husband and wife. What do you suppose he meant? Obviously the reproductive aspect of gender is absent in heaven.
Astarte??? I'm so ignorant to this name. Is it some kind of god?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.