What does the average SDA mean by saying the HS is a "he" ?

[rob]

There are plenty of verses in the NT where the HS is written as a "he" because of the grammar case of the words require this.

The Greek word "pneiumia" for instance is masculine grammar case in Greek, so the Greek word "auto" must be written as "he".

But the OT has different grammar case for words using "ruwach" for instance, is "feminine grammar case" Thus such pronouns would have to receive "her".

Now does such a verse exist in the OT? Yes it does, and I post it here as it reads in the KJV

Ho 4:19 The wind hath bound her up in her wings, and they shall be ashamed because of their sacrifices.

The Hebrew under wind is ruwach, the Holy Spirit. Notice the pronoun "her" because of the feminine case from the word "ruwach"

Now for those challanged to assume grammar case means anything, which it doesn't, let us look at the Hebrew word "help meet" also in Hebrew is a masculine grammar case. So a pronoun would be "he"

Ge 2:20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

But God did not get a Steve for Adam, but a Eve for Adam. Even though the word here for help meet is masculine case.

So grammar case tells us nothing ? That is another topic for another theory. I believe it does tell us something, but its not gender.

OK show why does the Church speak of the HS as a "he"?

I got this response from my local Pastor once on this topic:

"
In some instances, the language is feminine, as you pointed out, but 98% is masculine. It is the same for God the Father and God the Son as well. Whilst most verses in scripture use the masculine pronouns for the Father and the Son, there are a minority that use feminine pronouns. God is said to give birth in the book of Job and portrays Himself as a mother in Isaiah. Jesus described the Father as being like a woman in search of a lost coin in Luke 15 (and Himself as a "mother hen" in Matthew 23:37).


In the end, whatever our theological explanation, the fact is that God used exclusively masculine terms to refer to Himself and almost exclusively masculine terminology even in metaphor. "

There is a problem with this response,

(1) When we are confronted with a theme, the majority of verses over ride the other verses that speak differently, rather than try to make harmony out of all the verses, as a good Bible student should do.
(2) Metaphor is a fancy word for poetry, and the average SDA like many people, write poetry verses off as fictitious, without exploring what the similes are trying to teach us.

Now in this Pastor reply, he uses the phrase " God used exclusively masculine terms to refer to Himself " therefore God must also by the law of association be also feminine. In language you cannot use some words without using its contrast. So question to those who say God is exclusively using masculine terms to refer to Himself, is wrong. And what does this mean anyway?

Notice the Pastor continues:

( Mt 11:19 The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. But wisdom is justified of her children.


And the passage you referenced in regards to the femininity of the Holy Spirit is a metaphor, not literal also).

So a poetry verse is treated as fictitious and therefore not worthy of serious consideration by the average SDA pastor? And since half of the Bible is poetry we have a problem if we enter into this treatment of Bible verses.

The local Pastor continues:

"
Through the Bible He taught us how to speak of Him, and it was in masculine relational terms. So, while the Holy Spirit is neither male nor female in His essence, He is properly referred to in the masculine by virtue of His relation to creation and biblical revelation. There is absolutely no biblical basis for viewing the Holy Spirit as the “female” member of the Trinity.


And if we do, we open ourselves up to the pagan tri-theism of the ancient Egyptians. They believed in a tri-theistic godhead of Horus (father), Isis (mother), and Set (son). The godhead of the Bible is very different to that pagan satanic copy."

First we have to ask the right questions and seek the right answers from the Lord, who provides wisdom if we ask:

Jas 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God

The Hebrew word "ab" in a narrow context means "father" and sometimes "fruit" implying the word has multiple meanings.

Hebrew words are broad in meaning. So what is the first but broad meaning for "ab" for ALL verses, regardless of context?

Ge 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his "provider"
Song 6:11 ¶ I went down into the garden of nuts to see the "provider" of the valley,

So "ab" in Hebrew means "Provider" , therefore by the law of association, "em" must mean "Responder"

This equates to the TWO Hebrew words for LOVE, not one word as most people assume.

Now is there a verse where the "responder" is responding with a "provider" in terms of love (these two Hebrew words for love"

Yes there is one in the OT

Isa 63:9 In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them: in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old. 10 But they rebelled, and vexed his holy Spirit: therefore he was turned to be their enemy, and he fought against them.

Here the messenger of the Most High is Jesus-YHWH and the Holy Spirit are both named together, working together as one.

And the feminine love "ahabah" is used here for responding love.

There is also one example in the NT showing two functions of love -


Lu 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her,
The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee,
and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee:
therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee
shall be called the Son of God.

This verse uses the word "born" and "born" as a process requires a "provider and a responder" doing different functions as one.
The word "overshadow" also implies two beings, not one, so the scholar SDA cannot say this is collectively one function of the Godhead as a whole. You require a source of light (Most High) and a partial filter or block of the light (HS) to make shadows.

Notice the Holy Spirit comes over Mary
And the power of the Most High Father overshadows Mary as well
And that born inside Mary : is the result of two Divine Beings, doing two different functions, providing and responding.

We will stop here because these themes are new to most of us, and thus you need some time to digest these verses. Later I shall confirm these Bible teaching using EGW as our Hebrew English translator. Shalom

 

[Chief]

This is quite a lot to digest.

While reading this, the incident where Jesus confirmed that there will be no man/woman after resurrection came to my mind (Mathew 22:30). The gender roles as we know them only exist within the limits of our temporal and spatial reality.

With this in mind, of what benefit is it to our salvation in ascribing gender roles or appropriating pronouns to the person of God?

 

[rob]

Mt 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

You are reading this verse fuzzy Chief. It does not say the biological makeup, and biological nature of providing love and responding love as a function is removed, only the genes of copulation are switched off. What you are saying indirectly is the functional personalities of loving does not exist in the next new earth. If that were so, than there would be no evidence of functional loving within the Godhead, but this is not the case. So my feeling is you are placing too much restriction on this verse, and reading it with a very narrow view.

You also are offended by my message, as Charles Kirk experienced. Hence the thread should be there? You are attacking the message, and have not answered the question I raise to the general church.

What does the average SDA mean by saying the HS is a "he" ?​

You could at least thank me for trying to resolve the question. I asked the Lord and this is the answer I got.
Yes you are correct. it is a lot to digest. Are you willing to read further studies?

https://spiritualsprings.org/ss-1144.htm

A study of love and the functionality of loving in each human personality.

https://spiritualsprings.org/ss-845.htm

A journey of human love and the qualities of both Hebrew words for love in humans

You ask me a question, rather than answering my question : what benefit is it to our salvation in ascribing gender roles or appropriating pronouns to the person of God?

Peter was soon to become a Christian doing genuine faith, notice the empowerment of Jesus:

I will write the verses in Hebrew using the correct meanings of ahab and ahabah as provider love and responder love;

Joh 21:15 ¶ So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, "provide love" me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I "provide love" [to] thee. He saith unto him, "provide" [for] my lambs.

This is based on Ps 23

Ps 23:1 The LORD is my "provider" ; I shall not want.

The word meaning "provider" fits all contexts of this Hebrew word.

Joh 21:16 He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, "provider love" thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I "provide love" [to ] thee. He saith unto him, "Provider" my sheep.

The providing love goes to all growing stages of people in the church.

Joh 21:17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, "responding love" thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, "Responding love" thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I "responding love" thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

Now sure of the Greek word here, but Jesus is asking a different function of love to come forth from Peter, the kind of love a man has when courting a worman for marriage, the kind of love for nurture and fellowship, a more intimate relational love.

Now for GOD:

Jer 31:3 The LORD hath appeared of old unto me, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting "responding love":

If "ahabah" is eternal, than it remains a part of divinity and by association a part of humanity for eternity too.

Shalom

 

[Chief]

Mt 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

You are reading this verse fuzzy Chief. It does not say the biological makeup, and biological nature of providing love and responding love as a function is removed, only the genes of copulation are switched off. What you are saying indirectly is the functional personalities of loving does not exist in the next new earth. If that were so, than there would be no evidence of functional loving within the Godhead, but this is not the case. So my feeling is you are placing too much restriction on this verse, and reading it with a very narrow view.

You also are offended by my message, as Charles Kirk experienced. Hence the thread should be there? You are attacking the message, and have not answered the question I raise to the general church.

What does the average SDA mean by saying the HS is a "he" ?​

You could at least thank me for trying to resolve the question. I asked the Lord and this is the answer I got.
Yes you are correct. it is a lot to digest. Are you willing to read further studies?

https://spiritualsprings.org/ss-1144.htm

A study of love and the functionality of loving in each human personality.

https://spiritualsprings.org/ss-845.htm

A journey of human love and the qualities of both Hebrew words for love in humans

You ask me a question, rather than answering my question : what benefit is it to our salvation in ascribing gender roles or appropriating pronouns to the person of God?

Peter was soon to become a Christian doing genuine faith, notice the empowerment of Jesus:

I will write the verses in Hebrew using the correct meanings of ahab and ahabah as provider love and responder love;

Joh 21:15 ¶ So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, "provide love" me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I "provide love" [to] thee. He saith unto him, "provide" [for] my lambs.

This is based on Ps 23

Ps 23:1 The LORD is my "provider" ; I shall not want.

The word meaning "provider" fits all contexts of this Hebrew word.

Joh 21:16 He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, "provider love" thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I "provide love" [to ] thee. He saith unto him, "Provider" my sheep.

The providing love goes to all growing stages of people in the church.

Joh 21:17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, "responding love" thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, "Responding love" thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I "responding love" thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

Now sure of the Greek word here, but Jesus is asking a different function of love to come forth from Peter, the kind of love a man has when courting a worman for marriage, the kind of love for nurture and fellowship, a more intimate relational love.

Now for GOD:

Jer 31:3 The LORD hath appeared of old unto me, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting "responding love":

If "ahabah" is eternal, than it remains a part of divinity and by association a part of humanity for eternity too.

Shalom

I do appreciate all the effort you put in your submissions. I should have started with that, pardon my oversight.

I am honestly struggling to understand you. I think we are on two different wavelengths. Being that I am not a theologian, would you mind toning down on the reference to Hebrew/Latin and just use plain English?

In a sentence, what pronoun do you suggest (from your studies) we use when referring to the Holy Spirit?

I had provided a response to your question on why the Holy Spirit is referred to by the pronoun He

• John 16:17 "Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you."
• John 16:8 "And when He has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:"
• John 14:26 "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and remind you of all that I said to you."
• John 16:13 "However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come."

I don't take offense in holding objective conversations.

I visited the referenced pages (looks like the css is broken on that website). The four commonly discussed types of love are summarised as:

1. Affection (Storge)​

• The most common and everyday form of love.
• Rooted in familiarity and comfort - like family bonds, shared routines, and simple pleasures.
• Humble and often unnoticed, but forms the bulk of our lived experiences of love.

2. Friendship (Philia)​

• Once highly valued by the ancients, now often overlooked.
• Built on shared interests and mutual understanding.
• Not essential for survival but deeply enriching; it forges movements, ideas, and communities.
• Seen as a glimpse of heavenly fellowship.

3. Romantic Love (Eros)​

• Passionate love between partners, face-to-face and absorbed in each other.
• Can be dangerous if reduced to fleeting passion, but true eros goes deeper.
• At its best, it mirrors God’s covenant love, exemplified in marriage.
• Calls us to place another’s well-being at the center of our own.

4. Charity (Agape)​

• The highest form of love - selfless, unconditional, God’s love for humanity.
• The training ground for the other loves, but also their rival if they replace God.
• Demands vulnerability: to love is to risk heartbreak.
• Ultimately, it is the Gospel command - to love beyond self-protection, as Christ loves the world.

 

[rob]

Greetings Chief, what you have posted is off the topic a little, but new to me, so I will reply

Quote:"
The ancient Greek language had four words to describe different types of love: agape, phileo, eros, and storge. Only two of these Greek words are used in the New Testament, agape (self-sacrificial love) and phileo (brotherly love).

A third type of love, eros, expresses sexual love, but the word is nowhere to be found in the New Testament. The fourth Greek word for love is storge, which relates to natural, familial love such as the love between a parent and child. In the New Testament, the negative form of storge is used twice. Astorgos means “devoid of natural or instinctive affection, without affection to kindred.”

Romans 1:31 describes sinful humanity as having “no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy.” The Greek word translated as “no love” is astorgos. The other instance of this word is found in 2 Timothy 3:3, where it is translated “without love.” Paul warns that one mark of the “terrible times in the last days” (verse 1) is that people will lack natural love for their own families.

In Romans 12:10 we find an interesting compound: philostorgos is translated as “be devoted.” The word combines philos and storge and means “to cherish one’s kindred.” Believers in Christ, children of the same heavenly Father, are to “be devoted to one another in love.” As part of God’s family, we should show loving affection toward each other and be prone to love. Philostorgus is used only once in the New Testament, and that’s in Romans 12:10.

EndQuote:"

The Bible was originally written in Hebrew, not Greek. Hence there are only two Hebrew words for love, not four.

The fastest and simplest way to prove this to you, (without using Hebrew words) is to read a KJV verse as it reads.

Such a verse is used by Paul in the NT to mean "translating" but is written as "interpretation" which is a similar word to "translating"

Here is the verse:

Isa 28:11 For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.

Notice the translation is prophecy, and it goes out in stammering lips - ie fuzzy

Hence the reason why I read the NT back into Hebrew first before reading it's message.

 

[rob]

Now you asked my what pronouns would I use

For the Most High, I would use "heavenly Provider" and remove references to "he"
For the Shadday, who administrates the medium function known as the Holy Spirit, I would use "Holy Spirit" and leave the matter respectively like that.
For Jesus, is a little easier, since He carries our image in the form of gender male as a Collector of Love.

The best word for "elohiym" is the English word "family" not the invented word "trinity". Such a word is used by EGW, but ignored by the average SDA.

This implies we have heavenly parents and a divine one and only Son, as we humans understand this simile.

Hope that helps.

 

[rob]

So back to my question:

What does the average SDA mean by saying the HS is a "he" ?​

Our local Pastor was not much help

"Through the Bible He taught us how to speak of Him, and it was in masculine relational terms."

What does this mean "masculine relational terms" ? To me it means the Most High is our Heavenly Provider.
I equate gender into these functions "masculine" is a Provider and "feminine" is a Responder.
This changes our complete perception of LOVE and loving as a function.

But I would like a response from an average SDA on these two question? Maybe even a link to a study on this?
I have found no response as to why such terms are used? And I find they are used ignorantly and incorrectly.

Shalom

 

[david.p.rod.69]

There are plenty of verses in the NT where the HS is written as a "he" because of the grammar case of the words require this.

The Greek word "pneiumia" for instance is masculine grammar case in Greek, so the Greek word "auto" must be written as "he".

But the OT has different grammar case for words using "ruwach" for instance, is "feminine grammar case" Thus such pronouns would have to receive "her".

Now does such a verse exist in the OT? Yes it does, and I post it here as it reads in the KJV

Ho 4:19 The wind hath bound her up in her wings, and they shall be ashamed because of their sacrifices.

The Hebrew under wind is ruwach, the Holy Spirit. Notice the pronoun "her" because of the feminine case from the word "ruwach"

Now for those challanged to assume grammar case means anything, which it doesn't, let us look at the Hebrew word "help meet" also in Hebrew is a masculine grammar case. So a pronoun would be "he"

Ge 2:20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

But God did not get a Steve for Adam, but a Eve for Adam. Even though the word here for help meet is masculine case.

So grammar case tells us nothing ? That is another topic for another theory. I believe it does tell us something, but its not gender.

OK show why does the Church speak of the HS as a "he"?

I got this response from my local Pastor once on this topic:

"
In some instances, the language is feminine, as you pointed out, but 98% is masculine. It is the same for God the Father and God the Son as well. Whilst most verses in scripture use the masculine pronouns for the Father and the Son, there are a minority that use feminine pronouns. God is said to give birth in the book of Job and portrays Himself as a mother in Isaiah. Jesus described the Father as being like a woman in search of a lost coin in Luke 15 (and Himself as a "mother hen" in Matthew 23:37).


In the end, whatever our theological explanation, the fact is that God used exclusively masculine terms to refer to Himself and almost exclusively masculine terminology even in metaphor. "

There is a problem with this response,

(1) When we are confronted with a theme, the majority of verses over ride the other verses that speak differently, rather than try to make harmony out of all the verses, as a good Bible student should do.
(2) Metaphor is a fancy word for poetry, and the average SDA like many people, write poetry verses off as fictitious, without exploring what the similes are trying to teach us.

Now in this Pastor reply, he uses the phrase " God used exclusively masculine terms to refer to Himself " therefore God must also by the law of association be also feminine. In language you cannot use some words without using its contrast. So question to those who say God is exclusively using masculine terms to refer to Himself, is wrong. And what does this mean anyway?

Notice the Pastor continues:

( Mt 11:19 The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. But wisdom is justified of her children.


And the passage you referenced in regards to the femininity of the Holy Spirit is a metaphor, not literal also).

So a poetry verse is treated as fictitious and therefore not worthy of serious consideration by the average SDA pastor? And since half of the Bible is poetry we have a problem if we enter into this treatment of Bible verses.

The local Pastor continues:

"
Through the Bible He taught us how to speak of Him, and it was in masculine relational terms. So, while the Holy Spirit is neither male nor female in His essence, He is properly referred to in the masculine by virtue of His relation to creation and biblical revelation. There is absolutely no biblical basis for viewing the Holy Spirit as the “female” member of the Trinity.


And if we do, we open ourselves up to the pagan tri-theism of the ancient Egyptians. They believed in a tri-theistic godhead of Horus (father), Isis (mother), and Set (son). The godhead of the Bible is very different to that pagan satanic copy."

First we have to ask the right questions and seek the right answers from the Lord, who provides wisdom if we ask:

Jas 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God

The Hebrew word "ab" in a narrow context means "father" and sometimes "fruit" implying the word has multiple meanings.

Hebrew words are broad in meaning. So what is the first but broad meaning for "ab" for ALL verses, regardless of context?

Ge 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his "provider"
Song 6:11 ¶ I went down into the garden of nuts to see the "provider" of the valley,

So "ab" in Hebrew means "Provider" , therefore by the law of association, "em" must mean "Responder"

This equates to the TWO Hebrew words for LOVE, not one word as most people assume.

Now is there a verse where the "responder" is responding with a "provider" in terms of love (these two Hebrew words for love"

Yes there is one in the OT

Isa 63:9 In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them: in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old. 10 But they rebelled, and vexed his holy Spirit: therefore he was turned to be their enemy, and he fought against them.

Here the messenger of the Most High is Jesus-YHWH and the Holy Spirit are both named together, working together as one.

And the feminine love "ahabah" is used here for responding love.

There is also one example in the NT showing two functions of love -


Lu 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her,
The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee,
and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee:
therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee
shall be called the Son of God.

This verse uses the word "born" and "born" as a process requires a "provider and a responder" doing different functions as one.
The word "overshadow" also implies two beings, not one, so the scholar SDA cannot say this is collectively one function of the Godhead as a whole. You require a source of light (Most High) and a partial filter or block of the light (HS) to make shadows.

Notice the Holy Spirit comes over Mary
And the power of the Most High Father overshadows Mary as well
And that born inside Mary : is the result of two Divine Beings, doing two different functions, providing and responding.

We will stop here because these themes are new to most of us, and thus you need some time to digest these verses. Later I shall confirm these Bible teaching using EGW as our Hebrew English translator. Shalom

So, is The 'Holy' Spirit a 'Holy' Feminine Noun, right? Can the Holy Spirit be a feminine Spirit?

I get your point because how would The Father have a feminine spirit within Himself, right? Wouldn't He have a masculine Spirit? A Ruacch, instead of Ruach, for example, a libro instead of a libra, etc..... differentiating the different 'gender' nouns. La cocina being feminine, El bano being masculine; for example... So why would Ruach be feminine? I get your point..


Genesis 1:2 "And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."


ruach: spirit, wind, breath
Original Word: רוּחַ
Part of Speech: Noun Feminine
Transliteration: ruwach
Pronunciation: roo'-akh
Phonetic Spelling: (roo'-akh)
KJV: air, anger, blast, breath, X cool, courage, mind, X quarter, X side, spirit((-ual)), tempest, X vain, ((whirl-))wind(-y)
NASB: spirit, wind, breath, winds, side, mind
Word Origin: [from H7306 (רוַּח - Spirit)]


so, and the [noun feminine Spirit] of God moved upon the face of the waters?

hmm..

But I thought God was a 'He' and not a 'She'....

So how does this work?


qodesh: Holiness, sacredness, sanctuary
Original Word: קֹדֶשׁ
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: qodesh
Pronunciation: KO-desh
Phonetic Spelling: (ko'-desh)
KJV: consecrated (thing), dedicated (thing), hallowed (thing), holiness, (X most) holy (X day, portion, thing), saint, sanctuary
NASB: holy, sanctuary, most holy, holy things, holiness, holies
Word Origin: [from H6942 (קָדַשׁ - consecrate)]

1. a sacred place or thing
2. (abstract, rarely) sanctity


And then there is the Spirit. Feminine Noun.


Masculine noun with Feminine Noun.


Now in Romance speaking places, when 2 or more are being referred to in a sentence but they with opposite genders, the plural form of addressing that 'group' becomes feminine... not masculine.

But the languages which were spoken before Romance Languages seem to not have this 'romance' language rule as part of their grammar practice. It might be that they were more patriarchal than matriarchal.


And when looking back to the first Man. Luke 3:38 "Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God."

we see that Adam was made a 'son'. But from where did Adam's helpmeet come from? Was she created as Adam was? But 'she' is a 'she'....


ho, hé, to: the
Original Word: ὁ, ἡ, τό
Part of Speech: Definite Article
Transliteration: ho, hé, to
Pronunciation: ho, hay, to
Phonetic Spelling: (ho)
KJV: the, this, that, one, he, she, it, etc
NASB: those, who, what, this, those who, which, whoever
Word Origin: [the definite article]

1. the
{sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom}


Giving distinction with 'the'... rather than without the distinction ...

The House, house
The Book, book
The Son, son

La Casa, casa
El libro, libro
El hijo, hijo
etc.....

La casa de Maria; Casa de Maria.

etc....




38: τοῦ Ἐνὼς , the Enos
τοῦ Σὴθ , the Seth
τοῦ Ἀδὰμ , the Adam
τοῦ Θεοῦ . the God.


the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.


But the word for 'son' not used in this verse


ben: Son, descendant, child
Original Word: בֵּן
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: ben
Pronunciation: ben
Phonetic Spelling: (bane)


1. a son (as a builder of the family name), in the widest sense (of literal and figurative relationship, including grandson, subject, nation, quality or condition, etc., (like H0001 H0251, etc.))



So it's not the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God;

but rather

The Enos, The Seth, The Adam, The God.


Which leaves much room to need to be understood to be able to discuss and teach this to any who might be seeking to walk in a clearer Truth of the past, present and maybe even future....

 

[rob]

Greetings David

How nice to have a response like yours. God bless you.

Your questions first, The Most High has a Provider Love personality.
And the Son expresses Collective Love personality, a term Jonathan Sarfetti uses,
which I like as a child uses love differently to parental love.
Finally the Holy Spirit shows Responding Love.

The arrangements of gender is a shape to vessel these loving traits, which all higher animals have and express, including mankind. Except mankind is unique. All animal loving personalities as we understand were created, but Eve was “built” (banah) not created (bara). This is significant because it implies the qualities of love and love came from the man.

Therefore love flows as monotheism. Not as two independent flows. This is an important principle.

Originally there were 24 chromosomes of expression, and the Man is the only vessel will a complete set. The woman has many genes switched off and others doubled in expression, so that the expression of loving is different.
(Genes 1 and 2 are combined - with 2 centromeres, making 23 expressions in humans today)

Why would ruwach be feminine? I asked the Lord why is the “breast” a masculine grammar term when all verses use the breast mostly for women. Here is our answer:

When I was 17 I wrote a poem, now I see a little inspiration, I didn’t realise was there, all those years ago:

Love is like a river, a dam fed you some.
Clear was it water, traditionally done.

In this couplet, the wife is a simile of love as the husband is a simile of love also.
But the husband blocks and stores the water, to be released by him into her.

From the Bible we have two Hebrew words for love, not one as many assume.
(We also have to get rid of Greek notions of love, they do not exist with God)

Thus the husband is a Provider of love and the wife a Responder to His Love.

This is why during Creation, the Provider provides and the Responder responds,
so Creation is complete.

I get the impression without this circuit of love, love itself is never completed functionally.

For example what point would it be for a husband to do things, if a wife never responded in kind?

The other reason for the ruwach is to function as a medium. This is critical for creating a universe tuned for function and dysfunction at the same time.
You will note the earth was already in existence during creation as a frozen water ball left in darkness - a simile of sin-. We have to remove this evolution notion of chaos. The earth was void and formless because the Father left the sinning angels, as they wanted to be without the Father’s powers.

But the chief angel who sinned, wanted to be a provider. So the Most High allowed this creative function to exist, and the Devil has become a provider of all many of dysfunction, including self empowered powers. ( See John 8 : 44 "father" means "provider" )

So the ruwach as a grand medium allows dysfunction to exist without destroying it, by diminishing down the powers of the Most High, as those powers are carried by the medium into creation. (This means sinners can sin and miss His powers without the Father killing us - the powers are diminished in the medium ) Hope this helps. Shalom

 

[rob]

Greetings David

"But I thought God was a 'He' and not a 'She'....

So how does this work?

In terms of personality the Most High and the HS express love as personalities differently to each other. This is required as Romans 1:20 teach us the qualities of the Godhead are shown in nature during creation. Since we have unique differences in loving traits, than the Infinity Set has to demonstrate such traits also, otherwise it would not be an Infinite Set of all things that has ever been and will ever be.

"But the languages which were spoken before Romance Languages seem to not have this 'romance' language rule as part of their grammar practice. It might be that they were more patriarchal than matriarchal.


Yes my friend, in Hebrew grammar, according to Jeff Benner from Ancient Hebrew Research Center, in a group of boys and girls, the boys are expressed. Hence the reason we do not find many references to the HS as a “her” and usually in a collective power it is expressed as a “he. Hope this helps.

"But from where did Adam's helpmeet come from? Was she created as Adam was?

No she was built out of the man.

The Hebrew word “help-meet” has Ancient Hebrew letters “Looking at the Ploughing Head”
(Jeff Benner Lexicon for Ancient Hebrew)

The Responder has a “plough letter” which implies her manner of loving comes with “heavy handedness” and this is a very useful trait.

So the weaker vassal as we speak, comes a stronger emotional plough. Shalom

 

[rob]

Greetings David

"But the word for 'son' not used in this verse

Yes correct.

"So it's not the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God;

but rather

The Enos, The Seth, The Adam, The God.

Correct.

What does a son mean in Hebrew?

It is written as two letters - “The home over the nations”

Or another picture “The home as seed”

Or another picture “The home continues”

We see these ideas from Scripture:

Ge 4:25 ¶ And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.

Now there is a profound verse describing the Divine One with Collective Love

Ps 2:7 ¶ I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

What is this verse saying?

Ps 2:12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.
(KJV)

What is this verse saying?

Here is a different translation

Ps 2:12 Kiss the SEED, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.

There are many profound things to ponder. When you do genuine faith, you ask of Jesus powers in His Seeds by faith, to come and grow in you because you asked for this.

“put their trust in the SEED” is a faith promise in this Psalm .

Shalom

 

[rob]

To those wanting confirmation this message is correct, please see EGW comments

https://spiritualsprings.proboards.com/thread/144/god-best-defined-family

Shalom