Humanizing God

[CoreIssue]

We all have done it and do it at times.

Knowingly or not we see God as a super human.

But we have it wrong. God is not a human on a super scale. We are shadow copies of some of his aspects. Some, meaning we are not even shadows of most his aspects.

God can take any form he wishes, he has no flesh, we don't have a clue what his natural appearance is or if he even has one, he is not male or female and so much more.

God presents himself in human terms and images for our sakes. Not because he is human or even human like.

So, when the Second Person of the Trinity took on humanity, that has a lot more meaning than simply lowering his divine rights and abilities. He took on a completely new nature in addition to his divine nature.

[eahaddix]

[...]we don't have a clue what his natural appearance is or if he even has one[...]

God is not an amorphous entity. How can God have a face (ref. Exodus 33:11, 18-23 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2033:11,%2018-23;&version=31;), Numbers 12:8 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers%2012:8;&version=31;), Numbers 6:22-27 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers%206:22-27;&version=31;), etc.), if God is amorphous?

Moreover, we desire to see the face of God (ref. Psalm 105:4 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm%20105:4;&version=31;), 1 Chronicles 16:11 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Chronicles%2016:11;&version=31;), see also Psalm 27:8 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm%2027:8;&version=31;), Psalm 42:1-2 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm%2042:1-2;&version=31;)). Now, why do we desire this sight, if God is amorphous? From an intuitive point of view, this desire explicitly implies that God's face has a unique form.

[CoreIssue]

The Bible is phrased to give us a context to deal with God in humans can handle.

As with God being male. He isn't.

But by God figuratively having the male gender many issues in the Hebrew, in example, are automatically defined by the masculine usage.

A mountain has a face. The Bible speaks of the face of the deep (water) and so on.

You are doing exactly what I was talking about. You are humanizing God.

We do not know what God's natural face is or if he was "one" such face at all.

[eahaddix]

The Bible is phrased to give us a context to deal with God in humans can handle.

You are dodging my points with a generalized statement. Now, how do you know that God's "face" is not literally God's face during Exodus 33:18-23 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2033:18-23;&version=31;)?

As with God being male. He isn't.

But by God figuratively having the male gender many issues in the Hebrew, in example, are automatically defined by the masculine usage.

Agreed.

A mountain has a face. The Bible speaks of the face of the deep (water) and so on.

You are begging the question by equivocating different contextual usages of the word "face (http://www.studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=06440)."

You are doing exactly what I was talking about. You are humanizing God.

Wrong. You are engaging in non-sequitur thinking. The possession of a face does not make the possessor human.

We do not know what God's natural face is or if he was "one" such face at all.

You are begging the question by reasserting your position. Repitition does not demonstrate correctness.

[CoreIssue]

You are proving my point.

You concede he is not male yet argue he has a human form as "default."

We don't know if that is fact or not. The word "face" makes him human formed no more "he" makes him male.

God transcends our concepts.

Revelation 4:3 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=73&chapter=4&verse=3&version=31&context=verse)
And the one who sat there had the appearance of jasper and carnelian. A rainbow, resembling an emerald, encircled the throne.

Has God chosen a human like form? Maybe.

Does that make him human like from the beginning? No.

We simply do not know. But we most assuredly know God transcends humanity by leaps and bounds. We are dimly modeled on some aspects of him, but our flesh alone makes us vastly different.

[eahaddix]

You are proving my point.

"Because you say so"?

You concede he is not male yet argue he has a human form as "default."

Wrong. You are still engaging in non-sequitur thinking. The possession of a face does not make the possessor human. For instance, Seraphim (Isaiah 6:2 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%206:2;&version=31;)), Cherubim (Ezekiel 10:11, 14 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel%2010:11,%2014;&version=31;)), and angels (Revelation 10:1 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%2010:1;&version=31;), see also Acts 6:15 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%206:15;&version=31;)) possess faces, yet none of these beings are human beings.

We don't know if that is fact or not. The word "face" makes him human formed no more "he" makes him male.

You are still dodging my points. Now, how do you know that God's "face" is not literally God's face during Exodus 33:18-23 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2033:18-23;&version=31;)?

God transcends our concepts.

;) Hold on a second. "Transcends" under what context? Does God transcend the possession of a face, or does God possess a face of transcendent qualities?

Has God chosen a human like form? Maybe.

Does that make him human like from the beginning? No.

This argument is a strawman argument. I never asserted that God possesses a default human form.

[CoreIssue]

a·mor·phous http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/JPG/pron.jpg (https://secure.reference.com/premium/login.html?rd=2&u=http%3A%2F%2Fdictionary.reference.com%2Fsearch%3 Fq%3Damorphous) ( P ) Pronunciation Key (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/ahd4/pronkey.html) (http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/schwa.gif-môrhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/prime.giffhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/schwa.gifs)
adj.
Lacking definite form; shapeless. See Synonyms at shapeless (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=shapeless).
Of no particular type; anomalous.
Lacking organization; formless.
Lacking distinct crystalline structure.
We know 4 is out because that is physical.

3 is out because organization is not at issue.

2 is out because God is a type of his own.

That leaves 1. Show me where it says God has a definite form.

Which reaches beyond to whole subject of God being humanized.

Nothing really else to say on this thread topic as stated in the opening.

God is not human. We err to humanize him. He is not a super human.

[eahaddix]

We know 4 is out because that is physical.

3 is out because organization is not at issue.

2 is out because God is a type of his own.

That leaves 1.

Correct.

Show me where it says God has a definite form.

God is not an amorphous entity. How can God have a face (ref. Exodus 33:11, 18-23 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2033:11,%2018-23;&version=31;), Numbers 12:8 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers%2012:8;&version=31;), Numbers 6:22-27 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers%206:22-27;&version=31;), etc.), if God is amorphous?

Moreover, we desire to see the face of God (ref. Psalm 105:4 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm%20105:4;&version=31;), 1 Chronicles 16:11 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Chronicles%2016:11;&version=31;), see also Psalm 27:8 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm%2027:8;&version=31;), Psalm 42:1-2 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm%2042:1-2;&version=31;)). Now, why do we desire this sight, if God is amorphous? From an intuitive point of view, this desire explicitly implies that God's face has a unique form.

Which reaches beyond to whole subject of God being humanized.

Correct. However, the rejection of an anthropomorphic God does not logically necessitate an amorphous God.

[CoreIssue]

Strong's Number: 06440 Browse Lexicon (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/browse.cgi?number=6440&version=kjv) Original WordWord Origin~ynpfrom (06437 (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=6437&version=kjv))Transliterated WordTDNT (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=06440&version=kjv#Legend) EntryPaniymTWOT - 1782aPhonetic SpellingParts of Speechpaw-neem' http://bible.crosswalk.com/images/audio.gif (http://bible.crosswalk.com/cgi-bin/lexicon.pl?id=6440h) http://bible.crosswalk.com/images/audio.gif (http://bible.crosswalk.com/cgi-bin/lexicon.pl?id=6440hb) Noun Masculine Definition
face
face, faces
presence, person
face (of seraphim or cherubim)
face (of animals)
face, surface (of ground)
as adv of loc/temp
before and behind, toward, in front of, forward, formerly, from beforetime, before
with prep
in front of, before, to the front of, in the presence of, in the face of, at the face or front of, from the presence of, from before, from before the face of
The definition is not limited to the usage you are demanding.

It also means in front of facing God, in his presence and so on. Not face as in eyes, nose and so on.

[eahaddix]

The definition is not limited to the usage you are demanding.

It also means in front of facing God, in his presence and so on. Not face as in eyes, nose and so on.

But how do you know that Exodus 33:11, 18-23 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2033:11,%2018-23;&version=31;) employs definition # 7, as opposed to definition # 1?

If God is amorphous, then God would not have a "face (http://www.studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=06440)" (Exodus 33:20, 23 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2033:20,%2023;&version=31;)) or "back (http://www.studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=0268)" (Exodus 33:23 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2033:23;&version=31;)). These concepts communicate form, even in describing movement by God, orientation to God, or the glory of God. Otherwise, the reader encounters a conceptual contradiction.

paniym { paw-neem' } (Strong's #6440}
plural (but always as singular) of an unused noun (paneh {paw-neh'}; from 'panah' (6437 (http://www.sacrednamebible.com/kjvstrongs/STRHEB64.htm#S6437))); the face (as the part that turns); used in a great variety of applications (literally and figuratively); also (with prepositional prefix) as a preposition (before, etc.):--+ accept, a-(be- )fore(-time), against, anger, X as (long as), at, + battle, + because (of), + beseech, countenance, edge, + employ, endure, + enquire, face, favour, fear of, for, forefront(-part), form(-er time, -ward), from, front, heaviness, X him(-self), + honourable, + impudent, + in, it, look(-eth) (- s), X me, + meet, X more than, mouth, of, off, (of) old (time), X on, open, + out of, over against, the partial, person, + please, presence, propect, was purposed, by reason of, + regard, right forth, + serve, X shewbread, sight, state, straight, + street, X thee, X them(-selves), through (+ - out), till, time(-s) past, (un-)to(-ward), + upon, upside (+ down), with(- in, + -stand), X ye, X you. [Strong's Greek Dictionary (http://www.sacrednamebible.com/kjvstrongs/STRHEB64.htm#S6440)]

'achowr { aw-khore' } (Strong's #268)
or (shortened) achor {aw-khore'}; from ''Achiyra`' (299 (http://www.sacrednamebible.com/kjvstrongs/STRHEB2.htm#S299)); the hinder part; hence (adverb) behind, backward; also (as facing north) the West:--after(-ward), back (part, -side, -ward), hereafter, (be-)hind(-er part), time to come, without. [Strong's Greek Dictionary (http://www.sacrednamebible.com/kjvstrongs/STRHEB2.htm#S268)]

[CoreIssue]

How do you knows it is #1 and not 2, 5 or 7?

My point is as the he issue is definitely not male we don't know it means human like face.

That was my POINT to begin with. Humanizing God by auto assigning human definition.