freecocoa:
How am I biased? Did you put in consideration the part I saw first?

Exactly.

LordReed:


Exactly.

Exactly what?

Oh! Nevermind that, are you saying the people who saw then saw the male part first?

freecocoa:
Exactly what?

Oh! Nevermind that, are you saying the people who saw then saw the male part first?

Exactly that they are behaving like you. You see an androgynous person and the first thing you do is interpret what you are seeing in the light of your own perceptions. You probably see the hair and say woman, they probably saw no breast and say man.

LordReed:


Exactly that they are behaving like you. You see an androgynous person and the first thing you do is interpret what you are seeing in the light of your own perceptions. You probably see the hair and say woman, they probably saw no breast and say man.

You are kidding right?


What are the odds that all the young men in a community will see an androgynous figure and all see a man first?seriously?

How do you explain the named angels?

those names werent mentioned in the bible until those angels came. those angels were the very first to bear the names "michael " and "Gabriel", how did you know they were male names? we humans ascerted those names to males. nowhere in the bible was it stated that angels were males or females. it is on earth that "God made everything male and female" so that we could "multiply and fill the earth".

to answer your second question,
God is always referred to as "HE". it doesn't mean he is male. not at all. .

freecocoa:
No gender, yet they bear only male names, or are the names Michael and Gabriel unisex? Please name one genderless female named angel.

They don't take forms, yet they are referred to as "he" or does god not know the word "she"?

freecocoa:
You are kidding right?


What are the odds that all the young men in a community will see an androgynous figure and all see a man first?seriously?

How do you explain the named angels?

Hörny men see a no breast person and they are going to think it's a woman?

Names convey identity not necessarily sex. On hearing the name Alex most folks will assume it's a male when in fact females also bear the name.

LordReed:


Hörny men see a no breast person and they are going to think it's a woman?

Names convey identity not necessarily sex. On hearing the name Alex most folks will assume it's a male when in fact females also bear the name.

Who told you they had no brea$t? Mehn! Your ability to twist no be here, I hail o, twista.

freecocoa:
Who told you they had no brea$t? Mehn! Your ability to twist no be here, I hail o, twista.

Is this a man or a woman?

LordReed:


Is this a man or a woman?

I don't know what you are driving at, surely you aren't trying to tell me that is how the angels were dressed or the pose they took, while here on earth, just how is this picture supposed to help our discussion?

Anyways, after turning my device all around while also bending my head to get a better view, I think that's a woman.

freecocoa:
I don't know what you are driving at, surely you aren't trying to tell me that is how the angels were dressed or the pose they took, while here on earth, just how is this picture supposed to help our discussion?

Anyways, after turning my device all around while also bending my head to get a better view, I think that's a woman.

Of course this not an example of an angel but it is an example of an androgynous person so please just humor me with your answers there is a point to this.

Which features made you decide this person is female?

LordReed:


Of course this not an example of an angel but it is an example of an androgynous person so please just humor me with your answers there is a point to this.

Which features made you decide this person is female?

There's no point to this because the picture you posted is not good enough, atleast the person should stand upright with a clear view.

The face, practically everything about the picture screams male but I went with female because of the contours, seems make up enhanced and there's something about the pose too.

freecocoa:
There's no point to this because the picture you posted is not good enough, atleast the person should stand upright with a clear view.

The face, practically everything about the picture screams male but I went with female because of the contours, seems make up enhanced and there's something about the pose too.

Bear with me.

Imagine you saw this individual on a dusky evening walking past you into a house would your opinion of this person's sex be different?

LordReed:


Bear with me.

Imagine you saw this individual on a dusky evening walking past you into a house would your opinion of this person's sex be different?

Seriously it's not fair to ask me all these based on a picture that's not even clear, there would be so many other things to consider which might influence my opinion, should she/he walk past me.

freecocoa:
Seriously it's not fair to ask me all these based on a picture that's not even clear, there would be so many other things to consider which might influence my opinion, should she/he walk past me.

One point I am trying to make is that those people would not be in a position to fully observe those angels. You even have a picture and have had enough time to study features and you are still not sure if it's a man or a woman, instead you are relying on your perceptions. BTW it is a woman but with the clothes you can't see the breasts. There is a distinct possibility that this was what occurred. With androgynous persons how can you be sure if you are not seeing them in their birthday suits?

LordReed:


One point I am trying to make is that those people would not be in a position to fully observe those angels. You even have a picture and have had enough time to study features and you are still not sure if it's a man or a woman, instead you are relying on your perceptions. BTW it is a woman but with the clothes you can't see the breasts. There is a distinct possibility that this was what occurred. With androgynous persons how can you be sure if you are not seeing them in their birthday suits?

Duh! So if they didn't have brea$ts, they both didn't have bum bums too? And they both walked with swagger like a niggar? Dude please!

It would be easier to tell when faced with an adrogynous person physically, than in picture, let alone the one you posted.

See, it was even easy for me to tell, just with her face and pose and you are here saying what I don't know.

It's called androgynous for a reason, something's gotta give, you just have to look closely, if you can only see the features of a man, then it's no longer androgynous, no?

freecocoa:
Duh! So if they didn't have brea$ts, they both didn't have bum bums too? And they both walked with swagger like a niggar? Dude please!

It would be easier to tell when faced with an adrogynous person physically, than in picture, let alone the one you posted.

See, it was even easy for me to tell, just with her face and pose and you are here saying what I don't know.

It's called androgynous for a reason, something's gotta give, you just have to look closely, if you can only see the features of a man, then it's no longer androgynous, no?

Maybe you should look up the meaning of androgynous.

LordReed:


Maybe you should look up the meaning of androgynous.

You dey insult person o, so from this our discourse, you still I think I don't know what the word means? Wow!

freecocoa:
You dey insult person o, so from this our discourse, you still I think I don't know what the word means? Wow!

Because I don't understand why you would make this statement :
if you can only see the features of a man, then it's no longer androgynous, no?

LordReed:


Because I don't understand why you would make this statement :
if you can only see the features of a man, then it's no longer androgynous, no?

You are trying to say that the people of Sodom may have confused the angels for male due to their androgynous nature and I was trying to tell you that it's not possible for a whole community of men/boys to all see a man's feature when they met the angels.

An androgynous person's $ex is partly male and partly female in appearance, so how the feck then can they all decide the angels were men? Whatever happened to the female features part? Or are you saying that every physical feature in an androgynous person can appear male with exception to the privates?(which brings the female part into the equation).

freecocoa:
So he's sexist then.

And what if he is?

5minsmadness:

And what if he is?

Shows he's partial and a loving father who created everyone in his image, shouldn't be.

freecocoa:
Shows he's partial and a loving father who created everyone in his image, shouldn't be.

I give up my seat during lectures for my female counterparts and walk on the side of the road closest to oncoming vehicles when walking with a lady.

Am I sexist?

5minsmadness:

I give up my seat during lectures for my female counterparts and walk on the side of the road closest to oncoming vehicles when walking with a lady.

Am I sexist?

See question o, 5 mins.

If you are anything, it is only but kind.

He is coming soon

freecocoa:
See question o, 5 mins.

If you are anything, it is only but kind.

Most folk would say I'm sexist.
They would say I'm doing this cos I consider women as being weak and not being able to take care of themselves.



Being 'sexist' is a modern word. It holds no place in the ancient world. If not u would say the whole of the old testament was sexist when actually they were simply living life as they knew it and taking care of their female folk.


To your topic. Angels are males. There's no dichotomy in heaven, no gender appropriation, no racial profiling. It's not like nowadays when they make female action heroes to try and please the female/feminist folk.

Angels have all been 'males'. It's not man that will come with a new idea and tell God what to do. There is no political correctness in heaven. Anyone telling u angels are sex less are just trying to be polite to the female gender.
It doesn't mean God 'hates' females, on the contrary it shows that the female of the species was a special breed.

5minsmadness:

Most folk would say I'm sexist.
They would say I'm doing this cos I consider women as being weak and not being able to take care of themselves.



Being 'sexist' is a modern word. It holds no place in the ancient world. If not u would say the whole of the old testament was sexist when actually they were simply living life as they knew it and taking care of their female folk.


To your topic. Angels are males. There's no dichotomy in heaven, no gender appropriation, no racial profiling. It's not like nowadays when they make female action heroes to try and please the female/feminist folk.

Angels have all been 'males'. It's not man that will come with a new idea and tell God what to do. There is no political correctness in heaven. Anyone telling u angels are sex less are just trying to be polite to the female gender.
It doesn't mean God 'hates' females, on the contrary it shows that the female of the species was a special breed.

ofcourse the bible folks were sexist, how else would you describe the way they treated women? Calling them unclean in their periods and prohibiting them from coming into the temple, not deeming them fit to teach abi talk when men are talking, then the only thing that happens when a woman got raped, was she being sold off to her abuser, if all these isn't sexist, I don't know what it is.

It might be a new word, words get developed everyday, doesn't change the fact that women are treated with less regard than men, women were practically made for men and if something is made for you, I think it's safe to say you can use it however you like, the men in the bible weren't treating women as special beings in the way you present it, they were using them.

He obviously thinks little of them even if he doesn't hate them, that's why the bible cannot be true, God is not supposed to be biased.

freecocoa:
You are trying to say that the people of Sodom may have confused the angels for male due to their androgynous nature and I was trying to tell you that it's not possible for a whole community of men/boys to all see a man's feature when they met the angels.

An androgynous person's $ex is partly male and partly female in appearance, so how the feck then can they all decide the angels were men? Whatever happened to the female features part? Or are you saying that every physical feature in an androgynous person can appear male with exception to the privates?(which brings the female part into the equation).

Which is why I showed you a picture of an androgynous looking person whose secondary sex characteristics were not evident. Hörny men will most definitely be looking for those secondary characteristics. Could you see the swell of breasts through that model's clothes? It has nothing to do with its presence or absence and everything to do with perception. The men of Sodom called the angels men because that is what they perceived.

LordReed:


Which is why I showed you a picture of an androgynous looking person whose secondary sex characteristics were not evident. Hörny men will most definitely be looking for those secondary characteristics. Could you see the swell of breasts through that model's clothes? It has nothing to do with its presence or absence and everything to do with perception. The men of Sodom called the angels men because that is what they perceived.

If I can perceive that the picture is that of a woman, how can't even one person amongst them perceive one of the angels as female? And you are the one that dressed the angels to know there was nothing to indicate female features? Is the simple question.

Btw, did you read 5minsmadness's submission?

freecocoa:
ofcourse the bible folks were sexist, how else would you describe the way they treated women? Calling them unclean in their periods and prohibiting them from coming into the temple, not deeming them fit to teach abi talk when men are talking, then the only thing that happens when a woman got raped, was she being sold off to her abuser, if all these isn't sexist, I don't know what it is.

It might be a new word, words get developed everyday, doesn't change the fact that women are treated with less regard than men, women were practically made for men and if something is made for you, I think it's safe to say you can use it however you like, the men in the bible weren't treating women as special beings in the way you present it, they were using them.

He obviously thinks little of them even if he doesn't hate them, that's why the bible cannot be true, God is not supposed to be biased.

Lol
That's your human reasoning.
God is above humans. They are not above him.
Human's change the way they see themselves. GOD never changes.Not the way we change anyway.

Would you prefer the jewish women have sex during their menses. Do you know a woman can actually throw an embolus and die if she engages in sexual intercourse during her menstruation, not talk of the increased risk of transmission of infection, not to talk of the fact that its actually disgusting to have sex during menses ? There was a very good reason for a woman to be called 'unclean'during that peroid.
Oh and men had their moments of 'uncleanness' too.

Men were the ones entrusted with more responsibility and were/are less easily moved emotionally than women. So yes they were more suited to talk about spiritual things, they couldnt talk about other stuff cos they mostly didnt own them anyway. But even then cases abound in the bible of women who spoke up and were recognised.

When a woman got raped her honour was gone. Most time no other man would be willing to marry her and she would be left alone with no one to fend for her. It only stood to reason that the one who was caught raping her would be made to marry her and in so doing take an oath to take care of her. It might sound primitive now because in modern times a woman can take care of her self better than in those primitive days when life was cheap and one could be sold into slavery or killed by the enemy at any moment.

and so on and so forth.

And even though women were regarded as being made for men it doent mean all themen were beasts and raping and punishing the women daily. That is a sexist view of all men being beasts. In fact the bible admonished men to love thier wives and on more than one occassion men were punished for ill treating thier women.


Even today women are being used, nothing much has changed and you cant blame God or the bible for it.

5minsmadness:

Lol
That's your human reasoning.
God is above humans. They are not above him.
Human's change the way they see themselves. GOD never changes.Not the way we change anyway.

Would you prefer the jewish women have sex during their menses. Do you know a woman can actually throw an embolus and die if she engages in sexual intercourse during her menstruation, not talk of the increased risk of transmission of infection, not to talk of the fact that its actually disgusting to have sex during menses ? There was a very good reason for a woman to be called 'unclean'during that peroid.
Oh and men had their moments of 'uncleanness' too.

Men were the ones entrusted with more responsibility and were/are less easily moved emotionally than women. So yes they were more suited to talk about spiritual things, they couldnt talk about other stuff cos they mostly didnt own them anyway. But even then cases abound in the bible of women who spoke up and were recognised.

When a woman got raped her honour was gone. Most time no other man would be willing to marry her and she would be left alone with no one to fend for her. It only stood to reason that the one who was caught raping her would be made to marry her and in so doing take an oath to take care of her. It might sound primitive now because in modern times a woman can take care of her self better than in those primitive days when life was cheap and one could be sold into slavery or killed by the enemy at any moment.

and so on and so forth.

And even though women were regarded as being made for men it doent mean all themen were beasts and raping and punishing the women daily. That is a sexist view of all men being beasts. In fact the bible admonished men to love thier wives and on more than one occassion men were punished for ill treating thier women.


Even today women are being used, nothing much has changed and you cant blame God or the bible for it.

I didn't say anything about having sex then did I? I talked about being allowed into the temple, were men banned from entering the temple in their time of uncleaniness?

More suitable to talk about spiritual things indeeed, how about now that women now own ministries and are pastors, what changed? Did God suddenly make this generation of women more suitable for spiritual things? Please give me the list of the women teachers/preachers who were in abundance.

Is an all knowing God not supposed to know that rape would affect the woman terribly and that subjecting her to a life of misery with her attacker is not only f00lish but evil? So he doesn't give a rat's a$$ about the woman na.

Please also bring the list of men punished specifically for mistreating their women.

P.S, leave the topic of God not being human, we were supposedly made in his image, plus if we aren't capable of reasoning as high as him, why the feck would he ask us to "come let's reason together"?

freecocoa:
If I can perceive that the picture is that of a woman, how can't even one person amongst them perceive one of the angels as female? And you are the one that dressed the angels to know there was nothing to indicate female features? Is the simple question.

Btw, did you read 5minsmadness's submission?

As I said to you it is a matter of perception. An angel is not a man whatever sex you attribute to one is irrelevant, male and female are distinctions for creatures here on earth. The exercise in looking at that picture was merely to extend the idea that our perceptions play a role in how we see things.

I have expressed my own opinion on the matter and 5minsmadness has done same, thats about it for me.

freecocoa:
I didn't say anything about having sex then did I? I talked about being allowed into the temple, were men banned from entering the temple in their time of uncleaniness?

oh yes they were.

More suitable to talk about spiritual things indeeed, how about now that women now own ministries and are pastors, what changed? Did God suddenly make this generation of women more suitable for spiritual things? Please give me the list of the women teachers/preachers who were in abundance.

No God did not change. It was man who changed these things to please man, to appear politically correct. And yetmary magdalene was the first to proclaim the risen Christ. If God had any bias towards women he wouldnt have appeared to a woman first or allowed it to be documented as such.

Is an all knowing God not supposed to know that rape would affect the woman terribly and that subjecting her to a life of misery with her attacker is not only f00lish but evil? So he doesn't give a rat's a$$ about the woman na.

I gave you an explanation for this. If you are not satisfied with it then thats your problem. It was better the man marry her and take care of her than she be left desolate and alone and probably starve to death.

Please also bring the list of men punished specifically for mistreating their women.

P.S, leave the topic of God not being human, we were supposedly made in his image, plus if we aren't capable of reasoning as high as him, why the feck would he ask us to "come let's reason together"?

What has GOd not being human got to do with his wanting to reason with his creation? If He is to reason with you that means he will bring himself down to your level. And thats a very very low place to be anyway. The heart of man is selfish and full of wickedness. So it has been since the fall of adam.

I'm not a bible scholar, I leace such things for hiswordxray, or in your spare time you can read it up.But here's the ones I rmemebr offhead

Genesis 38:9. Onan wanted to use tamar for his sexual pleasure and God punished him.
The gospel of Mary Magdalene
Esther rescuing the Israelites(Book of Esther)
Judith rescing the isrealites (Book of Judith)
Susanna's virtue triumphs and the men who wanted to take advantage of her punished(Book of susanna)
The Daughters of Zelophehad who spoke out and thier requests were granted
Titus 2:3-5 Older women likewise are to be reverent in their behavior, not malicious gossips nor enslaved to much wine, teaching what is good.



Cant think of any more right now.