Tell your kids this is why they shouldnt gamble.
What is a woman?
- Thread starter Good1
- Start date
Tell your kids this is why they shouldnt gamble.
%%
I"M not a biologist or wildlife biologist, or a judge in black robes.
A female duck love to quack more than the male duck /LOL
The Lord God made a woman from the[ rib] side. Genesis 2.Partial disclosure; i passed the 2nd grade with good grades+/
%%
I"M not a biologist or wildlife biologist, or a judge in black robes.
A female duck love to quack more than the male duck /LOL
The Lord God made a woman from the[ rib] side. Genesis 2.Partial disclosure; i passed the 2nd grade with good grades+/
It would've been just as easy to make them both from the same "dust", and simultaneously. Especially when you consider the made-for-purpose design of genitals. So you have to ask whether the story tellers had an agenda, such as a patriarchy? Or, it could be an admission they don't know how either the man (made from dust) or woman (made from a rib) were made. For example, in an eastern religion, it is said the world rests on the back of a turtle, which rests on the back of a turtle...all the way down. It's an admission they don't know how the world is supported, so a ridiculously preposterous proposition is posited instead. Both men and women have the same number of ribs, twelve on each side.
%%
I"M not a biologist or wildlife biologist, or a judge in black robes.
A female duck love to quack more than the male duck /LOL
The Lord God made a woman from the[ rib] side. Genesis 2.Partial disclosure; i passed the 2nd grade with good grades+/
Instead of a male rib, or a bone at all, it looks like the distinctions between male and female are developed from the morphing of what's called the "ambisexual genital tubercle". You can have a tubercle on bone, including a rib, but genital tubercle does not appear to be associated with bone.
"A genital tubercle or phallic tubercle is a body of tissue present in the development of the reproductive system. It forms in the ventral, caudal region of mammalian embryos of both sexes, and eventually develops into a primordial phallus." Wikipedia
"Sexual dimorphism of external genitalia in humans is particularly profound in humans as size and morphology of the penis and clitoris are strikingly different even though both structures develop from the remarkably similar ambisexual genital tubercle, which is capable of either penile or clitoral development irrespective of genotype. Androgens are the key hormonal factor eliciting penile development in normal males...The major difference between the male and female is the lack of tubular urethra within the clitoris." ~Development of the human penis and clitoris☆
"Androgens are hormones that contribute to growth and reproduction in both men and women. Androgens are usually thought of as male hormones, but the female body naturally produces a small amount of androgens too. Androgen deficiency in women is a controversial concept." BetterHealth.vic.gov.au
"In women, androgens play a key role in the hormonal cascade that kick-starts puberty, stimulating hair growth in the pubic and underarm areas. Additionally, these hormones are believed to regulate the function of many organs, including the reproductive tract, bone, kidneys, liver and muscle." HealthyWoman.org
So it appears that both male and female develop from something that is neither male nor female. Books like the bible and the koran are not known for accurate scientific descriptions. On the other hand, there's an interesting statement from new testament Paul (the apostate Paul) which suggests that "there is neither male nor female in Christ". This might suggest that male and female were developed from something that is neither male nor female, namely, Christ.
Last edited:
%%
The Bible + koran ?/HUH?
The legs of the lame are not equal-King Solomon.
Faith is the title deed.Hebrews11:1
Some that has a title deed to real estate doesnt need to prove that to a renter, who choses to rent + but like to argue against title deeds.....................................................................................................................I think you are right on male + female creation being unique.
%%
The Bible + koran ?/HUH?
The legs of the lame are not equal-King Solomon.
Faith is the title deed.Hebrews11:1
Some that has a title deed to real estate doesnt need to prove that to a renter, who choses to rent + but like to argue against title deeds.....................................................................................................................I think you are right on male + female creation being unique.
If there is neither male nor female in Christ, doesn't that mean that anyone identifying as either/or is not in Christ? What does it mean, to a Christian, to be "in Christ"? Or, would you agree with me tat Paul was an apostate? I don't think he actually understood what it means to be "in Christ".
Yes, faith is the title deed to any land that appears when knowledge is ignored. It's like, who owned the title deed to the pig sty that that prodigal son ended up in? It's still a "foreign land", compared to the land of knowledge.
%%
The Bible + koran ?/HUH?
The legs of the lame are not equal-King Solomon.
Faith is the title deed.Hebrews11:1
Some that has a title deed to real estate doesnt need to prove that to a renter, who choses to rent + but like to argue against title deeds.....................................................................................................................I think you are right on male + female creation being unique.
Yes, they are unique, which is what the land of faith mainly offers. So you could say, whatever a woman might be, she is not a man.
Christ is also unique in the land of faith. So if you were to look around, in the land of faith, for examples of Christ, it would be well nigh impossible to find a comparison. In seeking Christ, then, it is best to look around and say, not this, not that. In some language, it sounds like: neti-neti.
"What is neti-neti method?
"Neti neti, meaning, "Not this, not this", is the method of Vedic analysis of negation. It is a keynote of Vedic inquiry. With its aid the Jnani negates identification with all things of this world which is not the Atman, in this way he negates the Anatman (Not-Self). Through this gradual process he negates the mind and transcends all worldly experiences that are negated till nothing remains but the Self. He attains union with the Absolute by denying the body, name, form, intellect, senses and all limiting adjuncts and discovers what remains, the true "I" alone.[1] L.C.Beckett in his book, Neti Neti, explains that this expression is an expression of something inexpressible, it expresses the ‘suchness’ (the essence) of that which it refers to when ‘no other definition applies to it’.[2] Neti neti negates all descriptions about the Ultimate Reality but not the Reality itself. Intuitive interpretation of uncertainty principle can be expressed by "Neti neti"[3] that annihilates ego and the world as non-self (Anatman), it annihilates our sense of self altogether.[4]
Adi Shankara was one of the foremost Advaita philosophers who advocated the neti-neti approach. In his commentary on Gaudapada’s Karika, he explains that Brahman is free from adjuncts and the function of neti neti is to remove the obstructions produced by ignorance. His disciple, Sureshvara, further explains that the negation, neti neti, does not have negation as its purpose, it purports identity." Wikipedia.
Faith, in it's ignorance of knowledge, manifests a land in which nothing actually equals, or hardly even resembles, that which knows. Adi calls what knows Brahman. I call it Christ. In attempting to identify with Brahman/Christ, it is not possible to search the land of faith for any models, neither a male model, nor a female model. This is largely due to the unique status of everything appearing in the land of faith/ignorance. Brahman/Christ is not a unique being in the land of knowledge. There, all beings, if there are more than one, are all the same, having the same knowledge, same power, same eternal qualities. Other than this equality, nothing actually exists. This is why there are neither male nor female in Christ.
You could say then, that a woman is something that is NOT Christ. Same thing with Christians, who, despite their unique status, differences and disagreements, agree to assert they are NOT Christ.
Last edited: