Sophiee1 wrote:
Sorry, I don't buy the "innocent me" tack you so often proffer.
Well then it will seem especially ironic when I tell you that I have no idea what you are talking about. I haven't kept ANYTHING hidden from you. You know that I'm a Christian, so I would think you would eventually stop holding it against me that all of my questions point in that direction. But with that in mind, I hope you can agree that I try very hard to follow your rules.

Sophiee1 wrote:
you ignore all those quotes where clearly we are told that G-d does not change, is not a man, and so on.
I have not ignored them at all. You just either don't remember my response or don't like it. In either case, this is an absolutely incorrect charge.

Sophiee1 wrote:
You have an agenda and you ignore anything that doesn't fit your agenda
Like I said, you have never provided a single quote from scripture that doesn't fit my "agenda" (and vice versa, I'm sure). Your explanation of those scriptures might not fit my "agenda", but that just means I don't buy your explanation.

And by the way - I really don't ignore your explanations. I read them quite carefully. But when you post very long replies - especially when you're just pasting from another source - I try to focus on what I see as the main points. (I think quality beats quantity any day.) Also, there are times when I feel like I've said everything I can say, and have nothing new to add. In those cases, I see no point in rehashing what has already been said. Once we get to that point of going in circles, I feel like it's best just to move on.

But please - any time you feel like I've ignored what you consider to be a key point, feel free to point it out.

Sophiee1 wrote:
Rather than assume (if you do not know the answer) the logical thing to do is ask for the answer.
You know for certain the answer to those questions? Okay, then I will ask you: Sophiee, can you please tell me the answers to the questions you asked?
  1. Did He speak out loud? How?
  2. What does it MEAN "and G-d said" or even "let there be light"?
  3. Did G-d originally say those words in Hebrew or is that how He dictated it to Moses?
  4. what kind of light was G-d speaking about?
  5. Light came into existence prior to the heavens and prior to the sun -- so what does "light" mean?
I'm sure I'm not the only one who would like to know these answers. In the interest of time, I'd be very satisfied if you could just answer the last one, and we could go from there. (By the way - my personal guess is that "let there be light" was the "big bang".)

My question/proposition was whether the "change" mentioned in Malachi 3:6 could be referring to attributes (or nature) of God, rather than states of being. For example, when God says He is "slow to anger" (Exodus 34:6, etc.), that is an attribute, and His nature. When He actually becomes angry, that attribute or nature does not change. (However, if God said "I do not get angry", then we'd have a problem.) Isn't this a far better explanation than denying the plain text of scripture, which, on quite a few occasions, describes Him as being angry?

Speaking of "slow to anger"... I just looked it up, and found nine occurrences. I really don't understand why He would say that if He never got angry. If He never got angry, wouldn't He have just said so? Are you telling me there is no way to say "I never get angry" in Hebrew?

Sophiee1 wrote:
(quoting Rabbi Shapiro) "So too, when we say Hashem gets “angry” we mean that Hashem acts in a way that seems to us angry."
Sophiee, do you not see that he has shot himself in the foot with this statement? Do you see that little word "acts"? Do you see how it means he's right back at square one? If God "acts", if He "does something", it's still a change, because it involves a "before" and "after".

And please - don't come back and tell me that I've just suggested that God doesn't "act". Scripture makes it very clear that He does - just as it makes it very clear that He gets angry, or pleased, or jealous. What I am suggesting is that none of these things are changes in God's attributes or nature. And I am simply asking if that's what Malachi 3:6 is really referring to.
 

Note: Forum rules require me to make the following disclaimer.

This post is not Jewish teaching, rather it is Mark's personal opinion as a non-Jew.