>>
>>Reply2: I'm not picking it, I'm going by whether or not
>>scripture does it! Simply because scripture mentions
>>something does not make it personified. People are not
>>being personified, the attributes are being personified IN
>>Christ.
>
>Response: LOL what are you talking about? Attributes are not
>and cannot be personified within an actual peron. You are
>making up stuff here. You can only personify things that
>are not human, i.e my heart leaped for joy. People don't
>personify attributes, you are making stuff up to aid your
>theology, nice try, it is quite inventive.

Reply3: Obviously you don't know what it means to personify. I am 100% correct. Dictionary.com says under personify: "To represent (an object or abstraction) by a human figure. " Jesus is a human figure by which the abstraction is represented.


>>
>
>>
>>Reply2: This argument does not help your position.
>>Grammatically, the congregator is a she. The only reason it
>>is not rendered as such is because Solomon is indentified as
>>such. The translators are following the GRAMMATICAL gender,
>>because Wisdom in Hebrew is feminine. Obviously you've
>>never studied any Hebrew.
>
>Response: Are you refering to the qoholet? If you are that
>word is masculine not feminine.
>
>Daber qoholet ben d'vid malek b'yerushalem
>>

Reply3: It is feminine. Here is what Halot says (notice what I placed in "****.. ****"): tl,h,qo: pt. qal *****fem.***** from lhq (Gesenius-K. §122r; R. Meyer Gramm. §94, 2g; Joüon §89b), Sept. evkklhdisdth,j, Symmachus paroimiasth,j, Vulg. concionator: leader of the assembly, speaker of the assembly Qoh 11f.12 727 129f, tl,h,Qoh; 128; for the meaning of this word see e.g. E. Podechard L’Ecclésiaste 128-134,; Lauha BK 19:1; Fohrer Fschr. D.W. Thomas 97f; THAT 2:613 :: Ullendorff VT 12 (1962) 215: the fighter, challenger, tl,h,Qoh;Åqo as a translation of Aramaic al'h]q'. †



>>
>>Reply2: Again, you must distringuish between the attribute
>>and the one in whom it is personified.
>
>Response: That is because you are making this up people
>don't personify attributes. lol

Reply3: As I already demonstrated, they can and do.

>
>Christ, as a spirit,
>>does not technically have gender, if you want to be
>>technical. CHOKMAH is a feminine noun, so grammatically it
>>MUST be rendered in the feminine. Thus calling wisdom SHE
>>has NO bearing on the natural gender of the person.
>
>Response: Ever heard of an antecedent? It is the same
>gender and person as the word it modifies and it does
>reflect gender.

Reply3: The person is not identified directly in the context of Proverbs, thus it follows the grammatical gender.

>
>
>>However, using the masculine AMON was a decision, showing
>>the NATURAL gender to be masculine, while only the grammar
>>is feminine.
>
>Response: But that could easily be translated as I was as an
>architech by his side. So Amon does not all of a sudden
>change the gender.
>
>>Reply2: Yes, and thus Wisdom = beginning, just like Christ
>>= beginning (Rev 3:14).
>
>REsponse: Hmm, still no exegesis of Corithians, and Rev 3:14
>does not have to be translated as beginnning, originator or
>ruler fits as well. Since that is where we get the word
>archbishop= high ruler, monarch=sole ruler etc.
>>>Reply2: GRAMMATICAL gender. It is just like in Greek...
>>Though maybe you've not really studied Greek either. I'm
>>starting to get that impression.

Reply3: Revelation 3:14's linguistically probable translation is beginning as in first-created(see BDAG). ARCH is never used for origin in scripture, and using it as such would be against the use of TOU QEOU. As for ruler, that would be ARCWN ala Rev 1:5.

>
>REsponse: Oh I am better than you think, I am just not
>agreeing with you here, seems to me like you are letting
>your theology guide your translation.
>>
>
>>
>>Reply2: Why? The LOGOS was adopted by John from Philo. We
>>are considering the Jewish mindset.
>
>Response: But John does not use Logos the same as Philo. SO
>we needs John mindset.

Reply3: Yes, I agree, he does not, but that seems to be John's basis for the use.

>>Reply2: Is that the best you can do? Wisdom is a girl
>>GRAMMATICALLY, that does not mean naturally. Jesus is
>>called Wisdom in Greek, and the noun is feminine in Greek
>>too! This means nothing, it is no basis for argument.
>
>Response: Actually that could be taken as a descriptive
>geninative in Greek so he is being desribed as something,
>not making him literally feminine.

Reply3: I agree that Jesus is not literally feminine, however, if we were to speak of him without identifying him the subject and just spoke of the SOFIA, we would translate it with feminine pronouns.

>
>>
>>Reply2: You are in denial.
>
>Response: Well at least I am not making up people
>personifying attributes that is hilarious.
>
>

Reply3: Maybe you should learn what personify means before you go making yourself look really bad (like you just did). Here is the complete entry so you don't repeat this error in the future.

To think of or represent (an inanimate object or abstraction) as having personality or the qualities, thoughts, or movements of a living: “To make history or psychology alive I personify it” (Anaïs Nin).
To represent (an object or abstraction) by a human figure.
To represent (an abstract quality or idea): This character personifies evil.
To be the embodiment or perfect example of: “Stalin now personified bolshevism in the eyes of the world” (A.J.P. Taylor).


Regards,
Tony