All About GOD - Growing Relationships with Jesus and Others
God created man and women in his own image.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Carla on
-
Maria, What are you trying to say? Would you try re-wording it for me? I'm not following what your point is. Thanks
-
Permalink Reply by David Velasquez on
-
Maria,
As Carla has mentioned God has brought you to a healthy community where we love God and His people. Hence all my heart desires to do with my responses to you is to edify you, to edify one another in the bond of peace and the Love we share in Christ. :) Ok
You say that man is far from destitute divine idea. To be honest I don't really know what you mean by that statement or what that means to you, but I will give you my best assumption here. I do not like to assume, but let me know if I am way off of what you mean.
While it is true that God has created us in his image (spiritual beings as LT mentioned) and He has placed eternity in our hearts as Ecclesiastes states, as well as his laws, we for now live in a fallen world. The born again has been placed in right standing before God and we are partakers of God's divine nature by having the Holy Spirit indwelling us, yet our righteousness and divinity is not of our own, it is in Christ. This is only applicable to the born again. The lost are in enmity (at war) with God.
You say: "man partook of inspiration," but I do not find that in scripture. Where do you find that, is it in the bible or from exterior sources and/or commentaries? Man partook of the fruit when Eve gave it.
You say: "The victim of that seduction Adam was free and master of himself."
Adam and Eve where created in innocence, holy and in such a state they were not enslaved to sin. But when they both fell, they became dead in transgressions and sins. Nowhere in the bible does it state that Adam was stronger than angels. That is estrange theology to the word of God. Adam has never been master of himself, even in a holy state; he was subject to his creator and dependent upon God for his sustenance. Men are not self sufficient or eternal within themselves, no one is, only God has those attributes. Your comments about Adam's position in God's creation is base on human deductions for the bible says that we are created a little bit lower than the angels.
Psalm 8:5 You have made them a little lower than the angels and crowned them with glory and honor.
As to your last statements, indeed, God made individuals with which He desires fellowship with and has endowed those individuals with traits and talents according to his good pleasure for each person. We do indeed have the ability to choose according to the liberties granted to us.
Love and blessings to you.
-
Permalink Reply by Maria on
-
Yes you are on point I do get what you are saying but I have other scriptures that are a bit complicated to me.
I have a Christian Dictionary that helps me in alot of my questions.
-
-
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. Genesis. 1:26
-
-
Does the phrase, "Let us make
man in our image," indicate plurality of persons involved in
creation?
-
-
Genesis 1:26; 3:22; 11:7; and Isa 6:8 are scriptures
rarely used in this day to support the theory of a plurality of persons in the
Godhead, and ordinarily, not used by one who is truly aware theologically for
the reasons depicted below.
-
-
I. Is the Creator an "us" in a plural sense?
1. Not according to Jesus: Matt. 19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, Mark 13:19 For in those days shall be affliction, such as was not from the beginning of the creation which God created unto this time, neither shall be. Mark 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. Jesus considered the Creator to be a "He."
2. Not according to John: Rev. 4:11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created. Rev. 10:6 And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven...the earth, ... and the sea, John considered the Creator to be a "thou."
3. Not according to Paul: Col. 3:10 And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him: 1Tim. 4:3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. Rom. 1:25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen Paul considered the Creator to be a "Him," "who is" and "God."
4. Not according to Peter: 1Pet. 4:19 Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing, as unto a faithful Creator. Peter considered the Creator to be a "him," a "faithful Creator," (singular).
5. Not according to Isaiah:Isa. 44:24 Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself; Isaiah considered the Creator to be "the LORD," "alone," and "by myself."
6. Not according to Job: Job 10:8 Thine hands have made me and fashioned me together round about; yet thou dost destroy me. Job 33:4 The spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life. Job considered the creator to be "Thine," and "the spirit of God."
7. Not according to Solomon: Prov. 8:26 While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world. Prov. 16:4 The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil. Solomon considered the Creator to be a "He," "the LORD," "himself."
8. Not according to Malachi: Mal. 2:10 Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us? why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother, by profaning the covenant of our fathers? Malachi considered the Creator to be "one God" and "one Father."
9. Not according to early Christians: 1Cor. 8:6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him. Paul spoke for the early Christian church, an "us" in this scripture, and declared that it was "one God, the Father," and "whom."
10. Not according to Moses Stuart, Biblical Repository, July, 1835, p. 102,103. "Nor does the appeal to the plural forms of expression in the Old Testament justify the modes of representation in question: [viz. society, covenanting transactions, and deliberative counsel, and the like, in the Godhead itself;] such as ‘Let us make man ; Let us go down and see; The man is become as one of us; Who will go for us?’ All these modes of expression seem naturally to spring from the almost continual use of the plural form Elohim, as the name of God. But he who has well studied the genius of the Hebrew language, must know that this often makes an intensive signification of words by employing the plural of number ; and particularly that this is the fact in regard to words designating dominion, lordship, etc. Such is the case not only with Elohim, but also with many others, even when they designate single objects. Elohim, is for the most part as much as to say, supreme God. But if any still insist on the argument to be drawn from this, as evincing of itself a plurality in the Godhead, what shall be said of its use in Psalm 45:6,7 where first the Son and then the Father is each respectively called Elohim? Is there then a plurality of persons in the Son, and in the Father too?
11. Not according to, Knapp, Prof. from mid 19th century Theology, p. 93. It (Elohim,) is derived from an Arabic word, which signifies to reverence, to honor, to worship. Hence, it comes to pass that it is frequently applied to kings, magistrates, judges, and others to whom reverence is shown, and who are regarded as the representatives of the Deity upon earth. Psalm 82:6. Exo.. 7:1...The plural of this word, Elohim, though it denotes but one subject, is appropriately used to designate Jehovah by way of eminence. In fact, many theologians have thought they perceived an allusion to the doctrine of the Trinity, though they have no sufficient ground for supposing that this doctrine was known at so early a period. And without resorting to this supposition, the application of this plural name to a singular subject may be explained from an idiom of the ancient oriental and some other languages, by which anything great or eminent was expressed in the plural number, (pluralis dignitatis, or majestaticus.) Accordingly, Eloha, (the singular,) augustus, [majestic,] may be considered as the positive degree, of which Elohim, ( the plural,) augustissimus, [most majestic,] is the superlative.
12. Not according to Theophilus, anonymous theologian of mid 19th century: "This language is understood to express determination, ‘And God determined to make man in his own image, after his own likeness,’ without supposing that he also intended to teach us thereby the mode of his own existence...When a man is about to do an important thing, and wishes to proceed with deliberation and act with discretion, he considers with himself, and perhaps speaks audibly : "Let us consider--let us see what to do." ...but in so saying, he does not intend to tell us anything as to the origin or mode of his existence. He is deliberating so as to come to a wise determination. God does not, like man, need to deliberate, in order to act wisely--at least, he has not told us so; but he makes himself and his doings known to us in language conformed to the manner of men; leaving it for common sense to decide as to the meaning of what he says of himself, for the express purpose of being understood-- not for the purpose of casting a mist before our eyes so that we cannot see what he means.
13. Not according to plural forms in scripture which are actually singular: Ezra 4:11 This is the copy of the letter that they sent unto him, even unto Artaxerxes the king; Thy servants the men on this side the river, and at such a time...Ezra 4:18 The letter which ye sent unto us hath been plainly read before me. The king, singular, called himself an "us."
14. Not according to the receiver of this letter to Artaxerxes.Ezra 4:7 And in the days of Artaxerxes wrote... unto Artaxerxes king of Persia; 4:8 to Artaxerxes the king 11 the letter that they sent unto him, even unto Artaxerxes the king; 12 Be it known unto the king, 13 Be it known now unto the king, 17 Then sent the king...18 The letter which ye sent unto us hath been plainly read before me. Six times it is certified by clear designation of singular pronoun (him, me) that the letter was sent only to the king (singular). The king answers without consultation, that the letter was sent unto "us" (plural pronoun). Thus, it is a single despotic monarch who calls himself by the plural pronoun, us, a plural of majesty.
15. Not according to Ezra who used the plural of majesty when speaking of an incident in the life of Artaxerxes. Ezra 4:11 This is the copy of the letter that they sent unto him, even unto Artaxerxes the king; Thy servants the men on this side the river, and at such a time. Ezra 4:18 The letter which ye sent unto us hath been plainly read before me. Ezra gives a clear Biblical example of the plural of majesty. There is no allusion to any "Assembly" gathered for consultation.
16. Not according to Jesus who used plural pronouns to refer to himself: John 3:11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness. Jesus and Nicodemus were all alone. Jesus spoke to Nicodemus and referred to himself as a "we" and "our," though he was obviously referring to himself, alone.
17. Not according to Paul who used plural pronouns to refer to himself: 2Cor. 10:8 For though I should boast somewhat more of our authority, which the Lord hath given us for edification, and not for your destruction, I should not be ashamed: Paul spoke of the edification given him by the Lord and said it was "given to us", and of his own authority and referred to it as "our" authority.
18. Not according to 2 Corinthians 10, in which Paul uses singular and plural pronouns interchangeably. 2 Cor. 10:1 Now I, Paul, myself beseech ... who in presence:2 I beseech you, that I may not be bold I am present I think think of us...if we walked 3 For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war 7 ... are we Christ's. 8 I should...our authority... given us...I should...9 That I may not seem as if I would terrify you by letters. :10 For his letters; but his bodily presence... his speech 11 such as we are ... we are absent... will we be... we are present. 12 we dare not make ourselves compare ourselves 13 But we will not... our measure... to us, 14 we stretch ...ourselves ...our measure...we reached... for we 15 our measure, our rule 16 our hand. Thirteen times Paul refers to himself with the singular pronouns, (I, who, his) twenty-five times he refers to himself with the plural pronoun, yet, in all this there is no indication that he is more than one individual.
19. Not according to Paul in Galatians 1:8, 9 who uses singular and plural pronouns (I, we) interchangeably to refer to himself, alone. Gal. 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
20. Not according to English speaking people who use the uni-plural you with the plural verb are when speaking of a single person such as "you are the author," used for "thou art the author." We use a uni-plural pronoun with a plural verb to speak of or to one individual.
21. Not according to Hebrew kings who continually in scripture refer to themselves with plural pronouns. 2Chr. 10:9 And he said unto them, What advice give ye that we may return answer to this people, which have spoken to me, saying, Ease somewhat the yoke that thy father did put upon us? 1Kgs. 12:9 And he said unto them, What counsel give ye that we may answer this people, who have spoken to me, saying, Make the yoke which thy father did put upon us lighter? Pro. Knapp gives this as an example of pluralis majestaticus, [plural of majesty].
22. Not according to God who used a both a plural and a singular pronoun to speak of himself. Isa. 6:8 Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? Then said I, Here am I; send me. John tells us that it is actually the prefigured glory of Jesus that Isaiah saw in this vision, John 12:41.
-
-
Maria,
I will take the time to answer this because it appears that you really want to understand it and because you are important to the Lord and to us here.
1. Not according to Jesus: Matt. 19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, Mark 13:19 For in those days shall be affliction, such as was not from the beginning of the creation which God created unto this time, neither shall be. Mark 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. Jesus considered the Creator to be a "He."
God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit each are referred to as "He" throughout scripture. In Acts and other places in the bible the Holy Spirit is call "He." Jesus is also said to have been directly involved in creation in John 1:1-5. In fact nothing has been created that has not been created by him, hence the fact that Jesus call His Father, who is a Spirit he, does nothing to prove that God is not three in one. The point that the above quote is trying to make does not stand to scrutiny or biblical interpretation since scripture interprets scripture.
Check out the article below:
A common mistake made with regard to the Holy Spirit is referring to the Spirit as "it," something the Bible never does. The Holy Spirit is a person. He has the attributes of personhood, performs the actions of persons, and has personal relationships. He has insight (1 Corinthians 2:10-11). He knows things, which requires an intellect (Romans 8:27). He has a will (1 Corinthians 12:11). He convicts of sin (John 16:8). He performs miracles (Acts 8:39). He guides (John 16:13). He intercedes between persons (Romans 8:26). He is to be obeyed (Acts 10:19-20). He can be lied to (Acts 5:3), resisted (Acts 7:51), grieved (Ephesians 4:30), blasphemed (Matthew 12:31), even insulted (Hebrews 10:29). He relates to the apostles (Acts 15:28) and to each member of the Trinity (John 16:14; Matthew 28:19; 2 Corinthians 13:14). The personhood of the Holy Spirit is presented without question in the Bible, but what about gender?
Linguistically, it is clear that masculine theistic terminology dominates the Scriptures. Throughout both testaments, references to God use masculine pronouns. Specific names for God (e.g., Yahweh, Elohim, Adonai, Kurios, Theos, etc.) are all in the masculine gender. God is never given a feminine name, or referred to using feminine pronouns. The Holy Spirit is referred to in the masculine throughout the New Testament, although the word for "spirit" by itself (pneuma) is actually gender-neutral. The Hebrew word for "spirit" (ruach) is feminine in Genesis 1:2. But the gender of a word in Greek or Hebrew has nothing to do with gender identity.
Theologically speaking, since the Holy Spirit is God, we can make some statements about Him from general statements about God. God is spirit as opposed to physical or material. God is invisible and spirit (i.e., non-body) - (John 4:24; Luke 24:39; Romans 1:20; Colossians 1:15; 1 Timothy 1:17). This is why no material thing was ever to be used to represent God (Exodus 20:4). If gender is an attribute of the body, then a spirit does not have gender. God, in His essence, has no gender.
Gender identifications of God in the Bible are not unanimous. Many people think that the Bible presents God in exclusively male terms, but this is not the case. God is said to give birth in the book of Job and portrays Himself as a mother in Isaiah. Jesus described the Father as being like a woman in search of a lost coin in Luke 15 (and Himself as a "mother hen" in Matthew 23:37). In Genesis 1:26-27 God said, "Let us make humankind in our image, after our likeness," and then "God created humankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them, male and female he created them." Thus, the image of God was male and female - not simply one or the other. This is further confirmed in Genesis 5:2, which can be literally translated as "He created them male and female; when they were created, he blessed them and named them Adam." The Hebrew term "adam" means "man" - the context showing whether it means "man" (as opposed to woman) or "mankind" (in the collective sense). Therefore, to whatever degree humanity is made in the image of God, gender is not an issue.
Masculine imagery in revelation is not without significance, however. A second time that God was specifically said to be revealed via a physical image was when Jesus was asked to show the Father to the disciples in John chapter 14. He responds in verse 8 by saying, “The person who has seen me has seen the Father!" Paul makes it clear that Jesus was the exact image of God in Colossians 1:15 calling Jesus "the image of the invisible God." This verse is couched in a section that demonstrates Christ's superiority over all creation. Most ancient religions believed in a pantheon - both gods and goddesses - that were worthy of worship. But one of Judeo-Christianity's distinctives is its belief in a supreme Creator. Masculine language better relates this relationship of creator to creation. As a man comes into a woman from without to make her pregnant, so God creates the universe from without rather than birthing it from within . . . As a woman cannot impregnate herself, so the universe cannot create itself. Paul echoes this idea in 1 Timothy 2:12-14 when he refers to the creation order as a template for church order.
In the end, whatever our theological explanation, the fact is that God used exclusively masculine terms to refer to Himself and almost exclusively masculine terminology even in metaphor. Through the Bible He taught us how to speak of Him, and it was in masculine relational terms. So, while the Holy Spirit is neither male nor female in His essence, He is properly referred to in the masculine by virtue of His relation to creation and biblical revelation. There is absolutely no biblical basis for viewing the Holy Spirit as the “female” member of the Trinity.
Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/Holy-Spirit-gender.html#ixzz2OQNqsMOm2. Not according to John: Rev. 4:11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created. Rev. 10:6 And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven...the earth, ... and the sea, John considered the Creator to be a "thou."
The second verses you quote do nothing to prove the point you are trying to established. John says the following:
John 1:1
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning. 3Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcomea it.
Colossians 1:17
17 iAnd He is before all things, and in Him jall things consist.
I could go through each verse, but I have to attend to my family for now, but you have not posted any verses that make your point when they are look at in context and interpreted with scripture.
Who is teaching you this erroneous teaching, because is not biblical?
Love and blessings to you.
-
-
Maria,
You say:
Genesis 1:26; 3:22; 11:7; and Isa 6:8 are scriptures rarely used in this day to support the theory of a plurality of persons in the Godhead, and ordinarily, not used by one who is truly aware theologically for the reasons depicted below.
The plurality of the Godhead/deity is not a theory, not a theory at all, it is a biblical fact. God is One in three persons. The belief that He is one God with three manifestations has been debunk throughout the ages and it's not sustained by any reputable scholar or theologian under the Christian umbrella. To someone who is knew to that erroneous doctrine it may appear that the rest of us have missed it, but again Maria, the arguments have been completely debunked throughout the Church history.
I think your intentions are to learn and I pray that as we discuss this topic in love, God grants you the enlightenment to see the truth.
We have discussed this particular issue multiple times here in AAG, check these discussions out:
-
-
Thank You for helping me I was so upset I was depressed I want to know God and help others the way Jesus taught his disiples. Please pray for my wisdon in God.
-
-
It does - God is three persons in one. That is revealed throughout scripture.
Welcome to
All About GOD
The Good News
Meet Face-to-Face & Collaborate
© 2024 Created by AllAboutGOD.com.
Powered by
