God Vs Man

1. 60

   Erudite Scholarposted 6 years ago

   DID GOD MAKE MAN IN HIS OWN IMAGE OR DID MAN MAKE GOD IN HIS OWN IMAGE?

   replyreport
2. 72

   Live to Learnposted 6 years ago

   No need to shout. We can hear you.
   
   It depends on how you define'image'  I think we are in the image of God but that has nothing to do with looks.
   
   If you are talking of our perception of God, sure. God is made in our image.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Erudite Scholarposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      @Live to Learn I felt the need to call attention to this topic.In image I mean physical likeness and non-physical attributes e.g intellect

      replyreport
      1. 72

         Live to Learnposted 6 years agoin reply to this

         I don't think it is as simplistic as that. I don't think you can use the example of Jesus' time among us to support the theory.

         replyreport
3. 77

   wildernessposted 6 years ago

   Interesting question.  God (at least in Christianity) has an image of being male and mammalian.  Or sometimes female since sexual equality became more popular.  Yet neither male nor mammal fits in with a single god out there, with no other gods, no parents nor children. 
   
   And certainly Jesus, a god in a man's body, has an image created by caucasians after their own image.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Erudite Scholarposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      @Wilderness, Jesus is presumed to be God incarnated as man.This is one of the reasons that people think that God looks like man.

      replyreport
      1. 77

         wildernessposted 6 years agoin reply to this

         Understood, but which man?  That was the point - the church (man) has created the image of Jesus, almost certain to be false, in the image they preferred.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Erudite Scholarposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            @Wilderness,
            I agree.Because we can not conceptualize God, we all create some sort of image about Him.The bible further reinforces this false idea.

            replyreport
4. 71

   Bede le Venerableposted 6 years ago

   The question is in reference to Genesis 1:26: "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.”
   
   So what does this mean? It obviously has nothing to do with the physical attributes of God as He is a spiritual, incorporeal being. That is, until the Incarnation.
   
   Rather than physical likeness, I think it has to do with divine attributes such as intelligence (reason), free will, the capacity to love, etc.
   
   On the other hand, God adopts the image of man when He becomes a human being in Jesus. He shares in our nature and we share in His.
   
   Here’s a question for you all: what do you think Genesis means when God makes man “in our image.” Why is it not “my image?”

   replyreport
   1. 85

      GA Andersonposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Here is a question for you Bede le Venerable, Why do you take the word of man, (that is what the scripture you quote is), as the word of "God?"
      
      Wouldn't the phrase "in our image" indicate it is the word of man you are quoting?
      
      GA

      replyreport
      1. 71

         Bede le Venerableposted 6 years agoin reply to this

         GA – Do you not accept this passage in Genesis as the word of God because it’s too puzzling? Or do you not accept the whole of Genesis and the Bible as the word of God?
         
         I can see why it’s puzzling; after all, God is supposedly one, how can He say “our image.” So it’s therefore the word of man?
         
         It’s not puzzling at all though if you understand God as a Trinity of persons. Moreover, this is not an isolated text with this view. There are other Trinitarian passages in Genesis, such as these:
         
         “Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil…” (Gen 3:22)
         
         In the Tower of Babel account, “Come, let us go down, and confuse their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.” (Gen 11:7)

         replyreport
         1. 85

            GA Andersonposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            Hello again Bede le Venerable.
            
            I have ventured into a thread it would be better for me to pass on.
            
            You deserve at least a short answer before I exit. My knowledge of the Bible tells me that it was written, content selected and compiled, by man.
            
            No, I do not believe Genesis, (nor any other part of the Bible), is the word of God. But my credentials for making that statement are sorely lacking, so it is just my thought.
            
            It was late, and I should not have intruded, sorry.
            
            GA

            replyreport
   2. 60

      Erudite Scholarposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      'Let us' implies that there were others who either witnessed or participated in creation.

      replyreport
      1. 71

         Bede le Venerableposted 6 years agoin reply to this

         Jeff – it’s important to include the verb… “let us make.” It’s not referring to witnesses to creation, such as the angels, but to the act of creating. Only God creates from nothing.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Erudite Scholarposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            I agree with you Bede. The question that Genesis fails to answer is "Who does 'us' "refer to ?

            replyreport
            1. 71

               Bede le Venerableposted 6 years agoin reply to this

               We make the inference from whole of scripture. Jesus revealed the Trinity more explicitly - Genesis only gives us hints.

               replyreport