> General Discussions
Genesis 5:1
Kat:
--- Quote from: Dave in Tenn on September 25, 2016, 04:58:08 PM ---Personally, I have trouble believing that "mankind" looks like it does because that's what God looks like. He took on flesh and became LIKE US, according to scripture. To me, the "image of God" that we bear has far less to do with the general "shape" of a human being and far more the way we are "put together". He breathed Spirit into man and it became living soul.
God is not a 6 foot tall man.
--- End quote ---
Rev 3:14 "And to the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write, 'These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God:
In that verse in Revelation it says that Christ was the "Beginning of the creation," so He was first of all. Now it also shows in Scripture that the Son though glorious as He was, He had a shape, had a form/image. Ezekiel bears witness of this in a vision from God.
Eze 1:1 Now it came to pass in the thirtieth year, in the fourth month, on the fifth day of the month, as I was among the captives by the River Chebar, that the heavens were opened and I saw visions of God.
Eze 1:26 And above the firmament over their heads was the likeness of a throne, in appearance like a sapphire stone; on the likeness of the throne was a likeness with the appearance of a man high above it.
This says to me that The Son was created to have an "image" from His beginning, it was mankind that later was given that same form as God said "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness" (Gen 1:26). And there are other Scripture that speak of God's form that appeared as a man in the OT. Moses could not look on His face, but he did see the back of Him in Exodus 33. So when you think of it humanity is created to begin our existence in an image physically like The Son has always had.
James 3:8 But no one has ever been able to tame the tongue. It is evil and uncontrollable, full of deadly poison.
v. 9 With it we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse people who are made in the likeness (Strong: that is, resemblance: - similitude) of God.
James is speaking of the tongue, and of people in general, not just believers being made in the "likeness of God." Paul also appears to speak of all men being in the image of God.
1Co 11:7 For a man, indeed, ought not to be covering his head, being inherently the image(G1504) and glory of God. Yet the woman is the glory of the man." (CLV)
Strong's concordance
G1504 - a likeness, that is, (literally) statue, profile, or (figuratively) representation, resemblance: - image.
Paul explained that as Adam was made a living physical being, natural, and I believe that is in God's own resemblance. The natural comes first and then after our experience in good and evil we would at some point be brought into His spiritual image/likeness, a "new creation" (2Co 5:17 ).
1Cor 15:45 Thus it is written, "The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit.
v. 46 But it is not the spiritual that is first but the natural, and then the spiritual.
Yes a few are being brought/prepared to be in His spiritual image while still in this physical flesh. But that will not be completed until we are resurrected out of the physical, then "we shall be like Him," spiritually perfected.
1John 3:2 Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.
mercy, peace and love
Kat
Dave in Tenn:
I really don't want to argue, but I remain unconvinced. Visions are just that--visions. Likenesses and similitudes are (or absolutely CAN be) referring to any number of things besides "shape" or visible form. I really don't have to look very hard to see just how man was created in the image/likeness of God.
Alex, we may all be (including me) laboring under too many assumptions for this discussion to be fruitful. Mine are simple:
1. I am a living soul. That's how I am formed in the image/likeness/similitude of God. I think other creatures are also living souls, but they are not the ones He is creating His family from. Just us. And it isn't because He doesn't "look like" them. There's more to mankind and His working us than the physical characteristics that broadly define "humans". These things may be "parables"--walking upright, binocular, forward-facing vision, etc.
2. God can take upon Himself any form (including what looks like a man) in the same way He condescended to speak to men as though He were a limited man. He wasn't what He "sounded like", so it stands (to me) that He isn't what he "looked" like.
3. God humbled Himself and became flesh and lived among us, and died at "our" hands.
4. Messiah rose from the dead and remained with us until He disappeared in the clouds. He appeared and disappeared, wasn't limited by physical barriers or "reality". Was both recognized and not recognized. That's what a "spiritual body" can do on this physical "plane"--what HE did in the interim.
I don't recall Ray "recanting" his belief that Jesus will not be "forever" with holes in His hands. He showed holes when He needed to show holes.
Saying He is a "Man" doesn't counter any of that. Maybe our definition of "MAN" is too narrow and lacking. Could be He is the only REAL man who ever lived. And since it's destiny to become like Him, we're not "real men" quite yet.
Anyway, I can't fit everything in a forum post. And I don't want to debate. There is just another way of looking at things (as if there were only two or three) and I think it's quite fitting to challenge assumptions. We don't have to convince anybody of anything.
Joel:
The way I see it, God is recognizable by the things he says, and does.
Joel
lilitalienboi16:
Dear Kat, let me also add to your reference of james and paul this reference of Genesis 9:1
Gen 9:6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.
Dear Dave,
I agree it is good to challenge assumptions and I am happy we can do that, for now.
Let us consider the hebrew word for image to which this entire thread is intimately bound to.
The hebrew word Tselem for image never refers to moral character or 'spiritual image.' It never implies some metaphorical meaning which is what you are suggesting is the real meaning behind 'image.' In fact, if you look up its limited uses in the old testament you will find that in every case it is used to describe some literal physical appearance.
Here is what ray said about this hebrew word teslem--IMAGE.
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,7500.msg115456.html#msg115456---------
Col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
COMMENT: Yes He is. But think about this: As Jesus is the image of His Father, His Father MUST HAVE AN IMAGE. Not only is Jesus the image of the invisible God, but He made humanity likewise: "Let Us make man [Heb: 'humanity'] IN OUR IMAGE" (Gen. 1:26). I have known for thirty years that the Hebrew word for "image" always means "form, image, and shape," and never means "spiritual or moral character." So how can humanity be made in God's "image" if He doesn't have an image?
-----------------------
He continues with this statement below, where in you will find him rejecting the notion that he once held in citing numbers 23 as proof that 'God is not a man.' I never said ray thought Jesus would forever be with holes in his hands either. He was raised a spiritual body, that body no longer dies, get's tired, grow's old, has holes in it, etc.. and as you said, spirit can take on the form it desires. This too though implies something that can be observed and not something more metaphorical.
(same email link from above)----------------------------------------------------
COMMENT: He not only "seems to be stating," He literally IS stating. But if the Father is invisible spirit, how can He be seen through visible humanity?
Are we to believe that somehow the Father looks like a man? And doesn't the Bible say that "God is NOT a man?" Actually, it doesn't. We are yet allowing the theology of Christendom to influence our thinking. I have used Numbers 23:19 myself in the past as a verse that shows that "God is not a man." But that is not really what this verse or I Sam. 15:29 are saying at all. There is no period (.) after the word "man" in either verse.
--------------------------------------------------
You are free to disagree with ray. He was only a man. But I think ray was onto something and his reasoning is sound. I cannot ignore these facts and the scriptures presented in favor of God having an image beyond merely implying a moral one but to actually meaning a more literal one that we as humanity can look upon.
Kat brought up the interaction with Jehovah where in moses attempted to see God's glory and God responded that no man is yet able to look on his face and live. After the events of revelation and humanity becoming like God, we are given this answer.
Revelation 22:4 And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads.
Is this not a hearken back to Moses' deep desire? Is this not humanities desire? To see God? To see God as HE IS?
1 John 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; FOR WE SHALL SEE HIM AS HE IS.
God bless,
Alex
Kat:
--- Quote from: lilitalienboi16 on September 26, 2016, 01:43:29 PM ---
Let us consider the hebrew word for image to which this entire thread is intimately bound to.
The hebrew word Tselem for image never refers to moral character or 'spiritual image.' It never implies some metaphorical meaning which is what you are suggesting is the real meaning behind 'image.' In fact, if you look up its limited uses in the old testament you will find that in every case it is used to describe some literal physical appearance.
--- End quote ---
I believe Ray called this whole thing an enigma and he never came to a resolution about it. Look at the very Scripture used as the foundation for some of your comments...
Col 1:15 He is the image[/u](G1504 Strong- a likeness, that is, (literally) statue, profile, or (figuratively) representation, resemblance: - image.) of the invisible[/u](G517 Thayer- unseen, or that which can not be seen, e.g. invisible) God, the firstborn over all creation.
There is the word "image" and you stated it can only mean literal physical appearance... YET it states in the very same sentence of that verse "the invisible God," invisible means - incapable of being seen. Now I know that you may think that means with physical eyes, but does it?
So that is why this topic just cannot be discussed here to any debt, there is a lack of agreement on this that always leads to debating. Sure we could all continue to give our differing reasoning about these things, but who do you believe. We can develop our own ideas of what God is, but I guess it just shouldn't be declared as a statement of fact, not here. It's just best to leave this topic alone.
mercy, peace and love
Kat
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version