So you believe the only man created in God's image is Jesus Christ? Despite Genesis saying that is false and all humans are made in God's image, so why is Jesus the only form of this?
Interpretation of a Bible passage
- Thread starter Masquerouge
- Start date
So you believe the only man created in God's image is Jesus Christ? Despite Genesis saying that is false and all humans are made in God's image, so why is Jesus the only form of this?
Masquerouge
Deity
God can be whatever he wants, but frankly when he's creating man he should be black.
And slightly hairy
What I mean is that Jesus isn't the only one in God's image on Earth. Every man and woman is in God's image.
and partial to walking on his knuckles maybe? Nah j/k
Masquerouge
Deity
My understanding was that Jesus is also a man (and that he died on the cross as a man).
That would mean that Jesus is some sort of image squared of God, since God created man in His image and Jesus is a man but also God...
My understanding was that Jesus is also a man (and that he died on the cross as a man).
That would mean that Jesus is some sort of image squared of God, since God created man in His image and Jesus is a man but also God...
Jesus is both fully man and fully divine.
Yeah, basically.
Jesus was both mortal and divine, it would make no sense for God to bring Jesus forth as something other than a man. God has only the form he chose for himself, and that form is perfectly adapted for the Earth he created.
Masquerouge
Deity
I wouldn't say "perfectly". Something along the lines of "rather nicely" is more accurate...
So you believe the only man created in God's image is Jesus Christ? Despite Genesis saying that is false and all humans are made in God's image, so why is Jesus the only form of this?
Me? I'm sure I didn't say that. I said that Jesus is the firstfruits. He is the perfect man, not the only man. He is the second Adam.
And if you want to know what God look like, if you want to know what His image is, then you look to Jesus Christ.
My understanding was that Jesus is also a man (and that he died on the cross as a man).
That would mean that Jesus is some sort of image squared of God, since God created man in His image and Jesus is a man but also God...
Fully man and fully God.
And, when He became flesh, He left his Godhood behind.
He made himself nothing, even to the point of being born in a stable.
Edit: That is Philippians 2.
Katheryn, if you want, you can put additional wording into your quote square boxes. In the 'quote' box, you can put 'quote=Bible Chapter', and that will allow us to see where you're getting the verses from. (That way I don't have to figure out where you're getting your verses from the hard way (Google!)).
Those passages were preserved (in a written form) after the Jews were in Egypt (and are sometimes attributed to Moses, at least as an urban myth). You'll note, then, that the Egyptian pantheon does NOT have human-headed gods, but animal-headed gods.
While the story of their racial god likely goes back before their time in Egypt, I would not be surprised if they then made pains to distinguish their god from the Egyptian ones in their creation myths.
Those passages were preserved (in a written form) after the Jews were in Egypt (and are sometimes attributed to Moses, at least as an urban myth). You'll note, then, that the Egyptian pantheon does NOT have human-headed gods, but animal-headed gods.
While the story of their racial god likely goes back before their time in Egypt, I would not be surprised if they then made pains to distinguish their god from the Egyptian ones in their creation myths.
punkbass2000
Des An artiste
This is true of all people, in some senses.
Could you elaborate on that?
Swedishguy
Deity
When did he say so? And do you have any kind of proof he did so?
punkbass2000
Des An artiste
Well, I would be more inclined to phrase it that we've chosen to forget our Godliness.
EDIT: So we didn't "leave it behind", per se.
The most common interpretation of this in terms of orthodox judaism is explained in this annotation:
Stone Edition Tanach said:
On a not so orthodox interpretation: That plural is necessary since in that first part of Genesis the name of God that is used is "Elohim" which is plural itself, literally meaning "Gods" - a remnant from the time where Judaism abolished Polytheism and instead worshiped "Adonai Elohim" the "God (who is) all Gods"
When were we ever Gods? We decay, die out, and then even our memory vanishes from the Earth. No offense intended, of course, but there is no reason at all for a humanist to think he is significant, let alone God-like.
punkbass2000
Des An artiste
Not "Gods". God. God is everything. We are God.
Our bodies do, yes. But you are more than your body.
This is a key point: You are not inferior to God.
