Author Topic: Does the bible really say that we are in God's image?  (Read 819 times)

eik and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline strobe

  • Awarded Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 111
  • Gender: Male
  • Welcome our New Member
Re: Does the bible really say that we are in God's image?
« Reply #32 on: May 03, 2021, 10:01:01 AM »
So in what sense exactly do you think we are in the image of God?
StRobe - As in Adam ... so in Christ

Offline Deborah

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 898
  • Gender: Female
  • New :
    • Discovering the Bible
Re: Does the bible really say that we are in God's image?
« Reply #33 on: May 03, 2021, 10:28:22 AM »
But, as I have already pointed out, Genesis 1:27 appears to say that men and women are in the image of God, whereas Paul appears to be saying that only men are. Can you explain this apparent discrepancy?

When Adam had children, they were said to be "in his own image" (Genesis 5:3) Still in the image of God, because all mankind is (Genesis 9:6) - but by derivation from Adam. So the woman also is in the image of God by derivation from Adam. In I Corinthians 11:7, Paul is careful not to say that Woman is "in the image of" Man, but only that Woman is "the glory of" Man.
"The gracious hand of our God is on everyone who looks to Him, but His great anger is on all who forsake Him." (Ezra 8:22)

Offline davetaff

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 3427
  • Gender: Male
  • New :God is Love
Re: Does the bible really say that we are in God's image?
« Reply #34 on: May 03, 2021, 11:43:04 AM »
Your idea of God creating, discarding, and re-creating is not what God or his apostles say about the way that God works.   Rom 11:29 "For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable." Even where there is apostasy, and God is obligated to destroy, he will continue to build on his earlier foundation. For God always leaves a remnant upon which he continues to build. Noah was a remnant, as was Abraham, as also the 7000 who didn't bend their knee to ba'al.

    please read what Paul said

        Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation.  The old has passed away; behold, the new has come.
2 Corinthians 5:17 ESV
https://bible.com/bible/59/2co.5.17.ESV           
   we are a new creation in Christ or are you saying Paul got it wrong     


So the church was built on Israel, and Israel was built on Adam, and in every epoch there have been men who have lived up to their calling of becoming in God's spiritual image as well as his temporal / secular image.
Again, a version of theology that simply doesn't exist in the bible, as it ignores what the appostles say and what scripture teaches: e.g. 1 Cor 11:7.

the only one in the whole of scripture who is said to be the image of God is Christ     

       Heb 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;                        
I have substantiated everything I've said with scripture which it seems you choose to ignore and you never give a better explanation       

 
All you're doing is spouting out your own propaganda without any attempt at substantiation, but derogating from the bible at the same time by saying that the individual man is not in the image of God. That would be enough I think to get you into serious trouble with the othodox churches, excluding the Quakers, the Unitarian universalists, and the "believe-what-you-want" brigade, and those churches that simply want your money. Would you like to address 1 Cor 11:7 please from a grammatical and linguistic aspect.

    7  For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man             

Do you honestly think that God is interested in if a woman wears a hat in church of course not these verses are speaking of man in Gods image which is Christ he is the glory of God the woman here is the church to cover her head means to protect and defend her head Christ against all attacks.

Love and Peace
Dave
https://bible.com/bible/59/2co.5.17.ESV

Offline davetaff

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 3427
  • Gender: Male
  • New :God is Love
Re: Does the bible really say that we are in God's image?
« Reply #35 on: May 03, 2021, 12:30:10 PM »
Hi
What we are told in Genesis is.

      24  Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh         

They shall be one not two separate beings man in the image of God is man and woman joined as one.
This will be realised when Christ returns for his bride the church and they become one.

Love and peace
Dave

Online eik

  • Awarded Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 300
  • Gender: Male
  • Welcome our New Member
Re: Does the bible really say that we are in God's image?
« Reply #36 on: May 03, 2021, 03:54:26 PM »
So in what sense exactly do you think we are in the image of God?
I offered you two senses of image before, a temporal and secular image, whereby mankind exercises powers of government and decision making in the world on God's behalf, for a time, and a spiritual image, which is the true image as being an eternal image.

Online eik

  • Awarded Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 300
  • Gender: Male
  • Welcome our New Member
Re: Does the bible really say that we are in God's image?
« Reply #37 on: May 03, 2021, 04:02:18 PM »
When Adam had children, they were said to be "in his own image" (Genesis 5:3) Still in the image of God, because all mankind is (Genesis 9:6) - but by derivation from Adam. So the woman also is in the image of God by derivation from Adam. In I Corinthians 11:7, Paul is careful not to say that Woman is "in the image of" Man, but only that Woman is "the glory of" Man.
The reason that Paul does not say that Woman is "in the image of" Man is because as you have suggested from Gen 5:3, the image concept is conceptually restricted in the bible to offspring. A man's wife is not the offspring of the man, even if in some sense Eve was taken out of Adam.  Adam was regarded as the son of God, (Luke 3:37) but Eve was not regarded as the daughter of God, but taken from Adam.

Still I don't think the idea of woman as the image of man is necessarily heretical given Gen 2:23, but I can see it's not purposeful, as it doesn't convey anything theologically over and above her status as a woman. The image concept is made meaningful in terms of a woman's purpose in her role as the glory of man.

What's your take on  Gen 2:23  "And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man."  Adam seems to be deriving the Hebrew for ("woman" as in English) from the Hebrew for "man"

Online eik

  • Awarded Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 300
  • Gender: Male
  • Welcome our New Member
Re: Does the bible really say that we are in God's image?
« Reply #38 on: May 03, 2021, 04:06:36 PM »
    7  For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man             

Do you honestly think that God is interested in if a woman wears a hat in church of course not these verses are speaking of man in Gods image which is Christ he is the glory of God the woman here is the church to cover her head means to protect and defend her head Christ against all attacks.

Love and Peace
Dave
No. I don't agree with this interpretation. Yours is a meta narrative. Yes, I do think God is interested in if a woman wears a hat to church. Paul does not refer to Christ in this passage but "the man," and the passage occurs in the context of an admonition to the Corinthian church. I cannot see how this exegesis can possibly hold any legitimacy.

Effectively you've just denied the passage means what it actually says.

Offline Deborah

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 898
  • Gender: Female
  • New :
    • Discovering the Bible
Re: Does the bible really say that we are in God's image?
« Reply #39 on: May 03, 2021, 05:10:31 PM »
What's your take on  Gen 2:23  "And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man."  Adam seems to be deriving the Hebrew for ("woman" as in English) from the Hebrew for "man"

The Hebrew for "man" in this passage is "ish"; the Hebrew for woman is "ish-shah" ("ish" with the feminine ending '-ah' stuck onto it). He's saying, in effect, that the woman is a female version of him. By coincidence, it's a wordplay that comes out in English as well, but in most languages it doesn't work.

Quote
Yes, I do think God is interested in if a woman wears a hat to church.
Paul isn't talking about hats. He's talking about veils (like the Muslim hajib) covering the hair - because in eastern Mediterranean culture, a woman's hair was considered erotic.
"The gracious hand of our God is on everyone who looks to Him, but His great anger is on all who forsake Him." (Ezra 8:22)

 

SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal