Let us make man in our image

SteveB

Well-known member
Just to be clear...


You are saying...

Only ONE Person created man.

Correct?


And you are saying...

You have never met a Trinitarian who believes MORE than ONE Person created man.

Correct?
Scary, isn't it.
That God can be one, and still be--- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
The Father is He. the Son is He, and we see in the new testament that the Holy Spirit is noted as a He too.
So, the when we read in Genesis 1:27--- In his own likeness and image, he created him, male and female he created them--- we're still talking a He, of whom God, as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is.

It seems to me that the problem here is that YHVH has plainly described himself, but people who don't know the bible get their panties in a bunch, trying to make ideas fit their biases, instead of simply allowing the bible to speak for itself.
 
Scary, isn't it.
That God can be one, and still be--- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Just to clarify your TRINITARIAN view...

You are saying...

That God can be one PERSON, and still be--- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Correct?

A simple Yes will suffice.


P.S.

I agree that God can be one Person, and still be--- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Since I believe...

GOD is spirit and is the only one who is eternal. GOD is also in the universe as spirit and as a human. GOD in the universe as spirit is called the Spirit of God, GOD in the universe as a human is called the Son of God, and eternal GOD is called God the Father.

It is TRINITARIANS who normally do NOT.
 

SteveB

Well-known member
Just to clarify your TRINITARIAN view...

You are saying...

That God can be one PERSON, and still be--- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Correct?

A simple Yes will suffice.


P.S.

I agree that God can be one Person, and still be--- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Since I believe...

GOD is spirit and is the only one who is eternal. GOD is also in the universe as spirit and as a human. GOD in the universe as spirit is called the Spirit of God, GOD in the universe as a human is called the Son of God, and eternal GOD is called God the Father.

It is TRINITARIANS who normally do NOT.
My description was pretty simple.
what part are you not understanding?
 
My description was pretty simple.
what part are you not understanding?


So whereas you and I would both say...

That God can be one PERSON, and still be--- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.


You would also say (whereas I would NOT)...

That God can be one PERSON, and still be--- three PERSONS.

Correct?

A simple Yes will suffice.
 

SteveB

Well-known member
So whereas you and I would both say...

That God can be one PERSON, and still be--- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.


You would also say (whereas I would NOT)...

That God can be one PERSON, and still be--- three PERSONS.

Correct?

A simple Yes will suffice.
a "simple" yes will suffice.

Why are you guys so small-minded?
As followers of Jesus, you really need to learn to think more clearly.

Theologically speaking, we must remember that God is not human and therefore does not fit within our definitions of male or female. It is appropriate to speak of the Holy Spirit in male terms as Scripture does, but we must understand that God is wholly other and does not exist in the same form as we do (with the exception of Jesus as God in human form).

The ideas the bible presents are more than "simple" (by which you mean easy), answers.
I don't give easy answers.
 
a "simple" yes will suffice.

Why are you guys so small-minded?
As followers of Jesus, you really need to learn to think more clearly.



The ideas the bible presents are more than "simple" (by which you mean easy), answers.
I don't give easy answers.

Okay...

What I am trying to determine is...

If I post this later on other threads...

@SteveB (who claims to be a Trinitarian) believes that God can be one PERSON, and still be three PERSONS.

Will I be telling the truth?
 

SteveB

Well-known member
Okay...

What I am trying to determine is...

If I post this later on other threads...

@SteveB (who claims to be a Trinitarian) believes that God can be one PERSON, and still be three PERSONS.

Will I be telling the truth?
What part of what I stated are you having a problem with?
Quit monkey-dicking around, and just say it already.
 

Stephen

Active member
SteveB believes that God can be one PERSON, and still be three PERSONS.[/COLOR][/B]

"God is one person and three persons at the same time."

As doctrinal statements go, it is as straightforward of a violation of the law of non-contradiction as one can find.
 

TrevorL

Member
Greetings SteveB and Stephen,
Just because angels were present does not mean they created man. It's plainly stated that YHVH created male and female, in HIS likeness and image.
I don't believe anybody in this thread has made the argument that the angels created. As stated in the opening post and made clear in verse 27, only one person created.
Yes, I claimed on the basis of Genesis 1:26 and Psalm 8:5 that the Angels participated in the creation of man.

God in Genesis 1:26 invites the Angels to participate in the creation of man in the image and after the likeness of God and the Angels. Genesis 2:7 indicates that the creation of man was a process, as sufficient and suitable “dust of the ground” was collected and man fashioned from this. Man was not spoken into existence or made from nothing. Genesis 1:27 does not contradict the participation of the Angels, but simply states that God created man in his image. This is the summary of what occurred and this does not contradict the conclusion that God and the Angels created man in the image of God and the Angels.

Stephen, as far as an exposition of this subject from a Christadelphian perspective, John Thomas in Elpis Israel, written in 1849 has a section called “Man in the image and likeness of the Elohim – Thou hast made him a little lower than the Angels” on pages 37-41, and the title of this section clearly states his conclusion that man was made in both the image of God AND the Angels. I have seen some Christadelphians deny this exposition, but I endorse this part of Elpis Israel, as do most Christadelphians I have encountered. His exposition also helps to understand the use of the term “Elohim” in such passages as Genesis 3:5, applying Elohim here to the Angels, in a similar way as Elohim represents the Angels in Psalm 8:5. Trinitarians deny this as they want to apply the plurality of Elohim to the Trinity which is against the clear teaching and understanding of the Genesis record.

Kind regards
Trevor
 

johnny guitar

Active member
I suppose this is the sort of bible reasoning it takes to be a trinitarian.


We have to deny that
  • Only one person created man, that person is identified as "he", "himself', and "God" as Genesis 1:27 and Psalm 8:5 make clear.
  • Jesus is the image of God
  • in the kingdom, we will be made like the angels for we are God's children
  • when God's children see Jesus they will be like him
And then we have to deny that these are related.


(along with all rational scholarship)
One BEING created man. He is known as Father, Son, Holy Spirit.
 

SteveB

Well-known member
Greetings SteveB and Stephen,


Yes, I claimed on the basis of Genesis 1:26 and Psalm 8:5 that the Angels participated in the creation of man.

God in Genesis 1:26 invites the Angels to participate in the creation of man in the image and after the likeness of God and the Angels. Genesis 2:7 indicates that the creation of man was a process, as sufficient and suitable “dust of the ground” was collected and man fashioned from this. Man was not spoken into existence or made from nothing. Genesis 1:27 does not contradict the participation of the Angels, but simply states that God created man in his image. This is the summary of what occurred and this does not contradict the conclusion that God and the Angels created man in the image of God and the Angels.

Stephen, as far as an exposition of this subject from a Christadelphian perspective, John Thomas in Elpis Israel, written in 1849 has a section called “Man in the image and likeness of the Elohim – Thou hast made him a little lower than the Angels” on pages 37-41, and the title of this section clearly states his conclusion that man was made in both the image of God AND the Angels. I have seen some Christadelphians deny this exposition, but I endorse this part of Elpis Israel, as do most Christadelphians I have encountered. His exposition also helps to understand the use of the term “Elohim” in such passages as Genesis 3:5, applying Elohim here to the Angels, in a similar way as Elohim represents the Angels in Psalm 8:5. Trinitarians deny this as they want to apply the plurality of Elohim to the Trinity which is against the clear teaching and understanding of the Genesis record.

Kind regards
Trevor
Hi Trevor.

You're going to have to explain to me how

For You have made him a little lower than the angels,​
And You have crowned him with glory and honor.​

is saying that God's made man lower than the angels, and then crowned him with glory and honor is definitive evidence that the angels were involved in the creation of man.
Especially when Hebrews 1:2-4, Colossians 1:15-19, Ephesians 3:9, John 1:1-3, all plainly state that Jesus created man.

Still seems that this claim that angelic beings are part of the US, and OUR is a serious reach into the magic hat of the magician, and pulling rabbits out.
 

Stephen

Active member
Yes, I claimed on the basis of Genesis 1:26 and Psalm 8:5 that the Angels participated in the creation of man.

God in Genesis 1:26 invites the Angels to participate in the creation of man in the image and after the likeness of God and the Angels. Genesis 2:7 indicates that the creation of man was a process, as sufficient and suitable “dust of the ground” was collected and man fashioned from this. Man was not spoken into existence or made from nothing. Genesis 1:27 does not contradict the participation of the Angels, but simply states that God created man in his image. This is the summary of what occurred and this does not contradict the conclusion that God and the Angels created man in the image of God and the Angels.

While I agree that God is definitely inviting the angels, and I don't think that Psalm 8:5 is definitive enough for the conversation with this crowd. As Genesis 1 makes plain, God commanded the earth to produce and it does, and he commanded the sea to produce and it did. So also does God with the angels, but it is different, it is an invitation to join him in the creation of man in their common image.

Stephen, as far as an exposition of this subject from a Christadelphian perspective, John Thomas in Elpis Israel, written in 1849 has a section called “Man in the image and likeness of the Elohim – Thou hast made him a little lower than the Angels” on pages 37-41, and the title of this section clearly states his conclusion that man was made in both the image of God AND the Angels. I have seen some Christadelphians deny this exposition, but I endorse this part of Elpis Israel, as do most Christadelphians I have encountered. His exposition also helps to understand the use of the term “Elohim” in such passages as Genesis 3:5, applying Elohim here to the Angels, in a similar way as Elohim represents the Angels in Psalm 8:5. Trinitarians deny this as they want to apply the plurality of Elohim to the Trinity which is against the clear teaching and understanding of the Genesis record.

I believe Dr. Thomas is entirely correct.
 
Still seems that this claim that angelic beings are part of the US, and OUR is a serious reach into the magic hat of the magician, and pulling rabbits out.
Hi Steve,

It seems the same to me, and I believe Jesus is God in the flesh.

I see it also in 1 King 22, starting in verse 19, and other places in Job. God communicates with His "heavenly host", also known as "gods". It makes complete sense to me that God is involving the elohim/angels/heavenly counsel/whatever in creation of man. It does nothing to discredit Jesus as God.

I actually believe Jesus is the one speaking in Genesis.
 

SteveB

Well-known member
Yes, in The O.T. among the nation of Israel, NOT in The N.T. in The Church.
I think the apparent change is not in the church, but in the translation from the Hebrew, to the Greek.
Lord, is the word-- Kyrio/Kurio.
If you look at the LXX, every use of LORD in the greek.... it's transliterated Kyrio/Kurio. EVERY SINGLE USE.
κύριος ὁ θεὸς

Check for yourself.

I have wondered about this for a really long time.... what does the Angel, Gabriel tell Mary?

For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord.​

Since when did the Angels ever call God--- Lord in the OT?
their use, in the OT.... was always translated LORD, from which we know was the YHVH.
It seems to me that it's the Greek language which has changed it, to be-- Lord, when it should've been---

For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ, YHVH.​
 

Stephen

Active member
Especially when Hebrews 1:2-4, Colossians 1:15-19, Ephesians 3:9, John 1:1-3, all plainly state that Jesus created man.

Wow, that is some creative reading.

Hebrews 1-2 is speaking of "the world to come" (Heb 2:5). Hebrews 1:3 even goes so far as to identify Jesus and God as separate identities where Jesus is representation of God.

Hebrews 1:3 The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, . . .

Colossians 1:15 identifies Jesus as "the image of the invisible God" and tells you which part of Genesis 1:26-27 Jesus is. This is a explicit declaration by Paul about which part of Genesis 1:27 Jesus is, he's the creation, not the creator.

Colossians 1:15 The Son is the image of the invisible God,

Ephesians 3:9 says that God created all things.

Ephesians 3:9 and to make plain to everyone the administration of this mystery, which for ages past was kept hidden in God, who created all things.

John 1:1-3 doesn't even mention Jesus. The "word" made things. Just like it says in Genesis 1.



Do you read any of these passages before rattling them off?
 

SteveB

Well-known member
Wow, that is some creative reading.

Hebrews 1-2 is speaking of "the world to come" (Heb 2:5). Hebrews 1:3 even goes so far as to identify Jesus and God as separate identities where Jesus is representation of God.

Hebrews 1:3 The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, . . .

Colossians 1:15 identifies Jesus as "the image of the invisible God" and tells you which part of Genesis 1:26-27 Jesus is. This is a explicit declaration by Paul about which part of Genesis 1:27 Jesus is, he's the creation, not the creator.

Colossians 1:15 The Son is the image of the invisible God,

Ephesians 3:9 says that God created all things.

Ephesians 3:9 and to make plain to everyone the administration of this mystery, which for ages past was kept hidden in God, who created all things.

John 1:1-3 doesn't even mention Jesus. The "word" made things. Just like it says in Genesis 1.



Do you read any of these passages before rattling them off?
Actually, I do.....
But since you clearly clipped my posting....

Especially when Hebrews 1:2-4, Colossians 1:15-19, Ephesians 3:9, John 1:1-3, all plainly state that Jesus created man.


Hebrews 1:2-4 (I did not say, Hebrews 1 and 2)
2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds; 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 at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4 having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
Colossians 1:15-19 (I did not say, Colossians 1:15)
15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. 18 And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence.​
19 For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell,​

Ephesians 3:9

and to make all see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ;​

John 1:1-3

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.

And since you did such a bang up job of proving you don't know how to understand what you read,

14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

the curious thing about John 1:14 is.... everyone whom I've ever met, and who's read the bible.... they're quite familiar that it's talking about Jesus.

You do however illustrate a rather curious point..... whatever you don't like, and doesn't fit your biases, and preconceptions--- just remove it from your sight, and viola! it ceases to exist. Is this a standard practice for ALL christadelphians, or just you, and atheists? I know it's normal practice for atheists. They've been doing it for the past 20 years that I'm aware of.

Curious.... which copy of the bible do you use? The NWT?
 

Stephen

Active member
Hebrews 1:2-4 (I did not say, Hebrews 1 and 2)
2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds; 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 at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4 having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

Hebrews 2 is still on the topic of contrasting angels and Jesus which is the topic in Hebrews 1. When the writer tells you the context, you should take him or her seriously. If your doctrine requires the context to be ignored, the doctrine should be discarded. The argument being presented in Hebrews 1-2 is that Jesus is superior to the angels in the world to come.

And when we read the words highlighted by you, we learn:
  • Jesus is the express image of God - Directly identifying him with being a creation in Genesis 1:27.
  • He became better than the angels - Which means he was lower than the angels. Identifying him with the created man in Psalm 8.
  • He obtained by inheritance - which means he didn't create it, but rather it was given to him
  • He obtained a better name - meaning his name wasn't the highest name before.
  • He sat down at the right hand of God - Meaning he isn't to be confused with God but sits at the creator's right hand.

The explicit and repeated affirmation of Hebrews 1:1-3 is that Jesus is the created image and the vessel through which God makes the ages.

Colossians 1:15-19 (I did not say, Colossians 1:15)
15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. 18 And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence.​
19 For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell,​

Colossians 1:15 sets the context. He directly declares that Jesus is the created in Genesis 1:27. And as the passage says, "in him" and "through him" are all things. Jesus is the "firstborn from that dead", and because of that he has preeminence.

The passage tells you why he has preeminence, it is because he is a creation. He is the firstborn from the dead. He's not preeminent because he is the creator.

Ephesians 3:9

and to make all see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ;​

Yes, God created through Christ Jesus. Ephesians 3:9 declares who the creator is, "God". It doesn't declare that Jesus is the creator. And through him and in him are we created.

John 1:1-3​
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.​

John is clear. In Genesis 1, God's words made things happen. Likewise in the new creation, so also did God's word in the new creation. As 1 John 1:1 explains regarding John 1:1, John was there "in the beginning", he saw it and touched it "in the beginning".

The beginning being spoken of here is the new creation, as the notes in the NET say:

Gen 1 describes the first (physical) creation; John 1 describes the new (spiritual) creation.

And since you did such a bang up job of proving you don't know how to understand what you read,

14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

the curious thing about John 1:14 is.... everyone whom I've ever met, and who's read the bible.... they're quite familiar that it's talking about Jesus.​

As John 1:14 says the word became flesh. Just as the God's word became light, expanse, etc.... in Genesis 1, so also did God's word become a man, Jesus.

As the passage says, he was "begotten" of the father, a unique son. So also among those who are God's children, they are begotten of the father.

You do however illustrate a rather curious point..... whatever you don't like, and doesn't fit your biases, and preconceptions--- just remove it from your sight, and viola! it ceases to exist. Is this a standard practice for ALL christadelphians, or just you, and atheists? I know it's normal practice for atheists. They've been doing it for the past 20 years that I'm aware of.

I believe you are fantasizing with your question regarding standard practice. From my perspective it appears that you have never bothered to read the bible and seem to be shocked by what it says.

Curious.... which copy of the bible do you use? The NWT?

Google usually hits the NIV first at biblegateway so that is most often quoted in this forum as I usually don't care much about what translation is being used. I use the ESV for daily reading. I use the NET notes as a first resource regarding Greek or Hebrew and then go deeper from there.

Do you have any specific objections to the translation of any of the passages I have cited? It appears to me that you have never read the bible and the scriptures seem alien to you regardless of translation.
 

TrevorL

Member
Greetings again SteveB and Stephen,
You're going to have to explain to me how
For You have made him a little lower than the angels,And You have crowned him with glory and honor
is saying that God's made man lower than the angels, and then crowned him with glory and honor is definitive evidence that the angels were involved in the creation of man.
Still seems that this claim that angelic beings are part of the US, and OUR is a serious reach into the magic hat of the magician, and pulling rabbits out.
Because in Genesis 1:26 God invites his audience to participate in the creation of man. From my perspective considering what the Bible states and teaches, the only other beings in his audience were the Angels. I anticipate, that with your Trinitarian perspective, you need to desperately find evidence for the Trinity in the OT.
Especially when Hebrews 1:2-4, Colossians 1:15-19, Ephesians 3:9, John 1:1-3, all plainly state that Jesus created man.
I will allow Stephen to continue to answer your references. I believe that the One God, Yahweh, God the Father is the Creator Psalm 8:1.
While I agree that God is definitely inviting the angels, and I don't think that Psalm 8:5 is definitive enough for the conversation with this crowd.
Perhaps we need to take it one step at a time, but I suggest that a wrong idea will only be ultimately negated when the full and correct teaching replaces the error. I consider it important to recognise that the Angels were in the Garden with Adam and Eve. I do not believe that God the Father was actually in attendance, or at least especially after their transgression as this would contradict other Scripture. I also consider that the plural "Elohim" with a singular verb in Genesis 1:1 and even in Genesis 1:27 represents the One God, Yahweh, God the Father who delights to share his purpose and his work with and through the Angels.

Kind regards
Trevor
 
Top