"Then ? said, "Let us make man in Our image"......
Options
Ioniz3dSPIRITZ
Members Posts: 3,985 ✭✭✭✭✭
"Then ? said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth,” (Gen. 1:26, NASB)
How do you explain this? Is this a contradiction?
How do you explain this? Is this a contradiction?
Comments
-
Well, what is it that you see that may or may not make it a contradiction?
-
alissowack wrote: »Well, what is it that you see that may or may not make it a contradiction?
I'm putting emphasis on the words "Us" and "Our", because according to Christian beliefs there is only one deity. Could this quote propose the idea that there may be more than one ? ? -
Ioniz3dSPIRITZ wrote: »I'm putting emphasis on the words "Us" and "Our", because according to Christian beliefs there is only one deity. Could this quote propose the idea that there may be more than one ? ?
There is the belief that ? is triune; that ? is one in three and this is just one place where it at least hints at something going on. -
This verse is about the Godhead. The father, son and holy spirit. "We"/"our"
-
Ioniz3dSPIRITZ wrote: »I'm putting emphasis on the words "Us" and "Our", because according to Christian beliefs there is only one deity. Could this quote propose the idea that there may be more than one ? ?
He was talking to Jesus. -
PUPU_IZ_DRO wrote: »He was talking to Jesus.
Does it make any difference that is was in the Old Testament. I do not read the Holy Bible regularly but are there any more passages (in the Old Testament) where it is referring to the Trinity? -
Ioniz3dSPIRITZ wrote: »Does it make any difference that is was in the Old Testament. I do not read the Holy Bible regularly but are there any more passages (in the Old Testament) where it is referring to the Trinity?
If someone ONLY had the Old Testament without the latter New Testament there is no way they would call that a Trinity because the only scripture that refers to "our" and "us" is that and I think one other scripture.
All the other scriptures state there is only ONE ? . And he does not say "our" and "us" any other time whenever he performs actions so its hard to state why it says that in this verse.
The people that state he is referring to Jesus get this from the New Testament because throughout the Old Testament it does not state who Elohim refers to. -
It is thought, by many baptists, that old testament refers to Jesus many times.
It is thought that the figure "The angel of the lord" is the preincarnate spirit of Jesus Christ.
There are times in the Old TEstament, that this figure even says that he is ? .
Likewise in Exodus 3:2-6 the phrase "the angel of the LORD" is used interchangeably with "the LORD." In fact the angel claims, "I am the ? of your father, the ? of Abraham, the ? of Isaac and the ? of Jacob" (Ex 3:6).
So, that explains it, if you believe that, which i do.
A good point is, that this figure appears only in the old testament. In the new testament, when Jesus is on earth, the angel ceases to appear. -
Ive heard many people, whne referring to the "fallen angels" mate w earth women, say that these angels are "sons of gods". They all have said yes, more than one and say the bible was edited to refer to one ? when this was said.
I think ? even co-signs this when he says there's no other gods before him, he's the one true ? , the others are "false" etc... Points to there being other gods and the Christian ? was jealous so he tried to put them down, make them look bad etc...
So from a bible stand point there is other gods. -
there was two creations in the book of Genesis chapter 1 and Chapter 2. One was made not of YAHUWAH rUACH and one was made from the Ruach which was Adam
-
waterproof wrote: »there was two creations in the book of Genesis chapter 1 and Chapter 2. One was made of the flesh and one was made from the Ruach which was Adam
Explain.
Because many biblical scholars can't agree on if there is really two stories, many claim Chapter 1 is a "flash back" whereas Chapter 2 is the actual explanation as to how it was created. -
Explain.
Because many biblical scholars can't agree on if there is really two stories, many claim Chapter 1 is a "flash back" whereas Chapter 2 is the actual explanation as to how it was created.
I MEAN one was created by YAHUWAH and have his spirit as in Adam and the other creation was not of his spirit.
If it was a flash back then it would contain that they had YAH'S SPIRIT but they didnt. their were other beings on earth before Adam. There is people that's walking on this earth that do not have the rauch.
I have to go deeper into my studies to touch on this topic even further but I WILL return to further discuss this topic -
Cool, look forward to it.
-
Yes, that is one of the first statements that needs interpretation which is never universal. The bible short after says the following after Adam and Eve ate of the forbidden tree,
22 And the LORD ? said: 'Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever.'
This is one of those statements in which plenty of cults, secret societies, concepts of ascension and gangs have been built from. This statement along with the verse about man being made in his image makes it seem as if knowledge really does reign supreme and that having knowledge is something the bible ? never wanted man to have because he could do a lot of damage and good, and maybe even challenge for superiority. Makes it seem like having knowledge is all that really differentiated man and the bible ? . These are the type of statements that really do just as much harm as good or more harm IMO. -
a lot of people in this thread may need to familiarize themselves with the concept of the "majestic plural":Ioniz3dSPIRITZ wrote: »How do you explain this? Is this a contradiction?
Majestic plural -
a lot of people in this thread may need to familiarize themselves with the concept of the "majestic plural":
Majestic plural
So, let's clear up one unclear statement with another? Is that the game we are playing? This is my major problem with people and religion they are always trying to paint the bible as perfect. So, I guess he is not speaking of the trinity here, just simply speaking the way all high rulers spoke because he was a high ruler. Why would the most high talk like all the other high rulers considering he has always stated that he is the highest and no-one else should be mistaken or compared to him? -
Couldn't he just be talking to the angels. I mean they were around before man was created and they were like ? 's entourage. He's speaking in the same manner that a rapper might. He might say "Let's go do this show," even though he's the only one that's going to perform. The rest are just there to watch and praise his abilities.So, let's clear up one unclear statement with another? Is that the game we are playing? This is my major problem with people and religion they are always trying to paint the bible as perfect. So, I guess he is not speaking of the trinity here, just simply speaking the way all high rulers spoke because he was a high ruler. Why would the most high talk like all the other high rulers considering he has always stated that he is the highest and no-one else should be mistaken or compared to him?
You do realize the Bible has been translated and re-translated many times right? You'd be foolish to think that when the Europeans did all their versions, they didn't slip in a little of their culture. For instance, they wrote ? as speaking like that because from their standpoint anyone of a position such as his would speak like that. -
alissowack wrote: »There is the belief that ? is triune; that ? is one in three and this is just one place where it at least hints at something going on.This verse is about the Godhead. The father, son and holy spirit. "We"/"our"PUPU_IZ_DRO wrote: »He was talking to Jesus.
lol @ this ? -
So, let's clear up one unclear statement with another? Is that the game we are playing? This is my major problem with people and religion they are always trying to paint the bible as perfect. So, I guess he is not speaking of the trinity here, just simply speaking the way all high rulers spoke because he was a high ruler. Why would the most high talk like all the other high rulers considering he has always stated that he is the highest and no-one else should be mistaken or compared to him?
lol waht are you trying to prove though?
that a man written book has flaws?
you the type to hear a fable and say "nah thats ? son, animals can't talk"???
theres messages to the bible, that for the most part are about being a better person towards the world around you (some of the edicts are outdated and show that it was written by man)
if you want a metaphor for the whole thing, its like you taking a college course, and without the lesson plan, being told to then tell everything you learned to one of your friends, and then he tells everything he learned from you to one of his friends.....now unless its math, alot of the ? is interpretation. the smallest bit of paraphrasing or editing in an attempt to put into leymans terms can change the message completely.
my point is, you are arguing semantics over the pronoun used, but are forgetting the point of the story.
people look to religion as a common easement to questions that would drive us crazy or into a severe fit of paranoia if we spent our days looking for answers
some peoples religion is science based others on faith
the thought of there being something beyond this life we live is important to people in concept not semantics lol
if you want it all spelled out for you specifically that means you don't subscribe to the mindset, move on, find a mindset that works for you.
but its a complete package. you wanna believe that dead loved ones go to heaven, accept the whole thing, u don't no big deal
this topic reminds me of this scene though -
soul rattler wrote: »lol @ this ?
? , as in it does not align with your beliefs, or ? as in the bible does not
introduce the idea of the holy trinity? -
lol waht are you trying to prove though?
that a man written book has flaws?
you the type to hear a fable and say "nah thats ? son, animals can't talk"???
theres messages to the bible, that for the most part are about being a better person towards the world around you (some of the edicts are outdated and show that it was written by man)
if you want a metaphor for the whole thing, its like you taking a college course, and without the lesson plan, being told to then tell everything you learned to one of your friends, and then he tells everything he learned from you to one of his friends.....now unless its math, alot of the ? is interpretation. the smallest bit of paraphrasing or editing in an attempt to put into leymans terms can change the message completely.
my point is, you are arguing semantics over the pronoun used, but are forgetting the point of the story.
people look to religion as a common easement to questions that would drive us crazy or into a severe fit of paranoia if we spent our days looking for answers
some peoples religion is science based others on faith
the thought of there being something beyond this life we live is important to people in concept not semantics lol
if you want it all spelled out for you specifically that means you don't subscribe to the mindset, move on, find a mindset that works for you.
but its a complete package. you wanna believe that dead loved ones go to heaven, accept the whole thing, u don't no big deal
this topic reminds me of this scene though
? your opinion ? go play in a thread were idiots are welcomed. You don't know my type of my mindset, you just proved you are a idiot and should be quarantined to portions of this forum were your type is welcomed -
? dont exist.. grow the ? up ?
Why do you stupid crackas and freeloading latin ? always come to people's posts and ? them up? Once again all you ignorant ? should be quarantined to threads were people obviously have nothing to add but it is a known fact that those areas are for that. -
-
if you think there's something "unclear" about the concept of the majestic plural, i don't know what to tell you. keep grasping at straws, i guess?So, let's clear up one unclear statement with another? Is that the game we are playing?
possibly because it's a book written by men and thus indicative of the way men talk and write?Why would the most high talk like all the other high rulers considering he has always stated that he is the highest and no-one else should be mistaken or compared to him? -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0c_-I2cLbo