RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> The Bible



Message

bgwill3 -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/8/2008 3:44:04 PM)

At Genesis 1:26, it has already been pointed out that God was speaking to God. The next verse states that "God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him".



Bluethread -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/8/2008 4:51:18 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: drmark

quote:

The only problem is that the only person I am sure is Spirit-filled and Spirit-led in all of His opinions is a Jewish Rabbi, Yeshua Ha Meshiach(Jesus the Messiah)


Then I suggest you re-read 1 Cor 2:12-16, Bluethread. I am sure of my relationship with Yeshua and I trust Him to have His mind. The Trinity is not an "opinion" to be taught by rabbis!


This is exactly my point, just because someone says or their followers say they are Spirit-filled and Spirit-led does not make it so. Therefore, we need to test all of the opinions of men to see if they are in line with the Ruach Ha Chedosh(Holy Spirit). Whether that opinion comes from someone who is "Jewish" or "Christian" does not change the words or argument.

Now, I hope you are not saying that one must accept the doctrine of the trinity in order to be saved or have access to the knowledge of Adonai. This, in my opinion, is not much different than the doctrine of "the circumcision", who sought to denigh access to Adonai to those who would not convert to rabbinic judaism. Paul clearly stated that salvation is by grace . . . and their is neither Jew nor Greek.

Therefore, I contend that regardless of what we call ourselves or what our theological views are, we are all allowed to express our opinion, ask for a reasonable explanation and be convinced in our own minds before accepting any doctrine.



drmark -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/8/2008 4:56:55 PM)

quote:

Now, I hope you are not saying that one must accept the doctrine of the trinity in order to be saved or have access to the knowledge of Adonai.
How long can one remained saved while denying belief in the Trinity? This is essential Christian doctrine and there are several threads on which you may debate the issue. I will not speak to it again here. "Access to the knowledge of Adonai" is essentially worthless without a personal relationship with the Triune Godhead!



MrFribbles -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/8/2008 6:59:07 PM)

quote:

At Genesis 1:26, it has already been pointed out that God was speaking to God.


I'm sorry, but I just do not see it. The Old Testament (and indeed, the early New Testament) Jewish population were vehemently monotheistic. ...Well, those that weren't caught up in idolatry, which was sadly all too common throughout their history (and indeed, to an extent, continues into Christianity today - but that's an entirely different discussion). If the original readers were meant to understand God as speaking to Himself in the plural, this would have gone against everything they knew.
On the other hand, given the early date of the story of Job, which if memory serves most place around the time of the Patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, all those great men), the idea of a heavenly host in God's presence would have been well known. It would have been understood that other, lesser spiritual beings regularly come into God's presence and speak with Him, and He to them. So, I don't know, I just don't see any problem with God calling all His angels around Him and telling them, "Hey, I'm going to make a new creature, and they're going to be like us - they're going to be in my image!" Then God makes man, and the hosts of heaven delight and rejoice in God's creativity and might.

I mean, if we all get to heaven and God says, "Yeah, that 'us' in Genesis was me hinting at the trinity," then I'll be fine with that. God's God, He can do what He wants, heh. But grammatically, historically and theologically, I just don't see the doctrine of the trinity taught here, in this passage.



bgwill3 -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/8/2008 10:01:08 PM)

So, if I may ask, do you believe that this passage (and others) that speak to trinitarian doctrine in the Old Testament and "early" New Testament (by which I presume you refer to the earliest extant writings, some of the Pauline epistles) are explicable by some other concept?

That the trinity was not explicitly revealed is one assertion; but to say that trinitarian doctrine is incompatible with so-called "strictly monotheistic" Judaism is incoherent. (As some have pointed out, such an assertion is held by Jewish folks and others who reject the deity of the Lord Jesus.)

(A) God revealed himself to and through the Jewish people and Judaism. However, orthodox Jews readily affirm God's monotheism while rejecting Jesus' deity.
(B) Truth is, Jesus is one with God, he himself is the eternal Word, who "was with God" and "was God," and became a man, died on a cross, and was bodily resurrected. He now sits at the Father's right hand, fully God and fully man. To him, the author of Hebrews attributes descriptions of God that we find in the Scriptures (e.g. Hebrews 1:10-12, Psalm 102:25-27).
(C) This Jesus was rejected by many Jews in his time. Some accepted him and preserved his gospel for us. But many, learned in the Scriptures, Jews by birth, keepers of the Law, seekers of God, many of these rejected him. Notwithstanding, we know that he is God, worthy of worship. That sets us apart from many orthodox Jews, who know the Scriptures, keep the Law, and cling to their understanding of strict monotheism.

It should also be noted, that the Scriptures in the OT that Christians understand as referring to the deity of the Messiah are explained, by orthodox Jewish teachers/scholars/etc., as meaning something else. (Since there is only one God, and Messiah is clearly a person other than God, Messiah cannot be full deity. How can two, or three even, be one? Illogical, and clearly eisegesis, in their view.)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrFribbles

quote:

At Genesis 1:26, it has already been pointed out that God was speaking to God.


I'm sorry, but I just do not see it. The Old Testament (and indeed, the early New Testament) Jewish population were vehemently monotheistic. ...Well, those that weren't caught up in idolatry, which was sadly all too common throughout their history (and indeed, to an extent, continues into Christianity today - but that's an entirely different discussion). If the original readers were meant to understand God as speaking to Himself in the plural, this would have gone against everything they knew.
On the other hand, given the early date of the story of Job, which if memory serves most place around the time of the Patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, all those great men), the idea of a heavenly host in God's presence would have been well known. It would have been understood that other, lesser spiritual beings regularly come into God's presence and speak with Him, and He to them. So, I don't know, I just don't see any problem with God calling all His angels around Him and telling them, "Hey, I'm going to make a new creature, and they're going to be like us - they're going to be in my image!" Then God makes man, and the hosts of heaven delight and rejoice in God's creativity and might.

I mean, if we all get to heaven and God says, "Yeah, that 'us' in Genesis was me hinting at the trinity," then I'll be fine with that. God's God, He can do what He wants, heh. But grammatically, historically and theologically, I just don't see the doctrine of the trinity taught here, in this passage.



bgwill3 -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/8/2008 10:06:35 PM)

I am not certain whether my last post is off topic or not. It may be. If so, I am fine with being corrected on that point.

My intent was to demonstrate that this passage (Genesis 1:26) must be compatible to trinitarian doctrine (or vice versa).

If the doctrine of the trinity is true, then it is clear to whom God was speaking.

If the trinity is in doubt, or out of our purview, then there are a couple of possibilities.

Speaking to those possibilities is moot if the doctrine of the trinity is true.



Anisavta -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/8/2008 11:28:57 PM)

quote:

I'm sorry, but I just do not see it. The Old Testament (and indeed, the early New Testament) Jewish population were vehemently monotheistic. ...Well, those that weren't caught up in idolatry, which was sadly all too common throughout their history (and indeed, to an extent, continues into Christianity today - but that's an entirely different discussion). If the original readers were meant to understand God as speaking to Himself in the plural, this would have gone against everything they knew.
On the other hand, given the early date of the story of Job, which if memory serves most place around the time of the Patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, all those great men), the idea of a heavenly host in God's presence would have been well known. It would have been understood that other, lesser spiritual beings regularly come into God's presence and speak with Him, and He to them. So, I don't know, I just don't see any problem with God calling all His angels around Him and telling them, "Hey, I'm going to make a new creature, and they're going to be like us - they're going to be in my image!" Then God makes man, and the hosts of heaven delight and rejoice in God's creativity and might.


"I'm sorry, but I just do not see it. The Old Testament (and indeed, the early New Testament) Jewish population were vehemently monotheistic."And from that you say Moses did not consider the "US" speaking about the Unity but instead angels?

"If the original readers were meant to understand God as speaking to Himself in the plural, this would have gone against everything they knew."
No actually they had a better handle on the whole thing than Western Greek thinking modern folk of today.
And are you speaking about a Hasid of Jerusalem or one of the Patriarchs?

"On the other hand, given the early date of the story of Job, which if memory serves most place around the time of the Patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, all those great men)"Actually the book of Job is considered the oldest in the Bible and dates before our Fathers.

"I just don't see any problem with God calling all His angels around Him and telling them, "Hey, I'm going to make a new creature, and they're going to be like us - they're going to be in my image!" Then God makes man, and the hosts of heaven delight and rejoice in God's creativity and might."
If that isn't 21st Century Western thought I'll eat my hat!
You are skating on thin New Age ice with that one.

Gen 1:27 And God created man in His image; in the image of God He created him. He created them male and female.
Now don't you think if this was a joint effort with the angels it would have said something like - And G~d and His host of Heaven created man in G~d's image...? Three times in one verse it is stated - in His image, in the image of G~d and He created them...

So if you don't accept the opening lines of the Scripture as speaking of the Unity - where do you think it began? What would be your first scripture reference Mr Fribbles?



Ezra -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/9/2008 12:37:43 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: 2by2

Genesis 1:26 says, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness" .

And Genesis 3:22 says "Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever "--

Who do you think he is referring to in these verses? Is he speaking to the Holy Spirit?

I appreciate your input as I seek wisdom....[sm=icon_smile_idea.gif]


The "us" in these verses is clearly the triune Godhead -- the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Genesis 1:1 says that "in the beginning God created". Whenever we read of "God" in the New Testament without further qualification, that word refers to the Father.

John 1:1-3 says that "in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was WITH God, and the Word was God... all things were made by Him". The Word is none other than the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who took upon Himself a human body (John 1:14).

Therefore we know that there were at least two Divine Persons at the Creation, the Father and the Son, and both are the Creator.

But we also know from Genesis 1:2 that "the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters", and the Spirit of God is also called the Holy Spirit or the Holy Ghost.

Thus there were three Divine Persons at the Creation, and they addressed each other and said "Let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness". Since all three Persons are fully God, we read in Genesis 1:26, "And God said", which means "the Godhead said".

If you were to ask, how can God address God, read Psalm 45:6,7, Psalm 102:25-27, and Hebrews 1:8-14. This is a Divine Mystery.



Bluethread -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/9/2008 6:49:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ezra

Genesis 1:1 says that "in the beginning God created". Whenever we read of "God" in the New Testament without further qualification, that word refers to the Father.


To avoid being derailed by the word nerds I will accept your qualified use of the word "God" for this discussion. This term could refer to Adonai as manifest in the form of a father. The Scripture refered to in the Apistolic Writings(new testiment) and familiar to people in Yeshua's(Jesus') time, is the Tanach(old testiment). In the Tanach(old testiment), Elohiem(the father), Ruach Ha Chedosh(the holy spirirt) and Ha Torah(the word) are different terms used for Adonai depending on the context. Therefore, we see the differentiation is rhetorical.

With this in mind, Yochanan(John) began his account as you quoted,

quote:

John 1:1-3 says that "in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was WITH God, and the Word was God... all things were made by Him". The Word is none other than the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who took upon Himself a human body (John 1:14).


Thus, Yochanan(John) sets the premise of his work as, Yeshua(Jesus) is Adonai because He embodies Ha Torah(the word).

Thus there were three ways of representing Adonai at the Creation, and Adonai said "Let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness". Since all three are full representations of Adonai, we read in Genesis 1:26, "And God said", which means "The fullness of Adonai said".

If you were to ask, how can God address God, read Psalm 45:6,7, Psalm 102:25-27, and Hebrews 1:8-14. This is a Divine Mystery.

This is how I see it in light of the scriptual and cultural context in which the Apistolic Writing(new testiment) was written.



Doc65 -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/9/2008 9:26:28 PM)

quote:

Oh, just people who have spent their entire lives studying God's word. And are apparently equipped enough in their knowledge to be the heads of various Bible/Missions departments at a conservative Bible college.


From the institution whose link was posted:

quote:

We believe in one God, eternally existing in three Persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, who created all things (Matthew 28:19–20; Acts 5:3–4; Hebrews 1:1–3; Genesis 1:1)

We believe that man was created in the image of God,Genesis 1:26–27


Honestly, if this is what the learned folks at this institution subscribe to as their doctrinal statement and then they indicate things such as:

quote:

I've heard that this is probably not a direct reference to other members of the godhead. At the very least, that wasn't the human author's original intent, seeing as how the authors of the Old Testament had no real concept of the trinity that we know of.


I really think they need to revisit what it is, exactly, that they subscribe to...it appears that what they call "doctrine" is something that is subjective and open for interpretation...

My 2 cents-worth.



turtleman -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/9/2008 11:10:55 PM)

In making man in his own image God made us a three part being like himself. We have a body soul and spirit. God also has three parts Jesus the word made flesh the Holy Spirit and God the father. Three parts yet all three are one just as all three parts of us are one even though each one is distinct and seperate. God was talking to himself and the other heavenly hosts. However we are made in the image of God not an exact duplicate.



MrFribbles -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/10/2008 1:15:49 AM)

quote:

I really think they need to revisit what it is, exactly, that they subscribe to...it appears that what they call "doctrine" is something that is subjective and open for interpretation...

My 2 cents-worth.


Excuse me, but the people you are accusing of such things happen to be, in my mind, some of the most godly and biblically learned people I have ever met. And if you would take a moment to re-read that snippet of my school's doctrinal statement, you will learn that it has no bearing on this discussion whatsoever. We ascribe to the trinity (as indeed any person wishing to legitimately call themselves a true follower of the Lord must), and we ascribe to the truth that each person is created in God's image. But the fact that we use Genesis 1:26-27 to back up the truth of the image doctrine does not imply we believe it simultaneously affirms the trinity.
Again I ask - if this verse is teaching the trinity, and if all of the Old Testament authors made it so abundantly clear in Scripture (which, from this thread, I seem to be getting the impression of), then why did Jesus' contemporary religious "leaders" treat the very notion of God existing in two persons, let alone three, as a heresy worthy of death?

The truth of the trinity is clearly taught in Scripture. I just do not see it in this one small passage. I may very well be wrong, but quite honestly, I don't see whether it matters if I am or not - the trinity neither stands nor falls on Genesis 1:26-27.



Anisavta -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/10/2008 10:37:35 PM)

Because this one small passage sets the beginning of the Unity of the Holy One.
And during service today as the Torah portion was read and a reference was made to the "complex unity" of the word Elohim in Hebrew - the language Genesis was written in it dawned on me. It doesn't matter that you Mr Fribbles or anyone out there challenging the scripture think it is not refering to the Unity of G~d. What is written is written. And although you don't understand the Hebrew language and have decided you can't fit Elohim as a Unity into your Western thinking - oh well. Elohim is (not maybe) a plural of the Name of G~d El. Argue on my brother but truth is truth.



MrFribbles -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/11/2008 6:31:33 PM)

Well, it seems obvious to me that this argument (though thankfully I might not yet call it an argument, though I am confident that if discussion should continue, it would escalate in that direction) is going nowhere. And since, thankfully, neither side is dangerously unorthodox in their beliefs, I will bow out. This will be my last past on this particular thread.



McFatty -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/11/2008 6:40:11 PM)

If we were created in the image of angels, we'd look weird. I have never met anyone with six wings!!!



Anisavta -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/11/2008 7:39:47 PM)

I think we will be pretty suprised when we actually see all of the heavenly host and creatures that G~d has created.



figmentPez -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/14/2008 4:55:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrFribbles

The Old Testament (and indeed, the early New Testament) Jewish population were vehemently monotheistic.


And the triune God is just one God. That some Jews did not recognize that the Messiah would be the Son of God does not mean that the Old Testament does not teach that, or that the Old Testament authors did not know that God is triune.

The LORD knew Moses "face to face" in such a way that "since that time no prophet has risen in Israel like Moses." (Deut 34:10) It is inconceivable to me that Moses would know the LORD that intimately, but not have a clue about God's triune nature.

Daniel certainly saw at least two persons of the trinity, in his visions of heaven in Daniel 7:13-14. Daniel saw the Son of Man, who is Jesus Christ the Son of God, worshiped in the presence of the Ancient of Days, who is the Father.

The Psalmist wrote of the Son of God in Psalm 2.

And that's hardly an exhaustive examination of how God is shown to be triune, even in the OT.



Bluethread -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/14/2008 7:46:25 PM)

Just because some think that Ha Meshiach(the Messiah), Ha Torah(The Word), Ruach Ha Chedosh, and Adonai Elohiem(The Lord Almighty) are seperate persons, does not mean the Apistolic Wrtings teach that. Oh sorry, that's four.



Hismusicgal -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/15/2008 12:17:01 AM)

Scholars don't have a solid answer on this subject either. We were discussing this in Biblical Hermeneutics II class a couple of weeks ago. There are several ideas. The original writings are not conclusive. With time gaps in translation it is possible that not everything comes through as the human author intended, but we need to remenber it might be God's intention But why are we questioning the Bible? If God wants us to know He would let us know but just maybe this is one of the things that we will not be told here on earth or ever for that matter.

[sm=angel.gif]



figmentPez -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/16/2008 4:19:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread

Just because some think that Ha Meshiach(the Messiah), Ha Torah(The Word), Ruach Ha Chedosh, and Adonai Elohiem(The Lord Almighty) are seperate persons, does not mean the Apistolic Wrtings teach that. Oh sorry, that's four.


And you're accusing me of making strawman arguments???? You have no clue what proper Christian, trinitarian, doctrine teaches, and yet you rail against it anyway.

The Word is the the Messiah, is the Son of God. The three persons of the triune God are the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Each of these individually, and as a whole are the LORD Almighty. This is not only taught by the Apostolic writings, but by the whole of scripture. The Gospels, the Epistles, the Law, the Prophets... everything. Any doctrine that rejects the triune nature of God is false, and will lead to great heresy.



Bluethread -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/16/2008 5:37:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: figmentPez

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread

Just because some think that Ha Meshiach(the Messiah), Ha Torah(The Word), Ruach Ha Chedosh, and Adonai Elohiem(The Lord Almighty) are seperate persons, does not mean the Apistolic Wrtings teach that. Oh sorry, that's four.


And you're accusing me of making strawman arguments???? You have no clue what proper Christian, trinitarian, doctrine teaches, and yet you rail against it anyway.

The Word is the the Messiah, is the Son of God. The three persons of the triune God are the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Each of these individually, and as a whole are the LORD Almighty. This is not only taught by the Apostolic writings, but by the whole of scripture. The Gospels, the Epistles, the Law, the Prophets... everything. Any doctrine that rejects the triune nature of God is false, and will lead to great heresy.


We may as well all log off figment Pez has spoken.



NobodyImportant -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/18/2008 1:35:40 AM)

The words 'let us' and 'our' aren't technically there, but are editorial components for english reading. Even then, 'let us' is no different than saying "let's" and, afaik, there is nothing in the verse to necessitate the use of 'us' over 'my.'

I think, conceptually, it reads:
God
Said (Willed\Thought\Commanded)
Fashion (Produce\Make\Accomplish\Bring About)
Adam (Man\Mankind)
Image (Likeness\Resemblance)
Likeness (Similarity. Second use for emphasis\repetition?)
Dominion (Dominion\Rule\Reign\Prevail)
Fish
Sea
Fowl (Flying creatures)
Air (Sky\Heavens)
Beasts
Earth (Ground\Land)
Moving Things (Creeping\Gliding Things)
Move (Creeps\Glides)
Earth (Ground\Land)

Some basic words need to be added between these concepts to make it more cohearant and compatible with english syntax, but if you read it 'naked' like this it still makes sense. God 'willed' the creation of adam in an image\resemblance, and gave him dominion over fish\fowl\beasts, and all moving creatures.

It doesn't say 'let us' make man 'in our' image, as if he is literally talking to someone else (much less an equal) but such an explaination is a side-effect of language differences. Particularly in that English is very, very specific about what it means and has many words for similar (if slightly different) concepts while Hebrew is very general. For example, in english we have 'said' for spoken words and 'thought' for unspoken concepts. This wasn't a necessary distinction in Hebrew as thoughts were simply said by the thinker to him\herself. You see this here, and elsewhere in the Genesis creation, where God reportedly 'says' something verbally which should more properly be seen as compelling, or willing something into being.

Genesis 1:3 is one of my favorite examples of this, where 'Let there be light: and there was light.' should probably be seen as 'God willed: be VERY light.' or 'be Light repeatedly.' -- Be light x2 -- rather than God 'said', 'let there be' light, 'and there was' light, which I feel diminishes the intended emphasis of one of his earliest commands. The universe is conveniently filled with many, extremely bright lights formed from the earliest of particles.. So this is not something which I feel should be underestimated. There are other examples where they chose to do it this way as well.

This doesn't significantly change the meaning of the passage(s), only the communication. I'm not skilled enough at translation to know why they chose to do it this way sometimes and not others, nor do I have access to the original texts, so I'm not criticising the translation except to suggest not drawing (or arguing about) deep theological conclusions based solely on the particular wording of that translation. The bible has been translated into many languages, so I imagine this would create serious problems if everyone did it.



rcjones -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/19/2008 6:27:26 PM)

There is a saying that the "pashat never loses it's meaning", which says that the literal is always the literal. Therefore the passage always speaks about the literal creation of man and woman in God's image and likeness.

But if we handle the scripture the way the rabbis did, but include the cannon of the New Testament in the mix, we may make some additional observations.

The word 'likeness' is not used in the immediate fulfillment language of Gen 1 and does not occur until Gen 5.1 ¶ This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;

In between the two occurrences of the word 'likeness', there is a narrative in the shadows (double entendre) of how Christ redeemed the world and made us "like him".

Abel was killed by his brothers as Christ was.
Abel is symbolically resurrected as Christ was by being "replaced" by Seth
Gen 4.25 ... For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.

Seth begets children who worship God just as Christ begets 'living children'.

Enos is like Abel/Seth, just like the children of Christ are like Christ.
Gen 4.26 ...and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.

Now he is fruitful and multiplying as Christ is.

So when God said it was "very good" on day six, Jesus said "It is finished on the cross, and there was darkness and the seventh day.

Christ is the express image of God, and we will be made 'like' him, so together Christ and his bride are in the 'image' and 'likeness' of God.

And together the 'oneness of Christ and his bride, reflects the oneness of God.



NobodyImportant -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/20/2008 4:15:27 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rcjones
The word 'likeness' is not used in the immediate fulfillment language of Gen 1 and does not occur until Gen 5.1 ¶ This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
Not to diminish your other interesting points, but 'Likeness' is used in Genesis 1:26, immediately after the word 'Image.'



rcjones -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/20/2008 8:39:21 AM)

Yes. He says he will make them in his likeness in 1.26, but does not 'fulfill it until 5.1.

In the fulfillment language of 1.27 "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." he did not use "likeness".

You will also note that he changed from "make" to "create". This is also used in 5.1.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI