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

All Forums >> [Theology] >> The Bible



Message


figmentPez -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/26/2008 6:51:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrFribbles
quote:

COMMENTING ON GEN 1:26 ". . .And therefore God himself not only undertakes to make, but is pleased so to express himself, as if he called a council to consider of the making of him; Let us make man - The three persons of the Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, consult about it, and concur in it; because man, when he was made, was to be dedicated and devoted to Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.
—Wesley's Commentary"


While I certainly don't see such a view as heretical by any stretch of the imagination, I feel it commits to all too common error of ignoring the fact that the Old Testament was written to an Old Testament audience. There is nothing, I repeat, nothing, in the original language to suggest the members of the Godhead. I again state that I have not heard a single valid argument against the "us" referring to the heavenly host.


What about the truth that man is not made in the image of the angels? "God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him" (Gen 1:27) Note that this does not say "God created man in His image, and in the image of the angels, in the image of God and the angels He created him." God says ""Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;" and then proceeds to say that man is made solely in the image of God, with no mention of the angels.




MrFribbles -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/26/2008 7:45:25 PM)

quote:

What about the truth that man is not made in the image of the angels? "God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him" (Gen 1:27) Note that this does not say "God created man in His image, and in the image of the angels, in the image of God and the angels He created him." God says ""Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;" and then proceeds to say that man is made solely in the image of God, with no mention of the angels.


Well, that all has to do with the question, "What is the image of God?" I seriously doubt that it is a physical-appearance thing, since we don't look a thing like the Holy Spirit. Rather, I believe it has to do with a number of inner characteristics that set us above animal life. Unfortunately, Scripture never explicitly tells us what the image really means. Obviously it is important, since it is because we are created in God's image that murder is forbidden (Genesis 9:6).
Regardless, I find no problem with the idea of angelic beings sharing certain characteristics with us, and some of those shared characteristics are what makes up the image. So, if I may butcher for a moment with a very, very loose paraphrase, I can picture God calling the heavenly hosts around Him so that they can share in the highlight of the 6-day creation - us. He says to the angels, "I'm going to make man, and he will be in my image. You are also in my image. So come, let's make man. I'll do the creating, you can all sit back and watch, because it'll be very good. I will make him in the my image, the image we share, and the image that now you will also share with man." Ya' know, something like that.




figmentPez -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/26/2008 7:50:21 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrFribbles

Well, that all has to do with the question, "What is the image of God?" I seriously doubt that it is a physical-appearance thing, since we don't look a thing like the Holy Spirit. Rather, I believe it has to do with a number of inner characteristics that set us above animal life. Unfortunately, Scripture never explicitly tells us what the image really means. Obviously it is important, since it is because we are created in God's image that murder is forbidden (Genesis 9:6).
Regardless, I find no problem with the idea of angelic beings sharing certain characteristics with us, and some of those shared characteristics are what makes up the image. So, if I may butcher for a moment with a very, very loose paraphrase, I can picture God calling the heavenly hosts around Him so that they can share in the highlight of the 6-day creation - us. He says to the angels, "I'm going to make man, and he will be in my image. You are also in my image. So come, let's make man. I'll do the creating, you can all sit back and watch, because it'll be very good. I will make him in the my image, the image we share, and the image that now you will also share with man." Ya' know, something like that.


That requires too much speculation for my tastes. Not only does in involve adding more to the the narrative than there is present, but it also requires assuming that angels are made in the image of God, something that scripture does not say or even hint at! Angels are not given the opportunity to become son of God, adopted into the sonship of the Only Begotten, as humans are. Angels are not given a chance for redemption like humans. Angels are going to be judged by humans. Something makes humans more valuable to God than angels are. If angels are made in the image of God, just as humans are, it's going to take some explaining why God treats them so differently than He does humans.




MrFribbles -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/26/2008 8:10:44 PM)

quote:

That requires too much speculation for my tastes.


Understandable. Like I said, I feel much of this discussion centers on what exactly the image of God is. So, ultimately, any view will have to involve some amount of speculation, since the image is never explicitly described. If all the elements of humanity you described are the image, then I would concede that my view is much more improbable.




VCO -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/27/2008 12:40:28 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrFribbles

No, we're not. We are not triune.

. . .

quote:

COMMENTING ON ISA. 6:8 ". . .God asked, Whom shall I send? And who will go for Us? The word “Us” in reference to God hints at the Trinity (cf. “Us” in Gen. 1:26; 11:7). This doctrine, though not explicit in the Old Testament, is implicit for God is the same God in both Testaments. . .
—Bible Knowledge Commentary (Dallas Theological Seminary)"


I like how it gives no solid argument for their statements. Perhaps you would do better to seek a more exegetical commentary . . .


U&U

We are the "IMAGE" (picture-type) of the Triune God.

LOL, now how is it on a site made up of mostly Evangelicals you seem to know very little about what Dallas Theological Seminary is known for. They have for decades been know as one of the finest Evangelical Seminarys in the land. Dr. John F. Walvoord is a graduate, Dr. Chuck Swindoll is a graduate, as well as several other well known Evangelical Pastors. Dr. Merrill Unger was Professor of OT Studies, etc. Bible Knowledge Commentary is concidered one of the best, Biblically sound Commentaries around.




MrFribbles -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/27/2008 12:08:54 PM)

quote:

We are the "IMAGE" (picture-type) of the Triune God.


What does that mean? Are you trying to suggest that, because we are made in the image of God, we physically look like God?

quote:

LOL, now how is it on a site made up of mostly Evangelicals you seem to know very little about what Dallas Theological Seminary is known for. They have for decades been know as one of the finest Evangelical Seminarys in the land. Dr. John F. Walvoord is a graduate, Dr. Chuck Swindoll is a graduate, as well as several other well known Evangelical Pastors. Dr. Merrill Unger was Professor of OT Studies, etc. Bible Knowledge Commentary is concidered one of the best, Biblically sound Commentaries around.


Oh, believe me, I am well familiar with the ideals of DTS and the Bible Knowledge Commentary. However, I also recognize that a commentary is not Scripture. It was written by the mind and heart of man alone, and as such, is fallible. Having a commentary back up one's argument is not a good reason to believe a certain view, especially considering the number of doctrinal issues that are still disagreed upon in many commentaries.




Heavendweller -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/28/2008 8:14:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Stormcrow

quote:

Jer 17:5 Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD.

I haven't dismissed creeds. Merely point out that they have substituted personal scholarship.

When you trust a creed you are trusting someone else's scholarship and trusting man rather than God.


On the first point, "they have substituted personal scholarship" that's a pretty broad brush with which you're painting. My personal scholarship tells me these are right on. Does my agreement with them in the basics of the Christian faith and dogma mean that I am less scholarly than you?

Methinks you presume too much.

On the second point, "When you trust a creed you are trusting someone else's scholarship and trusting man rather than God." do you presume that you're "personal scholarship" is greater and more sanctified than anyone else's? Let's look at your position another way:

Your major premise is that "trusting man' scholarship is evil." So we are not to trust anyone's scholarship. But then you argue that "personal scholarship is good."

Hmmm...If trusting man's scholarship is evil, but trusting your own is good, then either you're not a member of the human race, or it's OK to trust "some" human scholarship, at which point you become the final arbiter of that which is trustworthy and that which is not.

In either case, you're arguing from a position of hubris, not humility.


Stormcrow,
This is one of the most common sense posts I've read on Crosswalk. Thank you. So good to know that there are Christians out there who still consider the Creeds to be orthodox in nature, which defend the truth of the Christian faith, especially regarding the nature of God. I'm astonished at the increasing number of Evangelicals who cast the Creeds along the wayside or worse yet, discard them completely.

Heavendweller




VCO -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/29/2008 3:18:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Heavendweller

Stormcrow,
This is one of the most common sense posts I've read on Crosswalk. Thank you. So good to know that there are Christians out there who still consider the Creeds to be orthodox in nature, which defend the truth of the Christian faith, especially regarding the nature of God. I'm astonished at the increasing number of Evangelicals who cast the Creeds along the wayside or worse yet, discard them completely.

Heavendweller



U&U

I agree! I would only add "Or make up new ones based upon feelings or personal experiences, instead of Scripture."




Alpenwolf -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (5/30/2008 2:46:13 PM)

Probably He is talking about the angels. The Host of heaven.

(:




Hismusicgal -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (6/3/2008 2:10:41 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hismusicgal

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]


I felt lead to repost my earlier comment after rereading this thread again today!!!!

[sm=angel.gif]

We have to remember that the Bible is a real and true work. And inspired by God for the purpose of strengthening His Kingdom.




endless_night -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (6/17/2008 4:02:21 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrFribbles

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.

You might want to rethink that simply because Moses is given an account that only God had, the creation of the universe (from Genesis forward until Moses is placed in Exodus). So to assume that the author could not have been referring to the Godhead because He would not know the real concept is a little bit of a stretch when the author is writing about something He certainly wasn't there to see, much less comprehend (but I'm sure He believed as God said things happened). So you can clearly see that it was the Holy Spirit writing through Moses (well through all scriptures but you know what I mean) and therefore it does not throw away the idea that in Genesis 1:26 that God is talking to the Godhead.

And by the way, you do not need a PhD in the bible to be a scholar, you simply need to read it, study it and have it in your heart. And if you are like me, you might want to know more about the culture by reading history books but the Old Testament is there to help you with that aspect.




hellohellohi -> RE: Who is God referring to in Genesis? (6/17/2008 4:21:27 PM)

re: the OP

I thought He was using the "royal we." [;)]

Joking, kind of.




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI