Hahaha!!!!! 
Being created in the Image of God
- Thread starter greenberg
- Start date
There is no requirement for me to "demonstrate" since the claim that biblical mythology is "testimony" is yours. The onus of support is on you. Further, since there is no good reason to accept biblical stories as anything more than mythology, I'm justified in appealing to "reasoned minds" (I did not state "reasonable" as you erroneously write).
But this is me, yet again, answering one of your straw man arguments. You've clumsily shoved aside the fact that you've engaged in logical fallacy by using biblical mythology to support the "truth" of biblical mythology.
My oh my.
Why doesn't anyone comment on my idea that "being created in the image of God" is a pleonasm, and that all that was actually meant to mean is that God had an idea and he created according to that idea?
It is the simplest explanation and it solves all the problems.
Why doesn't anyone comment on my idea that "being created in the image of God" is a pleonasm, and that all that was actually meant to mean is that God had an idea and he created according to that idea?
It is the simplest explanation and it solves all the problems.
I think God was created in the image of man.
That's a good image.
Opposite of others, I percieve you as tolerant but searching. Searching for what has has been an answer which eludes me for now.
How very convenient
Can we be sure Adam had a mirror ?
On reflection, pun intended, doesn't a mirror show a laterally reversed image, so it would show god the wrong way round.
The bible tells us that Paul saw things through a glass. If we judge him by the behaviour attributed to him, it must have been through the bottom of a beer glass.He was intoxicated with god's love
Last edited:
Hello
I'm still waiting to hear from you on another thread . I asked you whether you believed the Bible was the revealed word of god and whether you took it literally. Would you like to answer me on this thread ? I assumed you had gone to heaven when you failed to reply. Instead, I see you area moral coward.
By the way, the reason why the answer , mentioned above, eludes you is because you are incapable of rational thought. All you can do is support one quotation from the bible with another. You have spun yourself a cosy cocoon in which you live and put yourself beyond reason
Till Eulenspiegel
Registered Member
I don't think being created in the image of God means we look like God. It means God created us the way he wanted to.
If I creat a piece of pottery in my image it does not mean the pottery looks like me. It means I thought up what the pottery would look like and I created it to match what I had conceived.
That is my understanding of being created in the image of God.
If I creat a piece of pottery in my image it does not mean the pottery looks like me. It means I thought up what the pottery would look like and I created it to match what I had conceived.
That is my understanding of being created in the image of God.
That's not what I was told at school. I was expected to believe that it was literally true. Your version sounds more plausible, if such a thing is possible with religious dogma
If you believe that twaddle you've sure got problems
It's all a pile of puke.
Our ability to relate is always based on perception, vaguries of sight limited by our understanding of the world. In many cases such as Genesis, the bible maintains a point of view of a man. Undoubtably this best relates to others in the retellings of events. Genesis shows an overview of the formation of the Earth not from supernatural perspective but from a human perspective. With the universe and the Earth already in existance the creative "Days" progress expressing possibly millenia or more. So one could easily summarize that the bible is a book of man however insight reveals in many parts of the Hebrew and Greek scriptures knowledge that greatly exceeds what was currently understood. Even some of the 40 writers didn't fully comprend what was being expressed.
This combination of a human perspective and superior knowledge points to a more experienced or expert source in the Bible. As a result the image that many "see" of God is expressed as wisdom to disseminate the information in well understood format at the appropriate amount. The phrase "Image of the Invisible" in the Bible can also be applied figurativvly to the Bible it's self as a testiment to his existence it is the only manner from which we can derive his personality and characteristics.
Unfortuanatly today if we rely on individuals who claim to represent God but no one could do so accurately. As flawed feeling human beings we're encroached upon by our own emotions, perspective and a constantly changing sense of justice.
This combination of a human perspective and superior knowledge points to a more experienced or expert source in the Bible. As a result the image that many "see" of God is expressed as wisdom to disseminate the information in well understood format at the appropriate amount. The phrase "Image of the Invisible" in the Bible can also be applied figurativvly to the Bible it's self as a testiment to his existence it is the only manner from which we can derive his personality and characteristics.
Unfortuanatly today if we rely on individuals who claim to represent God but no one could do so accurately. As flawed feeling human beings we're encroached upon by our own emotions, perspective and a constantly changing sense of justice.
Last edited:
Very true. Too bad most people are completely oblivious to that fact.
Why would you say that? Just curious....
Huumm... true... but we can use the bible to measure how close to the original perspective each individual is.
Recently (as of the previous night) I viewed a PBS Documentary called Intelligent Design vs Evolution. This film showed the trial events in the court room of Dover and the attempt by Creationist to insert religious agenda into the class room. The case preceeded with desasterous results ending with a rulling against the Intelligent Design initiative.
I was deeply disturbed at the motives of the people involved. In the end I had no choice to agree with the judge's ruling. My understanding of the evidence involved dictated that these people were planing a methodical infusion of "church" back in state institutions. Understand while I endorse ID I could not conscientiously endorse the people behind it. Perjury, misrepresentation and subterfuge were revealed by the prosecution.
But more than that was revealed. By siding with creationism and attempting to nudge an agenda under a legitimate propsal they might and probably did damage the validity of ID irreparably.
I ended up asking these people. "Why?" but as it was only a film and not an interactive person, I asked myself. If I were in there position why would I do it? I propose these individuals that resorted to dishonesty in order to represent science and by extention...their religion, felt that it was necessary. It seems they wanted to "heal" America. To me it sounds like...forced therapy.
I am not creationist but a realist. I search for the reality even if it might be beyond the five senses from which I use move through the world. Whether speaking of the science of the world or the testimony in the bible I search for the realistic perspective and very often that means excating the facts from under years of hearsay and orthodoxy. I realised that when ever a human being is invovled bias is subsequent factor. The question is how high is that factor and does the view fit the facts. That's why I mention Genesis. It is the largest misconception of theist and creationist. Just as in the Dover court case most of us are relying on a surface understanding of the Bible. Others like the theist invovled on the forums rely on a third hand understanding. This shapes are view. It's all most all perception.
When we're not seeing facts and evidence we're often reading other variables. Variables like agendas, bias, emotion, posture, and we use it to fit facts in a certain place. Sometimes that location is ridge with little tolerance like a prejudice. Others seek to define a proper place that may or may not fit preconcieved notions.
The post of this thread are illuminating to perception. It's not whether the view is closed or narrow minded...it's whether it's true or not, fact or fiction that matters the most. Most people have a narrow view from the begining but view points are best when wide and then narrowed...or focused over time and experience. Of course we all have our own unique set of experiences.
I was deeply disturbed at the motives of the people involved. In the end I had no choice to agree with the judge's ruling. My understanding of the evidence involved dictated that these people were planing a methodical infusion of "church" back in state institutions. Understand while I endorse ID I could not conscientiously endorse the people behind it. Perjury, misrepresentation and subterfuge were revealed by the prosecution.
But more than that was revealed. By siding with creationism and attempting to nudge an agenda under a legitimate propsal they might and probably did damage the validity of ID irreparably.
I ended up asking these people. "Why?" but as it was only a film and not an interactive person, I asked myself. If I were in there position why would I do it? I propose these individuals that resorted to dishonesty in order to represent science and by extention...their religion, felt that it was necessary. It seems they wanted to "heal" America. To me it sounds like...forced therapy.
I am not creationist but a realist. I search for the reality even if it might be beyond the five senses from which I use move through the world. Whether speaking of the science of the world or the testimony in the bible I search for the realistic perspective and very often that means excating the facts from under years of hearsay and orthodoxy. I realised that when ever a human being is invovled bias is subsequent factor. The question is how high is that factor and does the view fit the facts. That's why I mention Genesis. It is the largest misconception of theist and creationist. Just as in the Dover court case most of us are relying on a surface understanding of the Bible. Others like the theist invovled on the forums rely on a third hand understanding. This shapes are view. It's all most all perception.
When we're not seeing facts and evidence we're often reading other variables. Variables like agendas, bias, emotion, posture, and we use it to fit facts in a certain place. Sometimes that location is ridge with little tolerance like a prejudice. Others seek to define a proper place that may or may not fit preconcieved notions.
The post of this thread are illuminating to perception. It's not whether the view is closed or narrow minded...it's whether it's true or not, fact or fiction that matters the most. Most people have a narrow view from the begining but view points are best when wide and then narrowed...or focused over time and experience. Of course we all have our own unique set of experiences.
Last edited:
No need to wait. You are talking rubbish now. It can only get worse
You really must not say such things or Greenberg will say you are immature and then where will you be ? I am still recovering from his dastardly attack and will live in shame till the end of my days. Don't take any wooden pleonasms !
So beware, see what he said to me in the post above