What does this mean to you? How are we being so different, a image of god? What's really the image of him? Going by Genesis 1:27 and looking at us, is there a way to envision what God may look similar too? Is god a human like form only in comparison to us? Does other religions make similar claims like Genesis 1:27?
One thing is means to me is that the King James committee resigned themselves to accept the Catholic translation rather than to strive for a more accurate translation. The word here, as written, is not God, but Elohim, which means "Gods". It's plural. A better translation of the preceding verse is probably this: And the Godhead is saying: we shall make humankind (adm) in the image of us, as a likeliness of us . . . The clause male and female he created them may reflect a memory of earlier creation myths (Enuma Elish) in which the first human was androgynous. You mean them. Elohim is plural. In the Phoenician, Sumerian and Egyptian pantheons there were all kind of gods, some that might be any form of human . . . or not. It's a reference to the anthropomorphic God. In creation myths, the gods may be human in appearance. This is a variation on the earlier myths in which Gods were objects of nature, including animals, and forces of nature, like wind and the ocean. The gods kept animals too: verse 26, also likely a reference to the older religions. The Enuma Elish creation epic has a similar idea (Tablet VI., Library of Ashubanipal, Nineveh) and the Canaanites/Israelites apparently borrowed it, along with the flood myth. More familiar is the section where one of the gods fashions a human out of clay.
The Hebrews' god is probably (almost certainly) derived from Sumerian and Babylonian creation myths, though i suspect this tribe, like others of its type, chose as its patron (was chosen by - same thing, really) one of the minor deities of the older religion, whom they pictured as looking like their own patriarchs. The Jews didn't come into contact with Egyptian culture until much later. The creation myths of other geographical regions are somewhat more diverse, less human-centered. I'm guessing because the Jews were nomadic herders, so their relationship with other species was different from that of settled farmers, and far different from that of hunter-gatherers - and all of these life-styles clashed often in the ancient mid-east. There are a couple of stories alluding to this parting of the ways: Cain and Abel, closely echoed by Ishmael and Isaac, then Jacob and Esau. These may all be derived from the same story.
The wording in Genesis results in a legend/myth stating that Adam had two wives. The creation descibed as occurring on the 6th day indicates that male & female were both created that day. Later in Genesis, Adam is decribed as being the only animal without a mate. God takes flesh from his side (some translations say rib) while he is asleep & uses it to create Eve. In various stories/novels the first wife is called Lilith. In some stories/novels she & her descendents are evil; In others, she is a decent person.
She is considered evil because she refused to obey Adam and thereby asserting her equality. Bad, bad girl..!
What I still don't understand if it was so easy for god to create Adam, Lilith, Eve, without the need of a womb, why did he not just create Jesus (son of god) from some dirt also? The story of a virgin birth is ridiculous. According to god's laws, without the introduction of male sperm, a woman is unable to conceive a male. If Mary had been a virgin, Jesus would have been female and a clone of Mary. The story just becomes tedious and it's message obscured. But we must have a magic show! Miracles and Punishments (acts of god), because not only was Lilith bad, Eve was bad also (temptress). Seems god had a hell of a time getting that woman thing down. Maybe that's why he made Man in His Image (but of course).
Image of God does not mean a photographic image. Rather image of God is more like a disk image of computers, which is connected to the duplication of data. The temperaments of male and female are similar to God; software and firmware. For example, the tradition has God creating the universe. Humans are the most creative critter on earth and can add new things to the earth; skyscrapers. If God created DNA, then humans, in his image of creativity, can modify the DNA. God can create laws like the ten commandments. Humans create laws like regulations. God is omnipresent. Humans try to do that with satellites, GPS and cell phone towers so one can stay in touch from anywhere. God also has free will and is not robotically driven by instinct, like the rest of creation. Human can choose to be unnatural, which is part of free will; Satan said you can be like God knowing/defining good and evil. This can all be inferred from the left and right brain. Religion is right brained and therefore image of god would be symbolic or a 3-D concept. The left brain will think in terms of a literal meaning. The left brain might try to differentiate a 3-D God into a particular human painting. I would agree that an artistic man created that photographic image. If God is omni-present and omnipotent then he is being defined in 3-D. These two traditional conditions make a global or 3-D statement about an entire range of endless data points. This was designed with the right brain in mind. The left brain does not think in terms of the 3-D ball, but tries to define this in terms of individual data points. The 3-D is hard to visualize since it has to be everywhere at the same time. This takes an intuitive assessment for data speed.
That's where modern theology falls apart. They've turned an ordinary, intimate local god into inaccessible and unfathomable Big Omni. In Genesis, Adam and Eve hide from God in his own garden; he asks them how they knew they were naked. (It wouldn't have been hard to guess, just as we don't need omniscience to tell what a three-year-old with chocolate on its face has been up to.) The bigger God was made out to be, the less credible he became - which is a disservice to mythology. By the time of the Jesus story, there had been strong Greek and Roman influence in the region, and we all know how their gods went about producing half-human sons. The Babylonian gods had also done it the normal way, long before, as did the angels in Genesis. Mary's virginity is a deliberate misinterpretation by sex-phobic 4th century AD bishops: She had not known man - nobody said she had not known God or angel.
Other words are you suggesting satan was right? As said in Genesis 3:4*“You will not certainly die,” the serpent said to the woman. 5*“For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” Miss Jan you showed ??? So let me help ya. Is god a human like form only in comparison to us? ??? Other words is God Human like or only in comparison. Could God really be alien? How could the Image we were supposedly created in resemble him? We have a spirit form or so I am told. How do we really know?
There are rational and subjective laws of good and evil. A rational law would be in touch with cause and effect and therefore, like a law of science, applies to all. Do not jump off the ledge or you will die. A subjective law of good and evil is man-made and does not apply to all. It will often lead to division and conflict. The alcohol prohibition was a subjective law. If you analyze the people, not everyone had a problem nor does alcohol impact all the exactly same way. One size does not fit all in a rational world. The subjective law only applies to some, but will be forced on all as though this is a rational law. If it does not apply to you, you resist. This is humans playing god but using a second rate subjective law. If that same person said do no eat arsenic or you will die, this does apply to all. Say we did with science. Science has rational laws like Newton's (Einstein's) law of gravity. This applies to all and tells us the cause and effect associated with falling or flying. Say I wanted to make this subjective so I can play god, since I am a politician who needs a gimmick for those who can't tell the difference. I notice birds can fly therefore they are not under gravity in my pitch. I will create a one size fits all law based on the birds, ignoring the fact that humans can't fly. If elected, I will create a law that will void gravity so we all can fly like birds. This would be called pseudo-science law. But in subjective areas of study it sounds good to the low information voter who does not have a standard to judge this as irrational. The ten commandments were only ten rules. There are fewer rational laws then there are subjective laws because there are more humans playing god than there is God. God was not so much concerned with the competition, as with the wolves misleading the sheep leading them over various social and fiscal cliffs.
Lost my message. Anyway... Thanks for your posts miss Jan, I apologize if you believe I am "patronizing". I assure you I was not trying. The wages of sin is death. Where have I heard that before. Oh, I found it.
Yep, curiosity killed the cat. The whole message is that it is holy to remain ignorant. "the meek shall inherit the earth". But, I just cannot help asking why we are curious and why that should kill us in the end? I'll admit we do require a lot more wisdom, but that wisdom comes in many forms, a few of which are religions who try to offer an interpretation of God as the "Supreme Wholeness" . Problem with Abrahamic religions (interpretations), is they are exclusive and impossibly dogmatic.
Write4U, How can we own something that we cannot own? The ignorance lies in wanting to inherit the earth. How is that anymore intelligent than wanting to own and inherit a bubble? The ''light'' is in understanding that everything we see is temporary, (but due to immense passages of time in comparison to our lives, it seems forever) but our desires are real, and how we act in relation to the world, and how others react, is real. It's not the curiosity that kills us. It wasn't Eve's curiosity that killed her, it was her actions. She was lustful, it's that simple. We all are, which is why we are here. The wisdom comes through knowledge, and knowledge comes through understand who and what we are. I think that's true, but at least they remind us of God. If some people had their way they would wipe the idea of God clean from our minds. Eventually, as time passes, ''God'' will be virtually forgotten, and the ''meek SHALL inherit the earth''. jan.
From Wiki, We are not powerless, on the contrary we are extremely powerful. We just need to learn the wisdom to mold our godhood in an ethical fashion, a trait which so far no god in history seems to have been able to avoid breaking in spite of their heavenly struggles for dominance.
What is our power? That's an important question. God is beyond history, because history deals with things that took place in the past. I think what you are referring to are concepts of God, but such historical concepts are always going to be found lacking. I think we need to accept that God just is, and is beyond time, then we can view history and concepts with clarity. Regarding ''meek'', I think the context of the phrase ''the meek shall inherit the earth'' is sufficient to ascertain it's meaning. jan.
