Image of God
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
JWitness

Dickson, Australia

#1 Jan 29, 2013
What verses state that God created us in His image, with legs and arms and hands and fingers and face and so on as we are and not in a spirit form.
Crazy Baptist

Hopkins, SC

#2 Jan 29, 2013
JWitness wrote:
What verses state that God created us in His image, with legs and arms and hands and fingers and face and so on as we are and not in a spirit form.
of the three, Father Son or Holy Spirit, which one do we look like?

We know at least two were there when the "let US make man in our image" statement was made.

Jesus told Thomas that a spirit did not have flesh and bones so.....that leaves out the HS.

We also know that "the father made all things through Jesus His son".

I believe that we can then determine that we are all molded after and made in the image of Jesus.

Sorry - out of time for today or I would have posted the corresponding verses.

CB
Dennis

Yucaipa, CA

#3 Jan 29, 2013
Crazy Baptist wrote:
<quoted text>
of the three, Father Son or Holy Spirit, which one do we look like?
We know at least two were there when the "let US make man in our image" statement was made.
Jesus told Thomas that a spirit did not have flesh and bones so.....that leaves out the HS.
We also know that "the father made all things through Jesus His son".
I believe that we can then determine that we are all molded after and made in the image of Jesus.
Sorry - out of time for today or I would have posted the corresponding verses.
CB
The two that were there at Creation were God the Father and the Holy Spirit. To say that the Holy Spirit is not one of the 'images' of God is ludicrous. When God created MANKIND (not the individual, Adam) on the 6th day of creation THEY created humanity in BOTH the image and likeness of God - MALE AND FEMALE.(Gen. 1:26-27). The likeness is the bilateral physical identity of the race called HUMAN. This is expressed as basically two of every physical trait; arms, legs, hands, feet, eyes, ears. Yet we must also not that we have only ONE head, ONE heart, and ONE set of primary sexual equipment. These 'likenesses' are NOT IMAGE. Image is what gives a man or a woman their emotional and intellectual characteristics. We all know by experience that men and women are very different in these regards, and it is THOSE differences that are express in the term IMAGE.

G0D created mankind in THIER image, both MALE and FEMALE, that is, both MASCULINE AND FEMININE. That means that God has BOTH masculine AND feminine characteristics, that can be identified as separate and distinct entities within the God head, or FAMILY of God. This identifies that what God considers to be a Family is based in the association (becoming one flesh) of a male and a female on the physical level, and a man and a woman (masculine and feminine) on the emotional/spiritual level.

You will hear many MEN say that God is totally MALE in perspective and operation. That God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit are all masculine in nature and gender. This perspective was designed by SATAN to keep women in their place, because Satan know how powerful women could really be spiritually IF the ever discovered that part of God was THEM. This all male perspective cannot be supported in either the emotional, physical or spiritual realms. If this was true then this idea would support the idea that the IDEAL family would be all male in character and gender, which in fact gives rise to the idea that male homosexuality is the basis for a viable marriage. This idea is not supported in Scripture, yet I know many committed Christians that are in a homosexual relationship and consider it just as correct in the sight of God as that of a marriage between a man and a woman.

In this I make no personal judgement, because that is up to God. However, to willingly NOT INCLUDE women as an integral part of God is to deny them their proper place in the Family structure of Heaven. Without the Holy Spirit as the feminine characteristic of God who would women be able to go to with their deepest, darkest secrets, and KNOW that they would have a sympathetic listener that fully understood them because she WAS LIKE THEM. Without the Holy Spirit as the feminine side of God who would give birth to the offspring of God that is mentioned in Gen. 3:15 and in Rev. 12:17? ONLY females can give birth. So carrying the metaphor to it's logical conclusion one must say that in order for a productive family to exist in Heaven ONE of the members of that family MUST be the MOTHER, one must be the FATHER, and one must be the Child (Jesus Christ, and the 'rest of HER offspring').
Rockroller

Yucaipa, CA

#4 Jan 29, 2013
Dennis wrote:
<quoted text>
The two that were there at Creation were God the Father and the Holy Spirit. To say that the Holy Spirit is not one of the 'images' of God is ludicrous. When God created MANKIND (not the individual, Adam) on the 6th day of creation THEY created humanity in BOTH the image and likeness of God - MALE AND FEMALE.(Gen. 1:26-27). The likeness is the bilateral physical identity of the race called HUMAN. This is expressed as basically two of every physical trait; arms, legs, hands, feet, eyes, ears. Yet we must also not that we have only ONE head, ONE heart, and ONE set of primary sexual equipment. These 'likenesses' are NOT IMAGE. Image is what gives a man or a woman their emotional and intellectual characteristics. We all know by experience that men and women are very different in these regards, and it is THOSE differences that are express in the term IMAGE.
G0D created mankind in THIER image, both MALE and FEMALE, that is, both MASCULINE AND FEMININE. That means that God has BOTH masculine AND feminine characteristics, that can be identified as separate and distinct entities within the God head, or FAMILY of God. This identifies that what God considers to be a Family is based in the association (becoming one flesh) of a male and a female on the physical level, and a man and a woman (masculine and feminine) on the emotional/spiritual level.
You will hear many MEN say that God is totally MALE in perspective and operation. That God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit are all masculine in nature and gender. This perspective was designed by SATAN to keep women in their place, because Satan know how powerful women could really be spiritually IF the ever discovered that part of God was THEM. This all male perspective cannot be supported in either the emotional, physical or spiritual realms. If this was true then this idea would support the idea that the IDEAL family would be all male in character and gender, which in fact gives rise to the idea that male homosexuality is the basis for a viable marriage. This idea is not supported in Scripture, yet I know many committed Christians that are in a homosexual relationship and consider it just as correct in the sight of God as that of a marriage between a man and a woman.
In this I make no personal judgement, because that is up to God. However, to willingly NOT INCLUDE women as an integral part of God is to deny them their proper place in the Family structure of Heaven. Without the Holy Spirit as the feminine characteristic of God who would women be able to go to with their deepest, darkest secrets, and KNOW that they would have a sympathetic listener that fully understood them because she WAS LIKE THEM. Without the Holy Spirit as the feminine side of God who would give birth to the offspring of God that is mentioned in Gen. 3:15 and in Rev. 12:17? ONLY females can give birth. So carrying the metaphor to it's logical conclusion one must say that in order for a productive family to exist in Heaven ONE of the members of that family MUST be the MOTHER, one must be the FATHER, and one must be the Child (Jesus Christ, and the 'rest of HER offspring').
Great post Dennis! I doubt if anyone can deny what you wrote by using the words of the OT and or the words of Jesus! But I bet you that some will try by using the words of Paul! This in itself will prove Paul a liar!
Crazy Baptist

Hopkins, SC

#5 Jan 29, 2013
Rockroller wrote:
<quoted text> Great post Dennis! I doubt if anyone can deny what you wrote by using the words of the OT and or the words of Jesus! But I bet you that some will try by using the words of Paul! This in itself will prove Paul a liar!
From the OT chronologically:

"Let us make man" meaning a man, not mankind, not male and female "...in our image".

"God saw that is was not good for a man to be alone. I will make him a helper".

CB
Dennis

Yucaipa, CA

#6 Jan 29, 2013
Crazy Baptist wrote:
<quoted text>
From the OT chronologically:
"Let us make man" meaning a man, not mankind, not male and female "...in our image".
"God saw that is was not good for a man to be alone. I will make him a helper".
CB
Your first 'contention' is NOT true and NOT supportable in the original language (now, who is being contentious?). God had just created all of the beasts of the field, male and female, in their teeming numbers; He had just created the birds of the air, male and female, in their teeming numbers; He had just created the fish and sea creatures, male and female, in their teeming numbers. And now you insist that God did not continue this creative process, but instead stopped and said to themselves, "Now that we have made all these living things, male and female, in their teeming numbers so that they fill the earth, lets just make ONE single solitary man, and give him the responsibility to take care of ALL of these millions of creatures ALL BY HIMSELF." No, THAT makes no sense at all, because a single person would have been physically incapable to deal with that situation; God would have been more than cruel to expect such from a single human being.

The word 'man' used in Gen. 1:26-27 is the Hebrew word in Strong's: 120 'adam aw-dawm' from 119; ruddy i.e. a human being as an individual OR THE SPECIES, MANKIND.

So, CB, the word ADAM in the context established above could easily, and most probably, be translated MANKIND (the species). God made MANKIND in His image and after His likeness human beings who are both MALE AND FEMALE, based upon characteristics that were already extant IN GOD.

The only reason you WON'T see this is because you don't want to give up the power you THINK you have been given by God over the female side of the species, and this is exactly the reason why the MALE translators in a MALE DOMINATED religion (Catholic Church) translated the word the way they did. They did so to keep WOMEN IN THEIR PLACE; a place to which THEY had consigned them, a place at best of second class status, and at worse abject sexual slavery. Please read again with an open heart John 8:1-11, and tell me that this plight was not given to this poor woman simply because she was female, and for no other reason. If this is NOT true then why did not the Pharisees bring the MAN along with her to be condemned as well by the Master? Their SOLE purpose was to demonstrate their power not only of Jesus, but over this woman as well. They failed in both, just as you will fail to show that my understanding of this FROM SCRIPTURE is incorrect. But go ahead and try, your responses amuse me no end.
Crazy Baptist

Hopkins, SC

#7 Jan 29, 2013
Dennis says: "Now that we have made all these living things, male and female, in their teeming numbers so that they fill the earth, lets just make ONE single solitary man, and give him the responsibility to take care of ALL of these millions of creatures ALL BY HIMSELF." No, THAT makes no sense at all, because a single person would have been physically incapable to deal with that situation;

CB: Correct - that does not make any sense at all an NO God did not give Adam the responsibility of caring for them all. God took Adam and placed him in the Garden to do what?? take care of IT. The garden.

--->15 The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.

16And the LORD God commanded the man,“You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.”

UP UNTIL NOW ADAM WAS ALONE and then......

18The LORD God said,“It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”

19Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field.

AND THEN.....

But for Adam no suitable helper was found. 21So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribsi and closed up the place with flesh. 22Then the LORD God made a woman from the ribj he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

AHHHHHHH EVE!

:)

CB

Since: Aug 10

Pacific Northwest USA

#8 Jan 29, 2013
Dennis wrote:
<quoted text>
The two that were there at Creation were God the Father and the Holy Spirit. To say that the Holy Spirit is not one of the 'images' of God is ludicrous. When God created MANKIND (not the individual, Adam) on the 6th day of creation THEY created humanity in BOTH the image and likeness of God - MALE AND FEMALE.(Gen. 1:26-27). The likeness is the bilateral physical identity of the race called HUMAN. This is expressed as basically two of every physical trait; arms, legs, hands, feet, eyes, ears. Yet we must also not that we have only ONE head, ONE heart, and ONE set of primary sexual equipment. These 'likenesses' are NOT IMAGE. Image is what gives a man or a woman their emotional and intellectual characteristics. We all know by experience that men and women are very different in these regards, and it is THOSE differences that are express in the term IMAGE.
G0D created mankind in THIER image, both MALE and FEMALE, that is, both MASCULINE AND FEMININE. That means that God has BOTH masculine AND feminine characteristics, that can be identified as separate and distinct entities within the God head, or FAMILY of God. This identifies that what God considers to be a Family is based in the association (becoming one flesh) of a male and a female on the physical level, and a man and a woman (masculine and feminine) on the emotional/spiritual level.
You will hear many MEN say that God is totally MALE in perspective and operation. That God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit are all masculine in nature and gender. This perspective was designed by SATAN to keep women in their place, because Satan know how powerful women could really be spiritually IF the ever discovered that part of God was THEM. This all male perspective cannot be supported in either the emotional, physical or spiritual realms. If this was true then this idea would support the idea that the IDEAL family would be all male in character and gender, which in fact gives rise to the idea that male homosexuality is the basis for a viable marriage. This idea is not supported in Scripture, yet I know many committed Christians that are in a homosexual relationship and consider it just as correct in the sight of God as that of a marriage between a man and a woman.
In this I make no personal judgement, because that is up to God. However, to willingly NOT INCLUDE women as an integral part of God is to deny them their proper place in the Family structure of Heaven. Without the Holy Spirit as the feminine characteristic of God who would women be able to go to with their deepest, darkest secrets, and KNOW that they would have a sympathetic listener that fully understood them because she WAS LIKE THEM. Without the Holy Spirit as the feminine side of God who would give birth to the offspring of God that is mentioned in Gen. 3:15 and in Rev. 12:17? ONLY females can give birth. So carrying the metaphor to it's logical conclusion one must say that in order for a productive family to exist in Heaven ONE of the members of that family MUST be the MOTHER, one must be the FATHER, and one must be the Child (Jesus Christ, and the 'rest of HER offspring').
Wow!! A huge stretch, to say the least, and absolute and complete conjecture (overactive imagination) totally devoid of biblical proof. But then if I should say something fully logical such as, "If the Sabbath were a New Testament requirement of great import, Jesus would have specifically mentioned it," I am verbally stoned - Go figure!
Crazy Baptist

Hopkins, SC

#9 Jan 29, 2013
Dennis says: The only reason you WON'T see this is because you don't want to give up the power you THINK you have been given by God over the female side of the species, and this is exactly the reason why the MALE translators in a MALE DOMINATED religion (Catholic Church) translated the word the way they did. They did so to keep WOMEN IN THEIR PLACE; a place to which THEY had consigned them, a place at best of second class status, and at worse abject sexual slavery. Please read again with an open heart John 8:1-11, and tell me that this plight was not given to this poor woman simply because she was female, and for no other reason. If this is NOT true then why did not the Pharisees bring the MAN along with her to be condemned as well by the Master? Their SOLE purpose was to demonstrate their power not only of Jesus, but over this woman as well. They failed in both, just as you will fail to show that my understanding of this FROM SCRIPTURE is incorrect. But go ahead and try, your responses amuse me no end.

CB replies: Hey bud. I have no issues with women. If I cannot convince you that the women in my life love and adore me then surely my record with the ladies on this forum vindicates me.

My wife, mother and daughter live with me. My step daughter calls her father by his name and calls me daddy.

your blind hatred of Paul has warped your reality a bit.

Question: A few thousand years before Paul was born, how were the people counted? Were the women and children counted when God led the children of Israel out of Egypt?

Was Paul and the RCC responsible for that as well?

CB
Crazy Baptist

Hopkins, SC

#10 Jan 29, 2013
GrammyJoanne wrote:
<quoted text>Wow!! A huge stretch, to say the least, and absolute and complete conjecture (overactive imagination) totally devoid of biblical proof. But then if I should say something fully logical such as, "If the Sabbath were a New Testament requirement of great import, Jesus would have specifically mentioned it," I am verbally stoned - Go figure!
QUIET!

Your post makes perfect sense and is easy to read thus I must usurp my manly authority over you that Dennis swears Paul and the RCC has given me.

ROFL!!

Just Kidding Grammy.

I love grits. Girls Raised In The South

:)

CB
Rockroller

Yucaipa, CA

#11 Jan 29, 2013
Crazy Baptist wrote:
<quoted text>
From the OT chronologically:
"Let us make man" meaning a man, not mankind, not male and female "...in our image".
"God saw that is was not good for a man to be alone. I will make him a helper".
CB
Read the Septuagint you idiot! It's mankind! HUMANS for those of you who have no idea what mankind means--it's all of the races all over the world!

The Septuagint shows how far removed you are from ever searching for the real truth! You probably don't even know what a Strong Lexicon is.
fogn

Ellwood City, PA

#12 Jan 29, 2013
youtube.com/watch... … H.O.P.E.(Hell-o-Place-Earth)41 49
Dennis

Yucaipa, CA

#13 Jan 29, 2013
CB,
I am not questioning your love for the ladies in your life, but that doesn't change your attitude toward ALL women and their role that you see for them vis a vis the Christian church. The SDA church as a denomination does not ordain women pastors because the 'apostle' Paul has given instructions that preclude them being in any kind of overarching position over ANY man.

Why not do an experiment; ask your wife, your daughter if having a feminine part of God to pray too would not make them feel more secure and loved. Ask them how they would feel if the Holy Spirit was the Mother figure in the family of God. See what they say. I have spoken with a number of women, including my own wife and daughter, and everyone of them has expressed that revealing their deepest concerns to a Woman figure would make it easier for them to talk to God.

I can't speak for all women, of course. But those that I have spoken with LOVE the idea that the Holy Spirit is the feminine part of God. It gives them a since of ownership, that they as women have a real part in who God really is. I believe that God is represented in both the male and the female sides of humanity, and that just as in nature the male and the female compliment each other such that one is never as effective nor creative without the other.
Crazy Baptist

Hopkins, SC

#14 Jan 29, 2013
Rockroller wrote:
<quoted text> Read the Septuagint you idiot! It's mankind! HUMANS for those of you who have no idea what mankind means--it's all of the races all over the world!
The Septuagint shows how far removed you are from ever searching for the real truth! You probably don't even know what a Strong Lexicon is.
:)

Doesn't believe the creation story yet calls me the idiot.

My bible teaches that there once was a lowly carpenter that scorned and scolded ALL THE LAWYERS He came into contact with. Calling them empty and the children of hell.

I have built houses all over the east cost. Remind me what profession you chose.

So much for following in the footsteps of the Master, aye Counselor.

CB
Rockroller

Yucaipa, CA

#15 Jan 29, 2013
CB: "But for Adam no suitable mate was found." What was wrong with God? Was Adam to have a goat, hippo, rino, sheep, cow, horse, or a dog for a mate? Huh? How stupid are you people any way??? Do you think God forgot something and had to go around the word in order to try to find a mate for Adam? Well??

Get real folks! The 6 day creation took place thousands of years before Adam and the Garden was created! In that creation, God made all of the races to fill the whole earth! Lucifer was to be their watcher and teacher, but Lucifer usurped God and made them all believe he was their god! At the time "The Lord God" (a different named entity from the first creation)

Please see the word "THEM" in Gen. 1:26,27 & 28! This means more than ONE!

Now start with Gen. 2:7 and see that "The Lord God" made man (ONE MAN) out of the earth that had already been created.(Notice the process here very carefully). Next "The Lord God" planted (not created) a garden and THEN placed the ONE man inside that garden in verse 8.

Then out of the ground, plants came fourth from the plainting in verse 8 and these plants had fruit for food. Also the ONE tree of knowing good from evil came forth in the middle of the garden. Please notice that this ONE man was placed into a special garden which was OUT of the rest of the WILD world full of beasts and mankind-who were following Satan instead of their Creator. This was the FIRST Kingdom of Heaven (to be) which was in the world, but out of the evil world.

Verse 16 states that God told THE MAN (not the woman) not to eat from the tree of knowing good from evil for IF he did, on that very day God would execute him (kill him as Strongs states). Now ask yourself this--did Adam know and understand what death and kill meant? How did that happen? Adam HAD to know in order to rightely make a choice.(Let that sink in for a while)

Verse 19 then has "The Lord God" (after making the ONE Man) forming beasts of the field (not the same as the reptiles and beasts of the wild in chapter one) and birds of the sky (also not the same as the 'flying creatures' in chapter one) and brought them too Adam (not Eve) to name them.(Wow, I wonder how long that would take--perhaps longer than ONE 24 hour day?) But do you see the problem here--Adam was made BEFORE the garden and BEFORE the plants and BEFORE the animals of the field! This is totally different than in Chapter ONE--the 6 day creation!

Are you starting to get the picture here? If not, you are blind!

Then in Gen. 2:20 Adam gave names to all of the animals and birds--and THEN NO SUITABLE MATE (helper) for ADAM could be found! If ONLY ONE HUMAN had been made at this time, then what was God thinking about looking for any mate for Adam? Huh?

Here is the thing: God (not "The Lord God" made mankind, all of the races, male and female in the first 6 day creation and Lucifer/Satan caused them all to become wicked, believing a lie from the words of Satan. The Lord God looked all over the world for a woman who had not sinned yet, but could not find one. Therefore, Eve was made FROM Adam to make this pair complete and free from sin.

It was God's plan to have the rest of the humans living in the world SEE ADam and Eve and see how God the Creator was taking care of them and they could live for ever by eating from the tree of life. Thus, the people who saw the living testimony from Adam and Eve could become born again spiritually by the Holy Spirit and live in the Kingdom of Heaven. This was PLAN "A". but first Adam and Eve had to pass a test, just as the 144,000 must pass a test as found in Rev. 3:10.

The test is to choose the words of Jesus over the words of all others like Paul and EGW. Now it is YOUR choice too! I made my choice to follow ONLY Jesus!
Crazy Baptist

Hopkins, SC

#16 Jan 29, 2013
Dennis wrote:
CB,
I am not questioning your love for the ladies in your life, but that doesn't change your attitude toward ALL women and their role that you see for them vis a vis the Christian church. The SDA church as a denomination does not ordain women pastors because the 'apostle' Paul has given instructions that preclude them being in any kind of overarching position over ANY man.
Why not do an experiment; ask your wife, your daughter if having a feminine part of God to pray too would not make them feel more secure and loved. Ask them how they would feel if the Holy Spirit was the Mother figure in the family of God. See what they say. I have spoken with a number of women, including my own wife and daughter, and everyone of them has expressed that revealing their deepest concerns to a Woman figure would make it easier for them to talk to God.
I can't speak for all women, of course. But those that I have spoken with LOVE the idea that the Holy Spirit is the feminine part of God. It gives them a since of ownership, that they as women have a real part in who God really is. I believe that God is represented in both the male and the female sides of humanity, and that just as in nature the male and the female compliment each other such that one is never as effective nor creative without the other.
OK but.....you kinda dodged me here.

1) I didn't speak of my love for them as you assert in your first point here. I talked to you about their love for me. Love and respect that is freely given because I do not ever treat them "second best". You pegged me wrongly.

2) I cannot defend either the Christian church or the SDA's policies regarding holding church positions. I know that some do and yes I know what Paul taught. Neither are decided by me.

3) I can ask my wife and daughters, natural and step how they would feel if the HS was actually a female but then I would go against what is plainly written and cause the same confusion with them that you have with me. It simply does not say that. As I have already shown, every single time the HS is referenced He is described as a HE OR HIM OR HIS.

I also showed you that the Holy Spirit is none other than THE Holy spirit of the Father and Jesus.

Were not to the point of claiming they The FATHER and SON are also female too, are we?

BTW - I agree with you about that the male and female complement each other. God said they would. I agree.

CB
Crazy Baptist

Hopkins, SC

#17 Jan 29, 2013
Rockroller wrote:
CB: "But for Adam no suitable mate was found." What was wrong with God? Was Adam to have a goat, hippo, rino, sheep, cow, horse, or a dog for a mate? Huh? How stupid are you people any way??? Do you think God forgot something and had to go around the word in order to try to find a mate for Adam? Well??
Get real folks! The 6 day creation took place thousands of years before Adam and the Garden was created! In that creation, God made all of the races to fill the whole earth! Lucifer was to be their watcher and teacher, but Lucifer usurped God and made them all believe he was their god! At the time "The Lord God" (a different named entity from the first creation)
Please see the word "THEM" in Gen. 1:26,27 & 28! This means more than ONE!
Now start with Gen. 2:7 and see that "The Lord God" made man (ONE MAN) out of the earth that had already been created.(Notice the process here very carefully). Next "The Lord God" planted (not created) a garden and THEN placed the ONE man inside that garden in verse 8.
Then out of the ground, plants came fourth from the plainting in verse 8 and these plants had fruit for food. Also the ONE tree of knowing good from evil came forth in the middle of the garden. Please notice that this ONE man was placed into a special garden which was OUT of the rest of the WILD world full of beasts and mankind-who were following Satan instead of their Creator. This was the FIRST Kingdom of Heaven (to be) which was in the world, but out of the evil world.
Verse 16 states that God told THE MAN (not the woman) not to eat from the tree of knowing good from evil for IF he did, on that very day God would execute him (kill him as Strongs states). Now ask yourself this--did Adam know and understand what death and kill meant? How did that happen? Adam HAD to know in order to rightely make a choice.(Let that sink in for a while)
Verse 19 then has "The Lord God" (after making the ONE Man) forming beasts of the field (not the same as the reptiles and beasts of the wild in chapter one) and birds of the sky (also not the same as the 'flying creatures' in chapter one) and brought them too Adam (not Eve) to name them.(Wow, I wonder how long that would take--perhaps longer than ONE 24 hour day?) But do you see the problem here--Adam was made BEFORE the garden and BEFORE the plants and BEFORE the animals of the field! This is totally different than in Chapter ONE--the 6 day creation!
Are you starting to get the picture here? If not, you are blind!
Then in Gen. 2:20 Adam gave names to all of the animals and birds--and THEN NO SUITABLE MATE (helper) for ADAM could be found! If ONLY ONE HUMAN had been made at this time, then what was God thinking about looking for any mate for Adam? Huh?
Here is the thing: God (not "The Lord God" made mankind, all of the races, male and female in the first 6 day creation and Lucifer/Satan caused them all to become wicked, believing a lie from the words of Satan. The Lord God looked all over the world for a woman who had not sinned yet, but could not find one. Therefore, Eve was made FROM Adam to make this pair complete and free from sin.
It was God's plan to have the rest of the humans living in the world SEE ADam and Eve and see how God the Creator was taking care of them and they could live for ever by eating from the tree of life. Thus, the people who saw the living testimony from Adam and Eve could become born again spiritually by the Holy Spirit and live in the Kingdom of Heaven. This was PLAN "A". but first Adam and Eve had to pass a test, just as the 144,000 must pass a test as found in Rev. 3:10.
The test is to choose the words of Jesus over the words of all others like Paul and EGW. Now it is YOUR choice too! I made my choice to follow ONLY Jesus!
I stopped reading your post after you asked what was wrong with God.

I gave you exactly what the scriptures say and for that you state "Get real folks".

CB
Crazy Baptist

Hopkins, SC

#18 Jan 29, 2013
The RR is an unbeliever.

CB
Dennis

Yucaipa, CA

#19 Jan 29, 2013
RR,
While I agree with you in your assessment as to what happened during the literal 6 Day creation and then after, I honestly don't think that most people here on the forum want to think that hard and that completely about these things. It's just to complex. What they want is the Uncle Arthur simplistic children's versions of these stories because then they don't have to think to deeply or carefully about what happened. They would rather construct a world of their own devising, rather that read between the line of the 'narrative', choosing rather to place events in an order that confirms their beliefs, rather than read the narrative as it was given.

Genesis Chapter 2 IS NOT a rehash or further explanation of what occurred in Chapter 1. This is a NARRATIVE, and Chapter 2 FOLLOWS after Chapter 1 in both time and space. Chapter ONE describes the literal 6 day creation. Chapter Two describes events that occurred AFTER what happened in Chapter ONE was finished and done. This, however, can make things very inconvenient or those who believe the earth is only 6,000 years old, because if what you are saying is true the earth MUST be MUCH, MUCH older that that, and they just CAN'T have THAT - heaven forbid.

Adam and Eve were not the first humans on this plant, all of which was created by a God who exists in three parts, one being Father, one being Mother, one being Michael/Jesus/Son.

What makes all of this IMPOSSIBLE is that they have FAITH that what they BELIEVE to be true MUST be so, simply because they sincerely believe it to be that way. So, RR, don't try to overcome faith with anything that resembles facts; most people simply won't put up with it. Just state your case and move on, and leave them to wallow in their own sense of self satisfaction.
Crazy Baptist

Hopkins, SC

#20 Jan 29, 2013
Dennis wrote:
RR,
While I agree with you in your assessment as to what happened during the literal 6 Day creation and then after, I honestly don't think that most people here on the forum want to think that hard and that completely about these things. It's just to complex. What they want is the Uncle Arthur simplistic children's versions of these stories because then they don't have to think to deeply or carefully about what happened. They would rather construct a world of their own devising, rather that read between the line of the 'narrative', choosing rather to place events in an order that confirms their beliefs, rather than read the narrative as it was given.
Genesis Chapter 2 IS NOT a rehash or further explanation of what occurred in Chapter 1. This is a NARRATIVE, and Chapter 2 FOLLOWS after Chapter 1 in both time and space. Chapter ONE describes the literal 6 day creation. Chapter Two describes events that occurred AFTER what happened in Chapter ONE was finished and done. This, however, can make things very inconvenient or those who believe the earth is only 6,000 years old, because if what you are saying is true the earth MUST be MUCH, MUCH older that that, and they just CAN'T have THAT - heaven forbid.
Adam and Eve were not the first humans on this plant, all of which was created by a God who exists in three parts, one being Father, one being Mother, one being Michael/Jesus/Son.
What makes all of this IMPOSSIBLE is that they have FAITH that what they BELIEVE to be true MUST be so, simply because they sincerely believe it to be that way. So, RR, don't try to overcome faith with anything that resembles facts; most people simply won't put up with it. Just state your case and move on, and leave them to wallow in their own sense of self satisfaction.
Finally some decent advise from you.

Yes I agree.

PLEASE focus your efforts elsewhere. My resolve is firm.

I TRUST GOD AT His WORD and pitting your "facts" against my faith simply will not work. My faith being unwavering and firm and your facts well.....are really no more than your far left opinions.

Blessings, CB

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Seventh-day Adventist Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The 7th Day: Fact and Fiction 1 hr Earburner 2,097
Where are the true Seventh-day Adventists? 3 hr Teacher 18
Ron Wyatt Renown Archaeologist found the Arc of... 7 hr 10commandments 33
OC not TC 9 hr 10commandments 242
IS THE FOURTH commandment SUPERIOR TO THE FIRST? 12 hr KSH 36
Sabbath activity 18 hr JesusWasAJew -Goo... 44
Jesus DIED April 25, AD 31 says US NAVY (Apr '11) 19 hr Umfundize 85
Pull your children out of the Adventist Schools (Jun '09) Aug 21 Saturn Day 464
More from around the web