Man's body not shaped in the image of God

[Ghada]

Man's physical form is not made in God's image. That is the idolatry of carnal minded readers of the Bible.

Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

It's the soul and heart of man created in the image of God, who is Spirit. That is where man, like God and angel has power to choose to do good or evil.

No other natural living creature on earth has that power and image from God.

And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.

If man's physical shape is created int he image of God, then man has seen God's shape since the beginning.

Man's physical shape was created differently from that of all other natural living creatures, walking upright, and not as the forefooted or jumping creatures with two legs.

But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

Man was created spiritually in God's image, with a natural body different in shape from other natural creatures. God came in the flesh of man with a natural body in the shape of man, and not that of any other natural creature.

When Christ makes man's physical shape, it is not in God's likeness. But rather was to become the Son's likeness on earth. That is part of why He is called the second Adam coming in the flesh, in the same shape and likeness of Adam.

Neither is man's flesh sinful nor his shape, no more than any other flesh and shape of living creatures made by Christ with His own Spirit and hands.

 

[lforrest]

Did God really say he made mankind in his image? Yes he did, so I'll take his word for it. Not to say there isn't more to it than literally stated. Because man is a tripartite being.

 

[marks]

That is the idolatry of carnal minded readers of the Bible.

Show us your carnal reading.

 

[quietthinker]

Man's body not shaped in the image of God​

Whew! I'm sure relieved God doesn't have a pen:s.......cuz I'm certain having that instrument coupled with a religious mindset gives half the population on Earth extraordinary grief.

 

[Rella ~ I am a woman]

Of course God is spirit. And we are spirit. God gave us our spirit either on birth or conception (the jury is still out.)

But we also know by Exodus 33

20 He further said, “You cannot see My face, for mankind shall not see Me and live!”

22 and it will come about, while My glory is passing by, that I will put you in the cleft of the rock and cover you with My hand until I have passed by

23 Then I will take My hand away and you shall see My back, but My face shall not be seen.”

So obviously this spirit of God has a hand.... face..... and back.

Just like we do.

 

[quietthinker]

20 He further said, “You cannot see My face, for mankind shall not see Me and live!”

is this a threat or a consequence?

So obviously this spirit of God has a hand.... face..... and back.

and white skin, blue eyes and blond hair?

 

[Rella ~ I am a woman]

is this a threat or a consequence?

and white skin, blue eyes and blond hair?

Do me a favor. Pretty please with a cherry on top.

Please pull out your favorite bible translation.

Then please post what Exodus 33, verses 20, 22 and 23 have to say.

Then we shall discuss my reply and yours.

Thanks....

But while you are being so seemingly flippant with your "is this a threat or a consequence?" comment....

Also go look at

2 Samuel 6:3-8 and in 1 Chronicles 13:6-12 tell the account of a man who tried to protect the ark of God and died as a consequence.

And David and all Israel went up to Baalah, that is, to Kiriath-jearim, which belongs to Judah, to bring up from there the ark of God, the LORD who is enthroned above the cherubim, where His name is called. And they carried the ark of God on a new cart from the house of Abinadab, and Uzza and Ahio drove the cart. And David and all Israel were celebrating before God with all their might, even with songs and with lyres, harps, tambourines, cymbals, and with trumpets. When they came to the threshing floor of Chidon, Uzza put out his hand to hold the ark, because the oxen nearly upset it. And the anger of the LORD burned against Uzza, so He struck him down because he put out his hand to the ark; and he died there before God. Then David became angry because of the LORD’S outburst against Uzza; and he called that place Perez-uzza to this day. And David was afraid of God that day, saying, “How can I bring the ark of God home to me?” (NASB) 1 Chronicles 13:6-12

In 2 Samuel 6 we find some more details since it records the same event. Here is a portion of the passage.

But when they came to the threshing floor of Nacon, Uzzah reached out toward the ark of God and took hold of it, for the oxen nearly upset it. And the anger of the LORD burned against Uzzah, and God struck him down there for his irreverence; and he died there by the ark of God. (NASB) 2 Samuel 6:6-7

WHY? You may ask.... Well,

The ark of God was one of the holy objects . God had made it clear to the Israelites during the time of Moses that they were not to touch the holy objects associated with the tabernacle worship (Numbers 4:4-6, 15-20).

Now... this had bothered me most of my life... and in a way still does.

The man wanted to steady it lest it fall to the ground, possibly shattering or breaking.

Evidently God did not care?

We, as mortals cannot touch or hold things that God has forbidden. Obviously.

Nor can we look upon His face.

As to your other comment... that actually requires an very in depth answer and not for here and not for now.

 

[quietthinker]

Do me a favor. Pretty please with a cherry on top.

Please pull out your favorite bible translation.

Then please post what Exodus 33, verses 20, 22 and 23 have to say.

Then we shall discuss my reply and yours.

Thanks....

But while you are being so seemingly flippant with your "is this a threat or a consequence?" comment....

Also go look at

2 Samuel 6:3-8 and in 1 Chronicles 13:6-12 tell the account of a man who tried to protect the ark of God and died as a consequence.


In 2 Samuel 6 we find some more details since it records the same event. Here is a portion of the passage.



WHY? You may ask.... Well,

The ark of God was one of the holy objects . God had made it clear to the Israelites during the time of Moses that they were not to touch the holy objects associated with the tabernacle worship (Numbers 4:4-6, 15-20).

Now... this had bothered me most of my life... and in a way still does.

The man wanted to steady it lest it fall to the ground, possibly shattering or breaking.

Evidently God did not care?

We, as mortals cannot touch or hold things that God has forbidden. Obviously.

Nor can we look upon His face.

As to your other comment... that actually requires an very in depth answer and not for here and not for now.

Could it be that what is attributed to God as doing or saying in many of the OT records is questionable as to whether it actually was God? Why do I ask this? Because it is not consistent with how God behaves. So we must ask, how does God behave? The NT is clear that Jesus is the full revelation of God and that being the case he demonstrated that he would rather die than kill......otherwise why didn't he just zip Lucifer from existence at the outset of his rebellion?

I understand this is a bit of a shock to many for various reasons because they ultimately feel it undermines the authority of the scripture but its a shortsighted and ignorant view.

Personally I think that what is recorded in OT records is inline with how people thought and saw (their perceptions) which were not necessarily accurate. Take Job for instance, he had no idea that Satan was giving him a hard time. He and his mates assumed it was God. They were wrong. Isaiah tells us that both good and evil is God's doing, he was wrong. We know that from the records of the apostles that God has no darkness in him at all and the witness of Jesus who tells us it is the Devil who steals kills and destroys.

Cultural views, personal preferences interpret more often than not, incorrectly.

In the light of Jesus do we really believe it was God who ordered the genocide of the nations Israel invaded? In some accounts it tells them to slaughter everything that moves, in others it's all of a sudden Ok to keep the pretty girls for themselves or and the animals....all attributed to God telling them. Can you see there's a problem here? There is glaring inconsistency......unless God is arbitrary and fickle, which I don't think he is.

The NT tells us that Jesus is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. So, what are we to count on and trust as accurate?
My persuasion is Jesus. He is recored as saying 'you have heard said but I say unto you....' In other words, what you've heard needs correcting ie, what they had heard from OT records.
That other stuff (OT accounts) needs to be understood in the light of the cultural context it came from.....but that is a discussion for another time.

 

[Keiw]

Did God really say he made mankind in his image? Yes he did, so I'll take his word for it. Not to say there isn't more to it than literally stated. Because man is a tripartite being.

Made in Gods image= the ability to love and reason.

 

[Rella ~ I am a woman]

Made in Gods image= the ability to love and reason.

How does one make an image of an ability to love and reason?

Never mind... God said His... not graven or molton.... whew.... am I relieved.

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image...

The phrase “graven image” comes from the King James Version and is first found in Exodus 20:4 in the second of the Ten Commandments. The Hebrew word translated “graven image” means literally “an idol.” A graven image is an image carved out of stone, wood, or metal. It could be a statue of a person or animal, or a relief carving in a wall or pole. It is differentiated from a molten image, which is melted metal poured into a cast. Abstract Asherah poles, carved wooden Ba’als covered in gold leaf, and etchings of gods accompanying Egyptian hieroglyphics are all graven images.

But King Jimmy saves the day by saying graven image as Got Questions says above....

So Aaron did good....... as King Jimmys 2nd commandment was not beroken.​

​

Aaron Makes the Golden Calf​

32:1 When the people saw that Moses took a long time to come down the mountain, they gathered around Aaron and told him, “Come here and make us a god who will go before us, because, as for this fellow Moses who led us out of the land of Egypt, we don’t know what has become of him.”

2 Aaron told them, “Tear off the gold rings which are in the ears of your wives, your sons, and your daughters and bring them to me.”

3 All the people tore off the gold rings that were in their ears and brought them to him. 4 He took them from them and, using a tool, fashioned them into a molten calf. The people said, “This, Israel, is your god who brought you out of the land of Egypt.”

5 When Aaron saw this, he built an altar in front of it, and then he proclaimed, “Tomorrow is to be a festival to the LORD.” 6 They got up early the next day and offered burnt offerings and brought peace offerings. Then the people sat down to eat and drink, and then they got up to play.

 

[Keiw]

How does one make an image of an ability to love and reason?

Never mind... God said His... not graven or molton.... whew.... am I relieved.

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image...

The phrase “graven image” comes from the King James Version and is first found in Exodus 20:4 in the second of the Ten Commandments. The Hebrew word translated “graven image” means literally “an idol.” A graven image is an image carved out of stone, wood, or metal. It could be a statue of a person or animal, or a relief carving in a wall or pole. It is differentiated from a molten image, which is melted metal poured into a cast. Abstract Asherah poles, carved wooden Ba’als covered in gold leaf, and etchings of gods accompanying Egyptian hieroglyphics are all graven images.

But King Jimmy saves the day by saying graven image as Got Questions says above....

So Aaron did good....... as King Jimmys 2nd commandment was not beroken.​

​

Aaron Makes the Golden Calf​

32:1 When the people saw that Moses took a long time to come down the mountain, they gathered around Aaron and told him, “Come here and make us a god who will go before us, because, as for this fellow Moses who led us out of the land of Egypt, we don’t know what has become of him.”

2 Aaron told them, “Tear off the gold rings which are in the ears of your wives, your sons, and your daughters and bring them to me.”

3 All the people tore off the gold rings that were in their ears and brought them to him. 4 He took them from them and, using a tool, fashioned them into a molten calf. The people said, “This, Israel, is your god who brought you out of the land of Egypt.”

5 When Aaron saw this, he built an altar in front of it, and then he proclaimed, “Tomorrow is to be a festival to the LORD.” 6 They got up early the next day and offered burnt offerings and brought peace offerings. Then the people sat down to eat and drink, and then they got up to play.

Yes Israel failed God by making a molten calf. It was still considered by those as a festival to YHWH(Jehovah) but YHWH(Jehovah) did not accept it.
The same goes today- These 2 Thess 2:3= the great apostasy-rose up in the 2nd or 3rd century, these never had Jesus but it was a creation from satan=Catholicism. they held councils and came up with many untruths, they thus translated errors into their translating by satans will to mislead. they removed Gods name as well, they had no right. To this day all the religions claiming to be christian using the altered translations are being mislead into not entering Gods kingdom. They can look easily-God willed his name in his bible over 7000 places. the altered translations has removed it. YHWH(Jehovah) is THE ONLY TRUE GOD.= The Abrahamic God.
99%of all religion claiming to be christian are being mislead by these-2Cor 11:12-15)

 

[BlessedPeace]

Could it be that what is attributed to God as doing or saying in many of the OT records is questionable as to whether it actually was God? Why do I ask this? Because it is not consistent with how God behaves. So we must ask, how does God behave? The NT is clear that Jesus is the full revelation of God and that being the case he demonstrated that he would rather die than kill......otherwise why didn't he just zip Lucifer from existence at the outset of his rebellion?

I understand this is a bit of a shock to many for various reasons because they ultimately feel it undermines the authority of the scripture but its a shortsighted and ignorant view.

Personally I think that what is recorded in OT records is inline with how people thought and saw (their perceptions) which were not necessarily accurate. Take Job for instance, he had no idea that Satan was giving him a hard time. He and his mates assumed it was God. They were wrong. Isaiah tells us that both good and evil is God's doing, he was wrong. We know that from the records of the apostles that God has no darkness in him at all and the witness of Jesus who tells us it is the Devil who steals kills and destroys.

Cultural views, personal preferences interpret more often than not, incorrectly.

In the light of Jesus do we really believe it was God who ordered the genocide of the nations Israel invaded? In some accounts it tells them to slaughter everything that moves, in others it's all of a sudden Ok to keep the pretty girls for themselves or and the animals....all attributed to God telling them. Can you see there's a problem here? There is glaring inconsistency......unless God is arbitrary and fickle, which I don't think he is.

The NT tells us that Jesus is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. So, what are we to count on and trust as accurate?
My persuasion is Jesus. He is recored as saying 'you have heard said but I say unto you....' In other words, what you've heard needs correcting ie, what they had heard from OT records.
That other stuff (OT accounts) needs to be understood in the light of the cultural context it came from.....but that is a discussion for another time.

Reminds me of a guy who teaches the god of the OT in all those violence passages was actually Lucifer. The Lord of this world.

And Jesus was set to overcome what he installed as worship if himself.
It is somewhat related to the serpent seed doctrine.

 

[The Parson]

Bee's knees Louise. Are you serious. The Bible says:
Genesis 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. (KJV)
What on earth does likeness mean my friend???

 

[Rella ~ I am a woman]

Bee's knees Louise. Are you serious. The Bible says:
Genesis 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. (KJV)
What on earth does likeness mean my friend???

What the Bible says about Likeness of God

Moses writes that man is created in God's

www.bibletools.org

What the Bible says about Likeness of God
(From Forerunner Commentary)

Genesis 1:26 Moses writes that man is created in God's "image" and "likeness." Any reliable lexicon mentions that "image" and "likeness" reinforce each other in a manner common to Hebrew. It means we are like God in form and implies that, like Him, we have a spiritual capacity which animals do not have.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

Did God really say he made mankind in his image? Yes he did, so I'll take his word for it. Not to say there isn't more to it than literally stated. Because man is a tripartite being.

Jesus said if you've seen Him you've seen the Father.

We are made in His Image... He's a 3 part being (1 John 5:7), and so is man (1 Thessalonians 5:23)

And at the same time God is one and so are we... it's all part of the wonderful mystery of the Lord!

 

[Ghada]

Of course God is spirit. And we are spirit. God gave us our spirit either on birth or conception (the jury is still out.)

Exactly, just as the angels, whose bodies are immortal spirit in heaven, but ours are mortal and natural on earth.

But we also know by Exodus 33

20 He further said, “You cannot see My face, for mankind shall not see Me and live!”

22 and it will come about, while My glory is passing by, that I will put you in the cleft of the rock and cover you with My hand until I have passed by

23 Then I will take My hand away and you shall see My back, but My face shall not be seen.”

So obviously this spirit of God has a hand.... face..... and back.

Just like we do.

Not just like we do physically, until God came in the flesh. Now the shape of a man's body Christ Jesus resurrected and glorified sits on the throne in heaven, will sit on His throne on this earth for 1000 years, and finally will sit on His and God's throne on the new earth forever.

God made man a living soul in His image, and God became a man in the image and likeness of man.

Not the image and likeness of angels with immortal bodies.

 

[Ghada]

What on earth does likeness mean my friend???

I gave the Bible explanation at the top. Only one person has tried to address it.

 

[Ghada]

Who defends making the image of God in the image and likeness of man? Idolators. Anthropomorphics.

A carnal reading of Gen 1, that God makes man's body in His image and likeness, concludes with making the image of God in man's likeness. God's image is seen in the bodily shape of man. Man sees God's image and shape all around the world and in one's own mirror.

And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man,

It's the very definition of idolatry. This is specifically dealing with the image of God as compared to the physical image and likeness of man. It has nothing to do with the soul and spirit of man.

We further notice in the condemnation of such idolatry (that man's physical likeness is the very image of God Himself), that God's glorious image must be changed into the image and likeness of man's body.

I.e. God's image is not that of man's physical likeness and shape. His image must be changed to be shaped like man's body.

And yet, if the Christian anthropomorphics are to be agreed with, how must God's image be changed into that of man's body, if indeed God makes our body in His image? There would be no need to change God's image into that of man, since God has made man in His own image. Carnally applying God's image to man's body justifies the making and worship of the body as the very incarnate image of God.

And so we see the idolatry of pagans and some Christians alike, trying to change the image of God into their own physical likeness. Although the Christian version of anthropomorphism, based upon a carnal reading of Gen 1, would more accurately be called theosomorphism.

Rather than pagan man making their gods into their own physical image, the carnal Christian God makes His own image into their physical shape.

But of course, the Bible says that requires changing God's image into our own physical likeness to do so.

It's always wonderful to see how just one word of the Bible can say so many things, and destroy any idolatrous doctrine at once.

If not for that one simple word 'change' in Romans 1, then the verse would make no sense at all. How can it possibly be idolatry to make an image of God in the likeness of man, whose bodies are made by God Himself in His own image?

God would be condemning His own image as the source of all idolatry of man, for making His image in our own likeness, which is made by Him in His own image.

Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen.

 

[Rella ~ I am a woman]

Who defends making the image of God in the image and likeness of man?.

By description I would have to say it was the author of Exodus 33: 17-23

17 The Lord said to Moses, “I will also do this thing of which you have spoken; for you have found favor in My sight and I have known you by name.” 18 Then [h]Moses said, “I pray You, show me Your glory!” 19 And He said, “I Myself will make all My goodness pass before you, and will proclaim the name of the Lord before you; and I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show compassion on whom I will show compassion.” 20 But He said, “You cannot see My face, for no man can see Me and live!” 21 Then the Lord said, “Behold, there is a place [i]by Me, and you shall stand there on the rock; 22 and it will come about, while My glory is passing by, that I will put you in the cleft of the rock and cover you with My hand until I have passed by. 23 Then I will take My hand away and you shall see My back, but My face shall not be seen.”

So the author of Exodus claims God said He has a face. But was not permitted to see it.

So the author of Exodus claims God said He has a hand.

So the author of Exodus claims God said about His hand a second time.

So the author of Exodus claims God had a back.

Now either these words were handed down orally or they were truly inspired to be written id anyone other then Moses wrote exodus

For it is an absolute given assuming Moses wrote Exodus for if there was anything that was not apparently of a normal looking hand.... or a back..... Moses would have said so.

God told Moses he had a face. But if Moses saw it he would have died.

The mention of a hand, and the mention of a back that appeared somewhat normal tells me God very well could have made man in His/Their Image.

 

[Ghada]

And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

We see here also that man's body is not different than any natural creature on earth, except in shape and size by God. Whether it be human or frog, no natural flesh is made and shaped in God's likeness. And making of any creature's image as that of God is idolatry.

And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:

Human children are no different in bodily nature than the beasts of the field, who also beget after their own likeness. Man's image made by God, as with any likenesses of God's creatures, are their own image, not God's.

God Himself did not come in the fleshy likeness of His own image, but the Word was made flesh after the likeness of man, and not a frog.

But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

Nor did He come in any immortal flesh after the nature of angels, whose own spirit bodies are made immortally by God.

Christ Himself is the express image of God in the Spirit, not in the flesh. The Word was not made flesh after His own image, but was made flesh after the likeness of man.