If God is not The Trinity, when what did He mean...

  • Thread starter Thread starter 2ndGen
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jimmy_B said:
Hello FaithofAbraham

Ah… No!

How is it possible that “we are created in the physical likeness of that”?

You are kidding me, right? I have never seen a man with four animal faces or a man with the"likeness" of four animal faces, have you? where is there such a man?
Click to expand...
Why couldn’t we be created to look like that part of the cherubim with a man’s face? Maybe we really do look like that in the heavenly world. Does anyone know what Adam and Eve looked like before they were sent from the Garden?
 
FaithofAbraham said:
If the cherubim had a man’s face and hands it is reasonable to assume we are created in the physical likeness of that and they were there when God created man. As well as being created with abilities to love, hate, etc. like God. Don’t you think?
Click to expand...
Hello again FatithofAbraham,

I am not going to attempt to interpret the Bible but is seems that it is possible that ; “they had the form of men” might be referring to a creature with a man’s body and the face or likeness of an animal. At any rate, I don’t believe this is to be taken literally, isn’t it possible the these verses are referring to the four Apostles of the Gospels, Mathew, Mark, Luke and John?

I don’t know.

However, I do know that symbolism was important in the early Church, as it is today and that there exist art, statues, paintings and alike, depicting Mark, for example as a “lion”.

However, we know that the Apostle Mark wasn’t actually a lion.

I hope this helps.

God Bless!
 
FaithofAbraham said:
“To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life” means to me you can’t get to it unless God lets you, what does it mean to you?

Maybe they will do some digging in Iraq and find a cherub with a flaming sword, I don’t really know.
Click to expand...
Well, that verse is referring to “Heaven”, not a “garden” again. It refers to the following scritpures where the garden is spoken of in a “past” tense and Heaven in a future tense:

Ezekiel 28:13; 13"You were in (A)Eden, the garden of God;
(B)Every precious stone was your covering:
The (C)ruby, the topaz and the diamond;
The beryl, the onyx and the jasper;
The lapis lazuli, the turquoise and the emerald;
And the gold, the workmanship of your (D)settings and sockets,
Was in you.
On the day that you were created
They were prepared.

Ezekiel 31:8; 8’The (A)cedars in (B)God’s garden could not match it;
The cypresses could not compare with its boughs,
And the plane trees could not match its branches
No tree in (C)God’s garden could compare with it in its beauty.

Luke 23:43 43And He said to him, “Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in (A)Paradise.”

2 Corinthians 12
2I know a man (C)in Christ who fourteen years ago–whether in the body I do not know, or out of the body I do not know, (D)God knows–such a man was (E)caught up to the (F)third heaven.

3And I know how such a man–whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, (G)God knows–

4was (H)caught up into (I)Paradise and heard inexpressible words, which a man is not permitted to speak.
 
FaithofAbraham said:
If the cherubim had a man’s face and hands it is reasonable to assume we are created in the physical likeness of that and they were there when God created man. As well as being created with abilities to love, hate, etc. like God. Don’t you think?
Click to expand...
I don’t have a lion on 1/2 my face. Neither does Jimmy.
I dont’ see us resembling what was described.

It sounds like 1/2 man and 1/2 beast to me.
 
FaithofAbraham said:
Why couldn’t we be created to look like that part of the cherubim with a man’s face? Maybe we really do look like that in the heavenly world. Does anyone know what Adam and Eve looked like before they were sent from the Garden?
Click to expand...
I know…they looked like God for God created them both in “His” image:

Genesis 1:27
So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.
 
2ndGen said:
I don’t have a lion on 1/2 my face. Neither does Jimmy.
I dont’ see us resembling what was described.

It sounds like 1/2 man and 1/2 beast to me.
Click to expand...
Ok, it had a man’s face and you don’t see the resemblance.
 
Jimmy_B said:
However, we know that the Apostle Mark wasn’t actually a lion.
Click to expand...
I don’t think he was a cherub either, but a man. That’s another example of the obsession to make everything human something supernatural or deity, when it is only human.
 
2ndGen said:
I believe Adam and Eve were created in God’s image.

We weren’t created, we were pro-created “of” Adam and Eve.
Click to expand...
If those cherubim were there at God’s throne like they are in Ezekiel and Revelation, and they had the faces of men, it’s quite possible God patterned our faces after that one man’s face of theirs in terms of “in our image.”

Obviously I’m not saying that the other faces of the beasts were used for our faces.
 
FaithofAbraham said:
If those cherubim were there at God’s throne like they are in Ezekiel and Revelation, and they had the faces of men, it’s quite possible God patterned our faces after that one man’s face of theirs in terms of “in our image.”

Obviously I’m not saying that the other faces of the beasts were used for our faces.
Click to expand...
So now you’re only saying that God (and are now not including the angels) created man…

But let’s revert to the Scriptures again:

Genesis 1:27
So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.
 
Warning: **The apparent **mischaracterization of the Roman Catholic Church by “FaithofAbraham” documented by him, in post number 68 of this thread, does not; in fact represent anything in reality. It is, in fact totally and completely false, baseless and without merit. Additionally, it is not at all consistent with any real, known or apparent, fact or facts documented in post number 62 of this thread; or any other post, anywhere on this thread. Anyone reading post number 68 is hereby instructed to disregard the entire post and any subsequent and similar posts.

***How do you like them apples? :knight1: ***
 
2ndGen said:
So now you’re only saying that God (and are now not including the angels) created man…

But let’s revert to the Scriptures again:

Genesis 1:27
So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.
Click to expand...
God created angels, then He created man in His and their image. On one hand the physical, which may look something like the angels, and on another mental, emotional, intellectual, which was the likeness of God and the angels. Ability to think, obey commands, love, hate, etc.

As to whether or not angels helped to gather the dirt Adam was made from or anything like that, I don’t know. Angels help God do a lot of different things throughout the Bible.
 
Jimmy_B said:
mischaracterization of the Roman Catholic Church by “FaithofAbraham” documented by him, in post number 68 of this thread, does not; in fact represent anything in reality.
Click to expand...
I never mentioned RCC in that post, I was referring to Gentiles in general: Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, etc.
 
FaithofAbraham said:
I never mentioned RCC in that post, I was referring to Gentiles in general: Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, etc.
Click to expand...
Hello, FatherofAbraham,

If is wasn’t and it was addressing my comment as a Roman Catholic, and regarding the “early Church” (Catholic) then what were your comments to me based on? I doesn’t really matter, I was just surprised by the response I got from you. You might want to re-read post number 62.

Take care,
.
Jimmy.
 
FaithofAbraham said:
I never mentioned RCC in that post, I was referring to Gentiles in general: Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, etc.
Click to expand...
FaithofAbraham,

Ok great, so you don’t think that Roman Catholics have an “obsession to make everything human something supernatural or deity, when it is only human”.

So, that wasn’t what it appeared to be, an ant-Catholic jab at Mary or the Catholic Saints. You just, for some unkown reason, think that is it is Ok to post that I have an “obsession to make everything human something supernatural or deity, when it is only human”.

So it must just be a coincidence that I happen to also be a Roman Catholic. I am still confused because I haven’t written anything in over 800 posts which should have caused you to make a personal assumption of this nature, regarding my “Catholic” beliefs. 🤷

Take care,

jimmy
 
the Biblical We confused Rabbis as well…no one could give a clear answer as to how God is One yet says We. Some said God was consulting creatures, but it was rejected by others and there is no concensus on it.

Hear, O Israel, Adonai Eloheinu Adonai is one. These three are one. How can the three Names be one? Only through the perception of faith; in the vision of the Holy Spirit, in the beholding of the hidden eye alone.…So it is with the mystery of the threefold Divine manifestations designated by Adonai Eloheinu Adonai—three modes which yet form one unity.Zohar II:43b (vol. 3, p. 134).

Rabbi Levi explained that God was speaking to creation.

AND GOD SAID: LET US MAKE MAN, ETC. With whom did He take counsel? R. Joshua b. Levi said: He took counsel with the works of heaven and earth, like a king who had two advisers without whose knowledge he did nothing whatsoever.

Rabbi Abarbanel explained that God was capable of making all the lesser works of creation but needed assistance when it came to human beings.

these positions deny God’s omnipotence.

Rashi wrote : yet the verse does not refrain from teaching proper conduct and the virtue of humbleness, namely, **that the greater should consult, and take permission from the smaller;**for had it been written, “I shall make man,” we could not, then, have learned that He spoke to His judicial council but to Himself.

According to Rashi, if God had used the singular (“I” and “my”) we could not have known he was addressing the angels. True—we would never have guessed that God was addressing angels, since there is no mention of angels in the text. But even with the plural, there is still no mention of angels in the text.

The text does not support the concept of God consulting angels in creation, and Rashi’s argument became a source of confusion and disagreement among various rabbis.

A later commentator rebutted the suggestion that God had partners in creation. He insisted that since no other beings are mentioned in the passage, it is not valid to invent them; in fact, it is best to maintain the solitude of God in creation: “Why was man created last? So that the heretics might not say there was a companion with Him in the work.” Genesis Rabbah, VIII.3, p. 57.

Rabbi Ammi said: “He took counsel with His own heart. It may be compared to a king who had a palace built by an architect, but when he saw it, it did not please him: with whom is he to be indignant? Surely with the architect! Similarly, ‘And it grieved Him at His heart.’” (Genesis 6:6)

The Targum Neofiti translates verse 27: “And the Memra (Word) of the Lord created the man in his (own) likeness.”
 
“Let US make man in OUR image”.

If US = God + angels, then result is :

Let God and angels create man which makes angels equal to God in creation.
It was not angels who made us, neither had angels power to make an image of God. This is ascribing partners to God. The Father, His Word and His Spirit created creation, no one else did.

God is not consulting, He is saying " Let us"…He is not asking opinions, (the Bible mentions no one talking to God at that moment), and He does not listen to feedback (the Bible mentions no one giving his opinion).
 
2ndGen said:
When God said
“Let Us make man in Our own image.” in Genesis,
Who are the “Us” He ws referring to?
Click to expand...
it is the royal “We” (if there is no trinity).

royalty refers to itself as “we” or “us” because they are more than just their individual self. this is the explanation i have received from a few rabbis. God refers to Himself as “we” because He is king and ruler of all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top