Made In The Image Of GOD

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14000
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 906 times
Been thanked: 1629 times
Contact:

Made In The Image Of GOD

Post #1

Post by William »

Many individuals seem confused as to how GOD should be accurately defined. The confusion stems from the Abrahamic organized religion's many and varied sects which don't altogether agree on the definition, or terminology of definitions.

This has evolved, at least in regards to Christianity, as an image of male being upon a throne, situated somewhere in the sky of whom we are all 'made in the image of' but many think that this imagery is more about something being made in the image of man, and some aspects of Christianity agree that the imagery is false, or metaphorical at best, because "GOD is Spirit" and as such, does not even have gender, let alone form.

However, this stance often seems to contradict other ideas strongly held by Christians, including referring to the GOD as 'He' as well as Jesus being 'The Christ' and male and sitting on a throne as a representative of their idea of GOD - in form.

Furthermore, the idea of human beings being 'made in the image of GOD' helps fortify the imagery of GOD having a human form, contradicting the idea that 'GOD is Spirit', something else which really requires suitable defining.

Made In The Image Of GOD

Q: What exactly must that mean?

Inigo Montoya
Guru
Posts: 1333
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 8:45 pm

Post #2

Post by Inigo Montoya »

You answered your own question to some degree already.

It doesn't exactly mean anything, does it?

User avatar
ttruscott
Site Supporter
Posts: 11064
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:09 pm
Location: West Coast of Canada
Been thanked: 3 times

Post #3

Post by ttruscott »

It obviously cannot be physical so it must refer to the non-physical aspects of HIS being especially personhood, what we mean when we call someone a person with a person's character, intellect and imagination, a free will and a moral pov, etc.

I believe HIS image can be summed up as "a suitable partner for marriage, for the communion and fellowship on a spiritual level that is the perfect marriage", as that experience we are to share with our GOD is the end result of the cleansing of our reality from all evil and thus probably the purpose for our creation in the first place.

In all ways like GOD except without the Divine attributes seems possible too.

That HE chose our human shape while speaking of HIS own likeness might be instructive but I'm not convinced that our outer shape has any meaning at all.
PCE Theology as I see it...

We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.

This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14000
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 906 times
Been thanked: 1629 times
Contact:

Post #4

Post by William »

[Replying to post 3 by ttruscott]
That HE chose our human shape while speaking of HIS own likeness might be instructive but I'm not convinced that our outer shape has any meaning at all.
The impression I get from it generally is that 'The image of GOD' is related to the idea of 'The Breath of GOD' which is related to the idea of 'The Consciousness of GOD' and therein, we are all - in essence, or at the core of being - aspects of GOD, and perhaps as separate from one another as our own breath is. Not separate at all, and neither separate from GOD.

That is the Image of GOD as to what it must mean.

The thread throughout many religious writ - is the idea that our own ignorance is what sets us apart/separates us from GOD. The meat suits do not help in that regard, as they are obviously designed to achieve this state of illusionary separateness, and one can only guess at why such design was used, but one can at least surmise that we were fully cooperative in regard to choosing to wear said suits and experience said separation, if - for no other reason than to see what might happen, but more likely for some more careful reason...

Either that or foul play has to be considered, but even if that were the case, we would do well not to take on the role of 'victim' in regard to that.

GOD is 'spirit' and consciousness is 'spirit', and there are degrees of consciousness depending upon the form taken on.

Remove the form, and the consciousness identifies less as the product of said form and more able to identify as being the consciousness without form, but form also involves environment, and environment can be 'heaven' which still might give consciousness an incorrect identity in which to self-reference off of.

Should that be a concern though?

Or is the idea of form, even so constructed as to make it extremely difficult to understand oneself as "Made In The Image Of GOD" something of a test in which GOD-Consciousness is still able to understand itself as it truly is, rather than as the form it is within?

Thus to still be able to see ones self as 'an image of GOD' even whilst encased in mortal flesh and behave accordingly?

Even without props of enticement, such as possibly being chosen to be 'the wife of GOD' as an incentive?

One ought be careful when it comes to images...

User avatar
StuartJ
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1027
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2018 2:46 am
Location: Australia
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #5

Post by StuartJ »

And the Elohim ("God") said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness Genesis 1:26

The Elohim were the old version of "God" when the Israelites were still Canaanites themselves, and who created unspecified numbers of male and female humans as miniature replicas of themselves, and called them the Adam family.

Yahweh is a man of war: Yahweh is his name. Exodus 15:3

Yahweh is the newer, single male version of "God" who contradictorily created the mud-man and rib-woman, and, significantly, the writers of the mythology do not have this deity create humans in his image ...

Nonetheless, Jews and Christians still conflate the two contradictory myths, and the unseeable Jewish MAN of war in the sky looks like Pope Julius II ...

When you look at the commandment-breaking image of him in the Sistine Chapel.

And when the kiddies are being indoctrinated (brainwashed) in Sunday school, the images they are shown of the planet's first homo sapiens look like they have just come home from church and taken their clothes off in the back yard.

He looks like an advert for the world's first shaving cream, and she looks like Miss Nude Scandinavia 4004 BCE.

Yes, they're usually white and they're depilated and they look like "God" ...!
No one EVER demonstrates that "God" exists outside their parietal cortex.

User avatar
JoeyKnothead
Banned
Banned
Posts: 20879
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
Location: Here
Has thanked: 4093 times
Been thanked: 2572 times

Post #6

Post by JoeyKnothead »

From the OP, and various other carryin's on...

The image of God will forever be the image of those who seek, yet fail, to define an entity they can't even show there he sits. The god concept will forever remain a vague, loosely defined conglomerated pile of the various feathers picked off of various bovine excretions.

Conclusions?

God is a concept of man, with all man's faults. That's the closest definition we're ever gonna get.
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14000
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 906 times
Been thanked: 1629 times
Contact:

Post #7

Post by William »

[Replying to post 5 by StuartJ]

And the Elohim ("God") said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness Genesis 1:26
The Elohim were the old version of "God" when the Israelites were still Canaanites themselves, and who created unspecified numbers of male and female humans as miniature replicas of themselves, and called them the Adam family.
Yes - I think that this type reasoning gave way to the idea of ET influences as humans progressed in modern knowledge. The literal interpretation naturally lends itself to that interpretation in relation to 'image' meaning 'form'.

If that were the case, there are hundreds of conspiracy theories dealing with the darker side of this idea, one of the most comprehensive I have read speaks of the Annunaki, an ET/inter-dimensional species of extremely ancient origin, vastly knowledgeable who's King is named 'Anu' and where the idea of Yahweh originates.

Anu had 2 sons...
Yahweh is a man of war: Yahweh is his name. Exodus 15:3
If we are to note the stories, we need to note them all...the image in this case is in the behavior, and clearly humans are warriors, but not this alone.

There is no doubt that Abrahmic beliefs tend toward separating GOD from humans, and the 'breathe of GOD' becomes something akin to the electricity which gave the monster 'life', in the Frankenstein story.

As for me, I will stick to the idea that Consciousness is GOD, and is neither created or destroyed, and that is what 'the Image of GOD' really represents.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14000
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 906 times
Been thanked: 1629 times
Contact:

Post #8

Post by William »

[Replying to post 6 by JoeyKnothead]
That's the closest definition we're ever gonna get.
That is very hard to predict. It shows a disdain for human kind and hints that one believes humans are doomed to failure as a species and so will never realize their full potential, gaining knowledge in the process.

Inigo Montoya
Guru
Posts: 1333
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 8:45 pm

Post #9

Post by Inigo Montoya »

[Replying to post 6 by JoeyKnothead]

Perfectly said.

There is another strategy for defining the entity though. You just pick something else. An emergent phenomena. A state of matter. My lunch. Whatever. Then call it GOD, too.

If those things can be said to exist, I can stake a claim. Furthermore, I can capitalize it strangely to throw some extra mystique on it.

GOD is pure energy.
GOD is consciousness.
GOD is love.
GOD is a taco salad.
GOD is light.
GOD is the universe.

A case can be made that those things all exist in some sense. And if I choose to call one or more of those things GOD, I'm home free.

Many on that list have elements of mystery to them. Every GOD I ever heard of has elements of mystery to it. So they have that in common AS WELL, see?

Checkmate, atheist.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14000
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 906 times
Been thanked: 1629 times
Contact:

Post #10

Post by William »

[Replying to post 9 by Inigo Montoya]

GOD is checkmate, atheist. :D

GOD is consciousness is the best.

Post Reply