Ask a Theist!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 9 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-06-2012, 10:59 AM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(15-06-2012 10:56 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  This shows the earliest form of the Trinity. God speaks in persons (3) but is one. This is why He says "Our".
Alternatively it shows the later edits of a revisionist, or an early Hebrew tribal legend from back when they were polytheistic Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
15-06-2012, 11:01 AM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(15-06-2012 10:47 AM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(15-06-2012 08:08 AM)Vosur Wrote:  This one question has been sitting in my head for days. KC, I want to hear your opinion about this.

"Then 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 birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over everycreeping thing that creeps on the earth.”
- Genesis 1:26

Why does God say "in our image"? Doesn't that imply that there were other beings that worked together with him? Does this verse have the same meaning in the original hebrew version of the Bible? I'm curious.

While you're at it ChosenOne, tell me why that verse ain't interpreted as "We is God".

When "nu" is added to the end of a word it adds a plural pronoun to it. "Our" is used because of the grammar. In Hebrew there is no distinction between "we", "us", or "our", so when nu is translated into English, the proper word is used to coincide with English grammar.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-06-2012, 11:02 AM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(15-06-2012 10:59 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(15-06-2012 10:56 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  This shows the earliest form of the Trinity. God speaks in persons (3) but is one. This is why He says "Our".
Alternatively it shows the later edits of a revisionist, or an early Hebrew tribal legend from back when they were polytheistic Big Grin

No. The grammar doesn't added up. If that was the case, "God" would be plural not singular.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-06-2012, 11:04 AM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(15-06-2012 11:02 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(15-06-2012 10:59 AM)morondog Wrote:  Alternatively it shows the later edits of a revisionist, or an early Hebrew tribal legend from back when they were polytheistic Big Grin
No. The grammar doesn't added up. If that was the case, "God" would be plural not singular.
Your grammar doesn't add up Wink Ya walked into that one Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-06-2012, 11:07 AM
RE: Ask a Theist!
Humour me with the early tribal legend hypothesis. Why could God not have been one of many, perhaps a father God similar to Zeus? That would give rise to a singular pronoun for God and still allow the use of plural *by* God and come from a polytheistic background...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-06-2012, 11:09 AM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(15-06-2012 11:04 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(15-06-2012 11:02 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  No. The grammar doesn't added up. If that was the case, "God" would be plural not singular.
Your grammar doesn't add up Wink Ya walked into that one Big Grin

[Image: 1312598096983.png]

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kingschosen's post
15-06-2012, 11:09 AM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(15-06-2012 11:02 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(15-06-2012 10:59 AM)morondog Wrote:  Alternatively it shows the later edits of a revisionist, or an early Hebrew tribal legend from back when they were polytheistic Big Grin

No. The grammar doesn't added up. If that was the case, "God" would be plural not singular.
Wrong.

The grammar adds up to "God" speaking to those gathered in whatever Heavenly location the conversation is taking place in. It's anachronistic to put a Christian Trinity into the context of Genesis. "God" is either addressing a pantheon of gods or speaking to the heavenly hosts (ie, angels). There is no grammatical or contextual connection to the Trinity except from wishful Christians. I believe this has already been addressed elsewhere yet you hang on to this thought in error anyway.

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Erxomai's post
15-06-2012, 11:15 AM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(15-06-2012 11:02 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(15-06-2012 10:59 AM)morondog Wrote:  Alternatively it shows the later edits of a revisionist, or an early Hebrew tribal legend from back when they were polytheistic Big Grin

No. The grammar doesn't added up. If that was the case, "God" would be plural not singular.

Ladies and Gents: Your omniscient, omnipotent, fully equipped God... complete with the speech pattern of a control freak. Dodgy

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like kim's post
15-06-2012, 11:34 AM
RE: Ask a Theist!
@ Vosur and GirlyMan,

Having been raised in a similar style to KC, although I am no longer "a man of faith," but I understand a lot of the Christian thinking on this. On top of this, I am on lunch break, and I'm pretty sure KC would agree 100% with this answer.

The fact that God says "our image" is the first time we see what most Christians know as the "Godhead" but you might know it as many catholics, as the "Holy Trinity" that is to say God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit (Ghost). God who was the overall form/being that taught and created the world. Jesus being the physical form of God which he called "Son" and would establish the New Testament and fulfill the Old Testament. The Holy Spirit was the guide that filled the room where the apostles prayed after Jesus had arisen and left. He filled them with knowledge, understanding of "God's Will," and the power to perform miracels among many other things. Only the apostles, do we see as able to pass on the gifts of the Holy Spirit and no one else. So essentially, after all the apostles died, the Holy Spirit could no longer influence man in such manners. (Which is why, if you ever see someone who says they can speak in tounges, speak to those in heaven, perform miracles, snake handlers, etc... even their own Bible refutes their claim. So you don't even need to disprove the Bible to show them as frauds.

Some verses to help show these claims:

Romans 1:19,20. Here the Godhead/trinity as mentioned with some of its intent.

Colossians 2:2-9. Annoying scripture... says that the Godhead is without controversy and is a mystery. also 1st Timothy mentions a similar style verse.

Later on in, I want to say Hebrews, there is a scripture that tells the audience to not wonder about the mysteries of the universe. In essence, if something doesn't make sense, leave it be.

And for 3 verses in which each of the godhead is referred to as God:

God: Romans 15:6

Jesus: 1 Timothy 3:16

Holy Spirit: Acts 5:3-4

Do I believe in this, no, but I know how those how do, defend their beliefs. Hope this helps.

And KC, naturally, if you think me wrong in any of these or you say differently, this is your thread so I would expect nothing less.

And yet another interesting topic I am not interested in.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-06-2012, 12:46 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(15-06-2012 11:09 AM)Erxomai Wrote:  
(15-06-2012 11:02 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  No. The grammar doesn't added up. If that was the case, "God" would be plural not singular.
Wrong.

The grammar adds up to "God" speaking to those gathered in whatever Heavenly location the conversation is taking place in. It's anachronistic to put a Christian Trinity into the context of Genesis. "God" is either addressing a pantheon of gods or speaking to the heavenly hosts (ie, angels). There is no grammatical or contextual connection to the Trinity except from wishful Christians. I believe this has already been addressed elsewhere yet you hang on to this thought in error anyway.

No. That's not what the grammar implies at all.

Angels were not made in God's image; therefore, they are ruled out.

God is used as singular (Elohim) which in no, at all, in the least, suggest a pluralization.

This is also a refute to the Trinity explanation because Elohim is exclusively singular.

Some scholars say that it's in Cohortative Sense, which is, a singular being addressing himself and referencing himself in the plural form. Much like if you look into a mirror and say out loud to yourself, "What are we going to do?"

The Trinity refute to this is that the Trinity is singular and plural at the same time; therefore, Elohim is singular, but He is speaking to the different persons (Father, Son, Holy Spirit).

I could accept either, honestly, but I prefer the Trinity explanation because it makes more sense.

But, what you suggests isn't supported in the language.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: