"Then God said, 'Let US make man in OUR image, and in OUR likeness'"

reply to post by Archirvion


posted on 7-4-2010 @ 01:13 PM letthereaderunderstand makes the comment "Zeitgeist"

Archervirion admits Archervirion has no clue what Zeitgeist is

posted on 7-4-2010 @ 01:56 PM Archirvion makes the comment "Well according to our archive,you are actually on to something,but the zeitgeist idea is also onto the truth, its a mixture to be honest were both points are correct. How is that possible? Up to the public to find out. "

So, you had time to check this "classified" archive (I assume it's "classified" because while admitting you don't know what the Zeitgesit is you mentioned that there is classifed work afoot. And the time to aquire and see said movie to come to your conclusions about being onto something.

I'm not attacking you personally, just curious is all.

Originally posted by troubleshooter
You have a body and a mind (and some say spirit)...
...so are you one, two or possibly three?

Good question.

I have considered this often. What am I ? A father, a son, a brother, a husband, a friend, an employee, a neighbor, all of these or some or none of the above? Which takes precedence? To everyone I know I am something different. They define me as what they see me as. To my best friend I am no father and to my sister I am no son. So what am I? We all have the same question: do we define ourselves or do others define us? I wonder if the same applies to God…

reply to post by Sahabi


While you are correct, the Majestic plural was a device used at a later time. It was not employed during the ancient use of Elohim from Eloi (the singular).

Originally posted by silverstreak

A lot of people will tell you that God speaks this way because it is in reference to the Christian Trinity (Father, Son, Holy Spirit). However, I personally do not subscribe to this claim because these passages are from Genesis, in the Hebrew Old Testament. The concept of a "Trinity" is a Christian concept that was not created until the Christian New Testament (many thousands of years later after the recordings of the Hebrew books).

The Trinity is not a Christian concept, it is throughout the Bible. www.gotquestions.org...

reply to post by silverstreak


Because he was talking to his Angels who helped him.

reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic

But as for God's name being a plural form of Eloah -- Elohim, this is due to the name being plural intesive, so called majesty pluralis. I honestly don't see why this is so strange. [/qupte]

Did these ancient religious texts come accompanied with a guide to grammar and sentence composition or are scholars as usual trying to make an educated guess based on such rules which were created later and saying a-ha, because these are their rules that most surely must be what the ones who came before them meant, when they in fact, have no clue? And why can't people who have no clue just admit that. Why must people change things to suit their needs. I mean if Eve was written as Hayyah or whatever why not just call her that, why change it to Eve and destroy the original. I mean, if Jesus is so Holy, why call him Jesus instead of Yeshua, his given name? And here's athought, if "We, Us, etc refer to a trinity of multiple beings or essences being as one is it blasphemy to say that Jesus is God?

reply to post by wayaboveitall


I agree with that. Personally I find the idea of worshipping the creator if there really be one as ludicrous an idea as asking the cloned to worship the cloner. I mean if I ignored law and treaty and created a living being similiar to humans and could talk to it I would never be ignorant enough to ask it to worship me and I would command that it and it's ancestors do no not create a religion and worship me. These are fairy tales told by men to lure other men into their politics. I could write a BIBLE fill it with all the garbage I want, send it around the world for others to refine (and there are people who would do it) and over time it would be like any other hoaky religion, science, and belief as any that has ever existed or ever will. I'm not an athiest per say, I just don't fear any God or alien and I sure as hell don't live my life for them. And I would never fight their battles for them or kill on their behalf. The reason it's vague is because the authors were probably so busy making their BS sound as official as possible and cater to as wide an audience as possible that they simply suffered a case of oversight. God likely didn't inspire these works, God if there be one has probably never been seen by man at all. We'd have better luck kissing the sun with our lips or seeing the entire universe with our own eyes.

[edit on 8-4-2010 by PhyberDragon]

Originally posted by passenger

Originally posted by troubleshooter
You have a body and a mind (and some say spirit)...
...so are you one, two or possibly three?

Good question.

I have considered this often. What am I ? A father, a son, a brother, a husband, a friend, an employee, a neighbor, all of these or some or none of the above? Which takes precedence? To everyone I know I am something different. They define me as what they see me as. To my best friend I am no father and to my sister I am no son. So what am I? We all have the same question: do we define ourselves or do others define us? I wonder if the same applies to God…

I think you already know the answer.

We only truely find ourselves when we become emersed in the needs of another.

Many people self-destruct because of morbid self-focused...
...this is often seen in the behaviour of celebrities...
...I think the Madonna and Angelina Jolie serial adoption is patholigical evidence of this and is an attempt to right the imbalance of years of self-absorption.

I think we truely are only what we are to others...
...there really is nothing there when we look inside our own humanity.



[edit on 8/4/10 by troubleshooter]

As long as you don't interpret those lines to mean that there is a father god and a mother god, and the embodiment of this mother god currently resides in South Korea.

Because then you'd be a worshiper of The Mission Society Church of God, a Christian sect regarded to be a cult that believes that their biological families are second fiddle to their "spiritual families".

Kool-aid is sooooo good.

Originally posted by silverstreak
Then God said, "Let US make man in OUR image, in OUR likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, [a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground (Genesis 1:26)

And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of US, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever" (Genesis 3:22)

Come, let US go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other (Genesis 11:7)

He is referring to "us" and "our" as the trinity. Father son and holy spirit.

Good thinking out of the box tho! have to give u credit for that!

cheers

Yikes the ignorance coming from a lot of posters is frightening. Council at Nicea simply nailed down doctrine that was already believed by the church. Along with dismissing fairy tale books that were claimed belong in the canon. They only had the council because so much foolishness was cropping up (just like we see today). It would be the equivalant of us today having a council that says George Washington was the 1st president, because some are teaching Thomas Jefferson was.

The belief of God being a triune being has always existed, especially in the old testament. Ever wonder why Jesus' followers didn't think He was crazy for calling Himself the Son of God? The jews knew that the Messiah was in fact God. Ever wonder why God is called 'Elohim' which is a plural? Here are a few more verses for the OP:

Is 6:8
Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, "Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?" And I said, "Here am I. Send me!"

Ps 110:1
The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool

Proverbs 30:5
Who has ascended into heaven and descended? Who has gathered the wind in His fists? Who has wrapped the waters in His garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is His name or His Son's name? Surely you know!

Not that anyone is going to actually read this post, but at least I won't be guilty of remaining silent, there are many other examples, and I could go into greater detail, but again I don't think most of you really care...

havent bothered with the posts because i can explain it so here is to the OP

ok so about your post about God speaking of himself in a plural form..

your example is an English translation of a very precise Hebrew language as you said

what you must understand is the word in the Hebrew is "Elohim"

the -im ending giving the word a plural form..this word for God is used repeatedly in the Torah and is a clear example that God is more than singular

and as you said why not change the translation..well since the bible is put out in america mostly to be a christian text, yes it makes sense to us a plural form (as that is what is it to begin with and therefore there is no reason to change it) in the OT to show a picture of the trinity in the OT

now about you saying many churches overlook the nephilim teaching..i completely agree with you and disagree with the fact that they do this..the nephilim teaching helps to tie in many confusing aspects of early old testament life.

reply to post by PhyberDragon


Infact most languages were infact more complicated back in the days than they are now, and religion came before written language. Ancient texts show this. Organised religion and - language have common origins, and words in ancient (as today) languages normally had parallell gods and godesses representing what the words expressed. For instance in the ancient Egyptian language Ra was both the name of the god and also the word for Sun and so on. Lucifer, Venus, Mars etc. shows the same pattern in Latin. Thunder reflects the Norse god Thor, or as it is written in modern Norwegian Torden. Etc. What came first of either the gods or the words we do not know exactly, but my guess is that we are talking of parallell traditions and that they were developed at about the same time. Syllables each representing multiple deities and religious or cultural concepts could and can still today form new words showing relationships etc. and conceptual sentances could show whole stories and rituals between the lines. English reflects many such concepts and rituals etc between the lines for instance, if you look closely, and examine every sentance.

One other example is how Jesjuah reflects a Hebrew word Jesjuvah which means salvation, so when we say Jesus is Salvation noone can actually deny it, since it is a Word as well as a Name. And when we say that Jesjuah is the Son of God, noone can really deny that either, when we see how Jesjuah defined God: God is Love. Jesjuah was a child created through a Love Relationship between his parents. Later dogma and doctrines ignores such, and things turn into cults and sects completely lacking the imagination and knowledge needed to understand what the dude was actually talking about.

Originally posted by danj3ris
As long as you don't interpret those lines to mean that there is a father god and a mother god

Infact in ancient times Jahveh had a female counterpart, namely Asjerah. The Gnostics held that God had a similar counterpart called Sophia which means Wisdom. Using a common Hebrew scipher, Sophia becomes Baphometh, the god Templars were killed by the Inquisission for worshipping and so on.

reply to post by PhyberDragon

Because he was talking to his Angels who helped him

And it does say they all rejoiced at the work God had done.

reply to post by Sahabi
Hence its nearly impossible to believe a single word of the bible as translations from the original ancient texts have been redone innumerable times, and the gods only know how wrong that went from the original meanings and contexts.. no i dont speak any such languages, nor am i able to read them, but my posted view (and it was only that, a personal view and theory and nothing more) is a belief of mine that my studies have led me to over the years.. one of my closest friends, a much older man that was once a historian until he retired and tired of the lies he was expected to keep spreading about mankinds history..he does read ancient writings, and speaks fluent Latin among other languages (in his youth he was born into a very wealthy scottish family where his father pushed such high education and hired private tutors) and many nights have been filled with discussions on a great many topics, including that which the OP addresses.. my friend is not religious, but knows the bible inside and out regardless..which has brought him to very similiar conclusions that others and myself here seem to have. As there is no proof, all humans can do at this point is study and speculate.. but, no, i am sorry but my theory was not baseless fantasy.

reply to post by silverstreak


We are a tripartite being also. We consist of a body, soul and spirit but we are one. Paul teaches that we should divide these aspects of ourselves and learn to follow spirit alone.

The OT does speak in psalms I forget the chapter and verse but, David said "the LORD said unto MY LORD. Sit at my right hand while I bring all your enemys under your feet." David was king so it wasnt refering to him but his God.

I interpret it as the Father said unto the Son, thats two manifestations of the same God.

Paul also says that Christ is the fullness of the God head. It's difficult to understand spiritual matters and more dimentions. Given our understanding, but add another dimention and it would make perfect sense.

reply to post by silverstreak


I saw that it's already been mentioned, but it is most likely to be the royal plurality use of "our" and "us." It could possibly be a reference to the Trinity, though as you point out the concept wasn't fully accepted until even later in the church history. But, just because they didn't understand God in a Trinitarian sense, does not mean that His nature was any different.

The Nephilim issue doesn't get avoided as much as you might think, but it's not focused on because of two reasons:

1) It's Old Testament and many Christian leaders are obsessed with the New Testament only, to their own error

2) It holds no major doctrinal truth required for understanding regarding salvation. There is not teachable concept regarding them that is extremely valuable for altering a life to be God-centered, and so it is not a priority.

I personally am very interested in them, and often think that the "heroes of renown" that are not giants could have been the men of legend such as Hercules. The Nephilim did not end with the flood recorded in Genesis, as it said they existed in that time and afterward.

God Bless.

reply to post by Mykahel


Sorry to say, but no Godfearing Sjemite would ever even concider JHVH Elohim as being more than One personified Force of the Universe. The only scriptual "proof" of there being a Trinity, is a forgery, the so called Comma Johanneum, not included in our bibles until the sixteenth century. It's not included in any of the available Greek source texts of the NT, and was first mentioned in the sixth century, and then it was concidered a forgery by the commenter:

It is first cited by Vigilius Tapsensis, a Latin writer of no credit, in the latter end of the fifth century, and by him it is suspected to have been forged.

Source: en.wikipedia.org...

However, most modern Christian bibles contain this, to me obvious forgery made and incorporated in order to give foundation and "proof" of there being a Trinity. God is One. No point in argueing, it's but one of many forgeries brought forth by the Catholic Church to substanciate their own doctrines. Period.

[edit on 8/4/2010 by Neo Christian Mystic]

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by PhyberDragon

 

Because he was talking to his Angels who helped him

And it does say they all rejoiced at the work God had done.

The problem with this is that angels do not create. There is absolutely no biblical evidence that angels created anything at all.

Isaiah 44:24
"Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer, and the one who formed you from the womb, 'I, the Lord, am the maker of all things, Stretching out the heavens by Myself, And spreading out the earth all alone.'"

So clearly God made all things alone. Therefore, the "us" in "Let Us make man in our image" cannot be the angels. People are not created in the image of angels, but of God.