What is the express image of God?
- Thread starter keypurr
- Start date
keypurr
Well-known member
What is the express image of God?
I can say believing that Christ is the word in John 1 is logical. Notice I said Christ, not Jesus.
I can say believing that Christ is the word in John 1 is logical. Notice I said Christ, not Jesus.
keypurr
Well-known member
Hmmm, it seems my post concerning Amnos and Arnion has been deleted.
Edit: I see now there was a database corruption and a backup file restored.
I will remove the angry mob emoticon smiley from my comments.
The truth can no longer be hidden in the closet.
Philippians 2:5-11 New International Version (NIV)
5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:
6 Who, being in very nature[a] God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.
5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:
6 Who, being in very nature[a] God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.
keypurr
Well-known member
BR, if you compare with other translation you come up with a different view. NASB, NRSV do not seem to agree with the NIV. It is interesting to compare how folks translate from the Greek.
God speaking thru' Isaiah says
"As I live saith the Lord every knee shall bow and every tongue will confess Me"
It was Christ speaking...Christ spoke thru' all the prophets
"As I live saith the Lord every knee shall bow and every tongue will confess Me"
It was Christ speaking...Christ spoke thru' all the prophets
I can go with the NASB too The view is not different. The way you interpret it is.
Philippians 2:5-11 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus,
6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped,
7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.
8 Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
9 For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name,
10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
keypurr
Well-known member
I believe this version is more accurate than the NIV or KJV.
Notice the word "in" in verse 5. It was what was in Jesus that was a form of God. A spirit my friend. As I have been trying to show you.
And what does the phrase "Jesus Christ is Lord" mean?
keypurr
Well-known member
keypurr
Well-known member
Brother BR, I sincerely believe in the words I post. God has blessed me with some secrets that have been hidden for 2000 years. It is never my intention to deceive folks with a false doctrine. God created his son in a spirit form and that son God used to make everything else.
OCTOBER23
New member
KEYPURR said,
God created his son in a spirit form
and that son, God used, to make everything else.
-------------------------------------------------------
:rotfl:hahahahahahaa:rotfl:
:rotfl:hahahahahahaa:rotfl:
:rotfl:hahahahahahaa:rotfl:
:rotfl:hahahahahahaa:rotfl:
:rotfl::rotfl:
God created his son in a spirit form
and that son, God used, to make everything else.
-------------------------------------------------------
:rotfl:hahahahahahaa:rotfl:
:rotfl:hahahahahahaa:rotfl:
:rotfl:hahahahahahaa:rotfl:
:rotfl:hahahahahahaa:rotfl:
:rotfl::rotfl:
keypurr
Well-known member
Jesus came into existence when he was born to Mary.
Christ is an image, so he is a creation. That means there was a time when he did not exist also.
Christ spoke through Jesus, Christ existed before the world was made. Jesus did not.
keypurr
Well-known member
Is truth to much for you to handle friend?
Heb 1:1 Long ago God spoke to our ancestors in many and various ways by the prophets,
Heb 1:2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom he also created the worlds.
Heb 1:3 He is the reflection of God's glory and the exact imprint of God's very being, and he sustains all things by his powerful word. When he had made purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,
Heb 1:4 having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs.
Heb 1:5 For to which of the angels did God ever say, "You are my Son; today I have begotten you"? Or again, "I will be his Father, and he will be my Son"?
Heb 1:6 And again, when he brings the firstborn into the world, he says, "Let all God's angels worship him."
Heb 1:7 Of the angels he says, "He makes his angels winds, and his servants flames of fire."
Heb 1:8 But of the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, and the righteous scepter is the scepter of your kingdom.
Heb 1:9 You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions."
Define if you can October23.
Start by telling us what the express image of God would be?
Keep in mind that Jesus said his Father is a spirit.
keypurr, Jesus IS the Christ. Jesus IS Christ. Our Lord AND Savior
John 1:1-3 KJV -
Colossians 1:15 KJV - Who IS the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature -
Colossians 1:16 KJV - For by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by Him and for Him:
Colossians 1:17 KJV - And He is before all things, and by Him all things consist.
Colossians 1:18 KJV - And He IS the head of the body, the Church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things He might have the preeminence. -
Jesus existed before He was born, but He had not yet been named (though His name was to be since the time when He was in His mother's womb.
No, Christ is not an image Biblically. That is some other idea that is not Biblical.
The Bible says nowhere (or rather it does not say anywhere) that there was some "Christ" that spoke through Jesus.
Ben Masada
New member
What is the express image of God?
He does not have one and here it is why:
PERSONIFICATION OF ATTRIBUTES - GENESIS 1:26
"Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. Let them have dominion over... the whole earth."
The above passage of Genesis has been for years the trump card in the hands of Trinitarians to drop at the right time in the assumed thought that it will guarantee them to clean up the table, so to speak. Well, let them think again, because I have news. It's no longer that easy.
Elohim is incorporeal, and incorporeality reflects no image. But then again, how to harmonize the use of the pronouns in the plural form? The attributes of God, which are part of His essence, were impersonately involved in the formation of man.
Bear in mind that only in the creation of man was the statement issued: To make man in God's image. Since God has no visible image, and man does, it's only obvious that man's image would be according to God's attributes. Therefore, His attributes in a relative portion, were the active agent in the formation of man.
Now, it's imperative to focus on the pronouns used by the sacred writer, since the pronouns are anyways what Trinitarians use to think they have made their day. "Let US make MAN in OUR image and likeness. And let THEM have dominion over everything on earth."
Now, focus on the word MAN. It is in the singular form. Nevertheless, the purpose is for THEM to dominate the earth. If THEM were a reference to man, a clarification would be in order to explain the discrepancy in the Grammar. I mean, that it would be a reference to all men. This lack of clarification was not a lapse of the author, but intentional will to direct our minds to the attributes of God, which took part in the formation of man.
It's interesting and just convenient for Trinitarians to rapidly refer "us" and "our" to God Himself and hide any word of explanation on the plural pronoun "them," which could not be a reference to man. I hope they do not do this on purpose because it would be spiritual cruelty to hide the truth.
I hope we have settled this issue. Since "them" is not a reference to man but to the attributes of God, it's only obvious that "us" and "our" are not references to God Himself but to His attributes. Therefore, the Creator of the Universe is He Who has dominion over the whole of the Universe through man by way of His attributes.
Conclusion:
It's more than obvious that Israel could not uphold the banner of absolute Monotheism in God, and start the Scriptures with statements of plurality in God. The whole issue therefore, was personification of attributes.
Ben
He does not have one and here it is why:
PERSONIFICATION OF ATTRIBUTES - GENESIS 1:26
"Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. Let them have dominion over... the whole earth."
The above passage of Genesis has been for years the trump card in the hands of Trinitarians to drop at the right time in the assumed thought that it will guarantee them to clean up the table, so to speak. Well, let them think again, because I have news. It's no longer that easy.
Elohim is incorporeal, and incorporeality reflects no image. But then again, how to harmonize the use of the pronouns in the plural form? The attributes of God, which are part of His essence, were impersonately involved in the formation of man.
Bear in mind that only in the creation of man was the statement issued: To make man in God's image. Since God has no visible image, and man does, it's only obvious that man's image would be according to God's attributes. Therefore, His attributes in a relative portion, were the active agent in the formation of man.
Now, it's imperative to focus on the pronouns used by the sacred writer, since the pronouns are anyways what Trinitarians use to think they have made their day. "Let US make MAN in OUR image and likeness. And let THEM have dominion over everything on earth."
Now, focus on the word MAN. It is in the singular form. Nevertheless, the purpose is for THEM to dominate the earth. If THEM were a reference to man, a clarification would be in order to explain the discrepancy in the Grammar. I mean, that it would be a reference to all men. This lack of clarification was not a lapse of the author, but intentional will to direct our minds to the attributes of God, which took part in the formation of man.
It's interesting and just convenient for Trinitarians to rapidly refer "us" and "our" to God Himself and hide any word of explanation on the plural pronoun "them," which could not be a reference to man. I hope they do not do this on purpose because it would be spiritual cruelty to hide the truth.
I hope we have settled this issue. Since "them" is not a reference to man but to the attributes of God, it's only obvious that "us" and "our" are not references to God Himself but to His attributes. Therefore, the Creator of the Universe is He Who has dominion over the whole of the Universe through man by way of His attributes.
Conclusion:
It's more than obvious that Israel could not uphold the banner of absolute Monotheism in God, and start the Scriptures with statements of plurality in God. The whole issue therefore, was personification of attributes.
Ben
The reference is to Hebrews 1:3 in the KJV, not Genesis 1:26, but to address your post, 'ĕlôhıym describes God in the plural sense, and as such making man in OUR image as God said, was to make man a tripartite being, just as God is.
Nobody asserts that God in Genesis is a corporeal being, only that He IS a triune being.
Hope this helps?
Here is a problem: Yeshua never speaks of anyone physically seeing him, (which would mean his physical vessel) but rather that, "If you have seen me you have seen the Father." Anyone he would have said this to in that day and age would have immediately known that he was not speaking of ocular-visual "seeing" with the physical eyes of the flesh, (because everyone plainly knew that the Father is non-corporeal Spirit). Thus the image which Paul speaks of is also not speaking of an image that can be seen by carnal man with his physical eyes. That born of flesh is flesh and that born of Spirit is spirit. However I have a question and you seem like you would probably know the answer. Is Elohim a proper name or not? And if it is not a proper name then why is there now no definite article employed with it anywhere in the Genesis creation account? and why should it be rendered the way in which every translator renders it into English beginning with King Jimmy and his court? If it is not a proper name then shouldn't it simply be rendered god or gods? Is it not true that proper names in the Hebrew language do not use the definite article? And if they do not, and yet Elohim is not a proper name, it seems a rather large problem because that is how everyone is typically using it these days whenever they say "God".
When the Most High raises His right hand and swears by Himself, (because there is none higher) He "sevens" Himself, for that is the meaning of to foreswear oneself or the taking of an oath, "seven times" like Beersheva, as you probably know, (#7650 shaba`, "to seven oneself"). Perhaps the Seven Spirits before the throne are one and the same Son? Perhaps indeed in the beginning the Elohim cut down-create the Shamayim and the Erets. :chuckle: