Genesis 2:7 Explains Why Functional Information Exists In Biology

[Ps82]

JudgeRightly ...

Hello friend Nice to hear from you: Na Na NUH Na Na
Just kidding.

 

[VladtheDestroyer]

• I'm trying to introduce the concept that an invisible spiritual living God could create a living image to represent HIMSELF within our world.

The reason why you are having trouble introducing this concept is because it doesn't work. It isn't really possible to build a framework based on "Image" for understanding the plurality of God that is actually consistent with what the Bible teaches, because sometimes He is called the invisible God. Yet when men sometimes see angels in the Bible, they fall down and worship them and then then angel has to tell them, "Don't worship me, I am not God".

Also, "image" does not always even mean the same thing throughout the Bible. When Romans 10 talks about us being conformed to Jesus's image, it isn't saying we need to try to look more like Him or wear a disguise that looks like His image. It is talking about something more than just a visual image. So when God is called "Elohim" from the very beginning of the Bible, it isn't because God had different hats he could put on, to change his visual appearance. It is because Jesus, the Alpha and Omega, is Elohim. A part of that of eternal plurality from the beginning. Which is why when the NT was written, they quoted scriptures from the OT that call God Elohim and applied them to Jesus.

• 
  
• If HE could do such a thing for Adam #1, then we know HE could do the same for HIMSELF. And his image/his presence

Image and presence are not interchangeable terms. You are only adding one confusion on top of another.

If we were to replace every occurrence of image with "presence" in the Bible, it would only further show that the concept you have been trying introduce is incoherent.

You would have a much better understanding of God if you simply believed what the Bible says.

 

[VladtheDestroyer]

Yes, God gives of his spiritual nature and of life in measures. God created mankind male female. I believe that this was their first measure of life. God did not loose any part of himself to do so ... because... all things consist of God and are in God. He is merely able to allocate it to created things/beings existing within him.

Mmmm, no. Ultimately it was God's self-sacrifice that saved us.

Yes, and our Lord Jesus was the WORD of God, who was with God and was God as stated by the writer of John 1:1-2

Yeah but you just said God cannot lose any part of Himself. But, Jesus sacrificed his life. How can one do that without losing a part of oneself?

Again, your idea that Jesus was just a doppelganger, or a created image God wore like a disguise, doesn't work.

Hebrews 11:3 KJV also helps: Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the WORD of God (spirit)Gen 1 - Gen. 2), so (that) things which are seen (in a more heavenly realm) were not made of things which do (now) appear.
IOW, the current cursed elements (of now)were not used to form the heavenly realm. Then the curse came (in Gen. 2-3) under which we are subjected till now. IOW, Every element that existed before the curse was perfect.

I am not trying to pick on you. But Hebrews does not support your made up creation account of Jesus Christ.

The Bible is not just about God's relationship with man. It is also about God's relationship with the Son. Your ideology (if you would call it that) is dismissive of that relationship.

But that relationship is one of the greatest things about Jesus. Because the most important thing that He wanted to show us was that, not only does He love us, but He also loves the Father. And His obedience to the Father is the evidence of that. And each one of us that turns to Him will be a living testimony of these things, forever. That is so cool.

 

[VladtheDestroyer]

Just to see what would happen, I entered the following question into this new Copilot A.I. chat prompt that's on Windows 11 now;

Q: Is there a debate going on between VladtheDestroyer and Ps82 on the webpage I am currently viewing?


A: Yes — there is definitely an active debate between VladtheDestroyer and Ps82 on the page you’re viewing. It’s not just a casual exchange; it’s a sustained, multi‑post theological dispute that becomes increasingly pointed as it progresses.

What’s happening between them​

The thread begins with Vlad’s original post about Genesis 2:7 and functional information in biology. Ps82 responds supportively at first, expanding the theological interpretation. But very quickly, the two diverge sharply:

Clear signs of debate​

• Vlad challenges Ps82’s interpretations of God’s “image,” accusing him of adding words to Scripture and overemphasizing visual manifestation — e.g., Vlad says Ps82 “added ‘God the Spirit with his presence’ to Paul’s words” .
• Ps82 defends his interpretive method, insisting Scripture “interprets itself” and that his additions are explanatory, not distortions — e.g., Ps82 says “Because I understood scripture reveals itself” .
• Vlad directly rejects Ps82’s theology, especially the idea that Jesus is a created image — “Jesus isn’t a created image. He is the one who created all things.” .
• Ps82 continues elaborating his multi‑stage metaphysics, which Vlad repeatedly calls incorrect or irrational — “No, Ps82! This is still wrong!” .
• A third participant (“Right Divider”) even enters to call Ps82’s views “heresy” and question why he’s on a Christian forum — “This is a Christian forum and you're not a Christian… spouting heresy.” . ....

...

COOL! So I asked it a second question:

Q: Which debater contradicts themselves the most?

A: Short answer: Ps82 contradicts himself far more than VladtheDestroyer, and the contradictions are clear, repeated, and structural — not just differences of interpretation.
Below is a precise, section‑anchored breakdown using the content from the page.

Concise takeaway​

Ps82 is the one who contradicts himself the most, because his theological system repeatedly asserts mutually incompatible claims — often within the same post — especially about:

• whether God can “lose” anything
• whether Jesus is a created image
• whether the “image” is God or not
• whether Adam saw God or not
• whether Scripture should be interpreted literally or figuratively
• whether he adds words to Scripture or not

Vlad’s position is consistent: he argues that Jesus is uncreated, that “image” is not a created being, and that Ps82’s additions to Scripture are illegitimate.

Most significant contradictions by Ps82 (with citations)​

1. “God cannot lose any part of Himself” vs. “Jesus sacrificed His life”​

Ps82 explicitly says:

• “God did not loose any part of himself… all things consist of God”
• But later affirms Jesus’ death as God’s sacrifice: “our Lord Jesus… was God… to provide Salvation”

Vlad immediately points out the contradiction:

• “Yeah but you just said God cannot lose any part of Himself. But Jesus sacrificed his life.”

This is a direct logical conflict: If Jesus is God and Jesus died, then God did lose something — contradicting Ps82’s earlier claim.

2. “I do not add words to Scripture” vs. adding words to Scripture​

Ps82 claims:

• “I do base my thoughts on what I see in King James Version of scripture.”
• “scripture interprets itself”

But he literally inserts new words into Colossians 1:17:

• “he (God the Spirit with his presence) is before all things…” (Ps82’s added phrase)

Vlad calls this out:

• “You literally just added ‘God the Spirit with his presence’ to Paul’s words… Why did you do that?”
• “How can scripture be the foundation… if your beliefs depend on the words you add?”

This is a contradiction between Ps82’s stated method and his actual practice.

3. “Jesus is not a created image” vs. describing Jesus as a created image​

Ps82 insists:

• “I did not say our Savior was a created image.”

But repeatedly describes Jesus as appearing in a created image:

• “The IMAGE WAS CREATED… for our Lord Jesus.”
• “Jesus was not the image but was God appearing with IT.” (IT = created image)
• “the created image… was the firstborn of every creature.” (and Jesus appears in it)

This is a contradiction: If Jesus appears in a created image that is “firstborn of every creature,” then Jesus is functionally tied to a created entity — contradicting his claim that Jesus is not created.
Vlad points this out:

• “Jesus isn’t a created image. He is the one who created all things.”

4. “Adam saw God” vs. “Adam did not see God”​

Ps82 claims:

• “Adam saw the form of The LORD God… they heard footsteps… they hid.”

But earlier he says:

• “Before the addition of a living body mankind was a spiritual life only.” (no visual form)

Vlad counters with Scripture:

• “There is no record at all in Genesis of Adam ever seeing God.”

Ps82’s claim contradicts both the text and his own earlier metaphysics.

5. Literal vs. figurative interpretation​

Ps82 says:

• “I take things literally.”

But immediately:

• “I also see things spiritually and figuratively.”

And throughout the thread he switches between literal and figurative without a consistent rule, creating internal contradictions in his method.

Does Vlad contradict himself?​

Vlad’s statements are consistent:

• Jesus is uncreated
• “Image” is not a created being
• God did not create a visual doppelgänger
• Scripture should not be altered
• Adam heard God’s voice, not saw Him

I found no internal contradictions in Vlad’s posts. He challenges Ps82 but does not contradict his own earlier claims.

Final judgment​

Ps82 contradicts himself the most — repeatedly, structurally, and in ways that undermine his own theological framework. Vlad’s position is internally consistent and his criticisms of Ps82’s contradictions are accurate and text‑supported.


*******************

I guess I would agree with about 90% of the above evaluation. I think my point about Adam not seeing God was a bit of an overstatement. Looking back, I think a better point would have been to say that; if Adam did in fact see God, then this was something God didn't think it was important enough to bother mentioning in the Bible.