It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Created in "His Image" - the meaning of this and what we can take from it

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 06:23 PM
link   
I have heard this term very often while growing up and also often in various discussions (even News programs) and I'm wondering what other people really think this means and if it means something different to different people, or if it is pretty cut and dry as to what is meant by this.

What really got me thinking about this years ago was when I was working in IT and I would have to create a "master image" of a computer system and then that image would be copied over to each piece of hardware (laptop, desktop, etc). When making the original master image, I would have to make all the universal customized settings except for something like the computer name - that would be done after the install, because it allowed the staff to tell the identical machines apart (and give them different privileges, like some were in the accounting group, or R&D, or manufacturing). Oddly enough the common term is "using the master image", which if we were to transpose this to people, that master image would be God's image. So if this is true, that people are built in one image, God's, then everyone starts off basically identical with the exception of sex - and this also happens in IT, but it may be related to the unique peripherals the computer uses (printers, mouse, keyboard, etc) - those are individually installed.

Now as far as the sexes, I suspect that there is something like magnetism where one sex is "positive" and the other "negative" (and those can be relative to the person what is considered + or -). But each sex, determined by XX, XY will determine their pull of the opposite XX/XY, and a "push" of like XX/XY, so they are supposed to be biologically attracted to the opposite, just like a magnet, and repulsed (sexually for the most part, even possibly in other aspects) by people of the same sex - again just like magnets.


Now once you are born, you are "perfect" in "his image", then you get your name and family and from there you are exposed to worldly influences, some good, some evil, some that God specifically forbids and others that he tries to encourage.

In all Abrahamic religions, "God" forbids marking the body (tattoo's) and many believe piercings (there is debate in some sects, but old school followers use clip on earrings and NO piercings). Some people will even fight like all heck when EMT/docs/nurses request to take blood or give a shot, because it defiles the body and is "against God's law".

Just like a computer, that might have started off with a pristine install from the master image, it can become so corrupt with viruses, malware, damaged operating system (think mental illness as a comparison), hardware problems, etc. This is all due to poor choices of the user or by someone else "attacking" the system externally (like a hacker - think of these as demons in human terms).

When I listen to people talk about homosexuality, it is clear in all Abrahamic texts that it is strictly forbidden (if the original sources are used, not "new age - feel good re-interpretations") and I have always wondered if it is something people are born with, or if it is a result of something in someone's life (physical, psychological, spiritual attack - demon like - the hacker example), possibly happening at an age when the person would just not ever be able to remember (think less than year old, maybe by 2 years old). There is a lot of cases of ritualistic abuse of very young children (from infants to 2yrs old - to just START the process - it often continues for a lifetime). These issues are suppressed and the person suffering may not even know they happened, so to them the would honestly think they were "born this way". Maybe whatever is done creates such a dissonance w/n the person that they turn their back on their natural programming (possibly b/c they feel neglected, unprotected, unloved by God, etc) so they pursue a life that has been considered an abomination for millennia.

I know people who if they even look at certain foods on TV they will gag or even throw up (cream of wheat has done that to some people) b/c of their very early life experiences (1yr to 2yr old). Maybe there was "something" mixed in with it that the child KNEW was bad, and their subconscious remembers this, the taste, etc later on in life, and they have this reaction. I think this very same thing could translate to sexuality but I don't know how, what the triggers would be, and I dont' even want that discussed in this thread - if you do, keep it general b/c I don't want any ideas to be put out there.

So my hypothesis is that much of the abnormal likes/dislikes are the product of nurture while the more healthy behaviors are a product of nature, as they were programmed in "God's image". These learned abnormalities may not even seem that unnatural b/c so many others do this, and that is b/c people are falling away from God and what he designed for us, IMHO. IDK if this is exactly the way it is or how it works, but I feel that these arguments support what I am saying and it is more difficult for people who have "non-normal" (by percentage of population) behavior to support their actions as natural or normal, b/c by definition, they are not.

On another note, I think the media plays a HUGE role in re-enforcing any of the early childhood trauma that may promote homosexuality or hyper sexuality (straight/gay or bi) as well as promoting defiling of the body with tattoos and piercings among so many other things. I think the saying that "Satan" runs Hollywood is a valid point, even if only as an abstract idea, due to what they promote and push on their shows, movies, music, etc.

What do you all think. Does my explanation make sense at all? Can anyone argue against my points so we can have a healthy discussion?

If I offended anyone in this post, it was not my intention at all, I vtried to handle the topics as carefully as possible, but there is only so much that can be tip-toed around if you really want to get to the heart of the matter.



edit on 1 29 2019 by DigginFoTroof because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 07:06 PM
link   
a reply to: DigginFoTroof
My interpretation of "in his image" is "having a conscious intelligent will, just like God", which is why the immediate follow-up in Genesis is "having dominion" over the rest of the earth.



posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 07:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: DigginFoTroof
My interpretation of "in his image" is "having a conscious intelligent will, just like God", which is why the immediate follow-up in Genesis is "having dominion" over the rest of the earth.



I agree with that, that would be part of the "original install", the intelligence is built in from the "master/God" image.

Another way to look at this is like a blueprint for a house. Let's say that they make 100,000 identical houses but leave things like carpet, cabinet color, fireplace mantle, light fixtures and other things that "customize" the house to make it unique. Now all houses have the same foundation, footing, wiring, circuit breaker (both unit and location), phone/cable connections, etc.

Someone could come in and go against the HOA and paint the outside bubblegum/hot pink and electric blue, and that would get them in trouble with the HOA ("god" in this case) and they may plant bamboo as a fence (where it isn't allowed). The standard do's and don'ts are laid out by the HOA just the same as it is done in historic religious texts by "god".

I just don't think there is enough information to say that certain things are "natural" and we are "born this way". It is more likely that they were "made that way", most likely not by their choosing.



posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 08:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: DigginFoTroof
My interpretation of "in his image" is "having a conscious intelligent will, just like God", which is why the immediate follow-up in Genesis is "having dominion" over the rest of the earth.



Are you a supporter of abortion? Because if "in his image" means having a conscious intelligent will, then babies in the womb won't qualify.



posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 09:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: KansasGirl

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: DigginFoTroof
My interpretation of "in his image" is "having a conscious intelligent will, just like God", which is why the immediate follow-up in Genesis is "having dominion" over the rest of the earth.



Are you a supporter of abortion? Because if "in his image" means having a conscious intelligent will, then babies in the womb won't qualify.


I'm not sure that this is true. Babies have been proven to react to their mothers voice while in the womb (played through speakers/headphones) as well as various music, especially classical, jazz - instrumental mostly - they sometimes dance in the womb. I would say that this qualifies as consciousness to an extent, more so than many "living" humans that I have known and the unborn have MUCH more potential, that's for sure!


So, does anyone think that my analogy is somewhat accurate and describes what "his image" means? Can anyone think of something more appropriate or better example?



posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 10:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: DigginFoTroof

originally posted by: KansasGirl

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: DigginFoTroof
My interpretation of "in his image" is "having a conscious intelligent will, just like God", which is why the immediate follow-up in Genesis is "having dominion" over the rest of the earth.



Are you a supporter of abortion? Because if "in his image" means having a conscious intelligent will, then babies in the womb won't qualify.


I'm not sure that this is true. Babies have been proven to react to their mothers voice while in the womb (played through speakers/headphones) as well as various music, especially classical, jazz - instrumental mostly - they sometimes dance in the womb. I would say that this qualifies as consciousness to an extent, more so than many "living" humans that I have known and the unborn have MUCH more potential, that's for sure!


So, does anyone think that my analogy is somewhat accurate and describes what "his image" means? Can anyone think of something more appropriate or better example?




Well, then how about at 6 weeks after conception? When it's just the size of the head of a pin? Is there a conscious intelligent will then? If one answers no, then you can't have much of a problem with abortion, since "in His image" means to have an intelligent conscious will.

That's an argument I've seen used before anyway, about the "in his image" being intelligence/consciousness etc. It's not a terrible point, but it's has holes too.

I don't think we know what "in his image" means. Is it our bodily form plus our emotions and plus our decision-making abilities and capability to reason plus our intelligence plus our souls? Is it the soul- is THAT the "in His image" part? I don't think we know.

What analogy are you asking about, exactly? I'm not sure I see a simple analogy in your post. Could you state it in one or two sentences?



posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 11:44 PM
link   
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

It's funny how the people who are the most outspoken against homosexuality turn out to be one in the end.

And it's funny how the people who are most obsessed with immoral behavior are the very ones who are the most immoral.

You have to pay very close attention to what bothers you. Oh, what the hell. Never mind. Just go on hating whatever it is you hate.



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 12:33 AM
link   
Wow, a little projection in your post? I'm only talking about the way I see things, what makes sense to me (and many others). You can go ahead and believe what other people tell you they feel (just like some people claim they remember back to their birth - coming out of mommies body...) but I tend to follow reason.

Can you show me where I was hating, outspoken or any of the other things you accuse me of? You have a track record of slandering people on this board and making totally false and unsupported statements at the detriment of others.

I guess maybe what you said in your post is true, then you would be the most hateful and homophobic of them all. I never brought any of that up.



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 01:03 AM
link   
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

1 John 1:5 "God is Light, in him there is no darkness."

1 John 4:8 & 4:16. "God is Love."

You were created in his image. In the image of Love/Light you were created. Created to Love and to be Loved. To be light and follow the path of light/love.



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 02:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: KansasGirl
Are you a supporter of abortion? Because if "in his image" means having a conscious intelligent will, then babies in the womb won't qualify.

No, and I'm not a supporter of euthanasia for the insane or the victims of Alzheimers, which would follow from the same argument.
They would qualify as members of the species "made in his image".



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 06:49 AM
link   
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

Your analogy is similar to that of a primary key in relational databases. In that it is the starting source or point from which all else is derived, sorted and/or categorised etc...

That line in scripture…"God created Man in His own image"…Means that God has an actual image (in “His" conceptual Mind), of Himself…that he wishes to portray or project…through Man.

And to take it one step further it also means imo, that God the Father is Spirit and that Spirit resides in all of us…it’s the Spirit which gives us Life…

Each of Our individual human experiences is our Soul; the Soul being the lower aspect of the Spirit i.e. The Soul is us…the Son i.e. who we currently are in this life experience.

- JC



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 08:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: DigginFoTroof
So, does anyone think that my analogy is somewhat accurate and describes what "his image" means? Can anyone think of something more appropriate or better example?

His image of a perfect meat robot. The creation that would best house functionally the tiny spiritual aspects of Itself it split off (to experience Itself). Those would include reticulated limbs/opposable thumbs and a mind that functioned as a physical processor. That seems to be Its best image so far.

edit on 30-1-2019 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 08:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Joecroft

There you are.



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 08:39 PM
link   

I see the semblance in this image of him mooning us lesser beings.


edit on 30-1-2019 by Specimen because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2019 @ 09:27 PM
link   
i was born catholic but not practicing all my life. to be created in his image, ..... i sometimes wonder if revelations was an origin story. i woke up in a hospital with a scar on inside of right wrist and a massive head injury. a little while later i acquired an empire. i have wonders of my own as to what this is supposed to mean.

i had a stroke with the right side of my body paralyzed, i wonder if things like this happened a lot back then. scarlet woman atop ten headed beast? 1.....0.....numerology? a program that was written from when the system or concept was born? i have avoided reading the bible cause of some personal reservations about it.

edit*** i have had problems with social skills by being left behind and disabled. mostly with women, marriage is a cornerstone of christianity, treat others how you wish to be treated, dont sin. jesus wanted Mary Magdaline to sit at the table with the men which was unheard of. christianity has been used to give rights to women and equality for all as motivation.
edit on 30-1-2019 by SepirothPhoenix because: forgot something



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 11:37 AM
link   
a reply to: DigginFoTroof


What do you all think. Does my explanation make sense at all? Can anyone argue against my points so we can have a healthy discussion?

In the 1st century Nazarene perspective before their slaughter by the Roman, the doctrine of the Apostles of Jesus taught that God was total invisible Spirit. God then brought forth, from His Spirit, celestial visibility in a substance known as His “Word”.

It was the “Word” which created all visibility and substance in the celestial realm including the heavenly host. In this understanding as the “Word” became visible substance it acquired its image as the Spirit desired. This was before the creation of this universe.

We then can understand the doctrine of the Apostle John as he declares ------------
John 1:1-3
(1) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
(2) The same was in the beginning with God.
(3) All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

We were then taught that the “Word” created a space of substance of unknown matter within the heavenly realm which we understand as our universe. This universe is actually a void of visibility contained within the heavenly realm. The act of our visible creation can now be understood through the Genesis account with the understanding that throughout this creation all visibility and invisibility was pure and good. At this time evil was not created nor had it ever existed.

As man was formed from the purity of that which had been created, man was pure as he was formed and placed into the celestial garden. Man was a light bearing creation of celestial substance. He had no flaw whatsoever in his substance or mind and bore both the image of the “Word” [God] and the likeness of the Spirit [God].

As man then sinned against his Creators perfect will, the earth was cursed. Here is where most people are not taught the doctrine of the Apostles. The entire universe was filled with earthy creations. All visibility within this universe was of earthy substance and when the earth was cursed that meant that all creation became cursed. Beasts, humans, fowl, fish, and all matter including this universe must die. This universe and all within it is formed from the creation of the primary substance of earth.

When the earth was cursed and man became corrupt is when man was cast from the celestial realm into the earthy realm. This changed man from a pure celestial substance into a corrupt terrestrial [earthy] substance. Man’s substance changed although he still bore the image that he was first formed, he did not remain pure in substance or mentality. He lost his coats of purity [light] and acquired coats of earthy skin as well as his substance changed from life to death. Nevertheless his image remained as he was first formed and he then procreated from corruption but still retained the likeness of the Spirit of life.

My understanding of course



posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: vethumanbeing



Originally posted by vethumanbeing
There you are.


Whoa!!!…I feel like rolling out the red Carpet for your return...(For your 007 Movie Premiere)

Yes…there I am indeed…I get around you know…but I aint no square lol…unless I’m on the Chessboard…


Nice to see you back…I thought you had left this site for good... for other avenues and adventures and stuff. I even lit a candle in remembrance lol…just out of respect and admiration of course…nothing morbid or anything; it was a family show after all…



Originally posted by vethumanbeing
His image of a perfect meat robot.





You mean…God meat Robot or Robot meet God lol

Just got my hands on some French Rosicrucian documents and they write Rose Cross with an f type symbol… like this…



It kinda looks like Croft without the T…how freaky is that


Anyway…Great to see you back…

- JC



posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 01:40 PM
link   
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

The present image that is appearing is the image that every concept is created in.

Notice that a tv screen has an image on it and in that image it seems as if there are many separate things moving on the tv screen..... it is one image.

This image of light that is ever presently presenting itself is the image of God...... God is expressing and knowing himself timelessly.

edit on 1-2-2019 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 01:48 PM
link   
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

I have always believed it refers to the "Soul" created in His image. As in "I knew you before you were born".



posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 04:42 PM
link   
Male sometimes refers to our spiritual nature whereas female our earthly nature. So "God created man in his own image" suggests that our spirituality (aka soul) has properties of Creator. Allowing us to commune with our Creator through our soul.

Likewise in Christianity I believe that when Jesus said, "no one can know the Father except the Son". Jesus was referring to himself as the son of man. So "Son" was not referring to himself, but the soul of man. That we can only commune with our Creator through our soul.

Unfortunately our earthly nature (Eve aka ego) seeks earthly desires (apple) that blocks our soul from communicating with the Creator. Most major religions have different methods to help us traverse through the gates that are blocked by earthly desires so we can again commune with the Creator. In Jewish Kabbalah the gates are known as the ten sefirot of Atzilut. In Hinduism the gates are known as Chakras. etc.




top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join