What does in God’s image mean? He created Adam & Eve without a moral sense.

Hello everyone.

Please make sure your posts are directed towards the subject matter- not fellow members. Also, if you feel there is an off topic post, please alert it right away instead of responding. That way we can keep right on track and stick to the topic instead of making things personal.

Thank you and happy posting.

The story of Adam and Eve is actually a jewish folktale, it is not real, the story was made up, really, i have read the story a million times and there are many inconsistencies, and the main idea that a woman brought this world into sin, and also that god created the man before a woman, that is no logical. The story makes women the afterthought, but then human creation needs women at the pinnacle.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

The Arminianists call me a Calvinist and the Calvinists call me an Arminianist. I told him in another thread he can call me a Calvinistic Arminianist or an Arminianistic Calvinist and that he can even take his pick as to which one

I heard you the first time you said this but as far as I know no one is calling you that, for one reason that would presuppose that you were actually a member in good standing to one of those organizations. I don't think there is a church out there calling itself the Church of Antinomianism. Also as far as I know there is not a Church of Calvinism. Also there is not a Church of Dispensationalism.
What I was saying was that in different theological systems, there are extreme views that even the majority within that system do not accept. What I am warning against is this apparent desire to go to these different systems for the very purpose of extracting the most offensive aspects, then transmitting this conglomerate by way of a forum post, then saying "this is merely mainstream, orthodox Christianity". Where people not that familiar with the different varieties of theologies and doctrines within Christianity may accept that statement without question, and based on that post, decide to reject Christianity as a possible option for a spirituality system for adoption for personal use. All the while not realizing that real mainstream Christians would not consider adopting those doctrines themselves.

The quote you are referring to in the bible reads "let us make man in our image and likeness." The key words here are us and our. These are plural which shows and proves that there were a group of people(men) who were considered God(s). Otherwise, God would have described himself in singular form and would have said let me make man in my image. Adam and Eve don't represent the beginning of human life, but the beginning of the type of people of their kind that came from the people who already existed. The image of God that the bible refers to is the form of man(physically) and the likeness represents the nature of man. Yet if you've read the bible you know they could not keep up with the likeness which is why they were banished to the caves of Western Asia(Europe) as the book of Enoch explains. We must dig deeper than what is face value. Peace.

here are a few clues

By faith he left Egypt, not fearing the king’s anger; he persevered because he saw him who is invisible.
Hebrews11

Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him
Colossians1

Originally posted by Redevilfan09
God was an alien and made us the way he looked. Or he war a human, had intercourse with himself and presto, Adam was created. I believe the E.T part.

It was more like mixing their DNA with that of a creature already here on the planet, the "stamp of the Gods," this has been called. 18 different species offered their DNA in a grand experiment. I think they wished to see how we would turn out, whether we would take care of our planet and keep it clean, practice birth control, build in harmony, love each other, and practice equality......or, would we turn out to be bloodthirsty barbarians who destroyed the planet and everything in it, pumped out it's blood to run their cars, dug holes in the ground to power their cities.

How have we turned out, folks?
Would YOU be pleased with the results?

Originally posted by TheBlackManIsGod7
The quote you are referring to in the bible reads "let us make man in our image and likeness." The key words here are us and our. These are plural which shows and proves that there were a group of people(men) who were considered God(s). Otherwise, God would have described himself in singular form and would have said let me make man in my image. Adam and Eve don't represent the beginning of human life, but the beginning of the type of people of their kind that came from the people who already existed. The image of God that the bible refers to is the form of man(physically) and the likeness represents the nature of man. Yet if you've read the bible you know they could not keep up with the likeness which is why they were banished to the caves of Western Asia(Europe) as the book of Enoch explains. We must dig deeper than what is face value. Peace.

Elohyim is a plural noun and always used in a singular context. Every time it's seen in the OT it's technically a grammatical error.

One God who exists in 3 persons.

reply to post by jmdewey60

I heard you the first time you said this but as far as I know no one is calling you that, for one reason that would presuppose that you were actually a member in good standing to one of those organizations.

Calvinism and Arminianism aren't organizations, they are theologies. And in fact John Calvin had nothing to do with 5 pt Calvinism, that was invented by 2nd generation Calvinists in rebuttal to the 5 pts of Arminianism. And James Arminius had nothing to do with 5 pt Arminianism, he didn't agree that a person could lose their salvation. It was adopted after he died. And you called me a "Calvinist" in another thread, that's why I said that. And I didn't say it was people here on ATS that do this, I'm a member of several forums.

The Arminianists all call me a Calvinist, and all the Calvinists call me an Arminianist. Go figure. When one considers the implication of Einstein's general theory of Relativity they see that both predestination and free will are both Biblical doctrines. It depends if one is viewing it from outside or inside the space-time dimension or not.

I said this in the other thread and I'll say it again. "The river of truth flows between the banks of two extremes."

I reject BOTH T.U.L.I.P doctrine from the Calvinists and 5 pt doctrine from the Arminianists. However you must understand there is a difference between Calvinism and "Hyper-Calvinists" as well. Charles H. Spurgen was once asked how he reconciled the differences between Calvinism and Arminianism and his reply was:

"I see no need to reconcile friends."

reply to post by Greatest I am


GOD's image means:

- our physical body is part of GOD's creation

- our soul is part of GOD

reply to post by NOTurTypical

And you called me a "Calvinist" in another thread, that's why I said that. And I didn't say it was people here on ATS that do this, I'm a member of several forums.

What I remember saying "on that other thread" was me asking you if you were a Calvinist now, and what I was referring to was your description of your belief in what amounts to predestination. So I meant "Calvinist" as a shorthand for someone who teaches a concept of predestination, and would not ever imagine you actually being a Calvinist, because that would include the idea that you actually understand what you are saying. What I have to imagine is that one way or another, what you demand from your religion is salvation while keeping up an ungodly lifestyle and behaving in a mean and insensitive (and to the point of being hateful) manner. There are a couple ways to do that, one being that the law does not apply to them, including the law to love one another (that would be "works" to your way of thinking). The second way to accomplish the goal of gaining the feeling of complacency regarding the assurance of your own salvation is to believe that salvation is determined arbitrarily and outside of your control or any input on your own part, that all you need to do is provide evidence for your own satisfaction, by the mere desire to be saved, and if in the quest for that salvation, the thought of Jesus crosses your mind, then that proves that you have been pre-selected for salvation, and you are now free to continue on in an unconverted fashion (for example: blaspheming the name of God, and throwing curses on everyone you come across who does not submit to your intellectual superiority).

The Spurgeon quote is “No, I never reconcile friends.”

reply to post by jmdewey60


I'm not addressing any of that other nonsense for it is lies and slander. I've repeatedly claimed otherwise, and you refuse to recant your slander. Another refutation would be a waste of my time.

And I hope you realize Spurgeon made that quip about reconciling friends NUMEROUS times, there are many variations of the exact same truth.

CHS, like myself, also taught that man was predetermined to salvation on one hand, yet taught all men to accept the gospel on their own free will and "Look to the cross!" It all depends on who is looking at the salvation of man, from God's perspective He predetermines our justification in His Son, and from our perspective we choose of our own God-given free will. It's an issue of time being a physical property. Einstein's general theory of relativity is a fact. It's been proven 14 different ways to 19 decimal places.

It's a fact of Physics. No sane person can legitimately argue with it. Calvinists are correct in regards to this and Arminianists are also correct in regards to this. There are NOT two contradictory pile of Bible verses, but one Bible. Christians and theologians have argued this for centuries because Einstein didn't discover the nature of time until the 20th century. It's absurd after Einstein for Christians to argue this.

Here is another personal favorite:

"I would propose that the subject of the ministry of this house, as long as this platform shall stand, and as long as this house shall be frequented by worshippers, shall be the person of Jesus Christ. I am NEVER ashamed to avow myself a CALVINIST... I do not hesitate to take the name of BAPTIST....... But if I am asked to say what is my creed, I think I must reply--- "It is Jesus Christ!"

Charles Haddon Spurgeon, "C.H. Spurgeon's Autobiography" volume 1, page 172.


Now, CHS wouldn't say that today because TULIP doctrine wasn't a theology of John Calvin, it was made up by 2nd generation Calvinists in response to followers of Jacobus Arminuis, not Arminius himself, but after he died.


And on the sufficiency of Jesus Christ CHS says this, and I agree:


"There is nothing for God to do. 'It is finished!' There is nothing for you to do. 'It is finished!' Christ need not bleed. 'It is finished!' You need not weep. 'It is finished!' God the Holy Spirit need not delay because of your unworthiness, nor need you delay because of your helplessness. 'It is finished!'

CHS, "The Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit" volume 7, page 592


And likewise:


"He died for our sins, and..... He was raised again for our justification; that is, for our clearance. As the cross PAID THE DEBT, resurrection TOOK THE BOND, and rent it in pieces; and now there is NOTHING standing in the records of eternity against ANY SOUL that believes in the Lord Jesus Christ. His rising from the dead has made us CLEAR from EVERY CHARGE. "Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemeth? It is Christ that died, yes, rather, that is risen again." that rising again has CLEARED US from ALL THE SINS that can EVER be laid to OUR charge."

CHS, "The Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit", volume XLIII, page 248


Is Spurgeon my "cult leader" now since I've quoted him numerous times? And I've sat here researching and typing this out, for over an hour for this post, had Spurgeon lived today I would have linked 3 of his youtube videos because it's MUCH EASIER TO DO!!!! But alas, all I have are written works of this great man of God with which to draw from.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

I've repeatedly claimed otherwise, and you refuse to recant your slander. Another refutation would be a waste of my time.

OK, if that is so, can you at least provide a link?
Do you remember saying anything other than, "No, I did not say that"?
What I remember you saying is that there is nothing required to be saved.
Apparently there must be something, so you put it in a category called "by Jesus".
What you have said is that salvation is a "gift" and so there is nothing that can be done.
I have to assume that you have to believe, and the Bible tells us that the work that God desires from us is to believe, so you must then hold a doctrine of salvation by works, since believing is a work.
It may be that you have seen this flaw, since I have already pointed this out to you, so you decided to counteract it by adopting predestination to where there really isn't any requirement whatsoever and it is completely out of your hands and the only thing left is to feel satisfied that you can do whatever you want and you will be saved because God has given you the sign of your guaranteed salvation because you at one time felt "drawn" to Jesus, which according to you, can only happen if you are already predestined to be saved.

reply to post by jmdewey60

OK, if that is so, can you at least provide a link?
Do you remember saying anything other than, "No, I did not say that"?

This is stupid, how can I provide a link to me not saying something?? I've repeatedly however, asked you to link for us all to where I actually said these things you claimed I did say. And you won't do it. You're trying to shift the burden of proof to me to prove a negative.

I have a statement of faith on my profile for this very reason specifically. You can refer to it at any time you please, it's there for you because you make something new up virtually every time you slander and lie about me.

Refer to it often, anytime you wish to tell anyone what I believe and teach, you have my permission to copy/paste it in any thread. My beliefs are on public display at all times.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

I've repeatedly however, asked you to link for us all to where I actually said these things you claimed I did say. And you won't do it.

I have posted links before, to your earlier posts and you ignore them when confronted with your own words.

It doesn't say our grace from God is a gift, that goes without mention because grace means unmerited favor. If grace was based at all on merit it would no longer be grace.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

. . . I know I am saved by my faith and testimony because the Word says I can know
that I am saved by my faith and testimony . . .

www.abovetopsecret.com...

There are none. That's precisely what a free gift of grace is. Unmerited favor from God, gift means a gift. Do your relatives or children have to merit gifts from you? No they don't. Look up the definition of Grace. Not only "can" we sin, but we DO sin, we're sinners.
. . . that salvation is by God's grace, that Christ says He will never cast out a anyone who calls upon His name, that we are saved by faith alone, by grace alone.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I have the same gifted righteousness of the apostles, Jesus's righteousness. I'll declare His righteousness when I am judged.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

This covenant was unconditional and everlasting.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I said God's grace is free. That's what grace means, unmerited favor. The implication you made is conditions we have to meet for God's grace. Which is none. The minute we have to meet a condition it is no longer unmerited favor.

Here I asked if repentance is necessary.

That happens after faith. That's the "regeneration of our minds" Paul speaks of, that's a process of Sanctification, not Justification.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Cool, now that they are all here for everyone else to view, show where what I said then contradicts what I have on my profile for my statement of faith.

Here I asked if repentance is necessary.

And what does "Metakoi" mean in Greek?

reply to post by NOTurTypical

show where what I said then contradicts what I have on my profile for my statement of faith.

I have no idea what it says on your profile and never commented on that, seeing it as being irrelevant to what you write in your posts.

reply to post by jmdewey60


Alright, don't really see the point of posting all my quotes, I still agree with everything I previously said you posted. What you said above when you slandered me doesn't match any of that. That's a straw man argument. If you want to address what I say, then do it with what I actually say.

What does "Metakoi" mean in Greek?