We aint living some hundred years BC in ancient greece to use antrhopomorphization for the divine
It was about 500 in Persia.
Actually the antrhopomorphization takes place in ancient Greece famous at that time for its pantheistic culture and their gods ,but honestly who cares. My point is that antrhopomorphization here isnt the case
2 Cor 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
God actually made Jesus to be sin for us. He took our sins to the cross and executed us so that we who died to sin should no longer live in sin. This was an actual event that God planned. By our execution with Christ we are freed from our sinful nature, circumcised from the flesh and a new spirit created in us. Sin is still in the flesh and we must deny it daily and put it to death but our spirits are free from it giving us authority and power over it. The Law could not do this and we could not free ourselves from our bondage to sin on our own. What we could not do, God did for us in Christ. Our death and our resurrection is in affect now, new creations in Christ Jesus. An instantaneous event that now saves us from sin if we continue to walk in step with the Spirit.
Phil 2:13 for it is God who works in you to will and to act according to his good purpose.
God working in us both the will and the power to obey according to His good purpose. Again, this is done by His act of creating a new creation in Christ.
2 Cor 5:17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come! 18 All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: 19 that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. 20 We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God. 21 God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
Gal 6:14 y I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. 15 Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; **what counts is a new creation.
What counts is being IN CHRIST and being made a new creation. Not by a long drawn out process but by an instantaneous act of the Father. Then from being born again, not by the will of man but of God, we walk in step with the Spirit and renew our minds daily and from this we grow in maturity to be like Jesus. God saves us to save us. He became sin on the cross so that we would be recreated in righteousness, a new creation. This is the new covenant that was foretold, God writing His laws on our heart. The old covenant was written on stone tablets, the new is written on our hearts through the effects of the cross. Our spirits literally died and a new spirit was created. And even now those who put their confidence in Christ are true sons and daughters of God. Created in Christ unto good works.
From Genesis on, the Christ our savior was for told, the one who would save us from sin and Satan. A real Adam, a real serpent who would bruise our Lord’s heel but He would crush his head. Foretold by God and fulfilled through Jesus, the sacrifice lamb that was slain for the sins of the world. Slain for all but only the ones who turn and put their whole confidence in the cross of Christ receive the benefits.
In Genesis 1 that’s exactly the case, the humanization of God. And the divinization of humanity. Theosis.
Since theosis is a major teaching of the church here in Greece and i have studied it this is not the case( the deification of humans). Humans cant become gods thats mormonism or some other religions that im unaware that teaches it .
Hi Nickoloas,
It seems that very few people who post on this particular discourse forum believe in a literal Adam and Eve. However, many people have put a lot of thought into your questions and have written and spoken on them. Here is a very short summary of a few things I’ve read in the topic that I posted on a different forum, where the majority of posters seem to prefer a literal Adam and Eve
Because I am a scientist, I am not skeptical about scientific findings and trust them to be true. I trust the scientific process, because scientific ideas come from many different disciplines and the models are vetted by many different smart people who challenge each other’s ideas. Thus, the best ideas come to the fore. I also do not believe that God would use scientific data to mislead us. Thus, I affirm evolution. However, I also affirm Biblical inerrancy. Because God created both the physical world and all the creatures in it, there must be a way to reconcile the scientific data with God’s word given to us in the Bible, even if the best way to reconcile those truths is not fully apparent to us right now. It will all become clear to us when we get to heaven, and I think that it is OK for us to be uncomfortable with not fully understanding right now. God leaves room for mystery. I take comfort in the fact that since many people are thinking about how to resolve the Adam and Eve story with evolution, there are many options for thinking about those things, even if all the current options have some limitations. The fact that there are various ways of thinking about how to resolve the Biblical story with evolution assures me that there is a reasonable solution, which will become fully clear to us in heaven.
Here are some models I’ve been looking into:
One idea that I like is the idea of the Federal Headship of Adam and Eve. This is similar to a model described by John Walton, who says that a literal Adam and Eve were given a priestly role over humanity at the time of the Fall. I found this article by Tim Keller to be very helpful in thinking through that Federal Headship model.
I have also been learning about the Reasons to Believe model, which is laid out in Fuzz Rana’s book, Who is Adam, and which you can find him speaking about in YouTube videos, as well. To align with archeological evidence, their model has Adam and Eve being created specially by God, but about 100,000 years ago or so. Note that William Lane Craig has been thinking about these questions over the past couple of years and has some podcasts and videos talking about where he is landing, which is an even older Adam and Eve.
I have also been reading about the Genealogical Adam and Eve model, which you can find described in Joshua Swamidass’ book by that name. This model explains the limits of science. Due to limitations in scientific data, in the context of an evolving population, science could not tell us whether or not there was a special de novo creation of Adam and Eve within the past 10,000 years or so. If there had been a special creation within the context of an evolving human population, everyone at the time of Christ (or earlier) would have been a descendant of Adam, as Paul states in Romans 5.
The view is also expounded on further by Jon Garvey in his book, The Generations of Heaven and Earth. Jon Garvey blogs here
Joshua Swamidass has been recently interviewed by many people on his ideas, including Christianity today:
You can find Fuzz Rana and Joshua Swamidass talking about the differences between their models on a recent interview with Sean McDowell:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQ3burs-mUo
I’ve also enjoyed asking Jon Garvey and Joshua Swamidass more about their models on Joshua Swamidass’s online discourse forum: Peaceful Science
In this recent YouTube video by William Lane Craig, he describes part of his reasoning for why there could have been an original Adam and Eve couple around 500,000 years ago (science cannot prove otherwise.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBbb0vj2FmA
Sounds like he has and is releasing a whole series of videos now detailing his study on the topic of “The Doctrine of Man” for his “Defenders” classes. Intriguing.
Or if you prefer a written discussion, the argument has been written out here:
2 Likes
We bring God down to our level and thus ourselves up to His. As we evolve culturally, intellectually, so does He.
The Harvey Center has also been engaging with these ideas:
1 Like
Nope .Thats still not it.God chose to come down to our level you (we) didnt bring him
Thanks a lot Michelle .I cant thank you enough for going out of your program and answering that question into another forum .Take care !!!By the way what kind of forum is it?
Nevermind i think it is the Ravis Zacharias site?
Nope, we create Him in our image, whether He exists or not. We always will. And He’ll always present accordingly.
Then im sorry but this is not christianity and i actually have to say it.You seem to have created your own god Klax.Your God which is usefull only in yourself.You are attributing your characteristics to the divine …Theres no point continuing here.Our views not only are varied but are also conflicting.For me your views are almost on the verge of not beign christian i whould say.I dont know what your opinion is on mine but either way this is getting us nowhere i think
What’s being Christian got to do with it? We cannot not make God in our image. The small library of texts written over a thousand years with another thousand of oral tradition and non-Canaanite sources show the evolution of God. Who changed? Him or us?
You just said
Yet i believe Christ to be God.SO everything he quoted said i take it for not beign corrupted
Me too. Apart from by His humanity including His enculturation.
Jesus divine nature whouldnt allow him to make false quotations. You said earlier that you create God according to your image . Have you got time to explain that?
We ALL create God in our own image. We always have. We still have to create Him better as Christians generally have a pretty vile God and vile morality. Jesus’ humanity means His epistemology was incomplete and erroneous. His divinity made His sayings qualitatively as best as could be done given the human circumstances.
Wrong wrong and Wrong.You are wrong in every single one pf them