Is Genesis real history? (new Common Questions page)

Faith & Science Conversation
181

Well sure they are, Jesus and the rest of the N.T. pointed them out to us already. How many wise Jewish priest who knew the OT like the back of their hand could find these or recognized this until pointed out?

If you are willing to answer my questions, I am also willing to take you on an explanation journey. There are many blogs on this site, that have a theory, then walk you through the scriptures with how they came to that conclusion. 1 consist verse cannot be used.

John Walton speaks on the Gen account for 90min and has written multiple books. I think all of it is Biblical, but he couldn’t convey his theory by quoting 1 verse.

I am again not saying I am the only one right with exclusive rights to the truth. I am simply saying that is my theory, but there is plenty of verses/passages that back it up, it is a theory rooted in scripture.

Maybe my theory is wrong, maybe man was created from dust and became an IB and it was passed from Adam to Eve, and all descendants of. That is another biblically rooted theory.

Would you consider a vase with a drain valve in the bottom, that has the capacity to hold water, if the drain valve is wide open and it is not holding any. Is that a water holding vessel? Though you could create a vase, with a drain valve, knowing it is only going to hold water when the valve is shut, but giving it the choice of opening or not. It is still a vase, but it is only a water holding vessel when the drain valve is closed. Can you not say, I will create vases to hold water, still putting a drain valve in the bottom that could be opened? Or even creates vases to hold water with the drain valve defaulted open, and it can only hold water when it is shut? And still say you created a water holding vessel? Though you know without intervention of that valve, it will not hold any?

If you fail to bear the image of something, are you bearing that image? Is capacity to bear, the same as bearing? Bearing His image or not, we are still human, still potential IBs. But only become IBs, when we perfectly bear His image.

I think God created us as image bearers with the capacity to bear His image IF we allow Him. So in Genesis, He just says we are created to be IBs, not that we are IBs. The rest of the Bible(and greatly Jesus’ life) shows us how to fulfill that capacity, or to make that capacity a reality.

How is that innate? How do you represent something you aren’t trying to represent or even know to? One verse that backs up your innate theory is Rom 1:19. But again, that goes against evolution, as that would make all Homo sapiens IBs, Adam, would not have been the first. Or Adam was the first and YEC is right.

This sounds like what I am referring to. I just don’t see two different things here.

Yes, “kings and priests”. Rev 1:6 N.T Wright is where I got that from.

I agree (sans bold) but I’m searching the scriptures to find a verse that says the bold.

Gen 1:26-27
“Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”
So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.”

Them is male and female, them is mankind, Adam and Eve is mankind, Adam and Eve were IBs. How else did others become IBs.

I see 3 possibilities.

  1. YEC is right, IB is genetically passed down, we just haven’t discovered it yet, and maybe never will.
  2. Adam and Eve were allegorical accounts repressing mankind, in which case all mankind became IBs when those words were spoken.
  3. IB is something passed through interaction, knowledge/awareness passed on/made known.

I would say In short, my thought is that all were created to bear the image of God, but would agree that having the Spirit is necessary to achieve our full potential and purpose.

Do you carry a membership card to prove you belong to the Christian Association?

Why do you feel it so necessary to have membership? Or so detrimental/negative to not? Why look down on those without membership? There is no need to prove anything to anyone. But that doesn’t change facts (if my theory is right). If I am right, whether you/anyone “have a membership card’ or not, why does that change anything? It shouldn’t. But it would still be a fact that there is a difference.

It is just a theory, but we are to love all biological humans as ourself, to put the needs of theirs before ours. We should also be kind to animals, but they aren’t as sacred as a potential IB/human.

If it was a universal(global) flood, yes, I agree. But if it was a local flood (as evidence suggest it was) why were other IBs spared? Seems to me that a local flood would back up a local IB theory.

182

When I see “IBS” I think of Irritable Bowel syndrome, and for good reason. It’s like when you’re eating strawberry jam spread on sandpaper.

183

@still_learning,

Why are you trying so hard to turn Image Bearers into another instantiation of Original Sin?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I see 3 possibilities.
[1] YEC is right, IB is genetically passed down, we just haven’t discovered it yet, and maybe never will.
[2] Adam and Eve were allegorical accounts repressing mankind, in which case all mankind became IBs when those words were spoken.
[3] IB is something passed through interaction, knowledge/awareness passed on/made known.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

There are even more choices than that.

But what’s the point of going through all of this? What is accomplished if the Bible is exactly as you say?
Aren’t you just laying down another layer of coals for burning bad people in Hell?

2 Likes
184

I’m not. IB just so happens to be an unseen, unmeasurable, undetectable trait/status that mankind was given, and it spread somehow, and some might have it, and some might not.

To be clear, I am saying Jesus is the only one with a membership card to the Image Bearers Association (to use @beaglelady’s analogy). And one day I believe all humans will be members, thanks to Jesus.

I just said a simple theory somewhere above. It got nit picked and challenged, so I defended it.

I guess it would protect from others claiming others to be sub-human and exploiting them. If all humans were thought precious as potential IBs, there would probably be way less abortions. Or one couldn’t claim their race is better than others, as we are all potential IBs (some not yet realized, some realized, but failed).

But mostly it was just the logical conclusion I happen to come to. Others happen to come to other conclusions with their own logic. That doesn’t make either unbiblical.

How in the world do you get THAT…from what I said? I have to assume you didn’t read any of it. I know I have trouble getting my point across at times, but that is like me saying, “I like baseball competition”, and you accusing me of baseball stadiums charging too much for hotdogs.

First, I don’t believe there is any layer of coals for burning bad people in hell.
Second, above status of IB has nothing to do with eternal destination.

Quote a single post where an above post I said anything about hell, and I’ll eat my words. Though that accusation isn’t any where near my current beliefs, so if I did, please point it out so I can change it.

185

Okay – this is a whiplash moment for me. I haven’t followed this entire thread to see how this point was reached (and I don’t intend to retrace; only to explain why I may not be privy to what led to this). But how is this idea that some (people?!) might not have the image of God – how is this idea getting purchase?

So when God tells Noah in Genesis 9:6 that anybody shedding human blood – by humans their blood shall be shed … because “in his own image God made human kind.” If you accept that some people might not have the image of God, you have just conceded that they might not fall under this protection! Do you really want to defend that?

1 Like
186

But the Christian faith teaches that all humans bear the image of God.

Humans bear the image of God already. I’ve send this maybe a hundred times.

187

I reject all 3 personally. Let’s say with common descent where do people get the divine purpose to ‘bear His image?’ There is no clear demarcation line nor can their be. It is as impossible to answer as when does one species ‘become another’ or in the case of language evolution, when did British English ‘become’ American English? So I look at it as a divine purpose that cannot be taken away and we did not ‘acquire it’ at a certain point. I’d probably go as far to say that it was God’s divine purpose for us to bear his image from before the foundation of this world. What about other hominid species? I look at it in a John 21 sense where ‘what is it to you what I purposed for homo naledi, you go and bear my image.’ Ultimately sure, people can accept this divine purpose or not, but that doesn’t change the fact of God saying that everyone has this divine purpose/quality that equates to the image of God.

2 Likes
188

Name some people who bear the image of God. How can you tell?
Name some people (besides me) who don’t bear the image of God. How can you tell?

Do you bear the image of God? How can you tell?

189

Jesus, that’s it.

Because He is the embodiment of God, everything God spoke about in the OT, Jesus lived. He never sinned, He allowed the Spirit if God to live in Him, and truly bearer God’s image.

Forget Genesis for a second, just think of the words, the meaning of them. Bearing, or representing God’s image. Surely you would agree that Jesus is the only one on Earth to successfully do that? I really can’t image anyone answering no to that.

That is really all I am expressing. Though I agree, Genesis has been interpreted for a long time to have said all humans are created image bearers, rather than my thinking of all humans were created to be, image bearers.

But looking at the definition of bearer, or upholding, or perfectly representing an image, and then seeing all humans, all sinners. It makes me question, how can a sinner bear the image of God? A mirror cannot reflect or bear an image differently than what is in front of it.

I guess I am just understanding the words “image bearing” as others are?

I believe you will, I will, everyone will. I think all will bear the image of God, and every knee will bow to Jesus as their king. Some sooner than others. But I think you don’t, I think I don’t right now.

How can you tell Jesus was an image bearer? He displayed the traits of God without fail, the Spirit of God came out of Him. He submitted to the Spirit of God and God’s will in everything, up unto even death. He did nothing if His own will, but the Fathers.

But it isn’t for me or you to tell. Nor would or should it effect the way you live, if you could tell.

Though I answered this above, I feel you might accuse me of skipping it…

No, I do not. I try my best to, but mostly I point to the One who did bear His image, because I want people to see God. IF people were to see God in me, it would only be from the Spirit of God living inside me. So it wouldn’t be me they are seeing, but Him.

I try to honor God and focus on Jesus, so they can see Him in me. But I fail. I get distracted as Peter did, I begin to sink in the waters as Peter did when our focus comes off of Jesus.

Though one day, in heaven, I will no longer be weighed down by this flesh, I will have been perfected in Him, by Him, and He will be able to live through me, and God will be glorified in that, forever!*

190

In other words, you see “image bearing” as something to do rather than something to be?

191

Don’t kill any potential IBs. That is all He could be saying, they are precious, I agree.

Far from it. The potential IBs that were created (I.e. all mankind) are the same ones protected by that command.

You are mixing your thoughts and mine. If Gen 1 says mankind was created to be IBs, then this is saying, don’t kill the potential IBs, ones that will become IBs, that will bear God’s image.

You can see my post above for a short explanation of my logic.

Common, really? That is your argument? One could also say the Christian faith teaches that Adam was the first and only human on earth, made from dust.

Christian faith doesn’t teach either of those things. The Bible can be interpreted to believe either of those statements.

The Christian faith teaches us that we are to love God with all our heart, mind, soul, and strength. To love our neighbors as ourselves (Matthew 22:37-40). That we cannot win favor with God of our own merits (Eph 2:8-9).
Apart from God, we have no purpose, we can do nothing (John 15:5). Jesus died for our sins (1 Cor 15:1-3 and many other verses). That Jesus conquered death, victory over sin (1 Cor 15:55-57), and we can go through Him.

Yes, you have said this maybe a hundred time. Obviously you believe that, you have also provided scripture and logic to back up that statement.

I have also said maybe a hundred times, what I believe, and have also provided scripture and logic to back up that statement.

I am not trying to convince you, you believe what you believe. This is no different between a YEC and a EC. Both have different biblical interpretations and logic to back those beliefs.

If I am trying to convince you of something, it is this. That my thoughts on this in no way is a non biblical slippery slope that treats some as sub-human, or says some humans have more or less value. That is YOUR interpretation/misunderstanding of my beliefs. So I am trying to convince you as to how and why I don’t think that.

I would imagine in Eden?

I disagree. Though we are not the judge. You can argue all day the ball is past the foul line from your perspective, and I can argue the opposite from my perspective. But the referee/judge is going to make the call, regardless of what we see or think. Though I am I’m the parking lot stadium, walking as security guard as instructed. I am not even choosing a decision, because I know, not only is it not up to me, but I was instructed to not even attend the game, my job is the make sure the parking lot is safe. But that doesn’t mean I can’t know that there is in fact a line, and some are on one side, and some are on the other. I will continue to watch over the parking lot. If the referee wrote a book that said, all balls are supposed to be in bounds, but that all end up past the foul line (for now) but One. I can believe that. It doesn’t change that I am a gauging the parking lot.

I don’t know why people are getting so upset. I am saying I have a current belief of something, but it doesn’t effect the way I live, nor my purpose God gave me.

Who is “us” though? Were Neanderthal’s “us”. Were there IBs before Adam?

It might have something to do with me growing up YEC? But the only way I able able to reconcile EC (which I am now) is this interpretation of IB.

Exactly! I’m just in the parking lot. It isn’t up to me. BUT, I can’t help it if I have a thought about it, I can’t I think it, it makes sense to me.

Can you unthinking gravity? If the masses told you it wasn’t true, you can’t just unthink it. Somehow you have to be shown it is not true, or given a reason to see it isn’t.

I agree. I think we all have His divine purpose to be His IB. We have the capacity to be His IB. I think we agree on that.

I think where we differ, is that if you have the capacity or potential or purposed to be, but you aren’t, then I think you aren’t. Where it seems you think we are?

Yes, I guess that is what I am trying to say, thank you. Not that you agree with me, but at least you understand me.

I think this thought comes from John Walton, who said in the ANE, if something didn’t have purpose, it didn’t exist. The temple was just wood and gold material built up. It didn’t become a temple till God dwelled inside. A house is just a building, it doesn’t become a home till someone lives inside.

So I believe God created us to be something, to have purpose, to bear His image, not just be a physical flesh.

I don’t know how you can do image bearing without being an image bearer though. How can a vessel hold water, if it isn’t a water holding vessel. I think the doing (or in our case, failure to do), is showing that we fail to be an image bearer.

I can see a YEC community up in arms over this. I am just surprised an EC one has heartburn with it.

Though I guess, when a person gives a gift to one suffering, that would be an instance of bearing His image. But the second you put down another, you are no longer bearing His image. Only Jesus was able to bear the image of God 24/7. I don’t think it is something bestowed upon you at birth and stays with you. You do it or you don’t do it, if you are doing it, you are, if you’re not doing it you aren’t one. We all have the capacity to do it, but I don’t think that capacity is fully reached until heaven, and that is only through the Spirit of God in us.

Surely you would not say Hitler was bearing God’s image. Then how was he an image bearer? How can you be something you are not doing what it is.

192

Thanks for explaining – I guess I don’t see why it has to be either/or. I see it more as we were created in God’s image, but sin has prevented us from living up to the image we were given. In that sense, we (by our actions) deny God’s image all the time, but we can’t unmake ourselves out of his image – we’re not that powerful.

193

Thanks for shiwing me some grace

.

It seems for many here, IB is a status humans get no matter what, it seems meaningless to me if you aren’t using its meaning. How can you hold water, if you aren’t holding water. If you are not holding water, are you a water bearing vessel?

Again I am not trying to convince anyone of my thoughts, nor saying your thoughts are wrong. I just can’t unthink what I think. When I look at something not being it’s purpose, that it isn’t that thing anymore.

Matthew 5:13 “But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot.”

Matthew 19:26 “Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.””

How does a camel go through the eye of a needle? How is salt made salty again? How is a failed image bearer made to perfectly bear His image again? With God all things are possible.

Can we, not display His image? Was Judas displaying His image? Doesn’t display and bear image mean the same thing?

I don’t think that potential can be taken away, we’re not that powerful. No matter what horrendous things/images of Satan that you beared (bore) at one point and time, His image is stronger, Satan was conquered on the cross. Jesus showed us that we can indeed bear His image as intended, through the power of what Jesus did, and showed us on this earth, the power of God.

194

I think I get what you’re saying, I just don’t see any of this “potential” language that you use in what God actually said. We’re told that making us in his image is simply something he did, not something he required of us to do.

In the modern world, we often use this fact to remind each other of our duty as Christians – I hear things like, “Don’t forget that the [insert “other” human different-from-“us”-in-some-way group here] are also made in the image of God,” the implication being that we should treat them accordingly, and that we don’t get a pass for dehumanizing someone just because they aren’t like us.

This seems to be more specifically aimed at Christian duty – not the simple fact of being human.

I guess this is the difference in that you see being made in God’s image as a verb and I see it as a noun. Judas certainly did not bear God’s image well, and was not a credit to God in any way in what he did (as are none of us all the time), but that does not negate the fact that he, as a human, was made in God’s image. I just don’t see it as something that we only get to claim if our behavior is good enough (I assume this is what @beaglelady was going for when asking you how to “identify” which people actually “bear” it and which don’t).

2 Likes
195

Sorry if my jumping in above was a bit snappish in that regard. Obviously in poking around you happened on a lively topic that must be important! I appreciate how @Laura has been replying and hope that my replies too can show patience and grace even while wrestling around on this topic.

It isn’t just the Bible in play for us, but a couple thousand years of painstakingly hammered out church tradition too [perhaps Calvinism aside]. You have pictured IB as something that happens post-free will, right? As in I could make some choices that would presumably cost me my IB status in God’s eyes. Does that equate to salvation as well? It would be hard to imagine that somebody could be saved in Christ but at the same time had forfeited their IB status. Would you agree with that? IOW, (pending your acceptance of that premise) that would make IB a salvation issue.

So now Jesus enters the scene, and he patiently teaches that He (God) is seen in the “least of these” that anybody could imagine. So we go down the line – the mischievous boy whose hand was in the cookie jar without permission a moment ago? (how cute – of course he’s still in!) The man who swindled a retired lady out of her nest egg? (Ouch – much more painful, but Christ’s sacrifice is still good for him too.) But then we get so far down that line that eventually (if IB is in question) Christ would reach the nasty schmuck for whom he would have to say “Enough! I draw the line here; you murdered one too many people, and I’m sorry but you have forfeited your image of God status, and with it any possibility that my sacrifice can cover what you’ve done.”

It is scandalous and yet of fundamental importance that Christ never reaches such a line.

Now can you see how nearly the entire heart of the Christian gospel would have to be wrenched off its moorings to accommodate this new way of thinking? As fuzzy as the details of exactly what IB status could mean, it seems to have been important to Christian thinkers down the ages following New Testament principles to think of it as something prior to what we do with our free will. Something more like a capacity to recognize our needs, accept help, and learn to make godly choices. I’m not equating IB to that, but saying it could be something like that. If a class of people can potentially not be granted such capacity, then nearly all Christian doctrine is thrown into doubt is it not? [Setting Calvinism aside for the moment – I’m not a Calvinist].

Now – I know you’ve elaborated that you aren’t denying anybody’s IB status and are not using this as a weapon in that regard. Understood. If it was just hypothetical, and you refused to judge any ball as outside the existing foul line (even if this is just your recognition that you can’t accurately make any judgment about it at all) – I can live with that. I think what makes so many nervous is that when a door like this one gets opened widely, it isn’t just you that goes through it. Others can and have used that same door to justify all manner of atrocity against those they deem “sub-human”. So while you are not guilty of wanting to go there, can you understand why so many are thinking that there is just no good reason for even messing about on the threshold of this one? Maybe there is, and I haven’t properly considered it. But I sure can see a lot of reasons against it.

You’ve already conceded (I think) that we are probably more like the parking lot attendents in our inability to accurately judge a foul ball – we freely recognize that we can’t (accurately) make the umpire’s calls. And that is a good analogy. It would then lead to the question: so why trouble over it at all? Especially since we trust we have the perfect (omniscient) umpire, and so whatever the score is (on a scoreboard that we can’t see), we nonetheless trust that it is accurate. […and that we are not given leave to presume that anybody has put themselves beyond Christ’s reach.]

[with edits … a lot of them!]

196

I don’t see potential language either. But nor did I see the Genesis account as a non material account either, without John Walton explaining it to me. But now I can’t unsee it, it seems so much more logical, purposeful, and beautiful.

So I will give you that it is not literally written in the language…but neither is evolution or other things that can now be clearly seen by me and others when they read it .

I hesitate to say, it requires us to do, because I don’t want to convey that we can in any way earn our salvation.

You can say the same and have the same implication through my stance. Just add “potential” before IB and it means the same thing. Treat them accordingly, as a precious potential IB. You can’t dehumanize anyone on the basis that they are a non-IB, as you are a non-IB yourself. It just might be that they are a non-IB because they don’t know their purpose, where you are a non-IB because you failed that purpose. So if anything, they are more valuable than you. They are a blank slate, to which an art master piece could be painted. I am a muck of colors all over me, there will be no art masterpiece on this canvas until I receive my glorified body. Until then I will point to the ultimate master piece that was, is, and will be, Jesus. (To clarify, “you” a general term, I am a failed IB too).

I see the verb validating the noun. Like a water holding vessel is really only a water holding vessel, if it holds water right? The action/purpose/verb of that object, makes the object what it is.

I would say that doesn’t negate the fact that he/mankind was made to bear God’s image.

It’s all good brother! I fully understand that reading my massive walls of texts, and the many posts can be cumbersome and is skimmed, and when skimming through and seeing something that at face value seems to be very different than tradition… It is understandable again.

Thanks for giving me a chance and to try to hear me out.

Correct, it was something made known by God to Adam and possibly from God to Eve, but maybe through Adam to Eve.

You are following me so far.

No.

I don’t think of “salvation” as a ticket, like saving one from hell, or referring to one’s eternal destination. Or saving us from a bad thing that will happen in the future. I see salvation as current thing, saving us from the now that we are in. Saving us from the power of sin, the deceptions of Satan and/or our flesh that we can bear God’s image (impress God of our own strength or gain His accolades of our own merit). Or that we are better off not bearing His image, we can make an image for our self. Like the tower of babel in Gen 11:4 “so that we may make a name for ourselves”. We are worshiping ourselves, making a name for ourselves, we don’t need God or to bear His image (kind of mentality).

Saving us from those lies. Because we can’t please God from our own strength, for everything we have comes from Him. If we are merciful, it was because He blessed us with being merciful. And to attempt to take away any glory from Him and get it yourself is a lie.

Salvation is knowing God gave us all we have, and that despite our failing Him, He also gave us his all (Jesus) Knowing that He is our all in all, He loves us and showed us the way, atoned for our sins, so He can live in us now. And when we focus on Him living in us, we do bear His image, and in heaven, we will be fully sanctified, focusing on Him with no more distractions or lies, and will be the image bearers He created us to be.

I like the term “born again”. You are now reborn, living with a new knowledge awareness, one that is aware of your purpose to bear His image, and how to.

I am not sure I follow this. You can’t forfeit that potential, it is something God gave you. Sin prevents you from reaching that potential, the Spirit allows us to reach it.

Lets say God created a vessel to hold water, but at the bottom of the vessel, was a drain valve, the only thing that could close that drain valve is the Spirit. So God created a water holding vessel. The thing is, it will only be a water holding vessel when the Spirit is closing it, or the water will leak out and it will just be a potential water holding vessel, that holds no water.

Why would God create a water holding vessel with a drain valve in it in the spring loaded open position? Because He wants us to depend on Him. Only He can make us whole. God wasn’t caught off guard when Adam sinned. Jesus was always part of the plan, and His life was to show us that only the Spirit can make us whole, allow us to bear His image.

If you don’t know you were made to hold water, unaware of your purpose, you won’t hold any water, it will keep falling out of you. Or there are those that know they are a water holding vessel, but try to plug the hole by their own strength, the water will also all leak out, and it will not be a water holding vessel. Then there are some who know that only the Spirit can plug that hole (Christians or saved), and whenever they focus on Jesus, they are indeed able to hold water.

They problem is, like Peter showed us, is we get distracted, or scared easily as humans. And though one might know that Jesus is the only one who can plug it, and ask Him to, and He will successfully. When that weak human does get distracted or scared and looks away… Just as Peter began to sink as he took His eyes off Jesus, our water begins to drain out of our vessel again.

You aren’t un-born-again/unsaved when you look away/lose focus, as Peter was still saved by Jesus when he began to sink. You have acknowledged that you know God’s purpose for you, and that only He can help you achieve that purpose and you asked Him to help you achieve it (that is salvation/being born again). You can’t unlearn/unknow that (though it is possible to get distracted of forget like in the seed parable in Mat 13:28-23). The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.

In heaven, we will always have Jesus in the drain keeping it shut forever. It will be nice to not have to deal with our ADD flesh that loses focus all too often. And we will always bear His image, and He will be forever glorified! But our goal won’t be much different than here on earth, in that our goal is to keep our focus on Jesus, and bear His image, the difference is that we won’t fail that goal in heaven, and we do on earth.

I hope that clears up my thoughts on IB and salvation.

I am aware this is your hypothetical I am quoting and not your actual stance on the subject.

I don’t think that that sacrifice of Jesus was not able to cover all sins, it was. But Jesus did so much more than atone for our sins. He showed us the way, the way to bear the image of God. When you are willing to do the will of the Father no matter what the circumstances (being starving in the dessert, being mocked by those you wanted to bear your image, even up unto death on a cross). THAT is how you bear His image, that is the way that Jesus showed us, that is what we need to Spirit of God in us to do, because we can’t do it of our own strength.

The way is a powerful truth, more powerful than the powers or darkness. It doesn’t matter how many you have killed or how many cookies stolen, it isn’t about what you have done, it is about what you know have been showed you can do. You were given a clean slate, now live the will of God with the help from the Spirit of God, given to us by Jesus! When you do this, you will bear His image, but again probably get distracted and lose focus of Him and fail to bear His image while on this earth. But you now have the knowledge and ability to bear His image, to live your purpose. At that point you are saved, though again you might not bear His image at times, you can’t lose that knowledge.

I fully agree, there is no line!

If you you mix your misunderstood viewpoint of my new way of thinking with the traditional one then yes. But I think you don’t understand what I am trying to explain, as I would not condone any of what you are saying of Jesus not being able to forgive.

It seems like many keep agreeing with my views, they are just not calling it as I am calling it. I also think it is more like a “capacity” to recognize our needs, accept help, and learn to make godly choices. That is why I call it a potential IB, or the capcity to be an IB.

People seem to keep defending the traditional view, but then saying exactly what I am saying, and saying God made us image bearers, just means we have the capacity to bear His image.

So if you want to say that all humans are IB’s and that means that all humans have the capacity to bear His image, then I agree. I just think you are stuck on tradition requiring us to call them IB’s, and I am saying they are not. But we both agree they have the capacity to, so it seems we are really debating semantics.

Exactly. I just don’t refuse to not call them IB’s and it seems you refuse to not call then IB’s…as confusing as that triple and double negative is :grin:

Well, yeah, I agree with you there. All humans have that capacity and to not be granted such capacity is wrong. In the words of @Laura “we’re not that powerful”. I just happened to word it differently, and said all humans have that potential (instead of capacity).

I understand that. But again, if they used this logic to condemn another, they would have to condemn themselves. I am not saying anyone can call themselves an IB and say others are not and exploit it. I am saying we are all non-IB’s, equally, so there is no leverage to exploit.

I agree A door has been used to deem others as sub-human, but I wouldn’t say they are going through my door. They exploited a difference, I am saying we are equally non-IB’s.

Though people exploit the scritpures, but they have ‘clout’. I am just a guy online, I don’t have much clout or see people exploiting some guys rants online.

Though it could possibly just cause some food for thought, maybe get someone in the scriptures more?

Perhaps you are right. I didn’t really mean to turn it into this. I was just trying to explain something as I saw it, which reconciled certain theories about the flood, and it exploded.

I can stop. Again, it was just me at first using my thoughts in passing, to explain something else. But once it was attacked and called unbiblical, I had to greatly expand on it to defend it.

And though there may be of no “value” to hold these thoughts, or benefit me, it does help to reconcile other parts of scriptures. So it does have value to me, but it is fine if it doesn’t to you. But now that I have adopted it and intertwinded it with my other beliefs EC, flood, ect. I can’t really un-think it. The only way would be to show me in scripture where it is in error, and then I would also have to knock a few levels of my other thoughts.

The good thing and the reason I don’t get too wound up (or try not to) about my ideas getting attacked, is because in the grand scheme of things, it has so incredibly small importance and value in my life. I remain unshaken, because my faith is in God, who is unmovable, unwavering, unchangeable, my solid foundation on which I stand and have hope in. Anything I could easily be wrong about or be misunderstanding, bu never of the grace, love, mercy, justice, and righteousness of God.

HAHA, and you think you have lots of edits…I think I have a min 3 edit of all my posts :rofl:

197

Amen, brother!

And that paragraph alone basically nails (answers) my concern! I 100% agree with what you wrote there (and much else that you wrote too.) I’m just willing to think of that “non-forfeittable potential” as being like the “image of God”, whereas you are locating the IB slightly differently. But I will cease and desist.

Don’t feel bad for putting something out there that makes an “explosion”! We all have the opportunity to think through it some more when it’s out there.

198

But we are made in the image of God. Jesus is the very image of the invisible God, and he is uncreated.

1 Like
199

Okay, but I’m not sure that’s really comparable – evolution is biological, and the image of God is more of a spiritual reality. Or at least, that’s how I’ve seen it. I will certainly admit that I don’t know and often wonder about what it means, so I’m not really trying to “argue” per se… but my assumption has always been that being “made” in God’s image is beyond merely physical.

Well, I wouldn’t either, and perhaps that’s the issue, is that this idea of being a “potential image bearer” sounds too much like works-based salvation to some of us. :wink: In other words, why would God mention making people in his image if it couldn’t actually be true until after death?

Again though, when you say “you failed that purpose,” it sounds a lot like something that’s works-based. When we talk about sin, it’s often spoken of as being two-fold – we’re born into sin by the very fact of being human, but we also commit specific acts against God and our fellow humans. Why can’t the image be the same way? We’re born into it, but we also fail to uphold it properly. Rather than it being this hypothetical potential that we hope to reach someday.

And this makes it sound like it’s really more about semantics. I don’t know. I don’t have this figured out either, it just seems like an odd way to phrase it. I suppose you still seem to view it in a “having it but not having it yet” sort of way, which makes senses, I just wouldn’t phrase it the same way.

200

Somebody sent me this…

Something a little different for @beaglelady…

Image-Bearers
Image-Bearers.jpg798×458 89.8 KB

1 Like