In The Image Of God

[Bernard Gui]

In another thread, an evangelical Protestant friend said,

Physicality of being is not a condition for God to be God but it is for us in our state of existence (and will be in eternity) in a resurrected physical form with their spirit (in the image of God spiritually speaking), beginning with Adam and Eve. The above quotes I think calls into direct question the validity of the claims made by both and found to be wanting.

Could someone please explain what it means that we are "in the image of God spiritually speaking?"

Thanks.

Bernard

[shalamabobbi]

In another thread, an evangelical Protestant friend said,

Could someone please explain what it means that we are "in the image of God spiritually speaking?"

Thanks.

Bernard

You know the answer Bernard,

DC 1:16

They seek not the Lord to establish his righteousness, but every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god..

Edited July 5, 2011 by shalamabobbi

[volgadon]

That doesn't come close to answering Bernard's question.

[Franktalk]

God is intelligent and has knowledge. We are gathered spirits that possess the ability of intelligence we also have knowledge of many things and access to knowledge. In that sense we are in God's image. God can manifest in many forms one being a physical form. We can not change at will but the fact we are currently housed in physical form is a manifestation of something God does. So in this sense we are in God's image as well. God can and does manipulate at will His surroundings. He also can and does interact with other spirit beings and uses the physical world for His own purposes. This exercise of free will is also done by us to a limited extent in this physical realm. We interact with other spirit beings and we exercise our free will in the physical plane. God has all knowledge and knows good from evil. God has chosen good because it is His character. He knows that evil is a path to destruction. We can choose a path of good and be in the image of God. But we can choose evil and then God will intervene and turn us around in His own time. God is beyond the creation of the physical realm. He is a 24/7 supernatural event. We are a spirit housed in a physical shell which itself is a 24/7 supernatural event. Again another image of God.

[coolrok7]

As the one who made the statement, is it ok to answer?

[awh204]

In another thread, an evangelical Protestant friend said,

Could someone please explain what it means that we are "in the image of God spiritually speaking?"

Thanks.

Bernard

While I think the reference to צלם and דמות in Gen 1:26-27 is related to physical characteristics which the gods possess, most Christians who are sceptical of God's corporeal nature would say that it refers to man's spiritual status as a soul, or to our ability to rationalize.

[cksalmon]

Could someone please explain what it means that we are "in the image of God spiritually speaking?"

Thanks.

Bernard

I believe it's probably fallacious to ask Genesis 1.26's צלם and דמות (considered singly or in conjunction) to reveal some narrowly specific fact about humanity.* That is, Latter-say Saints who argue for a purely material similitude are surely missing the point. On the other hand, traditional Christian apologetic responses to Latter-day Saints that cordon off the meaning of Genesis 1.26 into the realm of some vague spiritual or cognitive facility are equally off-target.

The immediate context suggests that dominion is a key component of God's image, but I believe the intent is to invite a much more holistic comparison.

In short, I don't know what your Protestant friend means by "spiritually speaking," either.

cks

_____________________

* Thanks to awh204 for the unicode.

[awh204]

That is, Latter-say Saints who argue for a purely material similitude are surely missing the point.

In her article 'Genesis 1:26-7 as a statement of humanity's divine parentage', C Crouch basically asserts the same thing, arguing that going after a mere corporeal reading of the text misses the theological depth of the statement which the author is trying to convey. I disagree with her idea of Gen 1.26-7 as metaphor, and personally I think the theological point is to assert man's divine status, which encompasses, as you noted, the ability to exercise dominion.

[ebeddoulos]

As the one who made the statement, is it ok to answer?

Personally, I would appreciate it if you would.

[HeatherAnn]

DC 1:16 They seek not the Lord to establish his righteousness, but every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god..

Yeah, & Jesus taught, "The kingdom of God is within you." Everything we experience is processed from our mind & soul. We create images of God, & show the God we worship by how we think, feel & act.

[ERMD]

God can manifest in many forms one being a physical form.

Elaborate, please.

[mfbukowski]

Yeah, & Jesus taught, "The kingdom of God is within you." Everything we experience is processed from our mind & soul. We create images of God, & show the God we worship by how we think, feel & act.

Seeing ourselves in his image, or vice-versa is the only way we can see him as our "Father" with all that implies. He is the mirror of ourselves, raised to Godhood, seen "through a glass darkly, but then face to face".

Note the references in the LDS bible for that verse referring to "veil".

He is the highest we can conceive for ourselves, and more

Edited July 7, 2011 by mfbukowski

[shalamabobbi]

Yeah, & Jesus taught, "The kingdom of God is within you." Everything we experience is processed from our mind & soul. We create images of God, & show the God we worship by how we think, feel & act.

Here's a non-LDS source for you to look at

http://www.voiceofjesus.org/kingdom_not_within.html

The phrase that captures our interest is the last one,

. . . the kingdom of God is within you. (KJV)

But from the RSV:

the kingdom of God is in the midst of you.

There are other versions. For example,

For the Kingdom of God is among you. (NLT)

The FNT has the same:

For behold the kingdom of God is among you.

The gist of the meaning is the kingdom of God is not as the kingdoms of this world that conquer one another.

The Savior was addressing Pharisees who were looking for and expecting a military savior not a Savior from sin.

Everything we experience is processed from our mind & soul. We create images of God, & show the God we worship by how we think, feel & act.

True enough. We can alter what we experience though.

D&C 6:14

..blessed art thou for what thou hast done; for thou hast enquired of me, and behold, as often as thou hast enquired thou hast received instruction of my Spirit.

[Bernard Gui]

As the one who made the statement, is it ok to answer?

I did not want to derail the other discussion, so, please feel free to explain.

Bernard

[maklelan]

I believe it's probably fallacious to ask Genesis 1.26's צלם and דמות (considered singly or in conjunction) to reveal some narrowly specific fact about humanity.* That is, Latter-say Saints who argue for a purely material similitude are surely missing the point. On the other hand, traditional Christian apologetic responses to Latter-day Saints that cordon off the meaning of Genesis 1.26 into the realm of some vague spiritual or cognitive facility are equally off-target.

The immediate context suggests that dominion is a key component of God's image, but I believe the intent is to invite a much more holistic comparison.

In short, I don't know what your Protestant friend means by "spiritually speaking," either.

cks

צלם always and only refers to physical appearance. דמות has a wider range, but usually refers to physical likeness. Keep in mind Gen 5:3 states that Adam created Seth in his own "image and likeness" as well. Physical likeness is the best understanding of the phrase.

[awh204]

צלם always and only refers to physical appearance. דמות has a wider range, but usually refers to physical likeness. Keep in mind Gen 5:3 states that Adam created Seth in his own "image and likeness" as well. Physical likeness is the best understanding of the phrase.

How do you see Ps 39:6-7?

אַךְ כָּֽל־הֶבֶל כָּל־אָדָם נִצָּב

אַךְ־בְּצֶלֶם יִֽתְהַלֶּךְ־אִישׁ

Given the parallel between הבל and צלם, do you think there is a possiblity of seeing צלם as something other than a physical image, or is the Psalmist just talking of man's image in a negative manner?

[maklelan]

How do you see Ps 39:6-7?

אַךְ כָּֽל־הֶבֶל כָּל־אָדָם נִצָּב

אַךְ־בְּצֶלֶם יִֽתְהַלֶּךְ־אִישׁ

Given the parallel between הבל and צלם, do you think there is a possiblity of seeing צלם as something other than a physical image, or is the Psalmist just talking of man's image in a negative manner?

This is the only slightly metaphorical use of the word, but I do think it's meant to refer to vanity and physical appearances.

[Bernard Gui]

I believe it's probably fallacious to ask Genesis 1.26's צלם and דמות (considered singly or in conjunction)

to reveal some narrowly specific fact about humanity.* That is, Latter-say Saints who argue for a purely

material similitude are surely missing the point.

If Latter-day Saints argued for that, they surely would be missing the point; however,

Latter-day Saints argue for much, much more than a purely material similitude:

http://www.brighamyoungacademy.org/sources/first_presidency/origin_of_man_1909.doc.pdf

...let us now inquire: What was the form of man, in

the spirit and in the body, as originally created? In a general way the answer is given in

the words chosen as the text of this treatise. “God created man in his own image.” It is

more explicitly rendered in the Book of Mormon thus: “All men were created in the

beginning after mine own image” (Ether 3:15). … If, therefore, we can ascertain the form

of the “Father of spirits,” “The God of the spirits of all flesh,” we shall be able to

discover the form of the original man.

Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is “the express image” of His Father’s person (Heb. 1:3).

He walked the earth as a human being, as a perfect man, and said, in answer to a question

put to Him: “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father” (John 14:9). This alone ought to

solve the problem to the satisfaction of every thoughtful, reverent mind. The conclusion

is irresistible, that if the Son of God be the express image (that is, likeness) of His

Father’s person, then His Father is in the form of a man; for that was the form of the Son

of God, not only during His mortal life, but before His mortal birth, and after His

Resurrection. It was in this form that the Father and the Son, as two personages, appeared

to Joseph Smith, when, as a boy of 14 years, he received his first vision. Then if God

made man—the first man—in His own image and likeness, He must have made him like

unto Christ, and consequently like unto men of Christ’s time and of the present day. That

man was made in the image of Christ is positively stated in the book of Moses: “And I,

God, said unto mine Only Begotten, which was with me from the beginning, Let us make

man in our image, after our likeness; and it was so. …

“And I, God, created man in mine own image, in the image of mine Only Begotten

created I him; male and female created I them” (Moses 2:26–27).

The Father of Jesus is our Father also. Jesus Himself taught this truth when He instructed

His disciples how to pray: “Our Father which art in heaven,” etc. Jesus, however, is the

firstborn among all the sons of God—the first begotten in the spirit, and the only begotten

in the flesh. He is our elder brother, and we, like Him, are in the image of God. All men

and women are in the similitude of the universal Father and Mother and are literally the

sons and daughters of Deity.

“God created man in His own image.” This is just as true of the spirit as it is of the body,

which is only the clothing of the spirit, its complement—the two together constituting the

soul. The spirit of man is in the form of man, and the spirits of all creatures are in the

likeness of their bodies...

Bernard

[HeatherAnn]

Seeing ourselves in his image, or vice-versa is the only way we can see him as our "Father" with all that implies. He is the mirror of ourselves, raised to Godhood, seen "through a glass darkly, but then face to face".

Note the references in the LDS bible for that verse referring to "veil".

He is the highest we can conceive for ourselves, and more

Thanks, Mfbukowski.

I think its so important to keep searching to define God - because it's defining us.

I like that scripture you mentioned about seeing through the glass - very fitting.

I looked for the reference to "veil" - but couldn't find it. Which scripture were you referring to?

[HeatherAnn]

Here's a non-LDS source for you to look at

http://www.voiceofje...not_within.html

The gist of the meaning is the kingdom of God is not as the kingdoms of this world that conquer one another.

The Savior was addressing Pharisees who were looking for and expecting a military savior not a Savior from sin...

Thanks for that explanation & link, Shalamabobbi.

Jesus seemed to try over & over to teach others to look within, not externally.

How do you feel anything else but within? You don't feel the spirit among you, or even in the midst of you, but within you.

In that link, it mentioned "being inside the kingdom" - which reminded me of reading about higher levels of consciousness, which I have yet to understand & even further to apply.

From my scripture studies...

*Matt 4:17 “From that time Jesus began to preach, &to say, Repent: for the kingdom ofheaven is at hand.”

At hand = NOW

*Matt 16:28 “Verily I say unto you, There be somestanding here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of mancoming in his kingdom.”

He prophesiedthat some of his disciples would experience the kingdom of God within, duringtheir lifetimes.

*Mark 1:15 “Thetime is fulfilled, & the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, & believe the gospel.”

Jesus aknowledgedan after-death heaven, but focused his teachings on the kingdom of God within,here & now, “at hand.”

*Matt 6:10 “Thy kingdom come. They will be done in earth, as it is inheaven.”

The only prayerJesus asked us to say included discovering the kingdom of God within, so we canmanifest it in the outer world.

*Matt 6:33 “But seek ye first the kingdom of God, &his righteousness; & all these things shall be added unto you.”

The realizationof the kingdom of God within, should be our top priority, as Christians.

Edited July 8, 2011 by HeatherAnn

[shalamabobbi]

"The Father seeketh such to worship Him in spirit and in truth."

You are preaching to the chior. But I don't subscribe to the idea that because the kingdom is within that it is not also without, if that makes sense.

There are a lot of false dichotomies in existence with respect to religious concepts.

What do I need to do to enter my local college? Pay my tuition or make the GPA cutoff?

Both.

Because the transformation God is looking for is within does not nullify certain external requirements that also originate with Him. By doing what He asks of us we receive a greater portion of His Spirit within our hearts. All that is within our hearts finds expression without. Though some changes may occur in my personal behavior I don't exist in a vacuum. If I give to the poor for example that is an outward expression.

There are aspects of the kingdom that cannot be accomplished from within on an individual basis. We are social creatures and that aspect of our nature requires an external framework as well as the internal. Organization allows for needs to be recognized and met that otherwise would not be. It allows for the message of the gospel to be spread to others who otherwise would not have the opportunity to hear it. It allows for those who are ready for marriage to meet others of like faith and expression so that the two will not be unequally yoked. It allows for protection from false teachings that may contain some truth mingled with ideas that can ultimately be damaging. The power to heal was given by Christ to His apostles based upon the faith of the recipient. The power to seal was also given. There is only one verse about that in the Bible. Does that make it insignificant or not real? Or is the Bible merely the record of something that existed that was alive and vibrant and much greater?

John 4:25 when he is come, he will tell us all things.

[HeatherAnn]

Thanks, Shalamabobbi.

Yeah, it makes sense that the kingdom, or spirit of God, is not just within us but also all around. Yet, how we feel it is within.

And thanks for the reminder - that how we act & the environment we surround ourselves with, helps transform us... & that we affect & are affected by others.

Organizations (like the church) are important - for a sense of belonging & involvement, as well as help in raising children with high standards.

They help bring people together who share common beliefs & goals & they can unify a group by conformity.

I see them a little like parents... providing for their children, instilling some fear & shame so they "stay on the straight & narrow" way.

Yet, there comes a time, when, like grown children need to become more independent, some need to take more responsibility for their spirituality.

I'm not implying that we leave the organization, but that we "put away childish things" by not expecting to be commanded in all spiritual matters.

Since the kingdom of God is within, I see psychology closely related with spirituality.

Psychology = "study of the soul." The study of my unique soul or your unique soul will not be found in any church manuals.

Edited July 8, 2011 by HeatherAnn

[mfbukowski]

Thanks, Mfbukowski.

I think its so important to keep searching to define God - because it's defining us.

I like that scripture you mentioned about seeing through the glass - very fitting.

I looked for the reference to "veil" - but couldn't find it. Which scripture were you referring to?

http://lds.org/scrip...cor/13?lang=eng

11When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

12For now we see through a ^aglass, ^bdarkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

13And now abideth ^afaith, ^bhope, ^ccharity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.

Well unfortunately since my knowledge of Greek is non-existent, I would like to hear from someone who actually knows what they are talking about on this, but my understanding from concordances is that what is actually said in verse 12 could be translated:

"But now we perceive via a mirror, in mystery (or enigma, or veiled), but then, countenance (moving toward) countenance"

That's not great English, but it conveys my understanding of what the concordances say, and of course I would welcome Mak's comments - or anyone else who actually reads Greek- on this.

But what I was talking about earlier was that if you click on note "a" in verse 12, next to the word "glass" in the LDS edition of the Bible, it takes you to a references which refers you to the Topical Guide for the word "Veil" with references there to the "veil of the temple".

So if you think of ways that the veil could be like a mirror and ways in which two "countenances" move toward each other in that context, one can discover some interesting things both about this passage and the temple.

It also suggests this scripture:

2 Cor. 3:18

But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.

, which really amplifies that temple idea further if you think of it, and perhaps includes within the set of possible implications a very LDS view of both the temple and exaltation.

When I found this I thought it was pretty cool and helped me to see how possibly Paul was making some cryptic references to something very much like our endowment

That's what I was referring to in the other post.

Edited July 8, 2011 by mfbukowski

[cksalmon]

If Latter-day Saints argued for that, they surely would be missing the point; however,

Latter-day Saints argue for much, much more than a purely material similitude:

http://www.brighamyo...an_1909.doc.pdf

Bernard

That is, Latter-say Saints who argue for a purely material similitude are surely missing the point.

Okay. Please notice that no comma separates "Latter-day Saints" and "who" in my sentence.

[cksalmon]

צלם always and only refers to physical appearance. דמות has a wider range, but usually refers to physical likeness. Keep in mind Gen 5:3 states that Adam created Seth in his own "image and likeness" as well. Physical likeness is the best understanding of the phrase.

I'm not disputing that צלם has reference to physical appearance/form. I grant that, freely. The question is whether a bare lexical analysis delivers the theological intent of the phrase.

Physical likeness is the best understanding of the phrase.

Doubtless, others agree, but I'm not one of them.

Edited July 8, 2011 by cksalmon