Meaning of "Us" in Genesis.

Might be a LITTLE off topic but here it goes,Just as the temple in the OT had an outer court, a holy place, and a holy of holies; so man was also crafted in like manner having a physical body (the outer court), a soul (the holy place), and a spirit (the holy of holies).So we were created in the image of God with a body for contacting the things of the physical realm, a soul for contacting the things of the psychological realm (i.e. mind, emotion, and will), and a sprit for contacting the things of the Spiritual realm (i.e. God Himself).It was not until God breathed Himself into the physical body of man that man became a living soul. After the fall of man, the spirit of man became dead, the soul of man became the self, and the body of man became the flesh. And there was a need for man to be redeemed so that God could fulfill His original purpose for creating man, who was created in the image of God.After Christ died on the cross the veil of separation between the holy place and the holy of holies was torn in two, effectively opening the way for us to contact God through Christ, which was previously blocked when God cast Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden (note the Cherubims and a flaming sword which are also quite significant).So I think it is also important to consider why man was created in God's image.

---

Those who come forward to God must believe that He is...(Heb 11:6)

quote:

---

Just as the temple in the OT had an outer court, a holy place, and a holy of holies; so man was also crafted in like manner having a physical body (the outer court), a soul (the holy place), and a spirit (the holy of holies).

---

I see this as a fine analogy. It is also represented in genesis, which signifies both a connection with the source, and a seperation treshold, seen in all the acts of the created process, eg. seperating of light/darkness, water/land, day/night, etc. It is also what is referred to as sanctified, which refers to what is seperated from normal usage. This seperation treshold between the physical and spirtal realms cannot be broken voluntarilly by man: the reason Genesis opens with the 2nd alphabet ['B'] and we are told to go forward - the 'A' factor being barred.There has been only one instance of this treshold being broken, which refers to an OPEN form of unity between the physical and spiritual realm, and this occured at Mount Sinai. All other forms of revelation, by their own declarations, comes under visions, omens, angels, etc. None were OPEN and DIRECT revelations, and today this is the only form of Revelation which can satisfy and resolves the various groups of contradicting belief systems; a preferred representatives of any particular religion will not convince or resolve - each will seek their own, and the cycle will continue as at the last 2000 years.

quote:

---

After Christ died on the cross the veil of separation between the holy place and the holy of holies was torn in two, effectively opening the way for us to contact God through Christ, which was previously blocked when God cast Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden (note the Cherubims and a flaming sword which are also quite significant).

​

So I think it is also important to consider why man was created in God's image.

---

This is a later belief, limited to the gospels, and made retrospectively. Although it is a genuine, Gdly inclined belief - it is not shared by the rest of humanity. In fact, Jesus was only one of 1.1 Million other jews who also had their lives sacrificed in an equally, or more terrible, manner, and it remains a sad error of its omission, and its distortions, seen in the gospels. The mode for interaction was not opened 2000 years ago, nor was revelation to humanity.All that occured was that the west's time came to forego its polytheism, as happened to the pre-islamic arabian peoples with islam, and this was given them in a mode they would understand ['He speaketh in the language of men; He understandeth the nature of man; Abraham shall be the father of many nations'/OT]. Europe was not able to take on board the OT as intended, and there was a compromise made, to assist those who for a long time were embedded in hellenism and romanism: these numerously rejected Monotheism and its stringest requirements, which contradicted their traditions.In the final count, all forms of messengers, dieties, and instruents, even the Gospels, will be directed to Monotheism in an absolute form, al beit via their own circuitous routes, be this via Buddha, Mohammed, Moses, Krishna, Jesus or even the atheist BBT adherants - the buck will stop at ONE. The shortest distance between two dots is when there are no dots in between.Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Elohiym is plural

---

There is only one operating factor here. That Elokim creates in the 'singular' - the verb in the verse is singular. There is no allignment or inference here of the trinity - which appears the only reason this issue is even raised, retrospectively, to render the OT follow the NT. But its the other way around: consider that the NT does not follow the quaran, while this is equally demanded of the NT as it does of the OT. Who's right - of course this depends on who's asking whom - and who decides?The problem appears to be that the NT premise is cushioned in a manner whereby it is wholly dependent on the trinity factor and a name - even it seems more so than the factor of Monotheism, and it becomes negated unless this is upheld via a series of accumulated and complex manouverings of the OT text and of every coherence. It is plain obvious the OT cannot be made hostage to two religions which came 2600 years later - with no interim observence of the OT, and while both the NT and Quran are in polar contradiction of each other. Worse, there is no seeming benefits of this: it becomes akin to first joining a VIP club before entry into salvation. Instead, humanity must find its path via their allignment to sacred laws, instead of its reverse mode. This makes all belief inclined and stopped at ONE - else chaos results - as has been seen from the past till today.The issue of Monotheism is not even rendered by the varied interpretation of a verse in Genesis: there is the entire body of writings from Abraham and Moses to Micah to consider, and numerous Prophets and sages - and a singular break away from its stringent requirements cannot pass eventually. So where does this bring humanity to? Obviously, the MY GD IS BETTER THAN YOURS is not the right way, and only ends up in cyclical disunity: but this is only applicable when names are used, and they disappear when beief is made subject to laws. Why should a christian or muslim or jews have a problem if the message is followed - with no names attached?What is required here is how does humanity unite in one belief, to go forward, without kicking anyone in the soul. I have not an answer obviously, and to be sure - no one else has either. Each belief system is stuck and trapped, not able to move to or fro - so this quagmire is assured to continue.I would throw some feelers here, with the clear understabding humanity is as yet not able to sustain such requirements, but which has no alternatives eventually. Here goes:The main problem appears when the Messenger is made transcendent of the message. When we look at the OT laws, we find no names attached to those laws - eg: THOU SHALT NOT STEAL. These are laws of DOs and DONTs, which do not require names - they are pristine and can be understood by all. But we have such factors as, Gd of Israel; No salvation but tru JC; No Gd w/o Mohammed, etc. Obviously, we cannot expect a Norwegian or Chinese to harken to a tribal family in Canaan 4000 years ago - nor would such harkening have any meanings, aside from policitickings. At the same time, it is just about impossible to ask one not to heed their sacred and revered ones - because the entire belief in the Creator has been attached to a 'NAME' - as opposed what that name says. This is a quagmire for humanity, when seen from a zoomed out aerial view.The price paid for this quagire is enormous upon humanity - it cannot go forward. Nothing can happen if one messenger from one belief systems reveals something, with the condition attached the messenger is transcendent of the message. There are one to many messengers and thus no message anymore. Chaos is the result.
Believe it or not, but if a scripture does not have the mandated command NOT TO ADD OR SUBTRACT - it means they can ADD AND SUBTRACT! This is not subject to traditions or beliefs, but requires a written, mandated law which says so. The OT has this law. I suspect there is a deep reason for it, other than what some see as a Zealous/Jealous God.Eventually, all of humanity must propose laws applicable for mankind - and all humanity must vote, and all agree to apply those as the laws of a universal belief system. Further, any changes outside of what humanity as a whole decides, must come not from a reveation by one group or nation, but from ONE God to all humanity. This means, if one religion's messiah was to appear - we have to say, no sir - we want only the Creator to address all humanity simultainiously. This will put any messiah on the line to deliver or go away: but it raises the value of humanity a 1000 fold.This is how a judiciary court operates on earth - laws agreed to by the Government, by its peoples. There should be no problem expecting Heaven to accept this. I suspect if such happens, nay - when it happens - the resultant agreed laws of humanity will parallel the OT more than any other - but it need not be that way to make the premise a good one. But this is the case today - the world turns by the OT laws - not a single one comes from elsewhere - and mysteriously, the OT declares this as a command - so it occured by itself.There is confusion that the aspect of LOVE is not a law: it is, and well contained in numerous OT laws. But what is important here, is that the eliminations of NAMES and the replacement of LAWS - effects all belief systems equally. I think the greatest impact will be felt by Christianity, to be fair here, but if this is for a higher cause - it is the only Gdly way to go. It's rejection says, christians do not feel they have any laws or messages from their messenger - which is also a telling negative factor equally effecting christians. The same issue impacts muslims and jews equally - perhaps more so because these religions are more fastedious on Monotheism, but who also rever the preferred names of their prophets and messengers. Here, the ultimate sacrifice for God must be evidenced by humanity, not by their messengers. This calls for the sacrifice of names of messengers - and the clinging to the message instead. This is perhaps even greater than a messenger from one sector coming and kicking others in their sincere beliefs. This may be the test upon huanity. Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

Some belief not shared yet by "the rest of humanity" may be belief in what is the truth.Certainly "the rest of humanity" doesn't share some of the opinions you have expressed here either.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Moses wrote "Let Us ..." in obedience to the God. He could have written "Let Me ..." but he did not. At least in these three places in Genesis he did not (Genesis 1:26; 3:22; 11:7).We might add Isaiah 6:8 which also contains the Divine "Us".We cannot blame that on a New Testament writer or expositor. You have to blame Moses for introducing this puzzle or mystery.Moses wrote "the man has become like one of Us". You have to realize that this was penned by this prophet and man of God. If it is mysterious, ( and I beleive it quite is ), you have to lay responsibility for that at the feet of the writer of Genesis.You cannot blame Christians for what was written there in Genesis.Now here is something you may blame Christians for writing. However I believe that it is the truth: Here the apostle Paul writes of things which were revealed to the New Testament apostles and prophets which were not made known to the sons of men.The New Testament apostles and prophets had revelation from God which was not previously revealed to sons of men in previous generations.There is no explicit claim concerning the "Us" in Genesis in this passage. However, the apostle John writes of the Father, Son, as the life giving Holy Spirit being the Divine "We" coming into man to make an abode with the lovers of Christ. I am pursuaded that the Divine "Us" of Genesis ultimately is the same God as the Divine "We" in the Gospel of John.The interpretation is "retrospective" only in the sense that revelations not made known to the sons of men in pre-new covenant age times has now been revealed to God's holy apostles and prophets in spirit in the New Testament age.Both the Divine "Us" and the Divine "We" have to be understood in relation to God dispensing His life into man. God is Triune for the purpose of imparting His life into man.The law of Moses could not give God's life to man. It could expose man as to how much man needed salvation from being apart from God. God's intention from the creation was that man would receive into his being the life of God. This is why he placed Adam before the tree of life. After man's transgression and fall God gave the law to totally expose all fallen sinners. But the law could not give life.Christ came to be Redeemer and life imparter - life giver by giving to man Himself - "the last Adam became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45)So this Divine "We" of the New Testament Gospel of John is the same Triune God as the Divine "Us" coming as a man, dying for our redemption on the cross, resurrecting, and becoming "a life giving Spirit" to dispense the life of God into His believers Jew and Gentiles.If the interpetation of the Trinity being seen in the Genesis "Us" it is because the fuller disclosure of the dispensing of God into man as Divine life is much more revealed in the new covenant than in the old.Paul says that the law was a child-conductor leading us up to faith in Christ:"So then the law has become our child-conductor unto Christ that we might be justified our of faith." (Gal. 3:24)The image of the law of Moses here is as a tutor or accompaning instructor leading the student into deeper knowledge and more complete understanding. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Hi Joseph, I have no idea where you get Elokim from as it does not appear in any Hebrew text I use and was not in the Hebrew text that was translated into the Septuagint, as I can find. I do not find a command not to add or subtract in the Bible.
I did find in the Old Testament. I also found in the New Testament. In Message 62 Apparently you do not believe Jesus was Messiah, God in the flesh come down to pay man's sin debt but rather a prophet or teacher.
Therefore your declaration that Elokim must be used in Genesis. My singular form is spelled Elohim and does not appear in the book of Genesis.You talk about all out laws being based on the OT. Jesus gave us two laws in the NT. Love the Lord thy God with your whole being and above all else. The second was to love thy neighbor as thyself. These two cover the 10 commandments. Now how many of the other 613 laws given to the children of Israel do you want the Gentiles to be under?God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

quote:

---

Some belief not shared yet by "the rest of humanity" may be belief in what is the truth.

---

Can you give any reasons why this should be the case? It did not happen for 2000 years, was not accepted by two major religions before and after christianity emerged: does it means all the other are less believers than christians? One cannot rely only on a religion's adherents, for the entirety of humanity - this leads only to chaos and calamity, and is basically self centred and verly rightious to a point of becomeing self deficient. Eventually, my understanding is that all names will go and only the Creator will reign - so if christians really and truely believe their own beliefs - they loose nothing - they do not and cannot loose the Creator - and this is so regardless of the premise christianity has via accumulation and periodical layers, made an allignment of their revered one with the Creator - in fact this factor leaves no excuse not to deflect from names! This is the higher view here, at least humanity must direct it that way and opt for it. Yhe names and rituals are only bridges relating to each religious group - nothing more than that.

quote:

---

Certainly "the rest of humanity" doesn't share some of the opinions you have expressed here either.

---

Your wrong. The most believed scripture is the OT, by period of time, concencus and impact [15M jews, 2 B christians]. The most believed human is Moses [add 1.2 B muslims to that fig]. This is greater than all scriptures and revered ones in geo-history.Of course one religion's adherants will not accept a view which is different - and vice versa; and the only way out is not via one's preferred beliefs, but by engaging humanity as a whole - this is the ultimate quest, and it transcends the localised. Thus if humanity is going to make sacrifices for humanity, and forego belief in names, for belief in Gdly laws and to bring peace to all - the one who will be most effected here is Judaism: measure the time period of belief and their awesome sacrifices for adhering to it: twice that of christianity. We can be assyred the jews will refuse this premise far more than any other when push comes to shove. As I said, humanity is not ready for such a premise - but that this is inevitiable in the future. Such views come only when we zoom out and look at things from afar.When you think about it - it is a very easy stroke for Heaven to clear up any confusion - one simple direct revelation will do it. No one is going to NOT BELIEVE a direct and open revelation as per Sinai, made to all humanity - simultainiously. It is something any genuine human must accept for humanity. However, if any savior or messenger comes along from any one religion, it won't change a thing: we saw this when christianity rejected Islam - and while both adherents were sincere to a degree that makes their belief at a par margin, and when both equally believe the truth of their religion. Yet we know that all beliefs cannot be true. To reduce belief to a name is not one of great merit anyway, and if it is not limited to a name - this has to be made evidenced and manifest - for a higher cause. Any Messnger worth his salt will agree on that if we had the previligae of asking - its we humans who are the frail and ego effected, and hooked on a spiritual security blanket.So this premise of one saying their religion is the truth becomes a moot point in the big pic. To boot, christianity is the least provable religion - it is based solely on belief, though a very sincere one. Why would you feel that adhering to a message is less transcendent to the messenger - or put in the reverse, why would you feel that believing in the message but not the messenger is wanting? Would you rather that one believes in a name, but not in say a sacred law - such as not to murder? I'm sure not. And surely a messenger's name is not a message to anyone but that who was inculcated that way.My point is not against any religion, but to save all believers who are Gdly inclined or Creator inclined - as well as those who have variant beliefs and even no beliefs but would accept sacred laws. The best way to examine this premise is to ask yourself if you would condone another religionist telling you only their religion is the truth and the only truth? That answer is blatant.There is a great difference in the premises of'DO UNTO OTHERS WHAT IS GOOD FOR YOU' - and - 'DO NOT DO UNTO OTHERS WHAT IS HATEFUL TO YOU'. The former allows one to enforce their will on someone - the other negates this possibility. Billions of innocent humans have perished on the former - not one with the latter.The same applies to LOVE THY NEIGHBOUR - and - LOVE THE STRANGER. The former becomes self-serving - the other self-less and far more demanding. There is arguably no merit in the former. It all boils down to one question: what laws and concepts a religion has, other than the names of its revered ones? Here, the OT has a most telling episode.Genesis says, on a particularly hot day in the desert, Abraham was assisting some famished travellers who needed urgent assistance. At this point, Abraham is confronted with a revelation from God and is called upon. Abraham says, SORRY, I CANNOT COME NOW - PEOPLE NEED MY HELP. The next verse says:'AND THE LORD WAITED ON ABRAHAM'.

quote:

---

Hi Joseph,

​

IamJoseph writes:
There is only one operating factor here. That Elokim creates in the 'singular'

​

I have no idea where you get Elokim from as it does not appear in any Hebrew text I use and was not in the Hebrew text that was translated into the Septuagint, as I can find.

---

By using K instead of H, one does not mention a sacred name in vain [casually]. That is the only point, and is encumbant by the 3rd of the 10 Cs.

quote:

---

IamJoseph writes:
Believe it or not, but if a scripture does not have the mandated command NOT TO ADD OR SUBTRACT - it means they can ADD AND SUBTRACT!

​

I do not find a command not to add or subtract in the Bible.
I did find in the Old Testament.

​

Deut 12:32 (KJV) What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.

​

I also found in the New Testament.

​

Reve 22:18 (KJV) For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book. 20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
21 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

---

The law of precedence applies. One cannot change the OT - not even in slight interpretation. So that no changes must first apply to the OT, and thus the NT becomes an addition. If one change is allowed - there can be no means or justification of stopping this trend. However, I tried to bypass such variances of beliefs - they pervade all religions. All mothers love their children too.

quote:

---

In Re: Re- God Us (Message 62)

​

IamJoseph writes:
In fact, Jesus was only one of 1.1 Million other jews who also had their lives sacrificed in an equally, or more terrible, manner, and it remains a sad error of its omission, and its distortions, seen in the gospels.

​

Apparently you do not believe Jesus was Messiah, God in the flesh come down to pay man's sin debt but rather a prophet or teacher.
Therefore your declaration that Elokim must be used in Genesis. My singular form is spelled Elohim and does not appear in the book of Genesis.

​

You talk about all out laws being based on the OT. Jesus gave us two laws in the NT. Love the Lord thy God with your whole being and above all else. The second was to love thy neighbor as thyself. These two cover the 10 commandments.

---

Both those laws are OT laws. So it looks if those words were actually said by Jesus - he was not talking about the NT.

quote:

---

Now how many of the other 613 laws given to the children of Israel do you want the Gentiles to be under?

​

God Bless,

---

Of the 613, when we seperate the ritual laws [prefixed UNTO YOU], all of the moral/ethical laws are accepted by the world in all its institutions, to the extent those countries which do not follow them are seen as operating outside of the law. Not one of them is passe, so the term fullfilled can only be interpreted as observence of the not, not its being obsolete. There are no world accepted laws from any other religion - a provacative claim, but one which happens to be true, and a mysterious thing considering the OT adherants were always on the run in dispersals and exiles, and many great religions followed it.When the greatest revelation occured, namely at Sinai - the last thing the hebrews wanted were LAWS. They just came out of centuries of bondage and decrees. The only thing they got was an out pouring of laws. Love was one of them - and made subservient to two other factors: Honesty [3rd commandment], and respect [Honor of parents and the hoary]. This is correct, for what good is love w/o those factors? This gives a mathematical style constructive teaching what love is - its more than a generic term in a Beatles song.The important point is, those laws never needed any names!Bless you all!

1/16 is no problem at all: why would the 'US' not be used, when all the life forms were already created - including the spiritual beings in Heaven? Humans are the last and most recent. There is a verse in the psalms which clearly says, ALL LIFE KNOWS YOU. While humans speak to and of God via speech - other life forms do so via instincts. There are a whole array of commandments dealing with animals in the OT - they are regarded by he creator.
We learn from here that speech is a unique gift to humans, because the other life forms were not able to respond via dialogue. The first recorded dialogue is in genesis, between God and humans.The more important factor which answers your question of 1/26, is the next verse:

quote:

---

1/27 And God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them.

---

Note: created is singular; HIS is singular; in the image and He is singular. Also, this alligns with all other factors and commands in the OT - which is an intergrated document.Grammar was introduced in the OT, where it reaches its epitomy.

Hi Joseph, The important point is those laws were never given to Gentiles.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

I think you have to get into the scheme of the chapter.All the creatures are said to be after their kind. Each is made after its particular kind. Now a difference occurs in the creation of man. Man is after the kind of God. This is what you have to grasp here.When it comes to humanity God says "Let Us make man in Our image ...". The phrase " in Our image, according to Our likeness " should be juxtapose against "according to their kind" in 1:11,12,12 again, 21,21 again,24,24 again,25, 25 again Now in verse 26 we come to the creation of Man. In no other creation act does it say it say "Let Us". A special council was convened and a decision was made within the Godhead. This is special. This is different from all that has gone before in terms of created beings.Now God convenes a special council and the Divine "Us" creates man not according to their kind but according to the likeness of the Divine "Us" and according the the image of the Divine Our image.Do you see the difference when it comes to humanity?Now none of the other creatures take part in the act of creation. God alone is the Creator of Man. While the first dialogue may be between God and humans, BEFORE this dialogue you have God speaking within God and to God saying "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Oule likeness ..."This conversation PRECEEDS the dialogue between God and man.I completely agree with your next obervation which is precisely why mystified theologians arrived at a word Trinity and Tri - une or Three - One. For they could not deny that the Scritpure only presents God as one - one God. Yet God is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.Your observation simply confirms the mysterious nature of a God Who says "Let Us" and then tell us that the SINGULAR must refer to Him."And God created man in HIS own image; in the image of God He created him."It does not say "Their own image". Neither does it say "in the image of God THEY created him".Here you confirm my very point: It is well noted.So then WHO is "Us" in verse 26?Do you have any passage showing ANGELS participated with God in the creation of man?Do you have any passage showing OTHER life forms participated with God in the creation of man?Do you have any passage showing any other gods participated with God in the creation of man.I have none showing these things. But I do have Isaiah 9:6, for example, saying that the human child born shall be called Mighty God. And the same passage shows the Son given shall be called Eternal Father.A child, nine months in the womb of a woman, and coming out in natural birth like the rest of us is The Mighty God. And a Son is given to us. Yet such an unusual Son. This Son is simultaneously the Eternal Father.Here is a biblical source for our mysterious Divine "Let Us".I believe that the best Person in history to qualify to be the focus of Isaiah's prophecy is the Man Who claimed to be God come to us in the flesh as the Son of Man / the Son of God - Jesus of Nazareth: This One is God defined and God expressed. This One is God manifested. And He refers to the Divine "We". The Triune God created man in His image for a specific reason. It was mainly that He might dispense Himself into man to be man's eternal life. We were made like God to contain God.I said, we were made like God in order that God may come into us and be one with us in a united, blended, harmonious, interwoven way - an incorporation and a mingling of Divinity and humanity.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Now a difference occurs in the creation of man. Man is after the kind of God. This is what you have to grasp here.

---

Sure, and it is blatant that humans are unique in the universe. It is the gift of 'speech' refered as a Gdlike attribute, which makes humans unique - speech being the only tool the universe was created with. ['AND THE LRD *SAID* LET THERE BE LIGHT']. 'SAID' being speech, and nothing else, no tools or elements, was available when creation occured. We find all man's prowess is resultant only from speech. Speech is also alluded to in the 3rd C from Sinai - not to take the name in vain, being a reference to the sacredness of the word.

quote:

---

When it comes to humanity God says "Let Us make man in Our image ...". The phrase " in Our image, according to Our likeness " should be juxtapose against "according to their kind" in 1:11,12,12 again, 21,21 again,24,24 again,25, 25 again

---

This verse of 'kind' also applies to humans, and is affirmed later in genesis re created beings and their kinds - it applies to all creation, including non-biological entities: 'AND IT WAS SO' also applying to light, darkness, water and the firmaments. It is also an affirmation that species variances are not subject to skeletal and biological fossil records as per ToE. Thus we find no other life forms developed speech - despite their advantage of time over humans, adaptation being subject to time. Humans were originally incepted with speech, and it is not a result of evolution. A child is not though how to speak - the parent merely clicks and an inherent wirings takes over. Speech is ToE's greatest stumbling block.

quote:

---

In no other creation act does it say it say "Let Us".

---

Correct. But this is because the other life forms never had speech, thus no dialogue. But we know that spiritual beings do have speech, and that their creation precedes humans. The heavens were created before the earth [Genesis opening verse], and many Angels spoke to some of the revered prophets such as Abraham. There is here a premise of the sages that if any life forms exist elsewhere from earth - they would possess communication traits - but not speech.

quote:

---

A special council was convened and a decision was made within the Godhead. This is special.

---

Special can only refer to the cordiality of inclusion afforded them by God; we see this cordiality also afforded to Abraham concerning the destruction of Sodom: it would be inappropiate not to inform one of an important event, when in a close relationship. But any alluding that the council was party to the act of Creation should not be condoned, and would fall into blasphemy and the denting of the ONENESS of the creator. It was said to Moses that only God can give life, with no assistance from any source whatsoever - all sources not being existent when creation occured. This is seen in the opening 4 words of genesis - 'IN THE GENNING GOD'/Gen; and 'I TAKE LIFE AND I GIVE LIFE'/Ex.

quote:

---

Do you see the difference when it comes to humanity?

---

Yes, there is blatant differences with humans, and it is limited to speech - a Gdlike trait, which is alligned with man having dominion of all the worlds - meaning not only the universe, but also over spiritual beings eventually. The latter is undertandable when we consider only humans are given free choice [limited to moral/ethical decisions only, thus the 'law' was the first thing given at Sinai], and angels do not have the incumberence of laws and death - thereby also less merit than humans. Man is thus on a greater treshold than angels, who look down upon us in awe and tremblings how we survive in this scenario, where death can occur anytime. All in heaven is a reflection of and dependent upon what man does: this is the main arena, and this is because the law and the word of God was given to humans, not to angels: the Serpent was an envious angel wanting man to fail! 'The fullness of the glory of his works' is a verse of the angels on Sinai, who were bwing and extoling the Creator, which was overheard by Moses and thus recorded in the OT - it refers to a battle between arch angels and Moses, both vying for the OT - Moses won this academic battle on the grounds these laws cannot apply to those who have no death, and no temptation to sin. As per the story in Job, whereby an angel challenged Godthat man would sin and fail the Creator's gift when tested, so did the angels argue man should not be given the OT [Torah]. Thus did Moses tarry on the mount 40 days and 40 nights, striving the case for humanity - and Moses prevailed.Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

I think we agree about the uniqueness of human speech here. Though it is not this alone which separates us from the animals.However, I think you might get something out of a certain article called something like "Who Taught Man [or Adam] How to Talk?" It is scientifically based and biblically related also.If you're interested "Arthur Custance Doorway Papers" arthur Custance a ancient language expert, linquist, and Bible scholar has this interesting article on Who Taught Adam to Speak?http://www.custance.org/...Part_VI/WhoTaughtAdamtoSpeak.html After the fall of man, you are correct, we have this passage:"And Adam lived ont hundred thirty years and begot [a son] in his likeness according to his image, and he called his name Seth" (Gen. 5:3)You are quite correct. However if you back up to the first verse of the same chapter we have a reminder that Adam was made in the likeness of God:"This is the book of the generations of Adam. When God created Adam, He made him in the likeness of God." (Gen 5:1) So I am of the opinion that the term "mankind" actually only becomes relevant after the fall of Adam. The descendents of Adam and Eve born after the fall and expulsion of Adam from his original created state may be said to be "mankind" - in the image and likeness of the fallen man Adam.Man is still made in the image of God. However he has been marred. He has been damaged. He has been defiled by the fall. No other life forms posses the propencity to worship God either. The worshipping organ (so to speak) is not in any of the animals. Man is created with a worshipping component. The Bible says that God has placed eternity in man's heart. There is something in man that hungers and reaches out to that which is eternal. God is eternal:"He has made everything beautiful in its own time; also He [God] has put eternity in their heart, yet so that man does not find out what God has done from the beginning to the end." (Ecc. 3:11) The Creator of man has placed eternity in the heart of man. This also speaks of man in the image of God. Man has a God shaped vacuum within him that only the Eternal God can fit into and fill.So I would highlight not only man's speaking ability as setting him apart from the other living creatures. I would also include man's "organ" which prompts him to worship - to seek fellowship with God and to communion with God.No animals erect temples or seek to pray as far as we know. Animals do not build places of worship as far as we know.I know that there is something called a "praying mantis" but that is just because his claws are folded to look as if the insect is praying.Man alone seeks to pray to God, talk to God, commune with God, and fellowship with God to love God. Interesting. Wait a minute. "Let Us make man ..." is the speaking of God.
Genesis is recording what was spoken by God. I concur with this not only based on Genesis but other passages as well. For example Zechariah 12:1

​

"The burden of the word of Jehovah concerning Israel. This declares Jehovah, who stretches forth the heavens and lays the foundation of the earth and forms the spirit of man within him." (Zech 12:1) The heavens is made for the earth.
The earth is made for man.
And man has a spirit within him and is made for God.The heavens are mentioned first. Then the earth is mentioned second. And man with the worshipping spirit within him is the benefitiary of the previous two. Man is made for God.The full impact of the meaning of the human spirit does not become clear until the New Testament. In the New Testament the purpose of the human spirit becomes the most clear. It is designed to be joined to God:"He who is joined to the Lord is one spirit" (1 Cor. 6:17)The Lord here is Jesus Christ the Lord.
Jesus Christ the Lord is God incarnate, died, resurrected, and become a life giving Spirit -"the last Adam became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45)The man or woman saved by Jesus Christ through faith is JOINED in thier innermost being - the human spirit, with the life giving Spirit Who is God in Christ in a form in which He can enter into man.In the joining the spirit of the man or woman becomes "ONE SPIRIT" with the Lord. That is the Lord Spirit - the Holy Spirit becomes joined with the human spirit and the two become ONE mingled, united, blended spirit."He who is joined to the Lord is one spirit"No longer the two are separated: man's spirit and God the Spirit. But the two are joined and mingled together. This is why we say as Christians that Jesus Christ lives in us. It is not sentimental. It is actual. But there is more to it. He lives in our spirit and seeking to migrate out from there into our soul. As He moves out from the confines of our regenerated spirit into our soul the personality begans to express Christ. For the personality is seated in the soul of man.The joining of the Divine Spirit of Triune God with the comatose and deadened spirit of man causes the human spirit to be reborn: That which undergoes a new birth in salvation is the spirit in man. Remember, God steteched forth the heavens and laid the foundation of the earth and formed the spirit of man within him. Within man is the spirit of man.We when receive Jesus Christ into our being by invitation our human spirit is reborn of the Holy Spirit. The spirit is born of the Spirit. And the two spirits become one mingled spirit. For he who is joined to the Lord is "one spirit."The capital S Spirit causes the small s spirit to be enlivened, reborn, resurrected, and brought out of its comatose and deadened condition from the fall of Adam.So much more needs to be written about this. I have tried to show that it is not speech alone which marks us as unique. Although speech is no doubt a factor in man's particularity over the animals.I have tried to briefly show that man has a God receiver. Man has an "organ" for contacting God and being joined with God.This is like a radio antenna. The air is filled with radio waves. But if the radio has no antenna it cannot pick up the radio waves. On those waves are music, news, speech, etc.God is in a form in which man needs a divinely created antenna to pick Him up. The God substantiating organ is right within us. It is our human spirit. It is not our human soul. It is deeper than our personality. It is deep within as our human spirit.In that spot God has placed eternity as the Bible says in Ecc. 3:11.Much more needs to be said about the spirit of man. But God formed the universe. He laid the foundation of the planet earth. And upon earth he created man who within him has something called "the spirit of man within him."This spirit of man is the Divine antenna which can pick up the divine "radio waves" of the eternal God.Before another poster alluded to the temple as the outer court, the holy place, and the holy of holies. This also corresponds to the way man is created - outward body - inward soul - and more inward human spirit. It is in the human spirit where man is meant to be "one spirit" with the Lord God, where the glory of God dwells.We must be born anew. We must have out spirit born of the Spirit which is Jesus Christ and His Father. I emphatically see NO ONE Participating in the council except God Himself. Here is where we must have a difference of view. You seem to thing that the "Us" includes some others beside God. This is where we have a difference.It says "And God said, Let Us make man in our image, according to our likeness ..." (Gen 1:26)It is NOT the first time that Genesis has said that God said something. It is a repetition of what has been written before. For example:"And God said, Let there be light ..." (1:3)
"And God called the light Day ... " (1:5)
"And God saud, Let there be abd expanse ... " (1:6)
"And God called the expanse Heaven ... " (1:8)
"And God said, Let the waters under the heavens ..." (1:9)On and on we are told that God said something. Now we come to Genesis 1:26 and the same thing is repeated. Do you suggest that the others times it was God and someone else speaking?Verse 26 does not say "And God [ and the angles ] said". Nor does it say "And God [and the people] said ...".It is as in the previous verses of God saying, He alone speaks. "And God said, Let Us ..."WHO do you proport to be in on that council beside God Himself and what is your evidence of proof of the extra party being involved? Ah but I differ here.I await for you to tell me who is the Us that created man in the image of God.One thing I think we agree on is that the creation of man is different from the creation of all other things in Genesis. This council is not mentioned in connection with the creation of ANYTHING else. Man is special, because man is made in the image of God and according to the likeness of God.You say in essence "No council concept must be condoned" but you cannot erase the word "US". You cannot ignore the word "US".That is what is written. Who then is Us? If it is blasphemy then it is blasphemy according to what Moses wrote. You have to blame Moses for the blasphemy unless you come up with a plausible explanation as to who God and the other party is who share God's image. "Let Us make man in Our image"Face it Joseph. It does not even say "Let Us make man in [MY] image ...". Then you might have some ground to say God is speaking to angels. But the image belonging to the "Our" is the image of the image belonging to Us who is doing the making. And the next passage says that man was "in His [God's] own
image" [qs]And God created man in HIS OWN image, in the image of GOD He created him ..." (Gen. 1:27) Why does it not say "in the image [of God and the angels]?' Why does it not say "in [Thier] own image" rather than "in His own image"?Don't speak of blasphemy. Moses wrote this. If it is blasphemy then you have to say that Moses wrote blasphemy.I would not put it that way. I might put it this way: "Moses wrote mystery". Moses wrote something very mysterious. Moses wrote something mysterious to understand which needs the whole rest of the Bible including the New Testament oracles of God, to define and explain to us. That is a good point. However, God made an object called the ark of the covenant. If it was touched the wrong way God would take your life.In Genesis there is a tree of life. For Adam to eat of it was for Adam to receive the life of God Himself. No I do not believe that God is a tree or was a tree. But I can imagine that in order to make universal principles clear to all the human race, He could do things in a manner which communicates His truth. He had two trees with two kinds of fruit: the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.The tree of life was like the ark of the covenant. Somehow, to interact with it was to touch the life of God Himself. And to interact with the other tree, the forbidden one was to contact the evil spirit.Only God could give both the bios life and the eternal divine life. I agree if that is what you mean. The uncreated Life is the source of all created life. The uncreated life is God Himself. And He said "Let Us make man in Our image".Man in the image of God with eternity in his heart is designed to contain the uncreated and holy life of God Himself. That is that God and man could be united. He is the Head and Source of the relationship. Man is the recipient and gifted one of the relationship. For this much more than just speech is required.A parrot can imitate the speech of a human being. I think we have to look to more than speech. We agree on the uniqueness of speech. You wish to limit this uniqueness to speech. I think it goes beyond only speech.But speech is a component of this difference and uniqueness of man over the other creatures. We have to recognize that man is not an angel though as the angels of heaven. And they speak. They spoke in thier singing and celebrated at the creation accoding to Job 38: There is the speaking God. There are the speaking, shouting, and singing angels of God - "the morning stars" and "sons of God"[/b]. If speech is the key to fulfillment of the eternal purpose of God then why does God need man? He already had millions of angels who could speak.There must be something about man which not only set him apart from the other animals but even sets him apart from the angels in heavem also. Do you see my point?Millions of angels spoke and sang as God laid the cornerstone of creation. That us certainly before the creation of man. They already could speak. So why did God need more creatures who could speak if that is the ONLY trait of uniqueness valuable to the Creator? I think you draw at least a little closer. However, a decision was made by some angels to rebel against God. They knew it was wrong morally. Yet they chose to rebel.Is it only the New Testament that infers that angels rebelled against God by choosing? No indeed. Once again the Hebrew Bible informs us of wrong doing angels: In this oldest book of the Bible apparently the patriarchs knew that some of the angels had committed errors. Certainly the beginning of the book shows Satan coming with the other angelic sons of God choosing to blaspheme God by accusations. He wanted Jon to curse God to His face because Satan himself, even as one of the angelic "sons of God" (Job 1:6,13,38:7) wanted to do so.An angel and some angels chose to commit error and rebel against God and His moral authority.Thank God we have also the clarity of the teaching of Jesus: The Devil and his ANGELS chose to revolt against thier Creator. Not only so but they seek to join mankind to their rebellion that their eternal doom may not be suffered alone.I don't want to be their stooges to accompany them to the punishment prepared for them. We come closer to agreement in some of these things you say now. We agree here completely. I have been saying this. Interesting. We will come back to the law of Moses latter. Before the law of Moses God put the created man before the tree of life.The only real important command was that Adam should be careful of what he ate. That is Adam should be careful what entered into his being. Adam should be careful what got on the inside of him. We are what we eat. What we eat becomes the constitution of our being.Man was made in the image of God to take into himself God, as symbolized by the tree of life. There was no command how to worship. There was no command not to murder. There was no command not to make an idol or even break the Sabbath. There was only a command to be careful not to EAT the wrong fruit.If Adam would take in the fruit of the tree of life he would not only be a created man, he would be a God man - a man with God withing him. I hope to stress in the future the difference between a God created man and a God man.Before the new covenant age the rabbis probably taught that the tree of life was the word of God or the law of God. In that age I think that that is probably the best and most appropriate understanding that they could have had.For the word of God and the law of God proceed from God and express God. However, we have to realize that man was excluded from participation in the tree of life. So this cannot really represent the word of God or the Law of God since both are presented to the sinner.But the New Testament apostle teaches us rightly that man was "alienated from the life of God" (Eph. 4:18)When in history did man begin to be estranged and alienated from the very life of God? Where? It is recorded right here that this alienatation from the life of God commenced: At this time fallen human beings were "alienated from the life of God" (Eph. 4:18). Even so God still delevers His law to Israel and to the world. And even so God speaks His word to man. These are to bring man back to the life of God.The barrier to the life of God is ultimately removed in the death of Jesus Christ on the cross of His redemptive salvation for mankind.
No one comes to the Father except through the crucified and resurrected Son.When we think of the word Father in relation to God, we should think of Him not only as the Creator but as the Source of the Divine and eternal life of God. He Fathers His saved people by imparting His own Spirit into them, dispensing the life of God into the redeemed and saved.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

quote:

---

I think we agree about the uniqueness of human speech here. Though it is not this alone which separates us from the animals.However, I think you might get something out of a certain article called something like "Who Taught Man [or Adam] How to Talk?" It is scientifically based and biblically related also.

​

If you're interested "Arthur Custance Doorway Papers" arthur Custance a ancient language expert, linquist, and Bible scholar has this interesting article on Who Taught Adam to Speak?

​

http://www.custance.org/...Part_VI/WhoTaughtAdamtoSpeak.html

---

Those links sound good, I will read them shortly. Before I do, my impression is that speech appeared suddenly and in an already advanced form, by-passing the ToE related evolutionary phase. This stands to reason from the pov, the time factor has not impacted the other older life forms to beget speech; there is no evidence of speech prior to Adam/6000 years.

quote:

---

IAJ:

​

So I am of the opinion that the term "mankind" actually only becomes relevant after the fall of Adam.

---

Mankind as in modern humans, which is speech endowed, is of course a variant from depictions of prototypes of humans. There is no question something epochial occured around 6000 years ago. There is really no history per se before this date, and all modern human faculties and imprints disappear beyond that date. That we can debate this today, and that a bold, risk-prone date specific to the year was declared in Genesis 3,500 years ago - is something I find very creepy. Nothing justifies or explains it.

quote:

---

No other life forms posses the propencity to worship God either.

---

Nor of speech or the unique human trait of pornography, despite that humans alone were commanded to go forth and multiply. The other factor which is uniquely human are free choice - limited to moral/ethical values, which is in turn subsequent to laws/commandments.

quote:

---

There is something in man that hungers and reaches out to that which is eternal.

---

Correct, and the only valid definition of eternal/infinite is seen in the book of Exodus, namely, 'I AM THE LORD I HAVE NOT CHANGED'. Anything subject to change, in any form or level, is thus not infinite. Because whatever can change something, is transcendent of it.

quote:

---

I know that there is something called a "praying mantis" but that is just because his claws are folded to look as if the insect is praying.

---

I thought it was 'preying'

quote:

---

The full impact of the meaning of the human spirit does not become clear until the New Testament. In the New Testament the purpose of the human spirit becomes the most clear. It is designed to be joined to God:

​

"He who is joined to the Lord is one spirit" (1 Cor. 6:17)

​

The Lord here is Jesus Christ the Lord.
Jesus Christ the Lord is God incarnate, died, resurrected, and become a life giving Spirit -

​

"the last Adam became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45)

​

The man or woman saved by Jesus Christ through faith is JOINED in thier innermost being - the human spirit, with the life giving Spirit Who is God in Christ in a form in which He can enter into man.

---

This is a preferential belief, and one may go via any chosen path: the person's virtues transcends the path. The OT also commands, as a non-negotiable mandated law, NOT TO ADD OR SUBTRACT. This means it is complete and requires no tempering. We also see, that many rightious souls existed during and pre-OT, declared so by the Creator. I believe this factor was also acknowledged by the Pope. The exclusive path can thus only apply when one has entered such a covenant among themselves, making Jesus applicable only yo christians. In the end, the message rules, and the messenger/s become pathways of introductions only. One must include all applicable laws, because like the universe, the OT is an intergrated treatise. IOW, one cannot disregard such factors as:'ONLY THE SOUL THAT SINNETH IT SHALL PAY - THE SON SHALL NOT PAY FOR THE FATHER NOR THE MOTHER FOR THE DAUGHTER'By its reverse application, it also means that a rightious person cannot be made guilty by virtue of where he lives, hus skin color, or which community, nation or religion he is attached with. Ths is correct - I would not like to see a good man penalised without due reason. Goodness comes from doing good only.

Hi Joseph, Salvation comes only by believing on the Lord Jesus Christ. God loved mankind.Man was already condemned in Adam.Jesus died that mankind might live. Be born of the Spirit.He was resurrected that we might know it is real.All we have to do is receive the pardon offered by God.God the Father loved us. Jesus, God the Son died for us. The Holy Spirit seals our soul until the day of redemption when we are born again.This is the same "US" we find in Genesis 1:26.They are one.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."