Men and Women in GOD's image?

[Fraught]

When God says man kind he refers to all people. In this sense we can say that both male and female are made in Gods image.

God is Spirit and they that worship Him must do so in spirit and in truth. In the spiritual sense both male and female can worship God as equal Godly beings.

However, in the flesh a husband does have authority over his wife and children. But...

When it says we're made in Gods image and likeness, remember, God is not a fleshly human being although He does indeed look like a man in appearance because the Bible says so.

So, if you're speaking fleshly, yes males look like Him and when you speak spiritually, both male and female take on His image, likeness.

It is the spiritual man that is really important anyway, because no flesh person shall enter Heaven so thank God both men and women are on the same level in that particuliar sense.

but this is very contradictory. you say "God is not a fleshly human being" & you say "He looks like a man in appearance". I can go along with this only pertaining to Christ. He did choose to appear as a man (Jesus) for reasons of His own and obvious to us, in that culture (and maybe even in this one) that was pretty much the only choice if He was going to be heeded at all.

[Fraught]

*sighs*

SamP said

When it says we're made in Gods image and likeness, remember, God is not a fleshly human being although He does indeed look like a man in appearance because the Bible says so.

that's why i am asking where in the Bible it says that God does "indeed look like a man in appearance".

saying the Bible uses "He" in reference to God in no way answers this question.

How can it not? Have you ever seen a normal person being referred to as "he" that is not "a man in appearance"?

God is not a "normal person". He is Spirit. please don't put Him on your level.

are you saying God has male reproductive organs and chest hair? does He shave His face? is He broad chested and narrow waisted? as i've said, other things besides men are referred to as "he" and it has nothing at all to do with their appearance. being called "He" has nothing to do with God's appearance.

God came down to be a normal person - the most normal person in creation since the pre-fall Adam. I don't place God on my level - He did it Himself!

Second, as for "the parts of God," why does it even matter? Are you really curious to know if God has chest hair?

Finally, your reasoning is absurd. All males are called "he." Do you think that God looks like a woman and yet is called "He."? Such would be a defilement of God's nature, not to mention completely heretical.

I absolutely have. Up until 20 years ago, or maybe less, most writings used 'he' as a general pronoun because it was considered too cumbersome to do otherwise. It was assumed that the word 'he' was referring to a person, whether male or female. Now that's a fact. Look it up for yourself. Only the feminist movement changed this sometime in the 70's or 80's, i believe. Do you really believe that every time Paul in the N.T. referred to 'the brethren' that He was only speaking to the male members of the body? No Way!

[Mudcat]

To the original post... if anyone here still remembers it. The last few pages look a bit derailed.

Anyways. I believe as other have said, man and woman are made in God's image.

It is not like we can disengender God because he made man and woman in his image. It's not like God places us having a specific knowledge of what "in his image" actually meant as something that endangers our salvation. If we afford no literary license, then every male should exist as one man but in three persons.... at least if we are Trinitarians.

I really don't see what the fuss is about.

[Fraught]

To the original post... if anyone here still remembers it. The last few pages look a bit derailed.

Anyways. I believe as other have said, man and woman are made in God's image.

It is not like we can disengender God because he made man and woman in his image. It's not like God places us having a specific knowledge of what "in his image" actually meant as something that endangers our salvation. If we afford no literary license, then every male should exist as one man but in three persons.... at least if we are Trinitarians.

I really don't see what the fuss is about.

the fuss is about this statement in the original post: "the Bible is very clear about GOD being of a male persuation and HIS personification was also in the same male image". The Bible is actually very clear that God is a spirit.

[exrockstar]

one way mankind has God's image:

HE has a personality...we have a personality.

add more. it's fun. yay!

[TheStudent]

I rather understand the genuine intent is to refer to humankind's LIKENESS to God.

I see the use of the word 'image' as a failed translation.

btw: it's not the idea everything whatsoever in both the Old and New Testaments are

of God's will and guided authorship, but that it's contributing writers intend to assert

what they are saying is God concerned. Some is important guidance and wisdom, some

misses the 'mark'.

Genesis has Adam and Eve as originally purely good and necessarily knowing eternal life,

yet Eden is asserted a material life and cannot possible provide for eternal living.

(matter is defined by it's limit, relative to the eternal and infinite.)

[Shiloh62]

I read an interesting post that stateed that men and women were made in GOD's image. I wonder if someone wouldn't mind a slightly controversial question.

Is that really scriptural?

According to all I have read in the Bible, man was made in the image of GOD and woman was made from/in the image of man. Now, this might mean that woman is made in the image of GOD by virtue of being made inthe image of something made in the image of GOD, but is it really the same? After all, men and women do not look alike and the Bible is very clear about GOD being of a male persuation and HIS personification was also in the same male image.

So, is there scripture that states that women are made in the image of GOD?

I know that this can bring out some angry remarks. Try to curb that. Just wondering if there is scripture to back up a statement.

(O, I get the whole "In JESUS there is no male of female..." which is not an answer to this question)

Thanks

Peace

I believe that God made man in His image (in other words, Adam looked roughly like the Lord) and then later made woman in His image as well (taking care to differentiate between the two in order to create attraction between them.) I don't think the Bible specifically says that though.

okaaaaay! interesting!

[Fraught]

To the original post... if anyone here still remembers it. The last few pages look a bit derailed.

Anyways. I believe as other have said, man and woman are made in God's image.

It is not like we can disengender God because he made man and woman in his image. It's not like God places us having a specific knowledge of what "in his image" actually meant as something that endangers our salvation. If we afford no literary license, then every male should exist as one man but in three persons.... at least if we are Trinitarians.

I really don't see what the fuss is about.

the fuss is about this statement in the original post: "the Bible is very clear about GOD being of a male persuation and HIS personification was also in the same male image". The Bible is actually very clear that God is a spirit.

Also God has addressed "O Daughters of Jerusalem". Was He speaking only to the women. Obviously, these are figures of speech. Or, perhaps the Bride of Christ will be only women.

[Fraught]

I rather understand the genuine intent is to refer to humankind's LIKENESS to God.

I see the use of the word 'image' as a failed translation.

btw: it's not the idea everything whatsoever in both the Old and New Testaments are

of God's will and guided authorship, but that it's contributing writers intend to assert

what they are saying is God concerned. Some is important guidance and wisdom, some

misses the 'mark'.

Genesis has Adam and Eve as originally purely good and necessarily knowing eternal life,

yet Eden is asserted a material life and cannot possible provide for eternal living.

(matter is defined by it's limit, relative to the eternal and infinite.)

matter is defined by its limit now. natural laws have been put in place that define physical reality as we know it insofar as our historical knowledge extends. however, it may not have always been so. could 2 generations past have imagined this question?: is there a way to make an object more solid? no, but we can. it makes me wonder what questions we cannot yet imagine.

(edited because i'm not always clear-spoken. as to solidity, i am referring to the relatively new knowledge that the majority of a solid object is really empty space, as far as we can see)

[HAZARD]

Hi.

Man was created a miniture of God in soul and spirit faculties and with bodily parts like those of God. The only difference between the faculties of God and those of man is that those of God are infinate and those of man are finite; one is unlimited, and the other is limited. In other words, man has the same feelings as God and is capable of grief, anger, repentance, jealousy, hate, love, pity, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, mercy, compassion, kindness, fear, fellowship, pleasure, delight, and other soul passions and appetites and desires, but only on a smaller scale.