Bob wrote:
> zach wrote:
> > Bob wrote:
> > > Throughout the bible, God is referred to in the singular tense.
Yet
> > in
> > > Genesis 1:26 God is referred to in the plural sense.
> > >
> > > And God said, "Let *us* make man in *our* image after *our*
> > > likeness."  (KJV)(NAB)
> > >
> > > Then God said "And now *we* will make human beings; they will be
> like
> > > *us* and resemble *us*. (GNB)
> > >
> > > If the bible is literally and truly the "Word of
God", as many
> > > Christians believe, these words appear to say that God is a
> > collection
> > > of spiritual beings rather than a singular spiritual being. And
if
> we
> > > try to explain away the meaning of the plural pronouns, are we
not
> > > doubting the Word of God?
> >
> > The literal Word of God came to Earth in bodily form in the man of
> > Jesus Christ. Numerous places in the New Testament state that God,
> the
> > invisible, referred to as The Father, created all of creation
through
> > his Word. The plurality affirms the man, and the mission of Jesus
> > Christ, as evidenced by what the Apostles wrote about him in the
New
> > Testament. Creation, and the incarnation of Jesus, and subsequent
> blood
> > self-sacrifice for the salvation of mankind, were done according to
> the
> > will of the Father, God.
> >
> > (((   Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you
> post.   )))
>
>     OK, I can agree that Christ is one of the plurality. but I still
> have the question of "Why was man's creation a joint effort?"
>     In Genesis and the story of Creation, God creates the universe
(big
> bang), creates the sun & earth, the atmosphere on earth, the land
mass,
> the plants, sea life, birds, and land animals. All typical of what
you
> would expect an omnipowerful Creator to do. But when it came to man,
it
> became a joint project whereas he could have easily done it himself
as
> he did the rest of creation. That's what strikes me as odd.
>     Or else that part of the story had a different author who decided
> to insert an addendum, which is entirely possible also. But why the
> need?

That is a very interesting point, in that He starts to use the plural
when He creates man "in our likeness." I had never thought of it.

((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group.  All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
(((   Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post.   )))


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/1/05 9:34:37 AM ---