Evidence for God from Science

Hughfarey,

How come whenever I read your name, I think of this?

Huge Fairy

Believe me, Rick, people with names like mine know them all...

hugh
I was just rereading those two chapters in Genesis -- God is telling us the order in which He created everything and He was making a point of creating Man vs 26 'let Us create man in Our image , according to Our likeness , let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.
Chapter 2 -- the importance of the seventh day -- day of rest.
And He gives specifics in How man was created. And then the woman. And the home He'd fixed up for them.
I honestly don't find anything contradictory. It's a continuing account Of.
"Then God said." would you say that means He actually spoke those things into existence?
That which would be seen as contradiction is the evolutionary path To compared to Genesis pathway.

Okay -- what happens Nowdays , to animal life when earthquakes take place -- those happen fairly frequently compared to volcanic eruptions. But it definitely affects the environment of the wild life. They run away or die. Or forest fires which we've had a lot of over the years. They either run out of the area or die.

crochet1949 wrote:hugh
I was just rereading those two chapters in Genesis -- God is telling us the order in which He created everything and He was making a point of creating Man vs 26 'let Us create man in Our image , according to Our likeness , let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.
Chapter 2 -- the importance of the seventh day -- day of rest.
And He gives specifics in How man was created. And then the woman. And the home He'd fixed up for them.
I honestly don't find anything contradictory. It's a continuing account Of.
"Then God said." would you say that means He actually spoke those things into existence?
That which would be seen as contradiction is the evolutionary path To compared to Genesis pathway.

Okay -- what happens Nowdays , to animal life when earthquakes take place -- those happen fairly frequently compared to volcanic eruptions. But it definitely affects the environment of the wild life. They run away or die. Or forest fires which we've had a lot of over the years. They either run out of the area or die.

Crochet, who is "Our" referring to in "let us create man in Our image"? Multiple gods?

RickD. 'Our" is referring to the trinity / God head. It's the first mention of that in Scripture. In other wards Godhead = God the Father, Jesus Christ his Son and the Holy Spirit. 'Our' image / Jesus Christ - God's Son - was born into this world in Luke 2 / Christmas story. He was God incarnate / in the flesh. So, man has Spirit and came into this world looking like the average Jewish man. We all have a spiritual part to us. Our spirit lives on after physical death takes place. That spirit will receive a glorified body like Jesus Christ had after He was resurrected from the dead. And, no, we won't all end up looking like Jesus Christ. His body changed , not his appearance.
Not multiple 'gods'.

crochet1949 wrote:RickD. 'Our" is referring to the trinity / God head. It's the first mention of that in Scripture. In other wards Godhead = God the Father, Jesus Christ his Son and the Holy Spirit. 'Our' image / Jesus Christ - God's Son - was born into this world in Luke 2 / Christmas story. He was God incarnate / in the flesh. So, man has Spirit and came into this world looking like the average Jewish man. We all have a spiritual part to us. Our spirit lives on after physical death takes place. That spirit will receive a glorified body like Jesus Christ had after He was resurrected from the dead. And, no, we won't all end up looking like Jesus Christ. His body changed , not his appearance.
Not multiple 'gods'.

But "our" is plural. I thought God is one. Is this verse saying God is polytheistic?

We feel it is simply use of the "Royal we".

Audie wrote:We feel it is simply use of the "Royal we".

I'm trying to make a point with crochet. I guess she's not seeing it.

RickD
It's a 3 in 1 deal. Three persons within the Godhead.

And you're suggesting it's all a matter of 'interpretation'. But it's a matter of Bible doctrine /teaching.

RickD wrote:

Audie wrote:We feel it is simply use of the "Royal we".

I'm trying to make a point with crochet. I guess she's not seeing it.

I know

So -- apparently you don't like my response. And now it's that Bible doctrine, teaching is Also a 'matter of interpretation'. As would the matter of the virgin birth of Jesus be a 'matter of interpretation' and the bodily resurrection be 'a matter of interpretation'. Right?

crochet1949 wrote:So -- apparently you don't like my response. And now it's that Bible doctrine, teaching is Also a 'matter of interpretation'. As would the matter of the virgin birth of Jesus be a 'matter of interpretation' and the bodily resurrection be 'a matter of interpretation'. Right?

Yes, of course.

Crochet,

My point is that the English words don't always translate exactly from ancient Hebrew. I wasn't looking for an explanation about the Trinity. I was hoping you'd see that "our" was the English word used to represent a monotheistic God. Sometimes we need to look deeper than the English translation, if we want a better understanding of the text.

And English wordd are open to grest abuse thro' the vice of equivocation.

Audie wrote:And English wordd are open to grest abuse thro' the vice of equivocation.

Speaking of English words, maybe you wanna start using them, instead of this gibberish you're speaking.

"Grest"?????