How far does God's image go?

[Nitron]

Creationists think man was made in God's physical image (but God is not supposed to have a body!) How far does this go? Superficial outside image? Internal organs? GENOME? This would imply God is life and cannot die.

What about God's spiritual image? Unviable as well, as the ability to make rational, long term judgements, one of the few things which I find
distinguish us from other animals, is supposed to be a consequence of original sin. The other, CONSTANT change in behaviour, is not a property of God, who is meant to be immutable.

 

[arunma]

I don't think you've accurately represented the beliefs of creationists. Most creationists I know don't believe that God has a physical body (though I admit there are some creationists out there who believe some crazy things). There's not much to be gained from a straw man argument.

 

[HypnoToad]

Creationists think man was made in God's physical image

(emphasis added)

No, creationists don't typically believe that.

What about God's spiritual image? Unviable as well, as the ability to make rational, long term judgements, one of the few things which I find
distinguish us from other animals, is supposed to be a consequence of original sin.

No, there's nothing in Scripture stating or indicating that sin is necessary to make rational decisions.

As the previous poster stated, your post is essentially a strawman that in no way reflects creationism beliefs.

 

[Grengor]

.

 

[CACTUSJACKmankin]

Creationists think man was made in God's physical image (but God is not supposed to have a body!) How far does this go? Superficial outside image? Internal organs? GENOME? This would imply God is life and cannot die.

What about God's spiritual image? Unviable as well, as the ability to make rational, long term judgements, one of the few things which I find
distinguish us from other animals, is supposed to be a consequence of original sin. The other, CONSTANT change in behaviour, is not a property of God, who is meant to be immutable.

I would ask what the whole God's image thing says about other apes. They look a lot damn like us. Were they only made kinda sorta in God's image and we're really in God's image?

 

[FishFace]

Even a creationist can tell that this part of the absolutely-inerrant-literal-word-of-god is not literal; if we were literally made in the image of God, it would cause them some pretty nasty problems, and they're not so lost that they forge ahead regardless.
Hence it is understood more in a spiritual/mind kind of way, than physically.

Nonetheless, experiments show that we are different to other, "lower" animals only in extent, so we perhaps are to God, what chimps are to us.

 

[Nitron]

Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowingg good and evil.

Knowing good and evil => Making rational decision.

I keep hearing creationists say that evolution is wrong because God made humans out of dust in his image

 

[HypnoToad]

Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowingg good and evil.

Knowing good and evil => Making rational decision.

Yeah, see, an equals sign with an arrow doesn't actually demonstrate how sin is required to make rational decisions. Nor does it show how rational decisions were not made before the fall. Your premise also suggests God can not make rational decisions, as He has no sin. That also contradicts Scripture on the nature of God.

I keep hearing creationists say that evolution is wrong because God made humans out of dust in his image

"Out of dust" would be the key against evolution there, not the "image" part.

Also, "what you've heard" doesn't exactly substantiate a claim.

 

[Markus6]

"Out of dust" would be the key against evolution there, not the "image" part.

Which is definitely an important point as I think I'm pretty safe in saying that ALL christians, not just creationists, believe we are made in God's image.

 

[Nitron]

Eating from a tree was a sin in the sense they had disobeyed God. However, the fruit made them know good and evil.

Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil;

 

[HypnoToad]

Eating from a tree was a sin in the sense they had disobeyed God. However, the fruit made them know good and evil.

So?

 

[Nitron]

My point is that knowing good and evil and thus rational, long term decisions, is described as a consequence of the fall.

 

[RecentConvert]

I don't think you've accurately represented the beliefs of creationists. Most creationists I know don't believe that God has a physical body (though I admit there are some creationists out there who believe some crazy things). There's not much to be gained from a straw man argument.

As the previous poster stated, your post is essentially a strawman that in no way reflects creationism beliefs.

...but strawmen arguments are valid arguments!

 

[Nitron]

Ok. Thanks for clearing this up. (And no, I DO DOT want to turn into an evo version of gottservant )

 

[Markus6]

My point is that knowing good and evil and thus rational, long term decisions, is described as a consequence of the fall.

I don't quite follow your logical link here. How is knowledge of good and evil = ability to make rational, long term decisions?

To give a couple of generic get out answers:
The serpent suggested, and it seems pretty obvious, that God has knowledge of good and evil. Therefore, our eating the fruit is making us more like his image than we were created.

Some christians (myself included) think the fall was something that was meant/bound to happen. This means God meant for us to have the knowledge of good and evil. Whilst it is a consequence of the fall it can't be seen as a bad thing (i.e. a punishment for the fall).

 

[Nitron]

I dropped the claim.

 

[uberd00b]

I dropped the claim.

And you shouldn't have. Though this is off topic you are correct. Knowledge of right and wrong, good and evil is required to make a decision. Adam and Eve before eating of the tree were like babes, with no knowledge of good and evil. Hence they cannot bear any blame for their actions.

Note I make no mention of sin, as it's simply irrelevant.

[/offtopic]

 

[glo1]

Adam and Eve before eating of the tree were like babes, with no knowledge of good and evil. Hence they cannot bear any blame for their actions.

And yet that knew right from wrong as far as this: They had been told not to eat from the tree.
Did they not make a decision on that single issue?

(still off topic ... )

glo

 

[uberd00b]

Did they not make a decision on that single issue?

I'm not sure how they could have. It's akin to leaving a small crawling baby in a room, then putting your best Ming vase on a rickety table also in the room, wagging your finger at the baby and saying "no touchy table" then going down the pub to get bladdered. You really oughta get that vase insured.

 

[glo1]

I'm not sure how they could have. It's akin to leaving a small crawling baby in a room, then putting your best Ming vase on a rickety table also in the room, wagging your finger at the baby and saying "no touchy table" then going down the pub to get bladdered. You really oughta get that vase insured.

I guess I cannot see Adam and Eve in that state of childlike inability ...

glo