RE: Bear sacrifice

From: Don Perrett (don.perrett@verizon.net)
Date: Mon Apr 22 2002 - 23:07:38 EDT

  • Next message: Jim Eisele: "Re: Pansies?"

    Mike wrote: So then, how was Adam different from other men? From what you
    seem to be
                    saying, Adam was no different spiritually, in and of himself, than other
    men.
                    The difference would not be in what Adam was but only in what, or Who,
    Adam
                    knew. I think this is what has caused so much confusion.

    Let me answer this in your words:
    I believe Adam was a historical person who was created by God and inserted
    into an already populated world. I believe Bible chronology dates this event
    to 4,000 years before the birth of Christ. However, I do not believe that
    Adam was the first man who was created "in God's image." I do not believe
    that Adam differed in any way "spiritually" from the indigenous populations
    which surrounded Eden, other than being put under "law" by God. (Romans
    5:13)
    I believe God simply used Adam, as a representative of the human race, to
    illustrate the fact that no human being is worthy of eternal life. His
    inability to obey one simple command demonstrated that fact and brought
    condemnation upon all men. His actions served to prove the fact that the
    human
    race had long been unworthy of eternal life and had thus been deserving of
    the deaths they had long been suffering.

    I of course agree with this stance.

    Mike wrote: The claim has been made that Gen. 1:26,27 refers to the creation
    of the man
                    "Adam" in God's image, and that people other than Adam and his
    descendents,
                    before, during and after the time of Adam, were not created "in God's
    image."
                    As I understand this line of reasoning, being created "in God's image"
                    referred only to people who were created or born into a covenant
    relationship
                    with the true God. But, as of now, I remain unconvinced of the validity of
                    these claims.

    There are those that make this claim, but I am not one of them.

    Mike wrote: I still believe that Gen. 1:26,27 refers to God's creation of
    the human race
                    before His creation of Adam. I believe that being created "in God's image"
                    refers to men being given minds that are capable of thinking "spiritual"
                    thoughts and being given eternal spirits by God, something God gives to
    all
                    men but does not give to lower animals.

                    It seems to me that if the image of God, spoken of in Gen. 1:26,27, was an
                    image that was acquired by someone due to their being in a covenant
                    relationship with God, then Adam and Eve would have only acquired God's
    image
                    after they showed by their actions that they had decided to obey the
    command
                    God had given them. (A covenant is an agreement between two parties.)
                    However, Adam and Eve chose to disobey God's command. Though it seems
    likely
                    that they later entered into a covenant relationship with God by accepting
                    His way of obtaining forgivness for their disobedience, animal sacrifices.
                    For after being expelled from Eden God covered them with the skins of
    slain
                    animals. This probably was done to picture that their sins had been
    covered
                    over by blood that had been shed for them. (Gen. 3:21)

                    Some have compared Adam and Eve's being created in God's image to a person
                    becoming a new creation at the time they accept Jesus Christ as their
    Lord.
                    However, for a someone to be created in God's image in this way they must
                    first make a personal decision to follow Christ. Despite some churches'
                    custom of baptizing infants, people are not born into "the New covenant,"
                    even people with Christian parents. However, that is what some here seem
    to
                    be saying in regard to Adam and his descendants having "the image of God."
                    They say that they acquired that image simply by being placed under one
                    particular law (Don't eat this fruit.), or being instructed by God what
    kind
                    of religious rituals He wanted them to perform (Sacrifice these kinds of
                    animals.).

                    I don't think someone can acquire "the image of God" by simply being told
    by
                    Him what He wants them to do. Especially if they never personally decide
    to
                    follow those instructions (as was the case with Adam, Eve, Cain, and
    judging
                    from the very few people on Noah's ark, most of Adam and Eve's other
                    descendants). These things being so, I continue to believe that being made
                    "in the image of God" (Gen. 1:26,27) did not refer to Adam and Eve being
                    informed of God's requirements for them shortly after their creation, or
    to
                    their descendants being informed of God's requirements for them shortly
    after
                    their births. I continue to believe that Gen. 1:26,27 refers to God's
                    creating all men in His image by giving us minds which are able to
    understand
                    spiritual things and by giving us all eternal spirits, much like His own.

    You make good points. I totally agree. I must point out however that in
    reading these last couple of paragraphs, it seems that you start and end by
    saying that all men are created in his image, because we have a soul and are
    capable of having communion with God. I agree with this. The other
    paragraphs took me awhile, because it leads one to think that you are
    advocating the "image" as being the communion itself. If this is what you
    are saying, I would disagree. But I'm fairly certain this is not your
    position, so I'll take this as an explanation of the position of others
    which you wanted to point out. As I've said, if we took the time, you might
    find that you and I are probably closer than I am with Dick and Jim. I do
    agree with most of their position, but I do disagree on a few small items.
    My interest in aligning with them is that I would rather join together with
    those that are close than those that are not. Hopefully with time we will
    all find more answers to this question. I know that many feel that Genesis
    is a mute issue and that salvation is the only important thing. I say that
    it is the most important thing, but understanding how and why we are here is
    almost as important. Especially when too many kids today end up spiritually
    lost because of the differences between denominations and religions, not to
    mention the disconnection with science. Unless we can either admit that the
    bible is wrong and not factual, or disprove science, then we must begin to
    find the answers that connect them together. Hopefully then these lost souls
    will come home to God.

    Don P



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 22 2002 - 23:07:51 EDT