forum.christogenea.org

While listening to pragmatic Genesis it seems as though there is some confusion over the 'us' when Yahweh told somebody he was with to 'let us'make man in our image. I'm sure there's other commentary on this but I have not found it yet.
We were actually present with Yahweh at the time of this verse, in our real form, our spiritual form.
Job 38:7 confirms this.. During creation Yahweh says concerning the 'us' in Gen 1:26:"when the morning stars(#3556 Angels)sang together, and ALL the sons of God(#1121literal sons)shouted for joy". Here ' sons of God ' are defined as true literal sons. Is it conceivable that we were with Yahweh at Gen1:26? Who else could he be talking to, surely not himself even though the 'God' named here is Elohym. Is it conceivable that we, in our true original spiritual form actually was with Him and possibly 'agreed' with our Father that we could and would take on this Adamic form to come to this 'world' and take on the test.. I believe so. Other places where sons of god refer to adamic man are throughout Scripture.

That is how Wesley Swift tried to reconcile that verse in Job, and that is how Dewey Tucker insists upon interpreting it. However it is refuted by many other passages, which I have often explained in other places. 1 Corinthians chapter 15, Zechariah 12:1, etc.

Just because there were sons of God present at some point in the past does not mean that any one of "us" were there among them. As Paul said, the natural body comes first, and then the spiritual, which is sown a physical seed along with the natural.

PS: A few years ago, a few of our forum members departed, pulled away by Dewey Tucker's nonsense over this issue, which is clearly refuted by Scripture.

PS: I do not think there was "confusion" over the "us" of Genesis chapter 1. Rather, I do not pretend to know things that we cannot answer. Instead, I just explain the most likely possibilities.

If there is no definite answer for something in Scripture, it is better not to force a doctrine, but to humbly consider the possibilities and leave it on the back burner.

wehner wrote:While listening to pragmatic Genesis it seems as though there is some confusion over the 'us' when Yahweh told somebody he was with to 'let us'make man in our image. I'm sure there's other commentary on this but I have not found it yet.
We were actually present with Yahweh at the time of this verse, in our real form, our spiritual form.
Job 38:7 confirms this.. During creation Yahweh says concerning the 'us' in Gen 1:26:"when the morning stars(#3556 Angels)sang together, and ALL the sons of God(#1121literal sons)shouted for joy". Here ' sons of God ' are defined as true literal sons. Is it conceivable that we were with Yahweh at Gen1:26? Who else could he be talking to, surely not himself even though the 'God' named here is Elohym. Is it conceivable that we, in our true original spiritual form actually was with Him and possibly 'agreed' with our Father that we could and would take on this Adamic form to come to this 'world' and take on the test.. I believe so. Other places where sons of god refer to adamic man are throughout Scripture.

Celestial angels i.e. spirit beings and terrestrial messengers i.e. man with spiritual gifts are two completely different things. If you try and transpose man (Adamkind) into spirit beings, then you have just gratuitously given them an immortal soul, something which the Word denies. This is often confusing, because people seem to think that Spirit belongs to them, when in fact it belongs to God i.e. the breath of life was not given to Adam by Adam. Only two Adamics were ever given glorified bodies and even then they were not on par with celestial angels. The rest of Adamkind had not yet been born and certainly did not preexist. Therefore, Job 38:7 must be talking about one and the same thing using different terms, rather than spirit beings (celestial) AND physical beings (terrestrial) with God's Spirit breathed into his nostrils (Gen. 2:7). It was only the celestial angels who witnessed the Creation of earth. Scripture must harmonize with itself right? "Our true original spiritual form" was and is nonexistent. Our spiritual character is simply the act of repentance and reflecting God's will, not a mystical identity in the ether of time.

The "us" and "our" of Genesis 1:26 is the Elohim in the plural of the Godhead mentioned as the "fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ" Ephesians 3:9. There are many interpretations to the discerning of man's creation thanks to the different translations of manuscript sources and whether his (the translator) interests are less in the facts of the story than their meaning. From whatever source the compiler drew his material, we can only pray that it was to set forth the beginnings of history of our own people in terms of the purpose of God for the world. God created man for His own fellowship and to obey His will, and only through that obedience could the fellowship be maintained. Bill's translation of Eph. 3:9 is slightly varied from the KJV, but adds to our understanding, to wit: “and to enlighten all concerning the management of the household of the mystery which was concealed from the ages by Yahweh, by whom all things are being established.” There appears to be two fellowships; the first is God with His angels in heaven and the second is God with His people on earth.

The point is that there are some mysteries, which we do not fully comprehend and only presumptuous men would dare to go beyond what we know as the truth. God’s riches are infinitely unsearchable; we will never know them completely. But, that should not stop us from seeking the Light (out of darkness) nor pursuing the unknowns, which God reveals at His appointed times. Revelation does not come by osmosis, but by prayer and study. We should never be satisfied with the answers of man if they do not harmonize wholistically with all Scripture. It shows us (not the "us" of Gen. 1:26 lol) that our Christian duty is to become knowledgeable with the understanding that we have a life to live with Christ and the rest of our brethren.

Mark

Another thought... isn't Eloyim plural in Genesis 1 anyway? I have often found it strange that Yahweh doesn't appear by singular name until Genesis 2:4. I know that many have come out hard against a two creation account, because they fear it leads to universalism, but I don't see that it does lead to universalism by default. I'm not thoroughly convinced either way.

I don't view Genesis 1-2 at all as an account of material origins, and that could get me stoned in many places, but I can at least give a Biblical defense of it. I don't think anyone in the ancient world had a view of material origins. The creation language found in Genesis is also found on an Egyptian inscription where a Pharoah is being "created" or "formed" by the gods. Interesting to note that the artwork depicts the gods literally putting Pharoah's body together physically... however, when you read the associated text, it is clear that all that was actually happening was that Pharoah was being made king - and this was viewed as His "divine purpose" - i.e. creation.

In the Bible, there is no "creation" of the non-Adamites, however, they got here somehow - so they materially originated from somewhere, so in that sense, they are "created" beings. But they have no divine purpose from Yahweh.

Psalm 82:6 "I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High."
John 10:34 "Is it not written in your law the ye are gods?"
John 14:20 "At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you."

And as the Spirit of Jesus pre-existed, why not "us"?

martin41 wrote:Psalm 82:6 "I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High."
John 10:34 "Is it not written in your law the ye are gods?"
John 14:20 "At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you."

And as the Spirit of Jesus pre-existed, why not "us"?

Because we are not the deity. The 'mystery of iniquity' is man making himself a god. The 'mystery of godliness' is God making Himself man i.e. Jesus the Christ. This might help: http://kinsmanredeemer.com/DeificationOfMan.html

Mark

Good question wehner, some very inspiring responses. I am not in the tucker camp, that is for sure.

MichaelAllen wrote

I reallyIn the Bible, there is no "creation" of the non-Adamites, however, they got here somehow - so they materially originated from somewhere, so in that sense, they are "created" beings. But they have no divine purpose from Yahweh.

People have said to me 'God created all things' eg. John 1:3, Col 1:16. I think God did create all 'things', but things created outside God's Law are not the creation of God and are outside the will of God.

They are a corruption of His creation. He is not their God, He is not the God of mongrels and of corruption. And He will remove all offenses, uproot the plants that He did not plant.

Also, the 'restoration of all things' does not mean that non-whites are saved, they are not things. Rather I think it is referring to 'all things' between God and His people, which is what Bill teaches, in my estimation.

PS. Not only do all people have a different destination ...I think they also have a different origination. This can be seen at John 8 and the parable of the wheat and the tares and elsewhere. Which, to me, explains why non-whites cannot live in harmony with nature or us and create wastelands wherever they go.

Kentucky wrote:

martin41 wrote:Psalm 82:6 "I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High."
John 10:34 "Is it not written in your law the ye are gods?"
John 14:20 "At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you."

And as the Spirit of Jesus pre-existed, why not "us"?

Because we are not the deity. The 'mystery of iniquity' is man making himself a god. The 'mystery of godliness' is God making Himself man i.e. Jesus the Christ. This might help: http://kinsmanredeemer.com/DeificationOfMan.html

Mark

Yeah, But what I'm saying is if "G"od made us "g"ods then why not the pre-existence and the "us" be us?

Martin wrote:

Yeah, But what I'm saying is if "G"od made us "g"ods then why not the pre-existence and the "us" be us?

I thought some good answers were already given, but the question I would have about such an idea is 'How did we make ourselves'? How could we be present before we were made?

As Mark said, for one:

i.e. the breath of life was not given to Adam by Adam.

I think our spirit is from our physical body (sowed a natural body...), it does not pre-exist our physical body somehow. Men were created with Adam, with an origination in God. They do not have an origination before Adam. And I humbly agree with Mark on this.

Mark wrote:

It was only the celestial angels who witnessed the Creation of earth.

PS (just wanted to add the verse I was referring to)

1Co 15:44 It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body; if there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual.
1Co 15:45 And just as it is written, "The first man Adam came into a living soul," the last Adam into a life producing Spirit.
1Co 15:46 But the spiritual was not first; rather the natural, then the spiritual: