>You also keep trying to terminate the discussion by falling back on the
claim that "neither of us knows anything about the physical reality of God".
Not at all, Kevin. I just asserted that the reason we could discuss the
issue is because neither of us has any idea what the physical reality of
God is. Maybe since this is the case, it is better for us not to speculate
too much about it. I think God uses the word [image] to describe His
relationship to the reality He has just finished creating. I think God was
referring to the whole spectrum of man...physical, mental, spiritual. This
does not mean man is God, or that he is a virtual image of God, but in my
very humble opinion (on this subject), man was vested with attributes of
God. He had the capacity to procreate, to think spiritual thoughts, to
carry out spiritual acts, to develop his intellect without limits. In
addition, he may have attributes of the physical appearance of God (if such
a concept can be applied to God the Father). I am neither a theologian nor
the son of a theologian, so I will not attempt to defend my interpretation
of the text to you. I have shared it; it makes sense to me. If you don't
like it, I can live with that. If you can enlighten me, I will give
careful consideration to what you have to say.
>This is where I believe the latter half of Genesis 2:7 become important;
the >Hebrew words there strongly suggest that God imparted more than just
biological >life into man, but spiritual life as well, making him unique
among animals, but >also imparting to him some of God's own spiritual essence.
I do agree with you on this.
Art
http://biology.swau.edu