Activate the Swagger
- Feb 13, 2010
Well if we really were made in his image, I imagine he'd be some kind of native African.
God's true physical image can't be perceived by human eyes right? Maybe there's an error in translation in the bible and what was meant was that he raised/reared humans to his image as in how parents do to their children. A child's first influence in their personality and habits comes from the parents or the ones raising them. Also in a Latin language like Portuguese the verb "criar" can be used in the sense of "raising a child" but can also have the meaning of the verb "to create" which is the more literal translation. The Bible would make more sense if people didn't swallow everything the Catholic morons in the vatican feed them. They say it's dangerous for us "regular folk" to interpret the Bible. My ass.oktalist said:Aw, why no love for the East Asian God? Buddhism is the best irrational belief system out there!
But, if God created humans in his image, then he must be black African. Which was not an option in the poll
Believing in God and in His existence are two completely different things. Watch your semantics. That's how lawyers fuck you over. Just some advice, don't read too much into it.Henkie36 said:Italian, probably. Or Israelian. But to be completely honest, I don't care because I don't believe in God.
Why would an Englishman be fairer than a Middle-Eastern one?JoJoDeathunter said:Personally, I think God would be an Englishman as that explains why Jesus is often depicted as fair even though He lived in a Middle-Eastern country and also why the Bible is written in English and lots of people in it have English names.
That's why I said 'God' and not 'monotheism'. The monotheistic god people think of when someone says "God" is an Abrahamic one. I stand by my statement.llafnwod said: