ABRAHAMICS ONLY: The Tree called the knowledge of good and evil, (Genesis: a closer look) continued.

[Yahcubs777]

Very well said. I agree.

Have you ever asked yourself, where was the serpent when it was speaking to Eve?

We do not agree on the identity of the serpent. I will tell you what I know. It was only Father Adam who knew what the fruit would do. He purposely withheld that information from Mother Eve. The reason is because the Serpent needed to be made manifest as was designed in the plan GOD designed. It was a must happen.

There is a question Mother Eve asked him and he did not give her the answer, which led to her speculating about what the tree would do. As they were eating from the other trees in the Garden, each one changed the color of their glory raiments, which made her wonder what that tree would do. And she being friends with the serpent would tell her some things about the trees. She is the one that told the serpent that she thinks that tree will give her a higher kind of wisdom.

But the serpent was preaching a certain message to mother eve, which was that her third eye shall be opened, and she will begin to know things where she is not physically present. For no creation of GOD is blind. This is important because they wrote that their eyes were opened in the fall. No, they were closed in the fall, as was Samson's when his hair was cut off.

The message the serpent preached is that of duality of man, good and evil. And GOD who is all knowing spoke it as a parable to manifest their evil intentions and what they do in secret; which is that they can have out of body experiences. For that is the mark of the beast.

When you see the abomination that causeth desolation, is speaking of those that can eject their spirit being outside the body and meet with others that do the same in secret. This is what they did in John 11:47-52

 

[Yahcubs777]

Not always. Good fruit falls to the earth, rots and attracts all manner of creatures. It's a mess.

When the fruit was brought forth, it was good. What made it to rot at all is the terrestrial system.

 

[Yahcubs777]

From my reading.. it's 24 trees. On both sides of the river?

There are more than 12 yes, but it was only 12 that they are from to set the Altar, pointing to the 12 tribes of Israel.

 

[Yahcubs777]

I just want to say thank you to the people that have been in each of my threads as we look into genesis. We may not agree on some things, but I appreciate your contributions and hope you will continue to contribute.

THANK YOU

 

[Windwalker]

The issue has been in not understanding what sin is. For example, why do you think it is written: blood cannot inherit the kingdom of GOD?

And in Genesis Adam said: this is bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh (no mention of blood). And even Jesus His Pre-Eminence after HE resurrected HIMSELF said: touch me, a ghost has not flesh and bone like you see me have. Again no blood mentioned.

When you understand that blood is actually the sin nature spoken of, it becomes clearer what happened. That is why Isaiah calls sins red in colour. Blood is the reason the body is mortal, and ages falls sick and dies. Blood is also a result of a limited life span.

So you believe quite literally, that sin is stored in blood cells? A few problems here, not the least of which is that the Bible does not say that "blood" shall not inherit the kingdom of God. It says, "flesh and blood", which means your physical, material, biological body. It's not literally blood. It's saying that the earthly things about us, are not the eternal things about us. That's all it's saying really.

When Adam says "bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh," that is including blood, and skin, and hair, and eyes, and brainmatter, and all of it. "Flesh" is your biological skinsack, which includes bone and blood, and everything else, including the earthly impulses.

It's the latter, that is really meant in the metaphor of "Flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom". That means, the things and the ways of the earth, not literally you epidermis and hemoglobin! Those are metaphors for our "ways of the flesh", or earthly impulses, not a lesson in where sin lives in the body. Blood just keeps us alive, not causes us to sin. Saints have blood too.

So everyone born in sin is because they were born as mortals, in flesh and blood bodies. So when Enoch and Elijah put of that mortal body, and put on their immortal body, they were not among them that fell short of the glory. The glory is coded for immortality.

But they were sinners originally, so therefore, Paul is right in saying All have sinned, and All means All.

 

[Windwalker]

Lol the glorified state is a different body entirely hahaha. It has no vital organs of the mortal body, it has no need of them. It is not even the same height it is 60ft in height. Eyes like fire, legs like brass, hair white like wool, clothed by glory raiments called Shekinah glory. It is the kind of body that is perfect.

You are very literal about these things. We're going to be 60 feet tall, look a lot like the interior of an Foreign Imports store, and no interior structures that keeps this tall gift store standing, like bones, or organs, or blood, and such. That's a very strange image, if literally descriptive of a literal thing.

Put simply, dying and going to the ghost world to wait for resurrection is not being saved from death, as death is what forced you out of your physical body. It is GOD who sends HIS children into the earth. The body you have is GOD given in that sense. But it is not the kind of body that is in HIS image and after HIS likeness as was written. This is the fallen state, the mortal state.

So we were 60 feet tall, with brass legs, and then after we sinned we literal "fell" in height down to under 10 feet maximum, and got blood and bone based bodies instead? Does this mean that shorter people, such as dwarfism, is because of greater sin? They fell further from Grace and in height?

So, did God then recreate his Creation with an imperfect, sinful creation instead after Adam and Eve sinned? What happened to these pre-fall bodies? Did God literally cut them off at the legs, and not just as a figure of speech?

 

[Windwalker]

No, salvation is making heaven alive without taking any detour to the ghost world, and allowing maggots to feed on my body, the same body that GOD resurrects and then quickens at the resurrection. But that I can put on my immortal body in life without dying at all, by eating the Word of GOD.

Where does spirituality fit in with all this fleshly body/immortal body stuff? Where does that fit in with all this focus of the body? How does the intentions of the heart fit in with this?

Do you associate the temptations of the heart, with you having blood? What about those who overcome sin, yet still have blood? Didn't Jesus have blood, yet didn't sin? If blood is sin, then Jesus was a sinner if that is true. Maybe these are metaphors about something else, and not about our biology at all?

 

[Katzpur]

Makes no sense. Up till that point they had already understood what death is and made the choice not to eat of it. And it was Father Adam that was told, then he Adam, told Mother Eve. So they already understood what they should and shouldn't do.

I disagree. They did not know how to discern between good and evil until after they had eaten the fruit of the tree. And just before casting them out of the garden, God said, "Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil." If you believe that the name of the tree had nothing to do with the fruit it bore, I can't imagine why you thought it was given the name it was.

They understood God's instructions, but they did not understand that disobedience was "evil" or wrong for them to do. A two-year-old may understand his mother's words when she said, "Don't touch the stove top. It will burn you." But he does not understand the consequences of his disobedience until he learns the hard way.

 

[Katzpur]

Why is my name attached to someone else's post?

post #17

Sorry. I have no idea how that happened.

 

[halbhh]

In Genesis 2:16-17 it is written:


16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

If we look at this verse, you will see there is no causal link in eating the fruit and dying; simply because it was called the knowledge of good and evil; not the tree of death.

This reveals it is a parable, and the truth is found in another Parable spoken by Jesus HIs Pre-Eminence.

Matthew 7:16-20

16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

Notice, that HE makes it clear that there cannot be a tree that brings forth both good and evil? A corrupt tree brings forth evil fruit, a good tree brings forth good fruit. Ye shall know them by their fruits.

So the question remains: What kind of a tree was that tree in that Genesis story? Was it a good tree, or an evil tree?

GOD is the one that planted the tree. Can GOD plant an evil tree? Isaiah 45:7states that GOD creates evil:

7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.

But John the Beloved contradicts that. 1 John

5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.

So which is it?

Let us think about this deeper: If GOD creates evil, that means that HE would need to first conceptualise evil, then brood on evil, and then bring it into reality. How does that agree with John: GOD is light, in HIM is no darkness at all.

GOD cannot create evil. There is what Isaiah was revealing here which is something I will leave for now as its not easily understood unless you understand things like Matrixes of the earth, similitudes and adumbrations and then maybe you will understand adverse affects in GOD's Logos. So let me leave that aside.​

The point is, GOD created the tree, coooked the soup of the fruit, programmed the seed, planted the seed, and then told Father Adam the day he eats of it, he shall surely die.

And the name HE called the tree does not agree with HIM and HIS Most Holy Character, nor does it agree with what HE said would happen. Therefore, there is much more to this.

When you also take into account that Jesus His Pre-Eminence, who is the GOD in HIS incarnate Manifestation said that a good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, and vice versa, it shouldn't be ignored.

So either the tree was a good tree or evil tree. And it brought forth evil fruit or good fruit; it can't bring forth both.

If a person is honest in their studies of the Word, and is a seeker of the kingdom, they will be able to see this is not in agreement. How can there be a tree like that, and Jesus His Pre-Eminence said its impossible for a tree to be like that?

So what do you think the tree is? Ye shall know them by their fruits.

Disclaimer: no need to talk about context here, as i know HE was warning people against false prophets, and the fruits are their messages. But for a parable to work, it needs to be consistent, and Jesus HIs Pre-Eminence cannot lie. Therefore, saying it can't happen, means it can't happen.

Therefore, let us be honest, and rather than try to explain based on the doctrine you have accepted, look at it as it was written; as a real event. This is a serious topic.

I just want to say thank you to the people that have been in each of my threads as we look into genesis. We may not agree on some things, but I appreciate your contributions and hope you will continue to contribute.

THANK YOU.

Eating the 'fruit' of the 'tree of the knowledge of good and evil' means to take for oneself authority to judge what is Good and what is Evil.

To take (wrongly) upon oneself the authority to judge others even.

(as if we are old enough or that wise)

We are instructed by our Savior to not judge others. We can judge actions, but not people themselves.

Adam and Eve didn't trust God though, and that was a breaking of relationship, of which becoming people that do wrongful judging was only one outcome.

 

[Trailblazer]

In Genesis 2:16-17 it is written:

16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

If we look at this verse, you will see there is no causal link in eating the fruit and dying; simply because it was called the knowledge of good and evil; not the tree of death.

That's right, there is no causal link in eating the fruit and dying.

Below is part of a post I posted to an atheist about a month ago.

Tiberius said: If Adam and Eve is just a story, then Jesus's sacrifice is nothing more than God sending himself to be sacrificed to himself to convince himself to forgive Humanity for the crimes of two people who never even existed.

No, If Adam and Eve is just a story, it has a spiritual meaning that was conveyed by means of allegories. It has nothing to do with Jesus’ sacrifice because that sacrifice was never even necessary if there was no original sin committed by Adam and Eve. I believe tying original sin to the cross sacrifice was all a sham that Christianity used to get people to believe in Jesus so they would be saved from a sin that never even existed so they would not go to hell.

Let’s start over.

Every human born is subject to death and has been long before Adam and Eve, since some form of humans have existed on earth for 200,000 years. People are born and then they die, because God made our bodies that way, as mortal.

I do not believe in Adam and Eve is a true story, I believe it was an allegorical story. I believe that according to the story, the death they experienced symbolizes a spiritual death because they were barred from the Tree of Life. The Tree of Life is symbolic for the Word of God, the Reality of Christ which bestows spiritual life. Eternal life is a quality of life, of being near to God; it is not physical life. God never created the physical body to live forever. Once the physical body dies, the soul leaves the body and ascends to the spiritual world where it takes on a new form comprised of spiritual elements that exist in the heavenly realm.

It is a tree of life to all who grasp it, and whoever holds on to it is happy; its ways are ways of pleasantness, and all it paths are peace. (Proverbs 3:17-18)

Tiberius said: The bit about returning to dust doesn't seem to be referring to spiritual death, does it?

No, it doesn’t, but you cannot just look at one verse, you have to look at the verse in context.

Read these verses. It was only AFTER God delineated all the punishments for eating the fruit from the tree that God said that Adam would return to dust!

12 And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.

13 And the Lord God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.

14 And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;

18 Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;

19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

The very last verse in the series is this one:

19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

How could anyone with any logical abilities believe that returning to dust was part of the punishment?!

All God was saying is that AFTER Adam and Eve endure all the punishments delineated in the preceding verses they will return to dust (die) Duh! Of course Adam and Eve will die at the end of their life.

Do Christians even bother to read their own Bible and analyze verses and what they mean? I don’t think so, I think they just BELIEVE the false doctrines that were fed to them by the Church, unquestionably.

 

[Yahcubs777]

So you believe quite literally, that sin is stored in blood cells? A few problems here, not the least of which is that the Bible does not say that "blood" shall not inherit the kingdom of God. It says, "flesh and blood", which means your physical, material, biological body. It's not literally blood. It's saying that the earthly things about us, are not the eternal things about us. That's all it's saying really.

When Adam says "bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh," that is including blood, and skin, and hair, and eyes, and brainmatter, and all of it. "Flesh" is your biological skinsack, which includes bone and blood, and everything else, including the earthly impulses.

It's the latter, that is really meant in the metaphor of "Flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom". That means, the things and the ways of the earth, not literally you epidermis and hemoglobin! Those are metaphors for our "ways of the flesh", or earthly impulses, not a lesson in where sin lives in the body. Blood just keeps us alive, not causes us to sin. Saints have blood too.


But they were sinners originally, so therefore, Paul is right in saying All have sinned, and All means All.

So you are just going to ignore that Jesus HIs Pre-Eminence had a physical body when HE ascended? And HE said: Touch me, a ghost has not flesh and bone like you see me have. HE was still teaching them that heaven is a not a ghost world.

 

[Yahcubs777]

Eating the 'fruit' of the 'tree of the knowledge of good and evil' means to take for oneself authority to judge what is Good and what is Evil.

To take (wrongly) upon oneself the authority to judge others even.

(as if we are old enough or that wise)

We are instructed by our Savior to not judge others. We can judge actions, but not people themselves.

Adam and Eve didn't trust God though, and that was a breaking of relationship, of which becoming people that do wrongful judging was only one outcome.

Show me where they didn't trust GOD.

 

[Yahcubs777]

I disagree. They did not know how to discern between good and evil until after they had eaten the fruit of the tree. And just before casting them out of the garden, God said, "Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil." If you believe that the name of the tree had nothing to do with the fruit it bore, I can't imagine why you thought it was given the name it was.

They understood God's instructions, but they did not understand that disobedience was "evil" or wrong for them to do. A two-year-old may understand his mother's words when she said, "Don't touch the stove top. It will burn you." But he does not understand the consequences of his disobedience until he learns the hard way.

Thats the whole Problem. GOD said in Genesis 1:26-27 that Man was already in HIS image and after HIS likeness; which is a direct contradiction with Gen 3:22
What do yout think the tree of life will give?

 

[Yahcubs777]

Where does spirituality fit in with all this fleshly body/immortal body stuff? Where does that fit in with all this focus of the body? How does the intentions of the heart fit in with this?

Do you associate the temptations of the heart, with you having blood? What about those who overcome sin, yet still have blood? Didn't Jesus have blood, yet didn't sin? If blood is sin, then Jesus was a sinner if that is true. Maybe these are metaphors about something else, and not about our biology at all?

No, the heart if the very person,which is a Spirit Being. There are Children of the kingdom which are pure hominids, and are tares which are impure hominids; referring to the hoiminid status of their Spirit Being. Why do so many people think Spiritual means ghostly? If heaven was a ghost world, there wbe no need for the Word of GOD in the earth, nor would there be a need for the resurrection. In fact, there would be no reason whatsover to come to the earth and have physical body.

No, HE didn't. HE had a Mystery Divine Nature. HE did not have blood in HIS body until HE made HIMSELF mortal at the last supper.
The Whole Message is about putting on the original body of Man without dying and waiting for resurrection.

 

[Yahcubs777]

That's right, there is no causal link in eating the fruit and dying.

Below is part of a post I posted to an atheist about a month ago.

Tiberius said: If Adam and Eve is just a story, then Jesus's sacrifice is nothing more than God sending himself to be sacrificed to himself to convince himself to forgive Humanity for the crimes of two people who never even existed.

No, If Adam and Eve is just a story, it has a spiritual meaning that was conveyed by means of allegories. It has nothing to do with Jesus’ sacrifice because that sacrifice was never even necessary if there was no original sin committed by Adam and Eve. I believe tying original sin to the cross sacrifice was all a sham that Christianity used to get people to believe in Jesus so they would be saved from a sin that never even existed so they would not go to hell.

Let’s start over.

Every human born is subject to death and has been long before Adam and Eve, since some form of humans have existed on earth for 200,000 years. People are born and then they die, because God made our bodies that way, as mortal.

I do not believe in Adam and Eve is a true story, I believe it was an allegorical story. I believe that according to the story, the death they experienced symbolizes a spiritual death because they were barred from the Tree of Life. The Tree of Life is symbolic for the Word of God, the Reality of Christ which bestows spiritual life. Eternal life is a quality of life, of being near to God; it is not physical life. God never created the physical body to live forever. Once the physical body dies, the soul leaves the body and ascends to the spiritual world where it takes on a new form comprised of spiritual elements that exist in the heavenly realm.

It is a tree of life to all who grasp it, and whoever holds on to it is happy; its ways are ways of pleasantness, and all it paths are peace. (Proverbs 3:17-18)

Tiberius said: The bit about returning to dust doesn't seem to be referring to spiritual death, does it?

No, it doesn’t, but you cannot just look at one verse, you have to look at the verse in context.

Read these verses. It was only AFTER God delineated all the punishments for eating the fruit from the tree that God said that Adam would return to dust!

12 And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.

13 And the Lord God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.

14 And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.





16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;

18 Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;

19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

The very last verse in the series is this one:

19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

How could anyone with any logical abilities believe that returning to dust was part of the punishment?!

All God was saying is that AFTER Adam and Eve endure all the punishments delineated in the preceding verses they will return to dust (die) Duh! Of course Adam and Eve will die at the end of their life.

Do Christians even bother to read their own Bible and analyze verses and what they mean? I don’t think so, I think they just BELIEVE the false doctrines that were fed to them by the Church, unquestionably.

GOD does not curse and bless with the same mouth; that would mean HE is double tongued. What GOD was doing was warning them about how their bodies have changed, and how the earth was also affected. That Mother Eve concpetion will be multiplied and her sorrow in giving birth because the body she has now is susceptible to that kind of thing. To Father Adam, HE said that his body can now sweat, and the earth is the kind that is a terrestrial earth now. GOD warns the people about what they could experience because of what they did; not that GOD gives them that.
For example:GOD does not put enmity between anyone. What was revealed there is this is where the battle lines was drawn.

 

[Katzpur]

Thats the whole Problem. GOD said in Genesis 1:26-27 that Man was already in HIS image and after HIS likeness; which is a direct contradiction with Gen 3:22

Man may have been created in God's image and after His likeness, but he clearly didn't have a knowledge of good and evil until after he ate the fruit. And that's why God said, just before casting them out of the Garden, "Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil." I mean there are only so many different ways of saying something. If you still don't understand, I don't know what more I can do.

What do yout think the tree of life will give?

It would have given Adam and Eve immortality and they'd have lived forever in their fallen state.[/QUOTE]

You seem to be interpreting the phrase, "in His image" differently than I am.

 

[Yahcubs777]

Man may have been created in God's image and after His likeness, but he clearly didn't have a knowledge of good and evil until after he ate the fruit. And that's why God said, just before casting them out of the Garden, "Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil." I mean there are only so many different ways of saying something. If you still don't understand, I don't know what more I can do.

It would have given Adam and Eve immortality and they'd have lived forever in their fallen state.

You seem to be interpreting the phrase, "in His image" differently than I am.[/QUOTE]

Why was it mentioned at all, if it has nothingt to do with knowledge?

 

[halbhh]

Show me where they didn't trust GOD.

Definitely. Just read with a total attention (or that is what helped me) --

1Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”

2 The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’ ”

4 “You will not certainly die,” the serpent said to the woman. 5 “For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

6When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.
-----------
Genesis 3 NIV

-------
The real message of the seemingly obvious mistaken question in verse 1 is the underlying premise: God might do something very unreasonable and not for the best. The simple mistake in the question is only a diversion to hide that premise, to better help it be taken in.

Verse 4 is then merely the inevitable culmination of that same hidden premise: See how God is withholding the good from you, out of competitive spite or some such immature wrongness on his part.

Now, Eve chose to trust the serpent that God was that small and wrong, and distrust God then.

She would willingly believe that God was...like a herself in a bad moment, if you like. Less than herself in a way: she at least would often be better than that!

God was only less even than herself. She would not trust God that He might be willing to give her such fruit later maybe or other such possibilities that trust would suggest, but instead she chose the outright distrust.

Trust is part of good relationship. Eve here broke trust, and Adam then next. Faith is trust basically. They broke faith with God. Broke relationship. Perfect relationship has trust.

 

[Katzpur]

You seem to be interpreting the phrase, "in His image" differently than I am.

Why was it mentioned at all, if it has nothingt to do with knowledge?[/QUOTE]Being created "in His image" has nothing to do with our knowledge. They are two separate things entirely. What do you think an image is? The dictionary says it's "a representation of the external form of a person or thing." Use the word "image" in any other sentence and that's what it means. Twins are said to be a mirror image of each other, not because of their knowledge but because of their appearance.

All forms of life create offspring in their own image. You know that a kitten's appearance resembles that of its parent, and that's because a kitten looks like a smaller version of a full grown cat. A calf is in the image of a cow. A foal is in the image of horse. Finally, when Adam himself had a son, the son he begat was "in his own likeness, after his image." If Adam's son was in Adam's image and if Adam was in God's image, then man is clearly in the image of God. We are of the same species as God, though we are only "gods in embryo."