Katzpur
Not your average Mormon
I don't see how we can justifiably "forget looks." Can you think of even one example where you would use the word "image" in any other way but as a description of physical attributes? Look at these:michel said:"in his image" - I tend to view more as "with his potential to be forgiving, loving.... all the good attributes (forget looks ) does that enable you to understand how someone could describe God as intangible,with no human form?
She stopped in front on the mirror and examined her image in it.
That little boy is the spitten' image of his dad.
Their twins are absolutely identical; they are mirror images of one another.
Taking it a bit further, when we say, "He's the image of good health," we mean, "He looks healthy."
Finally, even the word "imagine" (which has the same root as "image") asks us to picture something in our minds. It is pretty much impossible to imagine something without seeing it in your mind.
So I absolutely think that this instance is no exception. We are created in God's image, after His likeness. That means one thing only to me: we look like Him. When we say things like, "Well, that's what the Bible says, but it doesn't really mean that," we head off in the wrong direction entirely. I'd be willing to bet that every single person (well, make that Christian) on this forum who insists that God has no form is basing their belief off one single solitary verse of scripture, "God is a spirit."
When we take one verse out of the entire Bible and build a whole set of beliefs around it, disregarding all of the verses that appear to say something completely different, we're likely to get it wrong. We have to then be willing to come up with all kinds of explanations of why all of the other verses really mean something other than what they actually say. I just don't see that as a reasonable way of looking at it.
But I certainly would love to try to convince you to rethink your position!
Kathryn