Now, when Jose Rodelio Retome Rata could not stand all the articles and questions regarding his Bigotry. He then shifts the subject to a question that he thinks will divert the main issue. And by the way, Jose Rodelio Retome Rata loves to divert the issue using a Red Herring Fallacy. And for you to know, a red herring fallacy is a tactic used to divert attention from the original topic of a discussion or argument by introducing an irrelevant, distracting piece of information. It is an informal, often intentional, fallacy designed to mislead or confuse, shifting the focus to a different, usually easier-to-discuss issue. Actually, to be fair, Jose Rodelio Retome Rata's question was confusing. I don't even know how he takes it literally, as if it were all about the actual image or the qualities. So I'll explain both of them in this article.

Now let's go back to his question and answer it since he will promise to prove his Credibility on this topic. Which means if I could answer his question, then he will stick to it and answer the article that I made prior to this one, and will not shift on the topic. But, if he can't prove his credibility, this will simply show he was a bigot in a Cultic Religion. So here we go -

KUNG MAY CREDIBILIDAD KA MAY NAISAGOT KA SA TANONG KO SAYO?
#.BAKIT MAGKAIBA ANG IMAGE NI ADAN AT NI JESUS NA SI JESUS ANG IMAGE NG DIOS?

So here's the question that he wants to promote, and since I didn't answer it on his first attempt, he assumes that I didn't know the answer. Funny, since it was actually in the article that I made the last time that proves this silly question. He seems to think that men were created in God's image, so it should be the same looks, like identical twins. I just hope he is not serious about this, cause I'm pretty sure his minister and he himself couldn't answer it straight. So, we will just dive into the answer.

Literally and Figuratively

Ok, here is the answer, let's go back first to the creation of man -

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. - Genesis 1:26

Take note, God did not use the word "in my own image, after my own likeness", but rather "in our image, after our likeness". This alone will prove that you don't read your scripture and don't understand the notions of creation. To say Adam was created in the exact image of God, or what or how he should look, is totally absurd, and the same goes with Christ and the Father. In the Scripture, Christ was figured to be like the image of God, as what you're trying to point out, Jose Rodelio Retome Rata. So here's the list that might be problematic to you since alam ko naman na hindi mo pinapansin ang biblical context. So, baka sakali mababasa mo ito. Huwag mo gawing literal; ha, baka magkaproblema ka diyan. Tingnan mo muna kung ano ang context. -

John 12:45 - “He that seeth me seeth him that sent me.” Hindi ito nangangahulugan na literal na nakikita ng tao ang physical o bodily face ng Ama. Ang ibig sabihin nito, si Jesus Christ ang perpekto, buhay, at aktuwal na representasyon at manifestation ng character, nature, at will ng Diyos, hindi necessarily ang facial characteristics.
John 14:7-11 - “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.” Hindi ito tumutukoy sa physical, face-to-face vision ng Diyos Ama bilang hiwalay na persona. Sa halip, ipinapahayag ni Jesus na Siya ang perpekto, tangible, at visible na representasyon ng invisible God.
Colossians 1:15 - “Who is the image of the invisible God.” Ang ibig sabihin nito, Jose Rodelio Retome Rata, ay si Jesus Cristo ang eksaktong visible representation ng Ama—ang nakikita ng tao tungkol sa Diyos ay nakikita kay Cristo. Again, representation, not necessarily identical in facial attributes.
Hebrews 1:1-3 - “Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person.” Hindi ito nangangahulugang nakita ng mga tao ang literal na mukha ng Ama sa human sense, kundi si Jesus ang nag-embody ng lahat ng tungkol sa Ama in human form - just like kanyang kaluwalhatian, likas, at kapangyarihan. But could also be translated literally as if Christ "was the express image" being guided by revelations, I'll explain later.
2 Corinthians 4:4 - “Christ, who is the image of God.” Ang verses na 'to ay nagsabi tungkol sa spiritual at theological reality na - si Jesus Christ ang perpekto at visible na representasyon ng invisible God, at sa pamamagitan ng ebanghelyo, nakikita ng tao ang kaluwalhatian ng Diyos kay Cristo. But not necessarily facial attributes.
Philippians 2:6 - “Who, being in the form of God…” sa basic na unawa, Jose Rodelio Retome Rata, si Jesus ay kapareho sa nature, essence, at character ng Diyos Ama, hindi lang anyo kundi mismong pagka-Diyos ang ibinabahagi.

Now take note of this scriptural passage and the author. It is also important to understand the background of the author since this might be a contradiction to their testimony. Why? -

1. John, in his writing, remains in his stand that "no man hath seen God at anytime". He didn't wave on that, and for sure, he didn't know exactly the face of the Father. Also, Paul, in his epistles, like the above passages. It is also important to understand that Paul didn't see God the Father; the vision he received on the road to Damascus was ambiguous, and he had three different stories that didn't say anything about seeing God the Father, but were all about Christ. Which means, his writing might fail if you take it literally, Jose Rodelio Retome Rata. Pag-aralan mo rin kung ano ang kanilang patotoo at historical background. Di yang puro ka lang angas. But, as I have said lately, Christ might have the express image of the Father for some good reasons

2. The Apostles and Paul, who wrote the epistle, received lights and revelations from time to time, so I might sound heretical, but they might have seen Christ as the express image of the Father. We don't have any scripture to support that idea aside from those mentioned that Christ sits beside the Father or in the right hand of God, but it wasn't supported that much.

Sadali lang back to Genesis 1:26 muna at may nakalimuta ako. In Hebrew usage, the word Tselem (צֶלֶם) refers to a "shadow or phantom" or a physical representation, often used in ancient times to signify a king’s presence, such as a statue. It relates to the outward structure. Which means Adam might be the actual structure of a God. And also Demuth (דְּמוּת) means "likeness, resemblance, or similarity". It is derived from the root d-m-h (to be similar), suggesting a less physical, more abstract or relational similarity. I am not saying Adam's body statues that include facial features might be a resemblance to God's statue, but that is not always the case. As I have said, per scripture, "no man hath seen God".

However, there are also in the LDS also adopt the same terminology or teachings. Here are some of the lists that might interest you, Jose Rodelio Retome Rata. -

Ether 3:14-16

14 Behold, I am he who was prepared from the foundation of the world to redeem my people. Behold, I am Jesus Christ. I am the Father and the Son. In me shall all mankind have life, and that eternally, even they who shall believe on my name; and they shall become my sons and my daughters.
15 And never have I showed myself unto man whom I have created, for never has man believed in me as thou hast. Seest thou that ye are created after mine own image? Yea, even all men were created in the beginning after mine own image.
16 Behold, this body, which ye now behold, is the body of my spirit; and man have I created after the body of my spirit; and even as I appear unto thee to be in the spirit will I appear unto my people in the flesh.

So there's the answer: we are all created in the same image of God, not just Adam. And the creator was simply Christ. But to be fair, this is what we call Divine Investiture; Christ, at the same time, spoke on behalf of the Father. So, does this necessarily mean our image should be the same as the way it looks? I don't know about that, and it seems like your question makes no sense at all. Here's another one below -

D&C 20:17-28
18 And that he created man, male and female, after his own image and in his own likeness, created he them;
19 And gave unto them commandments that they should love and serve him, the only living and true God, and that he should be the only being whom they should worship.

Now, let's add a new post from our VIP Friend Jose Rodelio Retome Rata, and he made an attempt to quote some scriptures on his stand. Let's check it out -

COLOSAS 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

Again, it's not necessarily identical, but as I have explained a while ago, his nature and characteristic was indeed like the Father. Again, it was Paul who spoke that didn't see what God's face looks like, so it doesn't add up if you try to think it that way, Jose Rodelio Retome Rata.

1 Corinthians 15:47-49
King James Version
47 The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven.
48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

TINATANONG KO ANG MGA ITO KUNG BAKIT MAGKAIBA ANG IMAGE NI ADAN AT NI JESUS NA SI JESUS ANG IMAGE NG DIOS NA HINDI MAKASAGOT KUNDI NAGNGAKNGAK LANG!

Seriosly Jose Rodelio Retome Rata? Do you really think you can take that literally? As if you know what God would look like?

1 Corinthians 15:47-49 - King James Version
47 The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven.
48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

Was this all about Christ as the exact image of God? Short answer: Hindi lang. 1 Corinthians 15:47-49 is not primarily about Christ being the exact image of God (that idea fits better with passages like Colossians 1:15 or Hebrews 1:3). Ang focus dito ni Paul ay resurrection at transformation ng tao, gamit ang Adam-Christ contrast. So it has nothing to do with your question about "MAGKAIBA ANG IMAGE NI ADAN AT NI JESUS". Just because you'd seen the word image, you're thinking that it was all about facial identity similarity or whatever. This is not what the subject was all about. You're not making anysense. Here is the breakdown for you, Jose Rodelio Retome Rata -

The first man is of the earth, or earthy = Adam: mortal, physical, subject to death.

Adam: created innocent, unglorified, subject to the Fall
Adam reflected God’s image.

The second man is the Lord from heaven or heavenly = Christ: heavenly origin, source of resurrection life, and the first who obtains immortality or a resurrected body.

Christ: the exact image of the Father, glorified, divine, sinless
Christ perfectly embodies God’s image.

Colossians 1:15 - King James Version
15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

Again, as I have quoted this one already in the verses above, this is not about the literal facial image of Christ. I may be heretic in saying this, God and Christ were not,/ or may not be look-a-likes, but they do share the same qualities, essence, and as a being was a God. So they have in common and likeness in that sense, but not in a literal image.

KLARO DIYAN NA TINAGLAY NILA APOSTOL PABLO ANG LARAWAN NI ADAN NA TATAGLAYIN DIN NILA ANG LARAWAN NI CRISTO NA SIYANG LARAWAN NG DIOS MEANING MAGKAIBA NG LARAWAN SI ADAN AT SI JESUS.
GANITO KASI YAN!
NANG LALANGIN NG DIOS SI ADAN NILALANG SIYA SA LARAWAN NG DIOS.

So, you're saying it was literal, or the attributes and statues of God? Your explanation is confusing and vague. Cause we already knew that in Genesis 1:26-27, so what else do you mean about this Jose Rodelio Retome Rata?

Genesis 1:26-27 - King James Version
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Oh yeah, right, now you quoted it. And again, this was already stated in my statement above. Take a closer look at it and tell me how this was all about a literal image and likeness?

Genesis 5:1 - King James Version
5 This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;

ANG LARAWAN NG DIOS NA TINUTUKOY NA DIYAN NILALANG SI ADAN AY HINDI SA PISIKAL NA LARAWAN KUNDI SA KABANALAN.

Could be or could also be of a different thing. Adam was created physically, and he didn't know good from evil yet, so it doesn't make sense to tell us Adam was created or "NILALANG SI ADAN AY HINDI SA PISIKAL NA LARAWAN KUNDI SA KABANALAN" when he can't distinguish which was right to follow, but to be fair, we could take that also as an answer since God is Holy and of course his creation does. There are also a lot of them, Jose Rodelio Retome Rata. Maybe he was actually the same image who knew. Just as I have said, we are not to take that literally as it is. Only Christ bears the Image of God. Christ was the perfect image of the Father, but in the Creation, we don't know exactly what Adam may have looked like, or maybe he was literally like the image of God. You see my point here, the answer to your question needs a revelation, and you don't have that kind of teaching or doctrine in your INC, and yet you think you're confident enough to take the scripture interpretation without knowing the context. You always fail that way if you keep doing that. So, for my point on this one, here's the idea for you -

1. Physical image (literal likeness)
In LDS belief, God the Father has a real, glorified body. Kaya, when Genesis says Adam was created in God’s image, it means: Adam’s body was patterned after God’s body. A bodily structure that has a face and limbs, the capacity to stand, speak, think, act, etc.

Kaya hindi invisible o abstract ang “image” - anyo ng tao ang anyo or statue ng Diyos, and Adam matched that form.

2. Spiritual image (divine nature) Adam was also created with: Moral agency (ability to choose) Intelligence. Capacity for love, righteousness, and a relationship with God. Meaning Adam was God’s literal spirit son placed into a physical body. So the “image” includes who Adam was inside, not just outside.

Psalm 17:15 - King James Version
15 As for me, I will behold thy face in righteousness: I shall be satisfied, when I awake, with thy likeness.
Ephesians 4:24 - King James Version
24 And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.

KLARO NA ANG WANGIS O LARAWAN NG DIOS NA DIYAN NILALANG SI ADAN AY ANG PAGIGING BANAL.

NAIWALA NI ADAN ANG LARAWANG IYAN NG DIOS DAHIL SUMUWAY SIYA SA UTOS NG DIOS NAGKASALA SIYA.

I don't understand why you chose that passage and connected it to the topic!? Ephesians 4:24 Paul was actually saying about to change into the way of righteousness, this has nothing to do with the topic of Man Created in the image of God. But to be fair, since this was also part of the plan, which is to restore man into righteousness and come unto Christ, it is important also to partake of the goodness of the Gospel that could help us to be more holy or righteous. Okay, so let's regard that as if it were, in a sense, God wants us to be holy, but though it is not totally related to the issue.

Genesis 3:17-19 - King James Version
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.

IYAN ANG TINUTUKOY NI APOSTOL PABLO NA LARAWAN NI ADAN NA TINAGLAY NILA SAPAGKAT ANG LAHAT AY NAGKASALA.

The point you made is actually the result of "The Fall". Yes, it's true and no question about it. But if you think it was planned or created that way before the fall, it seems like you're trying to implement that God created unrighteous or cursed man in the beginning. That is not the point there; God's creation is perfect, and it was created through his goodness and holiness. So this was actually a different topic if you think it's your point, but as I have said, your question is confusing as to what area of theology we're to discuss. So I covered both of those possible topics as best as I could to satisfy your demand. But actually, you still fail to understand your scripture if you think that's how God created us.

1 Corinthians 15:49 - King James Version
49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
Romans 5:12 - King James Version
12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

HINDI NAKAABOT SA KALUWALHATIAN NG DIOS SA PAGIGING BANAL NA SIYANG TINUTUKOY NA LARAWAN NG DIOS NA DIYAN NILALANG SI ADAN SA PASIMULA SAPAGKAT ANG LAHAT AY NAGKASALA.

I don't know where you are referring to, and what kind of commentary was that. Yes, Adam fell that men might be brought to earth and experience earth life, but this doesn't mean God created man purposely as fallen. Why would God do that? The result of the fall caused our body to be imperfect and subject to sins and death; and yes, it's true, it was all because of the fall, but God's creation was perfect, and we are created in God's image; He didn't create man imperfectly or unfairly because it is predestined to be sinners. We don't believe that. We all have the potential to become like our Father, the reason why Christ came to redeem us from the Fall.

Romans 3:23 - King James Version
23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

As I have said already, this was the effect of the Fall of Adam; this doesn't make sense to the subject.

SI CRISTO NAMAN ANG LARAWAN NG DIOS SA PAGIGING BANAL.

Colossians 1:15 - King James Version

15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
2 Corinthians 4:4 - King James Version
4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

BANAL SI CRISTO NA HINDI SIYA NAGKASALA DAHIL PINABANAL SIYA NG DIOS.

Okay, so yeah, sure, we do believe that Christ was the only perfect man and was made holy, which shows an example for us all.

1 John 2:6 - New International Version
Whoever claims to live in him must live as Jesus did.

I was the plan, and of course Christ was the express image of God, which he was not just created in just physical structure, but also has the qualities of God. You may sound confused if you use the word Christ was "Holy" and "Be made Holy". I could make both of its meanings relevant by accepting him as the son of God literally, and not just a mere creation. Which means he was with God from the Beginning, so the quality Christ has is no different than what God was all about.

1 Peter 2:21-22 - King James Version

21 For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:
John 10:36 - King James Version
36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

ANG LARAWANG IYAN NI CRISTO AY TATAGLAYIN DIN NILA APOSTOL PABLO.

If you are talking about attributes and qualities, I do agree. But if you're talking about physically looking alike, which I found funny at first on your confusing question. I would disagree on that. But yes, as I have said, God created us with the qualities of a God; we can be humble, holy, or righteous because we have the capacity and attributes to become like him. Christ's word or a call for us to "be perfect even as our Father who is in heaven is perfect", doesn't make anysense if we don't have those qualities and capacity to do so.

Romans 8:29 - King James Version
29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
1 Corinthians 15:49 - King James Version
49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

PINABANAL SILA NG DUGO NI CRISTO DAHIL NAPATAWAD ANG KANILANG MGA KASALANAN.

This is actually a different topic, and I couldn't see how this made it relevant to the question you brought up. Ok, so yeah. That was soon after Christ performed atonement. We do know that through Christ's atonement, we will be able to have hope, peace, happiness, and so on. Christ was born and foreordained to become the saviour, and no question about that. Christ has the quality of the Father and was indeed the firstborn of all. So, what's the deal?

Hebrews 9:14 - King James Version
14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
Hebrews 9:22 - King James Version
22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

IYAN ANG IBIG SABIHIN NI APOSTOL PABLO NA TATAGLAYIN RIN NILA ANG LARAWAN NI CRISTO SA PAGIGING BANAL.

Again, the topic was all about the difference between Adam's and Christ's image. I just don't understand how this thing is relevant to the issue. We're not talking about the fall of Adam and the Atonement of Christ. If this were the case, then your question doesn't make any sense at all. So, okay, we will add that in some of the lines below, to satisfy your demand.

KAYA MAGKA-IBA NG LARAWAN SI ADAN AT SI CRISTO.
SI ADAN AY NAGKASALA KAYA HINDI NA SIYA KALARAWAN NG DIOS SA KABANALAN.

Oh come on, you're saying the appearance or the qualities? Adam was created in the same image as God and has the same qualities, but just because of the Fall, you judge him the same way as if there's no salvation for Adam. Who are you to say that? And what do you mean by "HINDI NA SIYA KALARAWAN NG DIOS"? Where did you find that in the scripture?

SI JESUS AY BANAL KAYA SIYA ANG LARAWAN NG DIOS SA PAGIGING BANAL.

Yes, no question about it, and yet you still believe he was just a human. So why did God choose Christ to have those qualities rather than all men? Was this all about unfair preferential treatment? If you go on and insist on this topic, you might be grilled on the same ground where you don't believe Christ in heaven was still a human.

Hebrews 1:3 - King James Version
3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:

KAYA HINDI SA PISIKAL NA WANGIS O LARAWAN NG DIOS NILALANG SILA ADAN KUNDI SA PAGIGING BANAL BAGO SILA MAGKASALA.

Actually, this is my point, but it turns out I have to get all the references right to answer your confusing question. And anyway, the short answer is we don't know the physical appearance of Adam, actually. No one could make a good portrait of his face and how it looks. Maybe he was indeed created physically with the same facial features as God, or maybe he looks like Christ. Who knew? But to tell us about the difference between Christ and Adam, yes, of course, we see a lot of difference. Christ was born in the Meridian of time to fulfil the atonement, while Adam was the first to be born to replenish the earth. There were a lot of story on his days and til the days of Christ, which he fulfilled the atonement to save us from the Fall of Adam. Everyone understood and knew that. I thought this was supposed to be a different theology of INC, but rather a simple combination of scriptural passages that sometimes may be taken out of context.

NAKAINTINDI KAYO MGA MOR-MOON LDS NA MAYAYABANG PERO MGA HANGIN NAMAN ANG LAMAN NG MGA ULO NINYO?

Yeah, of course, we understand that you're just a bigot and lame to quote scriptures, but it doesn't add up in your Theology. I can see how you fail every time you make a comment, because your commentary was so much as elementary. You're too childish and arrogant, and everyone understands that.

TINATANONG KO ANG MGA ITO KUNG BAKIT MAGKAIBA ANG IMAGE NI ADAN AT NI JESUS NA SI JESUS ANG IMAGE NG DIOS NA HINDI MAKASAGOT KUNDI NAGNGAKNGAK LANG! - by Jose Rodelio Retome Rata

Literally and Figuratively