| <p> It would be difficult to overstate the centrality of the image of [[God]] as a crucial theme in biblical theology. From the beginning of the end in [[Genesis]] (protology) to the end of the beginning in Revelation (eschatology), the image of God is crucial for understanding the flow of redemptive history. God creates humans in his image, justly punishes them for rebellion, yet graciously provides redemption from that rebellion, and then finally consummates redemptive history by transforming the whole creation into new heavens and a new earth. </p> <p> Genesis 1:26-27 indicates that God created humankind as male and female in his image ( <i> tselem </i> []) and likeness ( <i> demut </i> []). It is doubtful that distinctions between the meanings of these two words are to be pressed. Rather, the pair of words conveys one idea through a literary device known as hendiadys. Later, in Genesis 5:1-3 , after God's image-bearers had sinned against him, the language of Genesis 1:26-27 is repeated as a prelude to a list of Adam's posterity. Significantly, this passage links God's original creation of humans in his likeness with the subsequent human procreation of children in Adam's image and likeness. Following the Genesis narrative further, after the flood of Noah, Genesis 9:6 indicates that due to the image of God capital punishment is required in cases of murder. To murder a creature who images God is tantamount to an attempt to murder the God who created the image-bearer, and the heinous nature of this offense warrants the forfeiture of the murderer's life as well. </p> <p> But what is meant by the terms "image" and "likeness"? Three approaches to this question are commonly found, and no doubt all three have some merit. [[Many]] have concluded that humans are image-bearers due to their superior intellectual structure. Others have stressed that God mandates that humans function as rulers and managers of the creation as they image him (Genesis 1:26-28; [[Psalm]] 8:5-8 ). [[Yet]] another approach stresses the created relationships of humans; they image God as they relate to him, to each other, and to nature. Just as the [[Creator]] is a being in relationship, so are his creatures. [[Putting]] these views together, humans are like God in that they are uniquely gifted intellectually (and in many other ways) so that they may relate to God and to each other as they live as stewards of the world God has given them to manage. While an image is a physical representation of a person or thing (Exodus 20:4; Matthew 22:20 ), the human body does not mechanically image God, as if God had a body. Rather, the whole human being, including the body, images God's attributes by ethical living in concrete settings. </p> <p> Sadly, the pristine beauty and harmony of this original created order were shattered by the rebellion of [[Adam]] and Eve, and the record in Genesis 3 as well as the history of human cultures show how alienation between humans and God, humans and other humans, and humans and nature quickly became the normal state of affairs. Yet even in this sorry state of alienation and disharmony, humans can still image God, although in an inconsistent and perverted fashion ( Genesis 5:1-3; 9:6; Psalm 8 cf. 1 Corinthians 11:7; James 3:9 ). God calls his redeemed covenant people to the highest ethical standard. They are to be like him; their ethical obedience images God. </p> <p> In the New [[Testament]] the teaching of [[Jesus]] indicates the value of human beings implicit in their being God's image-bearers (Matthew 6:26; 12:12 ). More important, Jesus himself perfectly images God in his life and ministry as he relates sinlessly to God, people, and nature. As the first Adam failed the satanic test, the second Adam passed with flying colors (Matthew 4:1-11 ). Jesus did not forsake God as did Adam, but as the sin-bearer Jesus was forsaken by God (Matthew 27:46 ) so that he might restore his people to harmonious relationships to God, neighbor, and nature. </p> <p> It is primarily [[Paul]] who develops the New Testament teaching on the image of God. Paul sees Jesus as the one who preexisted in God's form ( <i> morphe </i> Philippians 2:6 ) and whose incarnation supremely imaged God (2 Corinthians 4:4; Colossians 1:15; cf. John 1:1,14 , 18; 14:9; Hebrews 1:3 ). Jesus' work of redemption is both compared and contrasted to Adam's work of rebellion (Romans 5:12-21; 1 Corinthians 15:22 ). Those who believe in Jesus are renewed in the image ( <i> eikon </i> [ 2 Corinthians 3:18; Ephesians 4:22-24; Colossians 3:9-10 ). Their destiny is ultimately to be made like Jesus, to image him perfectly as he perfectly images God (1 Corinthians 15:49; Ephesians 4:13; Philippians 3:21 ). In this respect [[Christians]] are like children who look up to their big brother and want to be like him (Romans 8:29 ). For the Christian, then, godliness in a world is Christ-likeness. </p> <p> For Paul salvation from start to finish, encompassing regeneration, sanctification, and glorification, is nothing less than new creation (Romans 8:18-30; 2 Corinthians 4:6; 5:17; Galatians 2:20; 6:15; Ephesians 2:10; cf. John 3:5; 5:24 ). This new creation is not merely individual but corporate and cosmic as well. The salvation of individual believers places them into community with other believers whose destiny augurs that of the physical uNIVerse itself (Romans 8:19-21; 1 Corinthians 15:24-28; Colossians 1:16; cf. Matthew 19:28; Hebrews 2:5-8 ). The community of believers in Jesus has already experienced image renewal and with perseverance they hope for the consummation of that renewal. In the meantime their ethical obedience is not merely to be like God but to be like Christ, who has provided not only an incarnate model for godliness but also a dynamic for attaining godliness through the [[Spirit]] (John 13:14; 1 Corinthians 11:1; Ephesians 4:32-5:2; Philippians 2:5; Colossians 3:13; 1 Thessalonians 1:6; 1 John 3:3 ). </p> <p> Any discussion of the image of God would be incomplete without some elucidation of the glorious future that awaits those who have been renewed in the image of God. This is the prospect of new heavens and new earth where righteousness dwells. God's plan of redemption in [[Christ]] would be severely truncated if it involved only the "spiritual" salvation of individuals who believe in Jesus. The original created order encompassed not only a "spiritual" relationship to God but also a social relationship to other humans and a material relationship to the world. [[Thus]] biblical eschatology envisions the restoration of all three of these relationships in a world where God's people may experience unhindered fellowship with him (Revelation 21:3-5 ) because the Edenic curse has been removed (Revelation 22:3 ). [[Ever]] since Abraham, the prototypical person of God, God's people have longed for this time when life in all its facets may be lived fully to God's glory. This glorious biblical vision of a time when creatures will fully reflect the Creator's splendor ought to provide strong encouragement to Christians who presently reflect God's likeness in an imperfect yet improving manner. </p> <p> [[David]] L. Turner </p> <p> See also [[Adam]]; [[Eve]]; [[The Fall]]; [[Personhood Person]]; [[Salvation]]; [[Sin]] </p> <p> <i> Bibliography </i> . W. J. Dumbrell, <i> The [[End]] of the Beginning </i> ; D. J. Hall, <i> Imaging God: [[Dominion]] as [[Stewardship]] </i> ; A. A. Hoekema, <i> [[Created]] in God's [[Image]] </i> ; P. E. Hughes, <i> The [[True]] Image: The [[Origin]] and [[Destiny]] of Man in Christ </i> ; M. G. Kline, <i> [[Images]] of the Spirit </i> ; A. M. Wolters, <i> [[Creation]] Regained: Biblical Basics for a Reformational Worldview </i> . </p> | | <p> In Genesis 1:26 , Genesis 1:27 , the truth is declared that God created man in His own "image" ( <i> ''''' celem ''''' </i> ), after His "likeness" ( <i> ''''' demūth ''''' </i> ). The two ideas denote the same thing - <i> resemblance </i> to God. The like conception of man, tacit or avowed, underlies all revelation. It is given in [[Genesis]] 9:6 as the ground of the prohibition of the shedding of man's blood; is echoed in Psalm 8:1-9; is reiterated frequently in the New [[Testament]] ( 1 Corinthians 11:7; Ephesians 4:24; Colossians 3:10; Isaiah 3:9 ). The nature of this image of God in man is discussed in other articles - see especially [[Anthropology]] . It lies in the nature of the case that the "image" does not consist in bodily form; it can only reside in spiritual qualities, in man's mental and moral attributes as a self-conscious, rational, personal agent, capable of self-determination and obedience to moral law. This gives man his position of lordship in creation, and invests his being with the sanctity of personality. The image of God, defaced, but not entirely lost through sin, is restored in yet more perfect form in the redemption of Christ. See the full discussion in the writer's work, <i> God's Image in Man and Its Defacement </i> ; see also Dr. J. Laidlaw, <i> The Bible [[Doctrine]] of Man </i> . </p> |
| <p> The notion of the "image of [[God]] in man" is one of the fundamental conceptions of [[Christian]] theology. It takes its root in the [[Mosaic]] account of creation, where we find God saying (Genesis 1:26), "Let us make man, בְּצִלְמֵנוּ and כַּדנְמוּתֹנוּ, in our image, after our likeness." This first expression is again used in the next verse, where the act of creation is recorded, and subsequently also, [[Genesis]] 9:6, after sin had entered the world. There is consequently no further difference between צֶלְם and דְּמוּת than that the one is the concrete, the other the abstract expression of the same idea. This is also seen in comparing 5, 3 and Genesis 9:6. The two synonyms are in fact used for the sake of emphasis, q. d. in exact resemblance of us. </p> <p> "No one doubts that the phrase ‘ image of God' denotes in general a likeness of God; but the opinions of theologians have always been different respecting the particular points of resemblance which [[Moses]] intended to express by the phrase. Nor is this strange, since Moses does not explain what he means by it, and it is used in very different significations in- the Bible, a fact that has not been sufficiently noticed. The common opinion is, that this phrase denotes certain excellences which man originally possessed, but which he lost, in part at least, by the fall. The principal texts cited in behalf of this opinion are Genesis 1:26; compare Genesis 2:15 sq.; and from the N.T., Colossians 3:19; compare Ephesians 4:24, where a renewal after the image of God is mentioned, which is understood to mean a restoration of this image, implying that man must have lost it; also 2 Corinthians 11:3. Against this common opinion it may be objected that the image of God is described in many passages as existing after the fall, and as still discoverable in men; as Genesis 9:6; James 3:9; 1 Corinthians 11:6-7, and especially Genesis 5:1-3, from which it appears that Seth, being made in the likeness of Adam, must have had the same image of God, whatever it was, which [[Adam]] possessed" (Knapp, Christian Theology, bk. 1, art. 6 sec. 53, p. 168). </p> <p> In the works of the fathers we find great diversity of opinion concerning this image of God (Gregor. Nyss. [[De]] homin. opif c. 4:5, or 16). Some of the early [[Latin]] fathers also maintained a bodily likeness to God (Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. 5,6). The Audaeans (q.v.) admitted only the physical resemblance (Theodoret, Hist. Ecclesiastes 4, 9), while [[Augustine]] and the [[Church]] of [[Alexandria]] rejected it altogether (Clemens, Strom. 2, 19). They also agreed in making the divine image, in a moral point of view, to consist in uprightness before God, and in the harmony between the higher and the lower faculties of the soul; as also physically in the immortality of the body, and the mastership over all other creatures. Others admit a confirmation and strengthening of the image of God in man by the indwelling of the [[Holy]] Spirit, which they consider not only as a gift of free grace, but also as necessary to the completeness of man (Cyr. Alex. Thes. 34. dial. 6). These different parties make great use of the distinction between the two expressions imago and similitudo; the scholastics maintaining that by the inmago (which, though weakened by the fall. was still extant) is to be understood the essence of the innate, natural attributes of the spirit, especially reason and liberty; and by the similitudo (which was obliterated by the fall) the moral nature of man, which was agreeable to God, or, in other words, the thorough unison with the divine will originating in the divine grace (HugoVict. De Sacram. 1. 1, p. 6, c. 2; Petr. Lomb. Sent. 1. 2, dist. 16, D.). </p> <p> The creed of [[Trent]] makes no positive mention concerning the image of God, but the Catechisimus Ramanus considers it as consisting in the peculiar inherent dispositions of the human soul, for after its definitions concerning Adam's body it says, "Quod autem ad animam pertinet, eum (hominem) ad imaginem et similitudinem suam formavit liberumque ei arbitrium tribuit," which, however, does not satisfactorily explain in what relation this liberun arbitrium (free will) stands with regard to the imago dei (image of God) in the soul. It also leaves undecided the question whether the consequent submission of the desires to the dictates of reason is also to be considered as forming part of this image of God. From the word addidit we can only infer that the originalis justitice admirable donum is something independent, not inherent (Cat. Rom. 1, 2,19). The Romish theologians still endeavor to maintain the distinctions made by the scholastics between imago and similitudo. "The ‘ original justice' is further considered as a supernatural gift, which man possesses by a special grace, so that it is made to counterbalance the natural division between the higher and the lower forces (the spirit and the flesh reason and sensuality), thus directing the forces towards God, and introducing the similitudo in the imago (Bellarmine, De Grat. Prinm Ilonsini: 5, 5). [[Thus]] the [[Roman]] [[Catholic]] Church starts in its theory from the present state of man, as resulting from the fall, in regard to which state communion with God is something superadded. Some Romanist theologians distinguish between original justice and original holiness (communion with God), maintaining the former to be the attribute of pure nature as it came from the hand of the Creator, and holding the latter to be exclusively the gift of superadded and supernatural grace. The evangelical Church, on the contrary, by considering the image of God as belonging to Adam's true nature, as he came from the hands of his Creator, obtains a doctrine at once more clear, more simple, and more true (Apol. 1, 17; comp. Form. Concord. sol. decl. 1 10). It considers habitual communion with God as a state natural to man, and belonging to his normal organization before the fall, not as a special particular gift. It maintains, further, that this original image of God was lost by the fall of man. </p> <p> "But in the papal anthropology, man, as he comes from God, is imperfect. He is not created sinful indeed, but neither is he created holy. To use the papal phrase, he is created in puris natusulibus; without positive righteousness and without positive unrighteousness. The body is full of natural carnal propensities, and tends downwards. The soul, as rational and immortal, tends upwards. But there is no harmony between the two by creation. An act subsequent to that of creation, and additional to it, is necessary to bring this harmony about; and this is that act by which the gift of original righteousness is superadded to the gifts of creation. In and by this act the higher part is strengthened to acquire and maintain dominion over the lower, and a positive perfection is imparted to human nature that was previously lacking in it. [[Original]] righteousness is thus, in reference to the created and natural characteristics of man, a supernatural gift. </p> <p> "The second peculiarity in the papal anthropology consists in the tenet that apostasy, involves the loss of a supernatural, but not of a natural gift. By the act of transgression, human nature lapses back into that condition of conflict between the flesh and the spirit in which it was created. In losing its original righteousness, therefore, it loses nothing with which it was endowed by the creative act, but only that superadded gift which was bestowed subsequently to this. The supremacy of the higher over the lower part is lost by the Adamic transgression, and the two parts of man, the flesh and the spirit, fall into their primitive and natural antagonism again. Original righteousness being a supernatural gift, original sin is the loss of it, and, in reality, the restoration of man to the state in which he was created" (Shedd, Hist. of Doct. 2, 146). </p> <p> The "image," or likeness of God, in which man was made, has, by some, been assigned exclusively to the body; by others simply to the soul; others, again, have found its essence in the circumstance of his having "dominion" over the other creatures. As to the body, it is not necessary to take up any large space to prove that in no instance can that literally bear the image of God, that is, be "like" God. Descant ever so much or ever so poetically upon man's upright and noble form, this has no more likeness to God than a prone or reptile one: God is incorporeal, and has no bodily shape to be the antitype of anything material. Not more tenable is the notion that the image of God in man consisted in the "dominion" which was granted to him over this lower world. [[Limited]] dominion may, it is true, be an image of large and absolute dominion; but man is not said to have been made in the image of God's dominion, which is accident merely, for, before any creatures existed, God himself could have no dominion but in the image and likeness of God himself, of something which constitutes his nature. Still further, man, according to the history was evidently made in the image of God, in order to his having dominion, as the [[Hebrew]] connective particle ("and") imports. He who was to have dominion must necessarily be made before he could be invested with it, and therefore dominion was consequent to his existing in the "image" and "likeness" of God, and could not be that image itself. </p> <p> The attempts which have been made to fix upon some one essential quality in which to place that "image" of God in which man was created, are not only uncalled for by any scriptural requirement, but are even contradicted by various parts of Scripture, from which alone we must derive our information on this subject. It is in vain to say that this "image" must be something essential to human nature, something only which cannot be lost. We shall, it is true, find that revelation places it in what is essential to human nature; but that it should comprehend nothing else, or one quality only, has no proof or reason; and we are, in fact, taught that it comprises also what is not essential to human nature, and what may be lost and be regained. As to both, the evidence of [[Scripture]] is explicit. </p> <p> (1.) When God is called "the, Father of spirits" a likeness is certainly intimated between man and God in the spirituality of their nature. This is also implied in the striking argument of [[Paul]] with the Athenians: "Forasmuch, then, as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone graven by art, and man's device;" plainly referring to the idolatrous statues by which God was represented among heathens. If likeness to God in man consisted in bodily shape, this would not have been an argument against human representations of the Deity; but it imports, as Howe well expresses it, that. "we are to understand that our resemblance to him, as we are his offspring, lies in some higher, more noble, and more excellent thing, of which there can be no figure; as who can tell how to give the figure or image of a thought, or of the mind' or thinking power?" In spirituality, and consequently immateriality, this image of God in man, then, in the first particular, consists. </p> <p> (2.) The sentiment expressed in [[Wisdom]] 2, 23, is evidence that, in the opinion of the ancient Jews, the image of God in man comprised immortality also: "For God created man to be immortal, and made him to be an image of his own eternity;" and though other creatures, and even the body of man, were made capable of immortality, and at least the material human frame, whatever we may think of the case of animals, would have escaped death, had not sin entered the world, yet, without running into the absurdity of the "natural immortality" of the human soul, that essence must have been constituted immortal in a high and peculiar sense, which has ever retained its prerogative of eternal duration amidst the universal death, not only of animals, but of the bodies of all human beings. (See [[Immortality]]). </p> <p> (3.) To these correspondences we are to add that of intellectual powers, and we have what divines have called, in perfect accordance with the Scriptures, the natural image of God in his creature, which is essential and ineffaceable. He was made capable of knowledge, and he was endowed with liberty of will. </p> <p> (4.) This natural image of God, in which man was created, was the foundation of that moral image by which also he was distinguished. [[Unless]] he had been a spiritual, knowing, and willing being, he would have been wholly incapable of moral qualities. That he had such qualities eminently, and that in them consisted the image of God, as well as in the natural attributes just stated, we have also the express testimony of Scripture. "Lo this only have I found, that God made man upright, but they have sought out many inventions." There is also an express allusion to the moral image of God, in which man was first created, in Colossians 3:10, "And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him;" and in Ephesians 4:24, "Put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness." This also may be finally argued from the satisfaction with which the historian of the creation represents the [[Creator]] as viewing the works of his hands "as very good." This is pronounced with reference to each individually as well as to the whole: "And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good" But as to man, this goodness must necessarily imply moral as well as physical qualities. [[Without]] them he would have been imperfect as man; and, had they existed in him, in their first exercises, perverted and sinful, he must have been an exception, and could not have been pronounced "very good." — Watson, Institutes, 2, 9-13. </p> <p> From this point of view we may arrive at a correct apprehension of the idea of the divine image. God, as an absolute spirit, whose essential element of life is love, cannot but manifest himself in an eternal object of this love, of the same essence with himself. This is the Son, the eternal, absolute, immanent image of God. But as God, by virtue of his unfathomable, overflowing love, calls also forth (or creates) other beings, to whom he wills to impart his blissful life by the establishing of his kingdom, he, the type of all perfection, cannot create them but after his own image, as he sees it from all eternity in the Son. This created image of God is man in his primitive condition. Man was the real object of God's creative activity, as is seen in God's special decision with regard to his creation (Genesis 1:26; comp. Psalms 8), and mankind are called to be the real population of his kingdom. The whole universe (and even in some sense the angels, Hebrews 1:14) was only created for man, which is the reason why he was not created till all other things were ready for him. The faculties which other creatures present only in a limited, disconnected manner, were in him (as the μικρόκοσμος ) united into a harmonious whole; moreover, in him alone (as the μικρόθεος), of all creatures, was the personal spiritual life of God mirrored; and by direct inspiration of the divine breath of life, the spirit was infused, by which he became a spiritual, self-conscious, free, and individual soul. Man was created God's image in his individualism. </p> <p> As God is not an abstract, but a real spirit, full of the living powers which created the world, so the image of God in man embraced his whole nature. It extended also to the body as the outward image, the dwelling and organ of the soul. Man was created the image of God in the totality of his being. But, while man was thus made the image of God to himself, he was also made the image of God to the world before which he stands as the representative of God, a relation by which the mastery over the outer world ascribed to him in Scripture (Genesis 1:28-30) is shown to have an inner foundation. Thus far the image of God was innate in man and inalienable. This innate state, however, bespoke a corresponding habitual state. Inasmuch as God the [[Spirit]] is love, man was destined to a life of love, and was at once brought into it by communion with God. From the heart, however, as the center of individual life, the power of love manifests itself in the direction of knowledge as truth and wisdom (objective and subjective directions), and in the direction of the will, as freedom and sanctity (formal and material directions), yet so that these spiritual conditions in their original working produced a state partly of untried innocence and partly of unfolding development. To the body, the image of God procured immortality (posse non mori), as the outward dissolution of the forces (death) is but the result of an inward dissolution of the principle of life. With regard to the world, however, man obtained by it a power, in consequence of which the world becomes subject to him by love, and not by force; and by his knowledge of its nature (Genesis 2:19-20), he is enabled to carry out God's will in it. </p> <p> This habitual resemblance to God, which, with the image of God innate in man's nature, formed the natural, original state of man, was lost by sin, as the life of love, coming from God, which formed its basis, was destroyed by selfishness coming from the heart of man. It could only be restored by the absolute image of God the Son, source of the life of love for the world, assuming himself the form of man. [[Jesus]] Christ, the [[Son]] of God, made flesh, is the real, personal restoration of the image of God in humanity. Since in the flesh he overcame sin for us by his death, and raised our nature to glory in his resurrection, man can again become partaker of the righteousness and spiritual glory which belong to him. By the Holy Spirit, which fills our hearts with love for God, the image of God is restored in us in truth and uprightness. See C. Sartorius, D. Lehre v. d. heiligen Liebe (Stuttg. 1843), 1, 34 sq.); J. T. Beck, D. christl. Lehrwissenschaft nach den bibl. Urkunden (Stutt. 1841), 1, § 19; H. Martensen, D. christl. Dogmatik (Kiel, 1850), p. 156; J. Chr. K. Hofmann, Der Schriftbeweis (Nordlingen, 1851), 1, 248-254: G. Thomasius, [[Christi]] [[Person]] u. Werk (Erlangen, 1853), 1, 147-224; Herzog, Real-Encyklop. 3, 614; Knapp, Theology, sect. 53 et sq.; Winer. Comparat. Darstellung, p. 33; Watson, Institutes vol. 2, ch. 1; Critici Sacri, "De Inmagine Dei," 1, 40; Fawcett, Sermons, p. 234; Dwight, Theology, 1, 345; South, Sermons, 1, 45; Grinfield, Inquiry into the [[Image]] of God in Man (Lond. 1837, 8vo); Harness, Sermons on the Image of God (Lond. 1841, 8vo); Bibliotheca Sacra, 7, 409; Jackson, Thos., Original [[State]] of Man, in. Works, 9, 1; [[Van]] Mildert, Works, 5, 143; Harris, Man Primeval (N. Y. 1851,12mo). </p>
| |
