The first biblical passage that speaks of man practically shouts that he is created in the image of God. Evangelical scholarship on the image of God has mainly concentrated on the Genesis texts, which has often led to speculation about the ontological identity of the image. However, there is a much richer reading which does not care so much to ask, “What is the image of God?” but “What does it mean to carry the image of God?” This reading draws from the witness of both the Old and New Testaments, discovering that the restoration of the image becomes a central theme in the New Testament, taking on eschatological significance.
Genesis introduces the idea of the imago Dei in the creation narrative. The six days of creation culminate in the creation of man. While the plants, fish, birds and beasts are all created “according to their kinds” (1:12, 21, 24), man alone is created in the image of God. “Let us create man in (בְ) our image (צלם), after (כְ) our likeness (דמות)” (1:26, ESV).
צלם is normally used to denote a physical image, especially of gods (Amos 5:26) but is also used figuratively in two Psalms describing mere dreams or semblances (39:7; 73:20). דמות denotes a likeness or resemblance. Even though the Reformers and the majority of Medieval scholars held that ‘image’ and ‘likeness refer to separate features, it has become accepted almost without exception by modern commentators that the terms are interchangeable and used synonymously.
Syntactically the בְ preposition may interpreted as a בְ of essence or norm. If it is the former, it indicates that man is the image (cf. Exod 6:3), while the latter indicates that man is merely a copy of the “image.” The second preposition is a כְ of norm. In 5:3 the preposit...
... middle of paper ...
... Ibid., 311.
Stephen R. Holmes, “Image of God,” in Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible, Kevin Vanhoozer ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005), 319.
Hoekema, Created, 22. “Then the best way to learn what the image of God is is not to contrast man with animals, as has often been done, and then to find the divine image to consist in those qualities, abilities, and gifts that man has in distinction from the animals. Rather, we must learn to know what the image of God is by looking at Jesus Christ. What must therefore be at the center of the image of God is not characteristics like the ability to make decisions, but rather that which was central in the life of Christ: love for God and for man… For no man ever loved as Christ loved.”
Douglas John Hall, Imaging God (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986), 84.
Douglas John Hall, Imaging God, 85.
In the first chapter of God Behaving Badly, David Lamb argues that God is unfairly given a bad reputation. He claims these negative perceptions are fueled by pop culture and lead many to believe the lie that the God of the Old Testament is angry, sexist, racist, violent, legalistic, rigid, and distant. These negative perceptions, in turn, affect our faith. Ultimately, Lamb seeks to demonstrate that historical context disproves the presumptuous aforementioned. In addition, he defends his position by citing patterns of descriptions that characterize God throughout the Old Testament. “Our image of God will directly affect how we either pursue or avoid God. If we believe that the God of the Old Testament is really harsh, unfair and cruel, we won’t want anything to do with him” (Lamb 22). Clearly, they way Christians choose to see God will shape their relationship with Him.
It would be naïve at best and blasphemous at worse to say that any theological construct could fully capture the full purpose and workings of God, especially concerning His redemptive plan for humanity. Clearly, there is eschatological construct that is without flaws. However, the further one goes away from the plain sense of the Scriptures the more error it accrues. Since no human can know the purposes of God apart from divine revelation, it is essential to center all endeavors of understanding God’s Word, the Bible. By allowing the Bible to speak for itself and thereby constructing a theological schema according to it, one can reduce the risk of misinterpretation. Likewise, Progressive Dispensationalism is not without flaws and imperfections, but it allows the Scriptures to speak for itself.
So let’s look at them together, and later analyze them separately. In the book of (Genesis 1:26), God said… “And let us make God human beings in our image, to be like us.” The first chapter of Genesis recounts the story of creation and verse 26 talks about the creation and origin of Adam. Unlike the previous, parallel verse, there is a distinct difference in verse 26. Verse 26, talks
N.T Wright (2008) stated that “When we read the scriptures as Christians, we read it precisely as people of the new covenant and of the new creation” (p.281). In this statement, the author reveals a paradigm of scriptural interpretation that exists for him as a Christian, theologian, and profession and Bishop. When one surveys the entirety of modern Christendom, one finds a variety of methods and perspectives on biblical interpretation, and indeed on the how one defines the meaning in the parables of Jesus. Capon (2002) and Snodgrass (2008) offer differing perspectives on how one should approach the scriptures and how the true sense of meaning should be extracted. This paper will serve as a brief examination of the methodologies presented by these two authors. Let us begin, with an
This paper is written to discuss the many different ideas that have been discussed over the first half of Theology 104. This class went over many topics which gave me a much better understanding of Christianity, Jesus, and the Bible. I will be addressing two topics of which I feel are very important to Christianity. First, I will be focusing on the question did Jesus claim to be God? This is one of the biggest challenges of the Bibles that come up quite often. Secondly, I will focus on character development.
2 Corinthians 3:18 states, “And we all, who with unveiled faces contemplate the Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his image with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.” God transforms Christians into His likeness. Genesis 1:27 reveals that, in the Garden, we were completely in His likeness: “So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.” To the artist, in the image of God means something different than what is often taught in Sunday schools. According to Sayers, “Is it his immortal soul, his rationality, his self-consciousness, his free will, or what, that gives him a claim to this rather startling distinction? . . . Looking at man, he sees in him something essentially divine, but when we turn back to see what he says about the original upon which the ‘image’ of God was modeled, we find only the single assertion, ‘God created’. The characteristic common to God and man is that: the desire and the ability to make things” (Sayers 17). The artist, like God, creates something out of nothing. But, there is an important distinction between something beautiful and poetic and something shoddy and cheap.
"EXPLORING THEOLOGY 1 & 2." EXPLORING THEOLOGY 1 2. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 May 2014.
Martens, E. A. God's Design: A Focus on Old Testament Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1981. Print.
God, God is able to relate to man. Nothing else was made in the image
of the Bible, Genesis, we are told we are 'made in the image of God'
Sakenfeld, Kathaine Doob, ed. The New Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible: D-H: Volume 2. Vol. 2. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2007.
From its inception, the human race was built upon a singular perception, an outlook based in patriarchal ideals. God, a supreme creator, armored in precision, creates man in his own image. It is inside this divine state that Adam is born, shaped from the Earth, his journey unfolds. Awakening in the splendor of Eden, Adam immediately recognizes his bond with a higher power, asking fellow creatures in the garden to expound upon the glory of his maker, “Tell me how I may know Him, how adore, from whom that thus I move and live” (XIII. 280-281) Outward from the account of his birth, readers are instructed, led toward patriarchy, following the use of a distinguishing pronoun “Him”. Milton throughout the text renders a strict Christian theological perspective, showcasing a phallic authority that spawns from the dawn of creation.
New Revised Standard Version. New York: American Bible Society, 1989. Print. The. Russell, Eddie.
Humans were created in God’s image. Because God is perfect and without error (infallible), we are a reflection of that. However, when Adam and Eve sinned against god, that infallibility was tainted....
For him [Berkouwer] the image does not consist in certain structural qualities that resemble similar qualities in God, but in concretely visible sanctification – that is, in the newness of life to which we are restored in Christ. This renewal of the image is both a gift from God and the task of man. The image of God and its renewal is therefore not a static entity but an ever-beckoning ideal, a challenge to consecrated