The Image of God

Many Christians think that a Pastor’s job should be to train people to do the work of ministry in the Church. And in doing that, it will help people have a better sense of mission and calling. But in doing so, there is a tendency to separate what Christian‘s do as an occupation, from what they do in ministry. I do not take that approach. The primary job of a pastor is not to just to teach and preach the Gospel. But to equip people to do the work of ministry “outside” the church.

I am a Physical Therapist who also happens to be an ordained minister. I do not see that as a disadvantage. All it means essentially is that as a follower of Christ and a healthcare worker, I get the privilege of caring for people both body and soul. I like to say, I get to help people while I help people. The reason I say this is that, what I find as I look at churches in America. Is that our discipleship tends to be a bit anemic. What I mean by that is, our teaching is all too often given more to appeal to a broad approach to spirituality. Keeping the cookies on the bottom shelf. Rather than doing the hard work of drilling down into the biblical data. So what I hope you are seeing is that what I try to do each time I teach or preach is to pull people a little more towards the deep end of the spiritual pool. Making you work a tiny bit harder in your thinking. While at the same time ,hopefully, not making you feel like you’re drowning.

Knowledge combined with belief can be a powerful thing. One of the things I have discovered in my Christian walk, is that we must strive to obtain a solid understanding of the fundamentals of our Faith. Then everything we are, do and strive to be, can put us on a path that leads to a healthy spiritual walk with Christ. Because if we don’t, that can lead us to a performance based perspective that we talked about last time. Which often can leave the Christian feeling disillusioned and distant from God.

One of those basic beliefs is how we understand the Image of God. One of the repeating themes that you have heard thus far is this idea of “identity”. Understanding who we are in Christ. Having a better understanding of the Image of God has direct implications for how we live and fulfill God’s purpose for our lives.

Identifying the nature of the divine image has preoccupied students and pastors for a long time. Chances are you’ve heard a sermon or two on the topic. I’m willing to bet that what you’ve heard is that the image of God is similar to list a qualities that both God and humanity share.

What are some of the examples of things that might be on that list?

• Intelligence

• Reasoning ability

• Emotions

• The ability to commune with God

• Self-awareness (sentience)

• Language/communication ability

• The presence of a soul or spirit (or both)

• The conscience

• Free will

All those things sound like possibilities, but they’re not. The image of God means none of those things. Now I am decidedly pro-life! But if the image of God is this list of qualities or abilities, then Bible-believers ought to abandon the idea of the sanctity of human life in the womb. That assertion may jar you, but it’s quite evident once you really consider that list in light of how Scripture talks about the image of God. Now before you string me up and throw stones at me. Give me some time and I’ll explain what I mean.

Genesis teaches us several things about the image of God—what I call “divine image bearing.” All of what we learn must come from the text and must be accounted for in any discussion of what the image means.

1. Both men and women are equally included.

2. Image bearing is what makes humankind distinct from the rest of earthly creation (i.e., plants and animals).

Gen 1.26-27

In Genesis 1:26 God says, “Let us make humankind in our image” (leb, emphasis added). God announces his intention. But who’s he talking to? His heavenly host. He’s not talking to the other members of the Trinity, because God can’t know something they don’t! And here the group he’s addressing learns what God has decided to do.

The notion that this is each member of the Trinity speaking amongst themselves I believe is extrabiblical and only based on speculation. Nowhere in Scripture (unless you believe that it only happens once and happens here) does this happen anywhere. But if we let scripture interpret scripture, we can take this as God talking to the heavenly Host. We have numerous other places in Scripture where this is the case.

Psalm 82:1

Psalm 89:5-7:

1 Kings 22:19-23

Daniel 7:9-10

The announcement is easy to understand. It would be like me saying to some friends, “Let’s get pizza!” Let’s do this! Clear enough. But there’s something else we don’t want to miss. God actually doesn’t include the group in bringing about his decision.

Unlike other meetings of the heavenly host. During these “divine council” sessions, the members don’t participate in this decision. When humankind is created in the next verse (Gen. 1:27), God is the only one creating. The creation of humanity is something God handled himself. Going back to my pizza analogy, if I followed my announcement by driving everyone to the pizza place and insisted on paying, I would be the one doing all the work. That’s what we see going on here.

It makes sense that God would be the only one creating humans. The divine beings of his council don’t have that kind of power. But that produces another oddity. In Genesis 1:27, humans are created in God’s image (“God created humankind in his image,” leb, emphasis added). What happened to “our image” from verse 26?

Actually, nothing. The exchange between “our image” and “his image” in Genesis 1:26–27 reveals something fascinating. God’s statement—“Let us make humankind in our image”—means that he and the ones he’s speaking to share something in common. Whatever that is, humans will also share it once God creates them. Not only are we like God in some way, but we are also like the divine beings of his council.[1]

[1]Heiser, M. S. (2015). Supernatural: What the Bible Teaches about the Unseen World—And Why It Matters. (D. Lambert, Ed.) (pp. 28–29). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

3. There is something about the image that makes humankind “like” God in some way.

4. There is nothing in the text to suggest that the image has been or can be bestowed incrementally or partially.

You’re either created as God’s image bearer or you aren’t. One cannot speak of being partly or potentially bearing God’s image.

Among the list of proposed answers to what image bearing means are a number of abilities or properties: intelligence, reasoning ability, emotions, communing with God, self-awareness, language/communication ability, and free will. The problem with defining the image by any of these qualities is that, on one hand, nonhuman beings like animals possess some of these abilities, although not to the same extent as humans. If one animal anywhere, at any time, learned anything contrary to instinct, or communicated intelligently (to us or within species), or displayed an emotional response (again to us or other creatures), those items must be ruled out as image bearing. We know certain animals have these abilities because of carefully conducted research in the field of animal cognition. Artificial intelligence is on the verge of similar breakthroughs. And if intelligent extraterrestrial life is ever discovered, that would also undermine such definitions.

Defining image bearing as any ability is a flawed approach. This brings me back to my pro-life assertion. The pro-life position is based on the proposition that human life (and so, personhood) begins at conception (the point when the female egg is fertilized by the male sperm). The simple-celled zygote inside the woman’s womb, which pro-lifers believe to be a human person, is not self-aware; it has no intelligence, rational thought processes, or emotions; it cannot speak or communicate; it cannot commune with God or pray; and it cannot exercise its will or respond to the conscience. If you want to argue that those things are there potentially, then that means that you have only a potential person. That’s actually the pro-choice position. Potential personhood is not actual personhood. This thought process would mean that abortion is not killing until personhood is achieved, which nearly all pro-choicers would certainly consider to be after birth. Life is sacred. Of that there is no doubt. But viewing the image of God in this way does not strengthen our position for being pro-life. So there must be something more to how we should view the Image of God.

What about the existence of the Soul?

Even the soul idea fails the uniqueness and actuality tests. This notion derives from the traditional rendering of Genesis 2:7 in the King James Version (“and the man became a living soul”). The Hebrew word translated “soul” is.....

nephesh

According to the Bible, animals also possess the nephesh. For example, in Genesis 1:20, when we read that God made swarms of “living creatures,” the Hebrew text underlying “creatures” is nephesh. Genesis 1:30 tells us the “living nephesh” is in animals.

The term nephesh in these passages means conscious life or animate life (as opposed to something like plant life). Humans share a basic consciousness with certain animals, though the nature of that consciousness varies widely.

We also cannot appeal to a spirit being the meaning of image bearing. The word nephesh we just considered is used interchangeably with the Hebrew word for spirit....

ruach

Examples include 1 Samuel 1:15 and Job 7:11. Both terms speak of an inner life where thinking, reason, and emotions occur, along with their use in activities like prayer and decision making. The point is that the Old Testament does not distinguish between soul and spirit. All these qualities associated with spirit require cognitive function, and so cannot be relevant until after brain formation (and use) in the fetus.

So how do we understand divine image bearing in a way that does not stumble over these issues and yet aligns with the description in Genesis?

Hebrew grammar is the key. The turning point is the meaning of the preposition in with respect to the phrase “in the image of God.” In English we use the preposition in to denote many different ideas. That is, in doesn’t always mean the same thing when we use that word. For example, if I say, “put the dishes in the sink,” I am using the preposition to denote location. If I say, “I broke the mirror in pieces,” I am using in to denote the result of some action. If I say, “I work in education,” I am using the preposition to denote that I work as a teacher or principal, or in some other educational capacity.

This last example directs us to what the Hebrew preposition translated in means in Genesis 1:26. Humankind was created as God’s image. If we think of imaging as a verb or function, that translation makes sense. We are created to image God, to be his imagers. It is what we are by definition. The image is not an ability we have, but a status. We are God’s representatives on earth. To be human is to image God.

This is why Genesis 1:26–27 is followed by what theologians call the “dominion mandate” in verse 28. The verse informs us that God intends us to be him on this planet. We are to create more imagers (“be fruitful and multiply … fill”) in order to oversee the earth by stewarding its resources and harnessing them for the benefit of all human imagers (“subdue … rule over”).[1]

If I understand the Image of God as a list of abilities I possess, then that understanding places the emphasis on me and not not God. And if you think about it. It is really a self-centered approach! If however I think of the Image of God as a status he has given me. Namely that I am His child then that fits very nicely with a full perspective of Scripture.

With this understanding as a backdrop. We can firmly say that the image of God is that status he has bestowed upon us as His children that we then bestow upon the world.

It may not seem like it, but a lot of life-changing ideas extend from all this. Living consciously as though our lives represent God and further his plans—even if we don’t yet see that plan—would change the way we approach each day.[1]

Consciously thinking of ourselves as God’s agents—his imagers—means the decisions we make matter. Christians, no longer lost in sin, can fulfill God’s plan with the help of the Holy Spirit. We are here to spread the goodness of life with God and tell people who need the gospel how they can enjoy that too. Our lives intersect with many people. Their memory of those encounters ripples through their lives and through all the people whose lives they touch. We are a glimpse either of life with God or of a life without God. There’s no middle ground.

The knowledge that all humans are God’s imagers should also prompt us to see human life for the sacred thing that it is. This extends beyond momentous ethical decisions that deal with life and death. What we’ve learned has an impact on so much of how we see each other and relate to each other. Racism has no place in God’s world. Injustice is incompatible with representing God. The abuse of power—at home, at work, or in government‌—‌is ungodly. It is not how God dealt with his children in Eden, so it has no place in how we deal with fellow imagers.

Lastly, representing God means every job that honors him is a spiritual calling. Every legitimate task can be part of moving our world toward Eden and blessing fellow imagers—or not. God doesn’t view people in ministry as more holy or special because of their job descriptions. God cares about how each of us represents him where we are. We either stand against the darkness, sharing the life God wants everyone to ultimately experience, or we don’t. The opportunity doesn’t need to be spectacular; it just needs to be taken.[2]

[1]Heiser, M. S. (2015). Supernatural: What the Bible Teaches about the Unseen World—And Why It Matters. (D. Lambert, Ed.) (p. 32). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press. [2]Heiser, M. S. (2015). Supernatural: What the Bible Teaches about the Unseen World—And Why It Matters. (D. Lambert, Ed.) (pp. 33–34). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

[1]Heiser, M. S. (2015). The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible (First Edition, pp. 40–43). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.