The journal article “the image of God” was written with the purpose of revealing a number of things. Among these things is the scarcity and brevity with which the Old Testament has referred to the doctrine stated as the image of God. Consequently, the scarce and brief reference has been made in such versus as Genesis 1:26, Genesis 5:2 and Genesis 9:6. Therefore, the author came up with the journal as a way of highlighting the importance that the doctrine bears, which is beyond all proportion, in relation to the laconic treatment that the doctrine receives in Old Testament. The paper will therefore, cover the doctrine of “the image of God” in terms of what it precisely means as well as its theological interpretation.
The author of the journal notes that because man is a creature that God made in His image, the doctrine of “image” limits the status of humankind. In other words, image refers not exactly to the real thing that it represents. Instead, it is often a copy, which is unlike original1. Therefore, the paper argues that the doctrine of “the image of God” has some limitations as far as the degree or the extent of similarities between man and God are concerned. In other words, the paper seeks to highlight the limitations evident in the degree or the extent of similarities to God as well as the precise meaning of the doctrine of “image.2”
Critical Interaction
The author of this article is discussing about the doctrine of “the image of God.” The literal meaning of this doctrine according to the author is that man is like God. This implies that man is the only godlike creature. The author further goes on to express his concern that by viewing man as one of the created animals, which is most highly developed, it becomes hard to understand his nature. He refers to the introductory chapter of Genesis that is emphasizing the doctrine of “the image of God.” Consequently, the author reveals the way Genesis is affirming dignity and worth of man. The dignity and worth of man is evident in the elevation given to all men, elevation that takes all men to highest conceivable level, which lacks complete divinization. Being a creature of God, also made in the image of God, the author views man as a creature of God subject to God’s over lordship3.
Theologians argue that God created man with a physical form like that of deity. This means that man was molded with a 3D embodiment that was exteriorized and delineated. From the biblical point of view, theologians argue that the doctrine of image tends to portray the spiritual faculty or quality of the person. In other words, image represents the spirit, the part that man shares with God. From the physical interpretation, theologians claim that the image is what makes man distinct from all the creatures4. Precisely, the man’s upright posture stands him out of the rest of the creatures. This standing out has some theological significance. Consequently, it designates the dominion and the greatness that man has over all the creatures.
The theologian wrote the article out of the need to discern the precise understanding of the doctrine of image. The biblical and theological perspectives that the author uses to approach the subject include the godliness, worth and dignity of man. These perspectives help him to meet the clear goal of discovering the meaning of the image of God that man has. The thesis development is logical since the author has provided evidence supporting his argument. This article is very important in helping man discover the godliness worth and dignity he has courtesy of the image of God5.
Conclusion
The paper expands a doctrine that is scarcely mentioned in the Bible and makes it a very important biblical statement whose meaning is of great help in the understanding of our worth. He thus achieve his goals very well.
Work Cited:
Clines D. J. A. THE IMAGE OF GOD IN MAN. Tyndale Bulletin 19 (1968) 53-103.
