Encourse Wiki

Dogmatic Theology — Topic 7

Properties3
tagstopic
courseDogmatic Theology
unitTopic 7

16 min read

Dogmatic Theology — Topic 7

Biblical Understanding of the Image of God in Man

The Holy Scriptures themselves speak of the creation of man in the image of God:

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. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them(Gen. 1:26-27).

Thus, the immediate biblical meaning of the image of God in man is this: just as God reigns over the whole world, so too man is endowed with royal dignity, and called to rule over the universe.

  • The Creation of Man
    • Biblical Understanding of the Image of God in Man
    • Patristic Understandings of the Image of God in Man
    • The Difference between the Image and Likeness of God
    • The Structure of Man: Dichotomist and Trichotomist Views
    • The Body is not Intrinsically Evil
    • Man’s Body and Soul as One Whole
    • The Origin of the Soul and Teaching of Pre-existence of Souls
    • Mutual Responsibility of Body and Soul for Sins

Man’s Body and Soul as One Whole

Each person is a unique and distinct individual; his soul and body are inseparably united. The Fathers of the Church insist that human nature consists not only of the soul or only of the body, but that both together indivisibly constitute man. They claim that the body is an integral part of man himself, acknowledging it as equally valuable as the soul (especially since the incarnate Word Himself took on not only a human soul but also a physical body). They refuse to ascribe to it a separate origin or fate from that of the soul. Death only temporarily separates the body from the soul until the resurrection, when it will be transformed and reunited with the soul to share either the blessedness of the Heavenly Kingdom or the torments of hell. These teachings were established in opposition to the spiritualist conceptions, according to which the body is only the embodiment of the soul, the evidence of its fallen state, the source of its impurity, a prison or tomb (σώμα - σῆμα. e.g. Plato, Gorgias, Cratylus) which by happenstance confines the soul. While the body is seen as an added and nonessential element, the soul alone constitutes the essence of man and must attain its fulfillment in separation from the body, in gradual negation of the latter. These ideas were received by the Gnostics because of their dualistic views.

In upholding, therefore, that man consists of soul and body the holy Fathers also oppose all forms of materialism or naturalism, which deny the existence of the soul, or reduce it to an epiphenomenon of the body, or consider it produced and dependent on the body, and claim that the body is the essence of man and the basis of any human manifestation. Yet the assertion of the dichotomous composition, of the coexistence of two substances and their clear division, does not express a dualistic view. St. Gregory of Nyssa stresses that “man, the being consisting of soul and body, is one.”[1]

Patristic tradition states that man’s body and soul, both elements of human nature, came into being in a single moment. Neither the body, nor the soul was created first and then later the other followed. Therefore the assertion that man evolved from some primate, God giving it later a rational soul, is absurd. St. Gregory of Nyssa writes: “the beginning of (man’s) existence is one, common to both parts, so that he should not be found to be antecedent and posterior to himself, if the bodily element were first in point of time, and the other were a later addition.”[2] St. John Damascene also states: “Further, body and soul were formed at one and the same time, not first the one and then the other, as Origen so senselessly supposes.”[3]

[1] Gregory of Nyssa. On the Making of Man. XXIX, 1.

[2] Gregory of Nyssa. On the Making of Man. XXIX.

[3] John Damascene. An Exposition of the Orthodox Faith. Book II, Ch. 12.

Mutual Responsibility of Body and Soul for Sins

To affirm the responsibility of soul and body for sins the Church Fathers emphasize the interrelation of their activities: In every activity they are related to one another and participate together in the result. So, if they exist in this condition, while awaiting the coming judgment for one’s life lived, why do you separate the one from the other? And since what is done is common to both, why do you assign judgment solely to the soul alone? St. Gregory of Nyssa asks. In continuation of these reflections, the Church Fathers also note that the sinful passions are common to the soul and to the body, as are the virtues also.

Patristic Understandings of the Image of God in Man

Among the Holy Fathers there is a broader range of views on what the image of God in man signifies. The Holy Fathers agree that being created in God’s image means partaking of the fullness of the graces and virtues that only God possesses.

For example, God is the ultimate intellect; man is also a being of intellect. God is a spiritual being; man also has a spiritual element – a soul. God is eternal; the reflection of eternity in man is immortality. The Holy Fathers locate the image of God in the human soul (St. Gregory the Theologian, St. Maximus the Confessor) or in its highest domain – the mind (St. John Damascene), as well as in the immortality of man (Tatianus, St. Cyril of Jerusalem).

In the text “Three Homilies on the Formation of Man in the Image of God,” St. Anastasius of Sinai (VIII c.) lists almost all of the preceding patristic definitions of the image of God in man. Thus, St. Anastasius states that the soul with its powers (the mind and the intellect) is one in nature, for neither mind nor “reason-speech” is a separate entity from the soul. They are manifestations of the soul. Therefore, the soul has a single, inseparable natural activity. For St. Anastasius, unity of action means unity of nature, like the unified action of the Persons of the Blessed Trinity. Moreover, “reason-speech” has a double birth: first in the heart in the form of a thought, and then through the mouth in the form of the spoken word. In this St. Anastasius sees the image of Christ, Who also has a double birth: first, eternally born of the Father, and then born in time of the Virgin Mary. St. Anastasius also sees the image of God the Trinity in the division of mankind into consubstantial hypostases. Furthermore, although all men are of one essence, Adam and Eve are different in their origin from all other men. We, as their children, are all begotten. And by this we are similar to Christ (both from eternity and in time). This is why the Word became incarnate, to save His brethren. This is an important Christological significance of the image of God in man. The union of the human soul and body symbolically represents the union of the two natures in Christ, divine and human. The Holy Fathers also say that just as God is the Creator, so man also possesses creative abilities, although unlike God he does not create ex nihilo , but out of available materials.

A number of modern theologians also see man’s capacity for fellowship as an indicator of the image of God. God is love (1 John 4:16). The existence of God as Three Persons is love; the communion of the Three is communion in love, the kind of communion which excludes any separateness or selfishness, but which is a total surrender of oneself to the other. In the same way, man cannot love and partake of love if he remained alone. Man, created in the image of God, is called to actualize in communion with God and with other people the potential for love that is inherent in him.

It must be stated that the presence of the image of God in man is the reason it is possible to know God. Like is known by like. This is the central thought of the Holy Fathers, who link knowledge of God and self-knowledge.

The Body is not Intrinsically Evil

There is nothing wrong or sinful in man’s bodily nature, for all of man in the fullness of his composition has received the blessing of God. The fact that the Son of God Himself took on both a human soul and body proves this to the utmost certainty.

Although it is a commonly accepted view in Patristic tradition that the soul is the higher principle while the body the lower, this must be understood simply as a hierarchy rather than an affirmation of the importance of one element over the other. When the Fathers speak of the enmity of the flesh and the spirit (cf.[ Rom. 7](https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Romans- Chapter-7/)), this must be understood in ascetic terms. By “mortification of the flesh” the Christian ascetic writers signify the liberation of the flesh from carnal passions. Although many passions and sins are carried in and through the body, the greatest and most dangerous of all sins - pride - belongs to the mind and spiritual element of man.

The Creation of Man

![Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden](https://media.swncdn.com/cms/BST/29994-adam-and-eve-in-the-garden-of- eden.800w.tn.jpg)A crucial proposition of the Christian faith is the assertion that man was created by God; his existence is not causeless or the result of random evolutionary developments of natural elements. The source, origin and end, the explanation of the mystery of man’s existence, are in God. The creation of man in the very image and likeness of God is the basis of man’s greatest dignity and the source of his vocation.

The Eastern Christian theological and liturgical tradition holds that the creation of man was preceded by a “Pre-eternal Council” of the Trinity regarding his creation, his future fate, and about what God’s response would be to man’s possible deviation from His benevolent will. St. John of Damascus calls this the “eternal and immutable Council” of God.[1]

Man was God’s final creation on the sixth day of creation; he was created last in order that he should enter the universe as ruler, as the crown of creation (cf. Gen. 1:26). The entire visible world was formed before man and for man; that is the heavens, earth, sea, sun, moon, stars, animals and plants. Following the ancient philosophers, St. Gregory of Nyssa also states that man is a small world (μικρὸν κόσμον), containing in himself the same elements with which the universe is filled, and uniting with himself all forms of life.

Nonetheless, the Holy Father’s understanding of the term “microcosm” itself differs from that of antiquity. For ancient authors it is a proud appellation in which they see a testament to the greatness of man, while the Church Fathers often have an ironic view of this term. St. Gregory of Nyssa observes: “Those who thought to exalt human nature by this eloquent appellation did not notice that they simultaneously bestowed on man the distinctions (idioms) of the gnat and the mouse: for they too are composed of these four elements.”[2] The Church Father’s view of man is characterized by an inverse perspective in comparison with that of the pagan sages. If for the latter the greatness of man consists in that which connects him to the universe, since the cosmos itself is thought of as a divine principle, the Fathers of the Church see the greatness of man in that which distinguishes man from the world, in that which separates him from it. And what sets him apart, according to the teachings of the Fathers, is the form of creation: man was created in the image of God.

[1] John Damascene. Apologia of St John Damascene Against Those Who Decry Holy Images. 1, 10.

[2] Gregory of Nyssa. On the Making of Man. XVI, 1.

The Difference between the Image and Likeness of God

Some of the Holy Fathers made no distinction between the image and the likeness. In particular, Athanasius the Great, Cyril of Alexandria and Anastasius of Sinai insist that they are synonymous. In the Russian theological tradition this opinion was also held by St. Philaret of Moscow who, referring to the Jewish text of the Bible, showed that the notions of image and likeness are often interchangeable in Holy Scripture.

Other Christian writers, beginning from the time of Origen, and also modern Orthodox theologians make a relatively clear distinction between the concepts of image and likeness. For example, St. Basil the Great draws attention to the fact that Genesis 1 says that God willed to create man in His image and in His likeness, but the next verse says: So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him , i.e. verse 27 is silent about the likeness. This is taken by many of the Holy Fathers to indicate that every man has the image of God in which is planted the seed of the likeness of God. The likeness of God though must be attained through a virtuous life.

The Origin of the Soul and Teaching of Pre-existence of Souls

The resolutions of the Church Councils clearly defined the Church’s teaching on the origin of the soul of the first man. The concept of the pre-existence of souls was condemned by multiple Councils: the Council of Alexandria in 400 AD, the Council of Constantinople in 543 AD, whose anathematisms were later joined to the acts of the 5th Ecumenical Council in 553 AD and the Council of Braga in 561 AD. The first anathema of the Council of Constantinople of 543 reads: Whoever says or thinks that human souls pre-existed, that before they were minds and holy powers and enjoyed the fullness of divine contemplation, and then turned to what was worse and thereby became cold in love toward God, and thus are called souls being consigned to bodies as punishment, let him be anathema.

Having rejected the doctrine of the pre-existence of souls, Christian theologians were divided between two other theories of the origin of the soul. Some adhered to the theory of traducianism (St. Eustathius of Antioch, St. Gregory of Nyssa, St. Anastasius of Sinai, and others). According to the theory of traducianism (from latin trado - to transmit, impart), as God created man out of the earth, so man by grace creates man from woman. I.e. the soul of each new human being is made up from the souls of the parents, just as the genetic material of the body is.

Other Christian theologians defended creationism , which became increasingly widespread in the IV and V centuries. Creationism proposes that God Himself creates each new living soul. Among the proponents of this theory were St. Gregory the Theologian, St. Cyril of Alexandria, St. Maximus the Confessor and St. Herman of Constantinople in the East; and in the West St. Hilary of Poitiers, St. Ambrose of Milan, Blessed Jerome of Stridon, St. John Cassian the Roman, St. Leo the Great, Gennadius of Marseilles and Cassiodorus.

The Structure of Man: Dichotomist and Trichotomist Views

Some Christian writers speak of an analogy between the structure of man and that of the tabernacle.The distinction is made in man between the material element, called the “body” or “flesh,” and the spiritual element, expressed by the words “spirit,” “soul,” or “mind. The Old Testament there is no distinction between the words “body” and “flesh” (in Hebrew it’s the same word); in the Greek New Testament, especially in the letters of apostle Paul, a theological distinction is made between “body” (σώμα) and “flesh” (σάρξ). The corruptibility of man, his sinful life, is attributed not to the body but to the flesh. By the “works of the flesh” ([Galatians 5:19-21](https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Galatians- Chapter-5/#:~:text=Now%20the%20works,kingdom%20of%20God.)) apostle Paul understands not only carnal sins, but also such sins as envy, strife, heresies, quarrels, and idolatry. The deeds of the flesh are governed by “carnal thoughts” (Rom 8:6), which are the opposite of spiritual thoughts. Following biblical tradition, the apostle does not regard the body as something intrinsically evil: the body was created by God, taken on by the Son of God, and it will be transformed by the Holy Spirit.

Scripture predominantly speaks of man’s dichotomist composition. The psalmist David distinguishes between soul and flesh: my soul thirsteth for thee, my flesh longeth for thee (Psalm 62:2). Satan says to God about Job, but put forth thine hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh ; God answers Satan, Behold, he is in thine hand; but save his life (soul). ([Job 2:5-6](https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Job- Chapter-2/#:~:text=But%20put%20forth,save%20his%20life.)). Of Job it is said, his flesh upon him shall have pain, and his soul within him shall mourn (Job 14:22). In the Gospel this division is clearer: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak. (Mt. 26:41; Mk. 14:38); that which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit (Jn. 3:6); it is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing (Jn. 6:63).

The Fathers of the Church speak mainly of the dichotomist composition of man (body and soul), but sometimes of a trichotomy (body, soul and mind, or, less frequently, body, soul and spirit). Nonetheless, the mind, or spirit, is understood not as an independent element in man, but as the highest capacity of the soul. The basis for the three-part composition of man is found in the letters of Apostle Paul: your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ (1 Thess 5:23); the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things (1 Cor 2:14-15); the Epistle to the Hebrews says of the word of God that it pierces even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart (Heb. 4:12).

Man - The Crown of

Creation

Graph View

Backlinks