To be the "image" of God means to "reflect" God in creation.

There is little debate that the basic idea of the

image denotes that human persons "reflect" the divine reality in some way. The key terms elem ( ) and

demut ( ) in the OT and eikon () in the NT all refer to the idea that some object reflects or resembles
another in some way. The basic idea of the image as a "reflection" of some other object is the main idea. The debate begins when we try to explain what is reflected, where is it reflected in humanity, and how this reflection actually takes place.

)E51kez(
5

and in the fire was what looked like four living creatures. In appearance their form was human

"Image" and "likeness" are synonymous ( ). Many patristic and medieval scholars argued that there was
an important distinction by the use of elem and Dmut in Genesis 1:27-28. Contemporary scholars agree that these two terms are largely synonymous and that we should not read any strong distinction into their use in this text. Gen 1 27 So God created humankind in his image, in the likeness of God he created him, male and female he created them. 28 And God blessed them, and God said to them, Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it, and rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of heaven, and over every animal that moves upon the earth.

The image of God includes all human persons. We also find almost everyone agrees that all human persons,
regardless of gender, race, or status are made in the image of God. Some theologians in church history have argued that males alone were in the image of God, but scholars now reject this interpretation. James 3 9 We use it to bless the Lord and Father, but we also use it to curse people who are made in Gods image: 10 the blessing and curse come out of the same mouth. Gen 1 27 So God created humankind in his image, in the likeness of God he created him, male and female he created them.

Sin has affected the image in some way. This seems amply supported by the emphasis throughout the Bible on
the pervasively depraved nature of human existence (Ps. 14.1-3; Rom. 3.23) and the consistent testimony of the NT that the image stands in need of renewal and restoration (Eph. 4.22-24; Col. 3.10). Despite this general agreement, the precise nature of this impact varies significantly depending on the particular view of the image that is in operation. Psalm 14 1 The fool has said in his heart, There is no God. Their deeds are corrupt and vile, not one of them does right. 2 Yahweh looks down from heaven at the children of Adam. To see if a single one is wise, a single one seeks God. 3 All have turned away, all alike turned sour, not one of them does right, not a single one.

The image in the New Testament is a Christological concept. The clear testimony of the OT is that all human
persons are made in the image of God. The NT authors continue this tradition Heb 1 3 The Son is the radiance of Gods glory and the exact representation () of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. In Christ, i.e., in his immediate origin in God and in his path of redemption, believers can thus gain a vision of Gods essence and reality 2 Cor 4 4 The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God ( .). The image of God is teleological. Finally, most thinkers affirm that the image is not an entirely static concept; instead, they view it as developing toward something it has a teleological dimension. Thus, as we have seen, Paul portrays the image as something that is being "transformed" (2 Cor. 3.18) and "renewed" (Col. 3.10) in human persons as they are drawn ever closer to the person of Christ. 2 Cor 318 And all of us, with our unveiled faces like mirrors reflecting the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the image () that we reflect in brighter and brighter glory; this is the working of the Lord who is the Spirit. Col 3 9 Do not lie to one another, because you* have taken off the old man together with his deeds, 10 and have put on the new man that is being renewed in knowledge according to the image of the one who created him, a. The image as representational presence We see that the functional imago portrays Genesis 1.26-28 as a declaration that human persons are a unique place for the manifestation of God's divine presence in creation. It is in virtue of this manifestation of divine presence, humanity exercises dominion in and over creation. In this sense, the image of God is a task, something that the human person performs in creation. This function is seen clearly when we consider a nation's flag. Although still symbolic, a nation's participation in its flag is so close that it is viewed as actually being "present" where its flag is present. Thus, to defile or disrespect a nation's flag is to defile or disrespect the nation itself. In the ancient near east, a divine image was understood to be far more than a merely symbolic depiction of the divine reality. Instead, an image was identified with a particular manifestation of the divine being's presence and sovereign authority. The image stood in "spiritual union" with the reality it imaged.28 The physical image of a king (e.g., a statue) was not a mere symbol of the king, but it was actually a manifestation of the king's presence. Similarly, an idol was understood to represent some divine being so closely that the presence of the divine was manifested through it. Exod 20 4 You shall not make for yourself a divine image with any form that is in the heavens above or that is in the earth below or that is in the water below the earth.

Understanding representation as involving the presence of the one represented in a way sufficient to ground the exercise of authority helps the functional approach connect with the Christological reorientation of the idea that takes place in the NT. The NT authors certainly understood the incarnation to involve the real presence of God in and through the humanity of Jesus Christ. Thus, that Christ is "the image of the invisible God" (Col. 1.15) communicates more than that he "reflects" or "makes visible" the invisible qualities of God, although he certainly does that as well. Instead, the emphasis of the NT is on the presence of the divine in the incarnation. Thus, Jesus declares, "The Father is in me, and I in the Father" (Jn 10.38), a thought echoed by Paul in his statement, "In Christ all the fullness of deity lives in bodily form" (Col. 2.9). Thus, Christ is not the true image simply in virtue of the fact that he reflects God's attributes quantitatively better than the rest of creation, as though even a purified human nature could ever adequately reflect the qualities and attributes of an infinite God; rather, Christ is the true image because he is the true "representative" of God, the one in whom the real presence of God is manifest in creation. Col 1 12 giving thanks to the Father who has qualified you for a share of the inheritance of the saints in light, 13 who has rescued us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of the Son
he

loves, 14 in whom we have the redemption, the forgiveness of sins, 15 who is the image of the invisible

God, the firstborn over all creation, John 10 38 But if I am doing them,* even if you do not believe me, believe the deeds, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father. Col 2 9 because in him all the fullness of deity dwells bodily,