Bible Tidbit about Reflecting the Image of God

In a recent Sunday School session, one of the attendees asked our Lutheran pastor what the Bible means when it says we are made in the image of God. This is a question that has bedeviled the church and synagogue for thousands of years. Our good pastor gave a credible and modern answer to the inquirer. It is certainly not our physical characteristics that make us in God’s image. After all, Jesus told us that “God is Spirit, and He seeks those who will worship Him in spirit and in truth.” It is our intellect, the pastor explained, our ability to know right from wrong, to dream, create, emote, and relate to God as our Father. I agree with all of that. After all, God the Father does not have genitalia. He does not need to pee after a drink of water. Only we do that.

There are several ways to unpack the two creation accounts in Genesis 1-4. In Genesis one, “the Adam” is a title applied to both male and female. God speaks and things pop into existence, including man and woman, both at the same time, and both are blessed with dominion over the creation. In chapter 2-4, “the Adam” is created first, given dominion, placed and settled in the Garden, and allowed to name all the animals. Things are not “created” by spoken word in the second story. Mankind and animals are “formed” from mud, and Eve is “built” from a rib. She is a “helper” suitable for Adam. Then she eats the “fruit,” tempting Adam to join her, and the rest is history. Poor Eve, she has been theology bashed for thousands of years because of that snack, and all of us women with her.

The Apostle Paul, or someone writing in Paul’s name, took those scriptures literally, emphasizing the second account. In several NT instructions, he pointed out Eve’s second creation as a “helper,” making her seem to be some kind of assistant. He focused on the wording that seemed to point to Adam as the image of God, and Eve as the image of Adam. He reminded the world that Eve sinned first, confirming that women are weak and shouldn’t be teachers of men. Finally, he set up a permanent hierarchy…First God, then Jesus, then the man, and last the woman. But wait, there’s more. In the waning days of his life, he nailed the box shut with descriptions of the perfect wife—one who dresses modestly, prays a lot, visits the sick, obeys her husband in all things, is a keeper at home, is quiet in the church, and covers her head to pray and prophesy. According to the Apostle Peter, she calls her husband “sir” as is fitting for the “weaker sex.” So, the image of God in that first century AD theological stream is male. Men reflect the glory and image of God. But what’s this in 2 Corinthians 3:15-18?

¹⁵ Even to this day when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts. ¹⁶ But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. ¹⁷ Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. ¹⁸ And we all, who with unveiled faces contemplate^[a] the Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his image with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit. (NIV, biblegateway.com)

Or Galatians 3:27-29:

^27 …for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. ²⁸ There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. ²⁹ If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

And the progressives call up the prophetesses Deborah, Hannah, and Hulda. And don’t forget Priscilla, Mary Magdalene, or the four daughters of Philip the evangelist who all prophesied. The debate is an incessant push-me-pull-you between the conservative mindset and the more pliable progressives. In today’s society to be serving up the soup from two millennia ago does not a nourishing meal make. It does not paint a likable picture of a God who claims to have removed our sin on the cross, but holds women bound to customs that would fit 1,000 BC.

Galatians 3:28 and 2 Corinthians 3:18 settle the debate for me. In our modern world, anything less is unworkable. But as the pastor was talking, it occurred to me that we humans reflect the image of God indirectly through the stunning engineering and aesthetic beauty of our physical bodies. Everything that you see around you, every train, plane, car, opera, book, TV, cell phone etc etc requires a body that functions in all respects as ours do. It would be a shame to have such bodies and not have an intellect to do the wondrous things that we do. And beyond the facility that our eyes and hands bring us, there is beauty.

Wait, say some of us. Beauty? I didn’t get in the right line in my prebirth state to get the gift of beauty. Well, yes, there is quite the spectrum of good looks amongst us, but think. You could have a beak instead of lips, a tail like a monkey or dog, a long nose like a horse, you could croak instead of sing, you could have green skin with purple polka dots. We don’t have to look like we do. In some sense we are dust and to dust we will return, but don’t think of mud scooped up when you think of “the Adam.” Think of bioengineering so remarkable, so durable that it’s hard to wrap your head around it. When we look at ourselves, we should see the reflection of an amazing and loving Creator.