George and other ASAers:
See my comments below.
George Murphy wrote on Wednesday, February 09, 2000 7:45 PM:
>
> Russell Maatman wrote:
> ..................................
> > My thesis which ties these ten points together is this: The image of
God is
> > not detected or determined by behavior, mental capacity, or body
structure.
> > Beings which do not bear the image of God could still carry out
human-like
> > activities and could be physically similar to human beings. Rather, the
> > image of God is that which makes human beings human; it is that which
needs
> > restoring by Christ. ..................................
> Russ -
> This 1 paragraph from your post is central to your argument and it seems
> to me that a lot is left unsaid or is unclear here.
> You have not said what you understand "image of God" to mean.
Before considering what the "image of God" _means_, let's consider who
bears that image. Those beings who bear that image who are the descendants
of Adam.
> There have, of
> course, been a number of interpretations of this in the Christian
tradition -
> rationality, dominion over creation, & having true fear of God & trust in
God as some of
> the more important. These are not mutually exclusive. & the point is not
that humanity
> was given some one characteristic, "the image of God", in addition to a
lot of other
> properties. Rather, being in the image of God means that the human as a
whole
> "corresponds to God", is able to be in communication with God and respond
to God
> appropriately.
I do not object to considering seriously these as marks of the "image of
God." In all cases, however, these characteristics represent a _potential_
behavior--the being can communicate with God, etc. Many people do not
utilize this potential, but they still bear God's image because they are
children of Adam. In this life, the image of God in every person is broken
because of Adam's sin. But for Christians the image is eventually
restored--presumably completely restored at the end of life.
> Now it is true that we're not going to find fossil remnants of the
_imago dei_
> in that sense. But if the concept means anything at all it will have
consequences in
> the lives of human beings which may leave clues. E.g., I would suggest
that the
> indications we have of Neanderthal &c religious practices which Glenn M.
e.g., has
> detailed suggest, not human beings in the "state of integrity" but those
in which the
> imago is damaged & distorted. What is restored in Christ is faith in the
true God,
> & its absence is shown by faith in false gods.
> Now whether or not my interpretation of that particular set of data is
correct
> or not can be debated. But my general point is that unless the imago dei
has some
> consequences which can be discerned by observation _and theological
analysis_ then it's
> not a very helpful concept for theological anthropology.
I understand your general point. But my general point is that we must begin
with the idea that those who bear God's image are those who descend from
Adam. Then, we do indeed perceive--first of all, as we study
Scripture--some of the consequences of bearing that image. Right there is
the nub: I'm claiming that going in the reverse direction, that is,
relating some of these consequences to beings not otherwise known to be
human, and then claiming that they are therefore human, is fallacious. It's
the fallacy we all learned in our first logic course: "If p, then q" does
not prove "If q, then p." I hope I am not descending to the trivial when I
point out that sometimes animals--dogs, for example--risk their lives to
save a child. So even the presence of altruism does not prove the presence
of the image of God.
> If all we can say is that
> creatures who are genuinely human differ from other hominids by virtue of
the imago dei,
> & the imago dei is what makes creatures human, then we haven't said
anything.
Obviously, if that last sentence of yours summarized what I am saying, I
would be guilty of circular reasoning.
Russ
Russell Maatman
e-mail: rmaat@mtcnet.net
Home: 401 5th Avenue
Sioux Center, IA 51250
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Feb 10 2000 - 11:47:38 EST