Lecture 3 The Image of God Flashcards
How did God create man?
- After God had made all other creatures, he created man male and female; formed the body of the man of the dust of the ground, and the woman of the rib of the man, endued them with living, reasonable, and immortal souls; made them after his own image, in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness; having the law of God written in their hearts, and power to fulfill it, and dominion over the creatures; yet subject to fall (WLC 17)
- Four observations here about this definition.
- First, notice that we are created with living reasonable and immortal souls. We might consider this, an eschatological perspective. We are created for immortality. So we have a beginning, but no end. God has no beginning and no end. There is a time when we were not. And yet, God has made us to be living creatures and we’re intended not only to be reasonable, but immortal. We’re intended to enjoy God’s fellowship forever. What it means to be human is to commune with God forever. We can start with this eschatological perspective. We’re intended for fellowship with God. So we have a beginning but in one sense we have no end.
- Second there is what we might call a moral perspective. So God made us in his own image. But what does it mean to be made in the image of God? Well, there is a tried-and-true triad that defines the image of God for us and you see this right in the middle here, the fourth line made them after his own image, in knowledge, righteousness and Holiness. That Triad represents the moral framework of the image of God. So Charles Hodge in his own systematic theology, refers to this triad of knowledge righteousness, and Holiness as the moral perfection of the image of God. We know this because it’s tied to our ability of standing before God with the ability of abiding by his law. So a parallel concept of knowledge, righteousness, and holiness is having the law of God written in our hearts. I’ll unpack this Triad in a few moments. But when we think of knowledge, righteousness, and holiness as a unit, what we’re really were talking about, is the ability to reflect the character of God and where is the character of God, exhibited? Its exhibited in the law of God. So my ability to reflect the image of God concerns with my ability to keep God’s standard and Character. So the image of God really does relate to our understanding of the law of God, the character of God, okay.
- Third is we’re given the capacity to obey that law. So we have the law of God, written in our hearts. And we have the power to fulfill that law. We have the ability to submit to God’s word, to comply, with God’s word, to uphold his word to sustain our status, as creatures, who have knowledge, righteousness, and holiness. In other words, fellowship with God is maintained through our obedience to his law.
- Fourth. There is the subject to change. We have the ability to fall. At least in the garden before the entrance of sin in the world, we have the ability to sin and the ability not to sin. This is an Augustinian concept that will come back to later in this course. We talked about the will. But at this point we see, we have the ability to comply or the ability to disobey. And our standing with God really hinges, at this point, on our ability to comply with his law to maintain knowledge, righteousness, and holiness. So, the image of God refers to our destiny. It refers to our moral qualities. It refers to our fellowship, with God, in relation to his word. And it also refers to our might say, our metaphysical Constitution. That there’s an ability to sin and there’s an ability not to sin this point.
How did God create man? -Westminster Shorter Catechism 10
- God created, man, male and female after his own image in knowledge righteousness, and holiness with dominion over the creatures.
- One considers what we might call the moral perspective. The Shorter Catechism locates the image of God in a Triad of moral traits, knowledge, righteousness, and holiness.
These traits actually, come from Paul’s teaching in two places.
Ephesians 4:24
Paul is outlining a Christian ethic. He talks about what it means to be an old creature outside of Christ and to be a new creature in Union with Christ. And in Ephesians 4:24, he says we are called to put on the new self, created after the likeness of God in true holiness and righteousness. So for Paul in 4:28, we are to put on the qualities and characteristics of Christ, since we’ve been created after the likeness of God and that likeness is understood in what Paul says in true, righteousness and holiness. So there’s two of the three traits of this moral Triad.
Colossians 3:10.
Then, in the parallel passage Paul changes slightly, the characteristic that he highlights in Colossians 3:10. He says, we are called to put on the new self which is being renewed in knowledge after the image of the Creator. So in Colossians 3, he introduces the concept of knowledge as we grow in our knowledge of the Creator, we are conformed more into his image. Whereas in chapter 4, Paul highlights our compliance with the qualities of Christ. And so we reflect his image in righteousness and holiness. And so together we have this moral Triad of righteousness, holiness, and knowledge.
Now Calvin and his commentary on Genesis 1 wisely refers to these three traits as a literary synecdoche. Synecdoche is a literary tool figure of speech, which puts a part for the whole. So you describe knowledge, righteousness, as holiness to represent the whole image of God. These three characteristics refer to the chief part of the image of God, but should not be confused as encompassing the whole of God’s image or the perfection of our whole nature. In other words. We can’t limit the image of God to these three traits, but they represent our moral constitution. So, we might think of other things of knowledge, righteousness, and holiness such as something, like love. Love would be a related concept that could be interpreted with this in this moral framework. So by emphasizing knowledge, righteousness, and holiness drawing on these Pauline themes, we’re not limiting the image of God to these three traits, but they represent what it means to be truly human.
Other reformed theologians such as Wihlemus Abrakel is a Dutch Theologian from the end of the 17th beginning of the 18th century. He writes a very famous book called The Christians Reasonable Service. It’s a really practical devotional systematic theology. Now, I think he pushes this a little too far but he attempts to align these three characteristics or these three moral traits to the make up of the Soul. And so, he’ll say the knowledge refers to our mind, in our intellect, our righteousness, refers to the will and our compliance with the law and Holiness, refers to the heart and our affection. So, you’ve got the mind, the heart and the will, I find that a little too neat and tidy. It helps and if it’s a, if it’s a heuristic device to think about, what we think feel and do fine. But remember Calvin’s advice that this is a synecdoche. Don’t reduce your anthropology to these three things. Understand these three things represent, what it means to be moral, what it means to be human.
Berkhower in his book notes, that the triad basically refers to the understanding of humanity’s need to conform to the character of God. I actually think that’s a fairly helpful definition. These three traits refer to our need to conform to the character of God.
Did God, create man so wicked and perverse? - The Heidelberg Catechism
No. On the contrary, God created man, good and in His image.
That is in true righteousness and Holiness so that he might rightly know God his creator heartily love him and live with him and eternal blessedness to praise and glorify him.
To use the verbiage of today, true flourishing exist in fellowship and communion with God in whom is real life; is vitality. There’s a vibrancy and a vitality; There is a blessedness in God that were meant to enjoy. And that happens when we bear His image, reflect his image.
What’s interesting about this is today that to err is to be human. So real humanity is to screw things up. It’s to be gritty. Is to get into the shallows of or the depths of our depravity here. That’s actually not what it means to be human.
In one sense sin represents inhumanity or a non-humanity, or sin represents an erosion of our humanity, an undoing of what it means to be human.
Conversely to be made in the image of God, to be redeemed, is to be renewed into true humanity. So in that sense, the truest human who ever walked planet Earth is the Lord Jesus Christ. He represents what it means to be truly human.
Now, it will raise the issue of whether a sinner retains the image of God, and we’ll talk a little bit about this in this class today. I think the answer is of course Yes.
At the issue of the image of God is really the basis of human dignity. But we can’t fall into the trap of thinking, that to err is the heart and soul of what it means to be a human. That’s a really wicked and evil thought actually, its a really wicked and evil thought.
Image of God in Creation
Image of God in Creation
What it means to be truly human.
Louis Birkhoff says, this is on page 206 of his Systematic Theology, “the doctrine of the image of God and man is of the greatest importance in theology for that image is the expression of that, which is most distinctive in man and in his relation to God. The fact that man is the image of God distinguishes him from the animals and from every other creature.”
Being made in the image of God is what distinguishes us from other animals. And because of that this issue of the image of God, is “of the greatest importance and theology.”
So what is the image of God?
To use this category from birkoff, the basic meaning of the image of God is that man is God-related. We are created in a way that we are oriented towards God.
The basic category is that we’re God-oriented.
This God-relatedness is reflected in moral and rational characteristics. We know them, as knowledge, holiness, and righteousness.
So the image of God to quote, Francis Schaeffer, refers to man’s mannishness.
What makes us unique as humans? Francis Turiton says, that “the image of God is the principal Glory of man by which he far exceeds other animals and approaches nearer to God.”
The principle Glory of man is that we’re created in God’s image, we’re above the animals and we’re closer to God.
The issue here is given in Ecclesiastes 7:29. It simply says God made man upright. Righteous to stand upright and relate to God, who is Holy. That’s what it means.
Problem is that we are base. We are depraved and that spirals into in humanity.
Likewise Psalm 33 will say shout for joy in the Lord, oh you righteous. Praise befits the upright.
Last night, my little Evelyn asked what is righteousness?
Well, it means to be right before God, to be in good standing with his law, to enjoy his company and fellowship, to be holy. And that’s what it means to be human. We think holiness means unhappiness. Well, no, actually Holiness is the key to happiness. A holy person possesses righteousness and that opens the door to happiness. I can live the good life, the blessed life; if you will the flourishing life, because there is righteousness and holiness.
The scarier thing is when you sin and you don’t feel anything at all; when and we do evil things and we don’t care. It’s a curse. And when we have no consideration of evil and the consequence of evil, it’s really frightening thing.
Psalm 32 is such a, profound commentary on the existential plight of sin. Most people go to Psalm 51, to think about David and Bathsheba. And that’s really great to talk about his repentance. If you actually want to picture of the turmoil, that David was in as he was actually being confronted with the sin of Bathsheba, read, read the beginning parts of Psalm 32. Existentially, it describes what happens when a person sins and that sin leads to an unraveling of the self.
locus classicus for the doctrine of the Imago Dei
Genesis chapter 1 beginning in verse 26
, then 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 birds of the heavens. And over the livestock. And over all the Earth. And over every creeping thing that creeps on the Earth. So, he created man in his own image. In the image of God. He created him male and female. He created them. And God blessed them and said to them, be fruitful and multiply and fill the Earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens. And over every living thing that moves on the Earth.
So, Genesis 1:26-28 is the locus classicus for the doctrine of the Imago Dei. That is the standard go-to text for developing the doctrine of the image of God.
Who is Us?
When we read verse 26, it begs a question. Who is the US?
Who is the US? The US is God?
The specific details of the Trinity that God is one being in three persons are not technically fleshed out until the arrival of Christ in the New Testament. And we’ve got to reckon with the fact that there are more than one persons in the godhead. Deuteronomy 6 in the Shema is the central doctrine in Israel. Hear O Lord. The Lord is 1. And so how do you reconcile Deuteronomy 6 and the claims that Jesus is the son of God?
And yet we know that this is the product of the trinitarian, God. God is the same yesterday today and forevermore. So while we may not have an explicit reference to the trinity in that we don’t really believe that Moses understood the doctrine of the trinity in the way that you and I do. We can certainly see in this a reference to plurality within the godhead. There is one God who creates and within this one God, there is plurality. At this point, Israel didn’t have enough information to reconcile those two exegetical data points.
But we can deduce from this verse that God is a single God who operates and creates, as a plural being. God does not say, Let me, let me make man in my image.
And so he is a god of plurality. A god of with-ness, we might say.
In the beginning, was the word and the Word was with God.
What is image and likeness?
Some church fathers especially, people like Irenaeus and Tertullian divide image and likeness.
They’ll describe image in terms of metaphysical, traits.
And likeness in terms of moral trades.
Others will try to distinguish between the body and the spirit.
Hokema does bring this out nicely.
Later Fathers have imposed an “and” in the text, let us make man in our image and in our likeness. That is not in the text. The ESV is right. Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.
The idea is a parallelism. After our likeness extends, and amplifies man in our image. It is a parallel idea. It is a basic synonym where the two ideas complement each other. There is no biblical basis for a distinction between image and likeness. The two terms are essentially used, synonymously.
The word image in Hebrew is selim. The word selim, simply means to carve or to cut. Like, cutting out the image of a dump truck out of a piece of wood. Carving the image of a god, let’s say. There is a correlation between the image and the original object of the image.
You see this use of selim and Daniel 3 where there is a statue or an image of Nebuchadnezzar. The image seen of Nebuchadnezzar in the Statue reflects Nebuchadnezzar. And there’s a correlation between him and the image. The way of thinking about this is between an archetype and an ectype.
So we are God’s image. In one sense we represent, God to the world just like Nebuchadnezzar’s statue represented His Image to the world.
The other word here is likeness and the Hebrew word is demuth.
The word likeness means to resemble something. Like a self-portrait resembles an author. And yet the self-portrait is an interpretation. It is distinct. You can’t conflate the two. And yet, it’s a likeness of the one who drew it. And so humans, man, is god’s representative on Earth.
We might say he reflects his Beauty, his dignity, His rule, his rain. Man, resembles God. He is creative, rational, artistic, and relational. And all of these, we image God.
People like Bahvink and birkhoff have picked this up. Man does not simply bear the image. He is the image of God. So we don’t need depictions of God because we have humans and in one sense we learn something about God’s character, God’s design, when we look at those, he has made to resemble him.
The Whole Person
Bahvink talks about the whole person as the image of God.
Bahvink says this, “the whole person is the image of the Triune God.”
Calvin and many of the reformed tradition, locate, the primary seat of the image of God in the soul. And so most of the tradition has often prioritized the soul. But what Calvin does is, he sees humans as embodied, souls and doesn’t discount the reality of the human body.
Calvin actually leans toward a holistic definition of the Imago Dei.
Calvin says this in the institutes in book 1, Chapter 15 Section 3.
“ and though the primary seat of the Divine image is in the mind in the heart or in the soul and its powers., tere was no part even of the body in which some rays of Glory, did not shine.”
Now again, Calvin maybe puts too much distance between the soul and the body but he seems to suggest the image of God resides in the soul, which animates the person and the image of God, then radiates out of the soul and covers as it were the entire body. It’s kind of how Calvin gets at the goodness of the body.
I don’t know if Calvin fully articulates what it means to be an embodied soul in person.
Bahvink, I think teases this out a little bit more, helpfully. He does so in four ways. Four ways, the whole person reflects the image of God.
Number one, the image of God is reflected in, man, as a living Soul. We are distinct from both animal and Angel alike in that God breathed the breath of life into humans. And we are not simply material beings, but we are living breathing, souls.
Number two. Building on this, the image of God is reflected in the faculties of humans. So the image of God is not located only in the soul or only in the body. But the image of God extends to the whole person heart, soul, mind, body, will. All of it represents the image of God in the person. So the image of God is not located only in our soul or only in our body, but extends to the whole person heart mind soul will body. All of it represents the whole person.
Number 3, the image of God is reflected in our moral composition. In particular, virtues. And Bahvink picks up knowledge, righteousness, and Holiness. His point though is that we’re not created as neutral beings we’re created with a purpose with a moral constitution. We’re made for good things.
Number 4. Bahvink , the image of God is explicitly reflected in the human body. Bahvink says this “the body is not a prison. But a marvelous piece of art from the hand of God Almighty.” It’s an interesting way of thinking about the body. The body is not a prison of the Soul, but it’s a marvelous piece of art from the hand of God. Almighty. That God is an artist and we need to recognize that. We don’t like to say that in the reformed world. We like to say that God is a theologian. But the body is something that is fundamentally good. It’s why we glorify God with our bodies.
We’re trying to say, when we talk about the image of God, we’re talking about a whole person here. So often we think of spirituality, we give our bodies a pass.
Now, other traditions don’t do this. Other traditions don’t give enough attention to intellectual formation. But in our tradition, we tend to overly spiritualize things.
John Murray says this.
“It is the metaphysical likeness to God, that grounds obligation and the fulfillment of obligation consists in conformity to the image of God.”
Oh, and our hearts feel so strangely warmed by that. It’s a pretty obtuse statement, let’s be honest. But it actually is very important.
It is the metaphysical likeness to God that grounds obligation. So since we are made to reflect God’s character, we are obliged to obey him. Metaphysical likeness grounds, obligation. God made me, and therefore he has the right to demand obedience and allegiance to him. And then fulfillment of obligation consists in conformity to the image of God. So, in order for me to be truly human, I need to comply with God’s standard and there I enjoy human flourishing.
Hokema, when he talks about image, he wants to say the image is twofold.
Structural that asks the question, Who are we.
And then functional. What are we to do?
And there’s a tension between these two. What you’ll typically find is in pre-modern scholarship people will think in this structural ontological category, who are we metaphysically? So traditional scholarship focuses on the fact that we’re made to obey we’re made to comply, we’re made to commune with God.
Modern scholarship tends to think in terms of functional, ethical, relational categories. What are we made to do? Modern scholarship often focuses on the fact that we’re made to do, things were made to do the cultural mandate, we’re made to rest and fellowship and so on.
I actually think Hokema is pretty helpful in saying that actually both of these are required and even see that to some extent in the Shorter. Catechism definition of what it means to be created in the image of God.
Gordon Mcconville is an Old Testament scholar and he’s actually written a fairly helpful book called “Being Human in God’s World.”
Gordon Mcconville does substantiate some of Hokema’s arguments here. This is a fairly recent book in the past couple years.
Gordon mcconville says “ there are aspects of both function and intrinsic nature in this likeness of humans to God. In fact, it is difficult to separate these two aspects of image.”
You might think of the structural bit as referring to reflection. Reflecting the character of God. And functional you might think in terms of rule; that is representing God.
Some will say you got to reflect his character, others are going to say need to reflect his rule and extend his kingdom. Actually, the best scholarship says you’ve got to actually bring these two things together.
And yet, I think there is a third category that we need to deal with liturgically
Why we exist?
Why are we made to be ethical creatures?
Ultimately, that’s for God’s praise. And it’s to do God’s work. But when we do God’s work, is it for ourselves? No, not unto us. O Lord, not unto us but unto thee be all the glory honor and praise. We do God’s work to bring him glory that we might reflect his character and enjoy his company.
So ultimately the liturgical component is the culmination of what it means to be made in the image of God.
Now, for those of us who appreciate alliterations we might say the image of God has three components. Character. Command. And communion.
In terms of character. We are called to reflect the moral composition of God. We’re not morally neutral beings. We are created to reflect the character of God and knowledge righteousness and holiness.
In terms of command. We are under the authority and lordship of God. So God’s word and will always govern God’s people. Likeness to God is expressed in terms of conformity to his will.
third, you have communion. We are created to know, love, and worship God. Notice actually, the context of the passage you move from image to command. or image and blessing command and rest.
So Creation in the image of God, God blesses them. He gives them a command to go be fruitful and all of this culminates in Sabbath Worship in rest; in fellowship with God.
Now, another piece to this is to say there’s one more kind of overarching category here. And this would be a Covenantal kind of umbrella that explains the context of the liturgical, structural, and functional. It’s a fourth C.
So what makes sense of these structural and functional and liturgical components is actually the fact that God has orchestrated the world in a covenant way. Everything God does is in some form a covenant that gives shape and expression to these other elements. And without that, we can’t fully understand what it means to relate to God in any one of these.
I don’t think you can privilege any one of these structural or functional, but I think all of them are for the purpose of a liturgical component, but all three of these perspectives are seen in a wider context of what we call covenant theology.
I think it’s this reason for why reformed theology has historically developed covenant, theology under the category of anthropology and not hermeneutics. That covenant theology explains what it means to relate to God. Relate to him in terms of our moral composition, relate to him, in terms of our work and relate to God in terms of our worship. So Covenant actually explains how each of those things function in the world that God has made here.
Image of God after the Fall
And when Adam had lived a hundred thirty years, he fathered a son in his own likeness after his image and named him. Seth.
Now this text does not explicitly say that Seth bears, the image of God. It says that he bears, the image and likeness of his father. But given the context of verses 1 and 2, John Murray has argued that there is no exegetical reason to believe that this is not a direct reference to Genesis 1 and that Seth is actually a chip off the old block. And bears, the image of God, as his father does. So if Seth is in the image of Adam and Adam is in the image of God. Therefore we can conclude that Seth too after the fall is created in the image of God.
It’s not explicit, but it is an indirect argument for the image of God after the fall. But a natural reading of this passage, would suggest that Seth is created, not simply in the image of Adam but also in the image of God.
I think that’s the natural way of reading the text and there’s nothing actually exegetically that would cause us to believe otherwise.
Another passage is in Genesis chapter 9 incredibly important passage right in the middle of the Noahic covenant.
And we read this, “and God blessed, Noah, and his sons and said to them, be fruitful and multiply and fill the Earth.”
What does that sound like? Have you just heard that before? In Genesis 1:26 and 28, right God, blesses and then gives a command you see actually liturgical and functional components of the image here.
The fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth and upon every bird of the heavens upon everything that creeps on the ground and all the fish of the sea into your hand. They are delivered every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. And as I gave you, the green plants, I give you everything, but you shall not eat flesh with its life. That is its blood. And for your lifeblood, I will require a reckoning. From every beast, I will require it. And from man, from his fellow man. I will require a reckoning for the life of man. Whoever sheds, the blood of Man, by man, shall his blood be shed for God, made him in his own image and you be fruitful and multiply. Increased greatly on the earth, and multiply in it.
What you find in Noah is a recapitulation of the creation story after the fall.
So you have Echoes of Eden after the fall. It’s very much a retelling of the creation story after the fall, after judgment in the flood, you have in Noah, God recreating his world and his people. But, this recapitulation takes place in the context of sin. That’s the variant here.
Now that you live in a fallen world, we have a new set of circumstances to consider. In a fallen world, people are pretty ugly and you’ve got to deal with the problem of things like murder. And as a deterrent for murder, you have the institution of capital punishment. So if a person takes a life, you have a right to take their life. Yet what’s the justification for the capital punishment here? It’s an affront to God because man is made in God’s image or to say, man is intrinsically worthy and dignified. If fallen man does not bear the image of God, neither the offense nor the penalty make any sense. Like, why is it an offense to murder someone, if that person doesn’t have any value, doesn’t reflect the image of God? And why would we hold somebody accountable for murdering if the person they murdered doesn’t have any inherent dignity? Neither the offense nor the penalty here makes sense apart from the fact that even Fallen man, retains the status of being created in the image of God.
That actually, the Imago Dei provides a basis for civil justice. For why we’re going to treat people no matter who they are with respect and dignity. Why? Because they’re image-bearers. It’s the fundamental ethic of civil justice or righteousness.
We’re not talking about whether a person is saved or not. Not, whether a person is worthy of life and if they’re in image-bearer, they’re worthy of Life. We’ve got to treat them with respect. It’s the basic argument here.
Image of God and Christ
Image of God and Christ
While we retain the image of God after the fall, we are incapable of sustaining fellowship with God and so, our image does need to be renewed.
The clearest example, we have of the image of God is seen in the face of Jesus Christ.
2nd Corinthians. 4:4 where Paul makes the statement “In their case, the God of this world has blinded the minds of unbelievers to keep them from seeing the light of the knowledge of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.”
In one sense, you can say, when God creates Us in His image, he’s creating Us in the likeness of his son. And when we reflect the Son, the father is happy in whom he is well pleased, but when we reject the son, we reject God’s image and the father is displeased.
So if you want to know what the image of God looks like in its purest form, you look at the Lord, Jesus Christ to represents in his incarnate state what it means to be the image of God.
Hebrews 1 that the son is the radiance of the glory of God, the exact imprint of his nature and he upholds, the universe by the word of his power after making purification for sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.
That the son does actually reflect in his person, the nature, and being of God. I do think Hebrews 1:3 refers to the Eternal nature of the Son.
a similar comment in Colossians 3:10, we ought to put on the new self which is being renewed in the knowledge after the image of its creator.
what’s interesting about Colossians 3 is that when you look at the virtues that Paul outlines in Colossians 3, the creator is actually the Lord Jesus Christ in whom he is preeminent over all things.
So Paul does seem to indicate in Colossians 3 that when we’re renewed after the image of its creator and real knowledge, we are renewed in the image of Christ. The basic point here is if you want to know what it’s like to be, truly human, you have to look at the Lord Jesus Christ.
Image of God and Sanctification
Sanctification in essence is being made more and more by the spirit into the image of Jesus.
We put sin to death and put on the qualities of the Lord, Jesus Christ, who is the image of God.
Romans 8:29 - So we know Romans 8:28 all things work together for good to those who love God and called according to his purpose. Well, what is the good?
Romans 8:29 For Those whom he foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed, to the image of his son in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. So, all things are not good, but they work out for good because all things are used by God, to conform his people into the likeness of his son.
So the goal of suffering or the goal of experiencing goodness is conformity to the image of God. That’s the purpose of sanctification. That’s the purpose of the refining. Fire of sanctification is that you’re being made more and more into the image of Jesus.
1 Corinthians 15:49 just as we have been borne, the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of Heaven.
You’ll know 1st Corinthians 15 is playing off of an Adam Christology. In the image of Adam we are Fallen creatures, we lack original righteousness. And so we deserve God’s just punishment. But in the last, Adam, we are being renewed.
2 Corinthians, 3:18 suggests that this process is Progressive.
The transforming work of sanctification happens, over time. Praise God for Progressive. Sanctification.
So the spirit conforms us into the image of Christ as we Behold Him, face-to-face first by faith, and then by sight.
The principle of sanctification is that you become like what you behold. So as you behold Christ by the spirit in word and Sacrament, you become like him. You transformed into his image.
An interesting passage is in James 3.
With the tongue, we bless our Lord and father and with it, we curse people who are made in the likeness of God.
I think this is another clear indication that fallen people, there is no distinction I think here between Christian and non-Christian in this text, people are made in the image of God in the likeness of God.
And we have to understand that our tongue actually has an effect on people. I think it’s actually a deterrent. We are to treat people with kindness in the way we speak, which is speak truthfully because people actually are in the image of God.
What is sanctification?
Sanctification is the work of God’s free grace, whereby we are renewed in the whole man after the image of God, and are enabled more and more to die unto sin, and live unto righteousness. -Westminster Shorter Catechism 35
So sanctification is a work of God’s free Grace that transpires over the entire course of one’s life. It’s not punctilious, it’s not one and done moment, but it’s an ongoing work of God’s grace.
What happens in this ongoing work? Well, we are renewed in the whole person Body and Soul after the image of God.
And what does this mean? It means two things.
It means mortification and vivification.
Mortification means we’re more and more enabled by the spirit to put sin to death and have victory over besetting sins.
But it’s not just seen in the negative, but in the positive more and more, we become like the Lord Jesus Christ. We live unto the righteousness of God.
So, over time in one sense you want to see us growing in Holiness. But it’s one of those things. I love the qualifier “more and more.” Sometimes incremental, isn’t it? Sometimes it’s almost microscopic over time there is transforming power. there is progression in the gospel. Over time we whittle away at sin and grow more and more into the image of Jesus. It’s a great little statement.
How is the word made effectual to Salvation?
So how does the word of God actually change us?
The Spirit of God makes the reading, but especially the preaching of the word, an effectual means of enlightening, convincing, and humbling sinners; of driving them out of themselves, and drawing them unto Christ; of conforming them to his image, and subduing them to his will; of strengthening them against temptations and corruptions; of building them up in grace, and establishing their hearts in holiness and comfort through faith unto salvation (WLC 155).
Maybe the most intriguing thing about this for me, is that all of this is in the context of public worship.
Sanctification doesn’t happen in isolation. We need God’s people. We need public worship. We need the Gathering of the Saints, to actually help us grow more and more into the image of Christ because actually, sometimes we see more and more of that image clearly and others that we see in ourselves and as we place ourselves under the word, we actually grow together in the image of Christ.
The word of God, when it’s read and proclaimed, it inevitably forces us to look out of ourselves and look externally to Christ.
So we talk about sin. Sin is never a termination point. We actually don’t talk about sin in order to wallow in despair. We said earlier, we talked about sin in order to be catapulted into the arms of God. So anytime you talk about sin, youre forced to immediately look at the solution. At the righteousness of God outside of us, namely Christ.
So we constantly have to look outward if we expect to grow in likeness to Christ. If you’re not paying attention to Christ, if you’re not growing, in your understanding of Christ, you can’t become more and more like him. You can’t be like Christ if you don’t know him.
It’s kind of a simple way of putting it. It’s the more time you spend with Christ, the more opportunity. You have to grow like him. So those are definitely a corporate and a liturgical component here to worship.
Since we have been delivered from our misery by grace alone through Christ, without any merit of our own, why must we yet do good works?
Because Christ, having redeemed us by His blood, also renews us by His Holy Spirit to be His image, so that with our whole life we may show ourselves thankful to God for His benefits, and He may be praised by us. Further, that we ourselves may be assured of our faith by its fruits, and that by our godly walk of life we may win our neighbors for Christ (HC 86).
And so we do good works in order to showcase the image of God in Jesus Christ, because we want others to know him because of what they see in us.
Jesus says something similar in Matthew 5:16. Let your light so shine before others that when they see your good works, their calls to glorify your father in Heaven. Why is that? Well, it’s because you are the image of God and when you do good things they realize you reflect him.
And so, we do good work in order to bring others to Christ.
If in this life no one can keep the Ten Commandments perfectly, why does God have them preached so strictly?
First, that throughout our life we may more and more become aware of our sinful nature, and therefore seek more eagerly the forgiveness of sins and righteousness in Christ. Second, that we may be zealous for good deeds and constantly pray to God for the grace of the Holy Spirit, that He may more and more renew us after God’s image, until after this life we reach the goal of perfection (HC 115).
