Anthropos is the Greek word for mankind. We find this word embedded in the title “Anthropology,” meaning the study of mankind. In order to end up at salvation and sanctification, it is first necessary to find our foundation for interpretation by making some conclusions regarding the nature of man. There are three different views regarding the origin of the soul and how one acquires a soul. There is the Creationist view which holds that God personally crafted each person’s soul and placed it in them somewhere in between conception and birth. The Traducianist view, on the other hand, believes that the soul is inherited from the mother and the father at conception. Another view not so widely held is the Pre-Exisistentionist view which teaches that there is a soul storehouse in heaven, and God sends a soul to a body when it is conceived. Personally, I believe the Traducianist view is the most Biblically correct view of the three. I believe that God’s plan was so intricate from the start that embedded in the DNA of Adam and Eve, there was a plan for the entirety of humanity. God knew the combinations of patterns and organized randomization in such a way that His plan for the souls of all of mankind was set in motion at the very beginning.
Second, what is the image of God? What implications does it have and what sort of influences does it have on human life? I believe the image and likeness of God in humanity is best illustrated by a combination of two views. One of those is the substantive view. This view holds that the image of God is an actual physical characteristic. It is manifested in our rational and creative capacities as humans. The other view in this duo is called the relational view. According to this perspective, the image of God is manifested when humans are in relation with one another in light of the trinity. God, in His very nature, is relational, and He has passed that on to humanity in creation. A third view, which I can understand and respect but don’t consider substantial by any means, is the functional view. This perspective understands the image of God as something that is shown through humans exercising dominion over the created order. This view is widely held by people who identify with the “Green” Movement. These people tend to hold the earth in high regard, which isn’t a bad thing. While I think proper treatment of the world we’ve inherited is important, I don’t believe it is necessarily directly related to the image of God.
I also respect and resonate with John Wesley’s view regarding the image of God. He describes the image of God as a Trifold Image broken up into the Natural Image, the Political Image, and the Moral Image. The Natural Image of God is reflected in humanity’s possession of personality, their affections and desires, their capacity for judgment, and the understanding of free will. This is very similar to the substantive view. The Political Image is manifested by humanity’s capacity to rule over the earth and their ability to have social relationships. The Moral Image, according to Wesley, was completely destroyed in the Fall of humanity. Adam and Even, being made in the image of God, also had an immediate and personal knowledge of God and had original righteousness. The idea that it is lost in the Fall is consistent with Martin Luther and with John Calvin. This is sometimes called “total depravity.” I also believe this is true. I used to think otherwise, believing that man is capable in and of himself to do truly good things.
I believed that apart from God, humanity could recognize their own selfishness and depravity and act apart from it. I stopped believing this when I had an experience where I acted out of completely rage and selfishness against someone I love. That night, I was lying in bed thinking about how I acted and thought about all the things that I had considered doing in that moment. I realized that many of those things, had I acted on the impulse, would have ruined my life forever and the life of someone I loved dearly. It was in that moment the Lord revealed to me my own depravity. By grace I was able to see how utterly helpless I am apart from Him and His grace. I now acknowledge my complete and utter dependence on the Lord every single day. I have since looked back on that moment where God revealed the truth to me and think of how loving the Lord is. He is still ever loving, ever giving, and ever gracious to me and to the rest of humanity.
As we look at creation, it is important to take a look at humanity in the Garden and try to understand the purpose of the Garden itself. I believe that the Garden was a place where God and humanity could live alongside one another without humans being completely destroyed by the Lord’s holiness. They could walk together and talk together. Apart from Christ, the closest that God the Father ever let anyone come to seeing him directly was when He allowed Moses to see His backside. Most current Bibles translate that Hebrew word to mean back, but this simply is not true. The word literally means buttocks. Moses wanted to see the Lord, and God essentially said, “Moses you would surely die if I were allow you to behold my majesty. But if you hide in that rock, I will put my hand over the rock and walk by so that you can see my backside.” The man who got the closest to God in the Old Testament was only worthy enough to see the backside of God in a silhouette while hiding in the cleft of a rock. This was a result of the Fall. In the garden, man was uncorrupted, but corruptible. Prior to corruption, they were naturally bent towards love and goodness. They could be in communion with God, while still growing to attain His level of holiness. The ultimate goal of humanity is to become like God in His perfect love, willing that which God wills. We simply did not have that in the Garden. As a result of the Fall, we now have a higher climb ahead of us than we had in the Garden.
No comments:
Post a Comment