Man in the Image of God: The Disagreement Between Barth and Brunner Reconsidered

1986 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 433-459 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joan E. O'Donovan

The task of understanding the uniqueness of human being which underlies the obligations obtaining among men in distinction from all other creatures, is a perennial task of Christian theology. The one complete and final revelation of God in Jesus Christ has planted this task firmly and unalterably at the centre of theological reflection rather than at its periphery. In our generation the search for theological clarity on this matter receives heightened urgency from the pervasive assault on dignity of human being coming from recent developments in the modern sciences and technologies. This assault is conducted simultaneously in the theoretical and practical realms, armed by the increasing coalescence of the two realms in advanced scientific method.1 Today the most consequential knowledge of human life is produced by the most exact, intricate, and complex forms of manipulation and control. In the enthralling feats of biochemical technology the coming–into–being of individual human life is now the object of experimental making.2 Whetheror not our mastery of the reproductive process will ever lay bare the mystery of human generation, it certainly throws open to an unprecedented degree the question of what human being is, and by what its uniqueness is constituted.

2003 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 88-125
Author(s):  
Anja Stokholm

Om forholdet mellem skabelse og syndefald hos Grundtvig og Luther[Grundtvig and Luther: on the Relationship Between Creation and Fall]By Anja StokholmTheologically speaking, two circumstances determine human life: on the one side, Creation and the creativity of God, on the other the Fall of Man and human sinfulness. Because God’s good creation is continuous, a positive understanding of the status and existence of natural Man is possible; but because Man is fallen and sin destroys creation, a negative perception of human life must also be acknowledged. Useful comparison may be made between the ideas of Grundtvig and Luther on this ambiguous relationship. One may ask of each: was the image of God in Man destroyed at the Fall or does the likeness of God remain a reality even in the fallen human being? Is it possible for natural Man to understand the Gospel and the Christian life? Can the understanding of the Gospels only have a negative character because it is reached from out of consciousness of sin; or can this understanding have a positive character because, sin notwithstanding, momentary experiencing of the truth of the Gospels may be granted? Are the views of Grundtvig and Luther too divergent to be reconciled?Regin Prenter maintained that their two positions closely corresponded, arguing that Grundtvig consistently developed Luther’s reformatory principles rejecting the possibility of human beings gaining justice or salvation by their own merit, and thereby also accepted that only in consciousness of the fallen condition of the world, the subverted nature of humanity, and sin, could the Gospel’s promises be received. Prenter’s harmonisation of Grundtvig and Luther, however, gives insufficient weight to the differences. Luther contends that the image of God in Man is lost, that Man is wholly sinful and unjustified; that just as inward spirit and outward flesh are discrete and cannot mix so are the justified and the unjustified states; and it follows that the unjustified human being is to be perceived a flesh alone. In so far as continuous creation, and manifestations of the positive such as the human capacity to recognise and comply with the demands of the law, are to be found in the world, these arise not from the inner resources of human beings but from the unmerited gift of God.Grundtvig too emphasises the seriousness and destructive nature of sin; but he insists that a remnant of the image of God persists in humanity - for instance in Man’s capacity to live in faith, hope and love, and to nurture the Word (that is, speech); and that its manifestation is a token of God’s continuing, and good, creation. Crucially important is Grundtvig’s conception that the image of God is located in the human heart, for this implies that goodness and the positive phenomena of creation express human life and nature in their true and proper form, and thus Grundtvig is able to identify natural human life, governed by the heart, as a positive context within which the word of the Gospel is indeed comprehensible. In differentiation, then, from Luther, Grundtvig maintains that natural Man also has a spirit and can be the agent of love and of goodness.Is this position incompatible with Luther’s doctrine on justification? Does the notion of goodness imply that Man can and must contribute to his own salvation? Grundtvig is careful to maintain that positive qualities such as love and goodness are a creation of God in Man, not an autonomous human achievement; and that the grace of God’s continuing creation in Man does not render salvation unnecessary. Man still needs the redeeming creation of Christ.Thus there are considerable differences between Grundtvig and Luther; but Grundtvig’s ideas are to be seen as a renewal and an independent continuation of Luther’s principal doctrine: that God alone can accomplish salvation. Yet acknowledgement and awareness of the differences, which arise in part through the different times and circumstances in which these independent thinkers worked, is conducive to a productive dialogue between the two.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (14) ◽  
pp. 92-97
Author(s):  
Edvica POPA ◽  

The notion of divine image is generously described by the patristic literature, each of the authors trying to identify the content of this special characteristic of human being, considered (in different positions) the defining element of the created rational being, indicating the possibility of opening to God not through something external, but from the inside of the human being. Since when they speak of God, the Church Fathers do not consider the reality of the one being, but that of the three persons, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, as well as when the question of the image of God is raised, they emphasize that this the image by which human nature is conformed is the image of the Son, or the image of the Word. In this article I set out to draw some points on this patristic feature of the Eastern Fathers.


2014 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Riaan Rheeder

God did not create once and then put an end to it. Testimony from Scripture shows that God continuously establishes or creates new things. Humans can therefore expect to always see and experience new things in creation. With this pattern of reasoning, one can anticipate that the human being as image of God will continuously establish new things in history. Although nature has value, it does not have absolute value and therefore it can be synthesised responsibly. The thought that humans are stewards of God is no longer adequate to, theologically put into words, the relationship human beings have with nature. New biotechnological developments ask for different answers from Scripture. Several ethicists are of the opinion that the theological construction of humans and created co-creators can help found the relationship of the human being to nature. Humans developed as God’s image evolutionary. On the one hand, this means humans themselves are a product of nature. On the other hand, the fact that humans are the image of God is also an ethical call that humans, like God, have to develop and create new things throughout history. Synthetic biology can be evaluated as technology that is possible, because humans are the image of God. However, it should, without a doubt, be executed responsibly.Sintetiese biologie eties geëvalueer: Die skeppende God en medeskeppende mens. God het nie net eenmaal geskep en daar gestop nie. Uit Skrifgetuienisse kan afgelei word dat God voortdurend nuwe dinge tot stand bring of skep. Daarom kan die mens verwag om gedurig nuwe dinge in die skepping te sien en te beleef. Hiermee saam kan verwag word dat die mens as beeld van God voortdurend nuwe dinge in die geskiedenis tot stand sal bring. Alhoewel die natuur waarde het, het dit nie absolute waarde nie en kan dus verantwoordelik gesintetiseer word. Die gedagte dat die mens rentmeester van God is, is nie meer voldoende om die mens se verhouding tot die natuur teologies te verwoord nie. Nuwe biotegnologiese ontwikkelinge vra na ander antwoorde vanuit die Skrif. Verskeie etici is van mening dat die teologiese konstruksie van die mens as geskepte medeskepper kan help om die mens se verhouding tot die natuur te begrond. Die mens het deur ’n evolusionêre proses tot God se beeld ontwikkel. Aan die een kant beteken dit dat die mens self ’n produk van die natuur is. Aan die ander kant is beeldskap ook ’n etiese oproep dat die mens, soos God, nuwe dinge in die geskiedenis moet ontwikkel en skep. Sintetiese biologie kan gesien word as tegnologie wat moontlik is omdat die mens na die beeld van God geskape is. Sonder twyfel moet sintetiese biologie egter verantwoordelik beoefen word.


2016 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 3439
Author(s):  
Nurullah Ulutaş

Ever since Modernist and Capitalist systems started to steer human life, critical approaches towards these two phenomenon have treated as subjects in literary works. In such literary works, which question human being's perception of ethics, the relationship between power and person brings along the options of being included in the system and rejecting it. Standing against the "inevitable ending" which turns human being into an automat defined as "a bureaucratic steel cage" by Weber, Marx has relatively more optimistic attitude about the possibility of human to escape from the system.In his theatre play titled Gizler Çarşısı, Turgay Nar narrates how human is corrupted through violence and control methods of power within the scope of hierarchical relations in the world. Messages that the author aims to give to readers/audience may differ in almost every stage; yet the main theme can be read as tragedy of human being which keeps to be objectified in front of the power. The strength behind money and power ensures a control over crowds via violence, memory impairment and amnesia. The author ironically narrates how humanbeing comes into power and then systematically puts pressure on the same species in order to disidentify them and include them into the system. Accordingly, civilization does not prevent humanbeing's insanity; the one who feeds this wild order and sacrifices oneself to it is nothing else than humanbeing. In the work, it is also emphasized that humanbeing is going to face "blinding and corruption" as soon as the questioning about the world comes to an end.In his work titled Gizler Çarşısı, Turgay Nar ironically narrates how Beşikçi, an ordinary citizen, is systematically desensitized by the power and turned into a beast that does not hesitate to kill even his own child, through symbolical characters. ÖzetModernizm ve Kapitalizm sisteminin insanoğlunun hayatına yön vermeye başlamasıyla bu iki olguya yönelik eleştirel yaklaşımlar, edebî eserlerde sıkça işlenmiştir.  İnsanın etik algısının da sorgulandığı bu tür eserlerde iktidar-birey arasındaki ilişki, sisteme dâhil olma veya sisteme karşı çıkma tercihlerini de beraberinde getirmektedir. Weber’in “bürokratik demir kafes” olarak tanımladığı ve insanın bir otomat haline dönüştürüldüğü “kaçınılmaz son”a karşı çıkan Marx; insanın sistemden uzaklaşabileceği konusunda daha iyimser bir tavır sergiler.Turgay Nar, Gizler Çarşısı adlı tiyatro metninde insanın dünyada hiyerarşik ilişkiler sarmalında iktidarın şiddet ve kontrol yöntemleriyle nasıl çürümeye uğratıldığını anlatır. Yazarın, okuyucuya/seyirciye vermek istediği mesajlar, hemen her sahnede değişse de ana tema iktidar karşısında nesneleşen insanın trajedisi olarak okunabilir. İktidar ve paranın gücü, kalabalıklar üzerinde şiddet, unutkanlık, hafıza kaybı gibi vasıtalarla denetim sağlar. Yazar, insanın iktidara geldikten sonra hemcinsi üzerinde sistematik bir baskı kurarak onu kimliksizleştirip sisteme dâhil ettiğini ironik bir tarzda bu eserinde işler. Buna göre, uygarlık, insanoğlunun cinnetini durduramamıştır; bu vahşi düzeni emziren ve kendini ona tutsak/kurban eden de insanın kendisidir. Eserde, dünyayla ilgili sorgulamanın kesildiği an insanın “körleşme ve çürüme”yle karşı karşıya kalacağı tehlikesi de dile getirilir.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 449-452
Author(s):  
Alan MacLeod ◽  
Nicola Spence

COVID 19 has raised the profile of biosecurity. However, biosecurity is not only about protecting human life. This issue brings together mini-reviews examining recent developments and thinking around some of the tools, behaviours and concepts around biosecurity. They illustrate the multi-disciplinary nature of the subject, demonstrating the interface between research and policy. Biosecurity practices aim to prevent the spread of harmful organisms; recognising that 2020 is the International Year of Plant Health, several focus on plant biosecurity although invasive species and animal health concerns are also captured. The reviews show progress in developing early warning systems and that plant protection organisations are increasingly using tools that compare multiple pest threats to prioritise responses. The bespoke modelling of threats can inform risk management responses and synergies between meteorology and biosecurity provide opportunities for increased collaboration. There is scope to develop more generic models, increasing their accessibility to policy makers. Recent research can improve pest surveillance programs accounting for real-world constraints. Social science examining individual farmer behaviours has informed biosecurity policy; taking a broader socio-cultural approach to better understand farming networks has the potential to change behaviours in a new way. When encouraging public recreationists to adopt positive biosecurity behaviours communications must align with their values. Bringing together the human, animal, plant and environmental health sectors to address biosecurity risks in a common and systematic manner within the One Biosecurity concept can be achieved through multi-disciplinary working involving the life, physical and social sciences with the support of legislative bodies and the public.


Author(s):  
Tikhon V. Spirin ◽  

The article addresses the core anthropological concepts of Carl Du Prel’s philosophy and explores the significance of those concepts for the Russian spiritualism of the late 19th – early 20th century. The Du Prel’s theory built up upon the concept of Duality of the Human Being. Du Prel insisted on simultaneous co-existence of two subjects – one pertaining to the sensible world and the other related to the extrasensory (‘the transcendental subject’) – that are divided by the ‘perception threshold’. He argued that in dormant and somnambular state the threshold would shift and thus enable the Transcendental Subject to act in the Extrasensory World. Du Prel believed that the human evolution is not over yet. He suggested that one could estimate what the new form of the human life would be judging by the conditions in which the transcendental subject comes out. Like many other spiritualists, Du Prel foretold the upcoming dawn of a new era where the boundary between science and religion on the one part and the Sensible and Extrasensory World on the other part will vanish. Anthropological doctrine of Du Prel correlated well with the views on the future human being held by the Russian spiritualists, and therefore he became one of the most reputable authors for them


2005 ◽  
Vol 77 (4) ◽  
pp. 343-352
Author(s):  
Brian S. Rosner

Whereas knowing God is central to every version of Christian theology, little attention has been paid to the other side of the divine-human relationship. This introductory essay approaches the subject via the brief but poignant remarks of two twentieth-century authors appearing in a work of fiction and in a poem. If C. S. Lewis recognizes the primacy of being known by God, Dietrich Bonhoeffer helps define it and underscores its pastoral value. Both authors accurately reflect the main contours of the Bible’s own treatment. Calvin’s view of the image of God, which T. F. Torrance defines as ‘God’s gracious beholding of man as his child,’ may be of assistance in defining what it means to be known by God.


2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 383-405
Author(s):  
David VanDrunen

AbstractLegal theorists have long debated whether law originates from a single source (the actions of state officials) or from multiple sources (including the innumerable communities and associations that constitute broader civil society). In recent years, proponents have defended polycentrism—and its critics have tried to refute it—from various moral, economic, and historical angles. But no contemporary writer has examined polycentrism from a Christian perspective. In the absence of such a study heretofore, this article attempts to evaluate legal polycentrism from a Christian theological and jurisprudential perspective. The Christian scriptures and Christian theology do not directly address whether law is polycentric or monocentric. Nevertheless, appealing to a number of biblical-theological issues—including the image of God, the Noahic covenant (Genesis 8:21–9:17), wisdom, and the purpose of civil government—I argue that Christians have good reason to regard polycentrism as a more satisfactory view of law.


2011 ◽  
Vol 104 (4) ◽  
pp. 489-505

THOU ART is an interdisciplinary and christological aesthetics that theorizes an integral relation among Christ, representation, and the formation of human subjectivity. Through a critical poetics it addresses the space of difference between a theological discourse on the creation of human being in the image of God—understood as creation in Christ, Word (logos) incarnate—and a philosophical discourse on the constitution of human subjectivity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document