The Likeness of the Image: Adamic Motifs and Anthropoly in Rabbinic Traditions about Jacob's Image Enthroned in Heaven

2006 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-84
Author(s):  
Silviu Bunta
Keyword(s):  
Present Article ◽  
Human Body ◽  
Image Of God ◽  
The Other ◽  
Roman Emperor ◽  
Near Eastern ◽  
The Image Of God

AbstractThe present article analyzes the various texts concerning Jacob's image engraved on the throne of glory. It compares the Jacob texts with previous traditions regarding Adam's special status as the image of God or the equivalent of a cultic representation of an ancient Near Eastern king or of a Roman emperor. The Jacob texts reveal a similar anthropology that emphasizes the dichotomy of humanity. On one hand the earthliness of the functionality of the human body is associated with angelic opposition, and, on the other, the body's divine likeness gives rise to angelic veneration. The investigation of the two traditions demonstrates a conspicuous dependence of the Jacob texts on the Adamic traditions.

On the transcendence and immanence of God

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Nestler
Keyword(s):  
Image Of God ◽  
The Other ◽  
Knowledge Of God ◽  
Divine Punishment ◽  
The Absolute ◽  
The Image Of God

Transcendence and immanence are two terms used to differentiate two realities, one of transcending worldly experience and the other of an inner-worldly experience. In scholastic theology (kalām), a respective distinction is being made regarding the image of God, whereby transcendence (tanzīh) is set against anthropomorphism (tašbīh) to solve the problem of how to deal with Quranic expressions that attribute human – formal or essential – characteristics to God. Also, in mysticism, the notion of transcendence and immanence of God plays a central role, for instance, in the teachings of Ibn al-ʿArabī. He mainly discusses this distinction in the chapter of Noah in Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam (“The Bezels of Wisdom”), regarding knowledge of God. He rejects a pure theology of transcendence as it describes only a part of the divine reality. However, he points out that even though His immanent reality can be experienced, it is not comprehensible, because it is unlimited. Both realities interlock through the idea of the Oneness of Being or Unity of Existence (waḥdat al-wuǧūd), because ‘in reality’ they are nothing else than God. Ibn al-ʿArabī illustrates this ontological dependency by the example of Noah’s legend, by showing that the prophet supported the belief of the absolute transcendence of God, which was unacceptable for his people, not because they negated God’s existence, but because they had an immanent image of God. Accordingly, Ibn al-ʿArabī interprets the divine punishment, instead of misfortune, as immersing in the sea of knowledge of God. In this way the soul becomes a place of manifestation or a mirror of the divine reality.

scholarly journals A Meatless Dominion: Genesis 1 and the Ideal of Vegetarianism

2017 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 144-154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan Patrick Mclaughlin
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Context ◽  
Image Of God ◽  
Moral Ideal ◽  
Near Eastern ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Genesis 1 ◽  
Unique Manner ◽  
The Image Of God ◽  
Enuma Elish ◽  
The Ideal

I argue that a strand of biblical tradition, represented in Genesis 1:26–29, depicts a nonviolent relationship between humans and nonhumans—indicated by the practice of vegetarianism—as a moral ideal that represents the divine intention for the Earth community. This argument is supported by four claims. First, the cultural context of Genesis 1 suggests that the “image of God” entails a democratized royal charge of all humans to make God present in a unique manner in the created order. Second, this functional role must be understood in light of the unique deity (Elohim) in Genesis 1, a deity whose peaceful and other-affirming creative act is distinctive from violent creative acts of deities in other ancient Near Eastern cosmologies such as the Enuma Elish. Third, Genesis 1 provides an exegesis of humanity's dominion over animals in verse 29, which limits humanity's food to vegetation. Finally, juxtaposing Genesis 1 with Genesis 9 reveals a nefarious shift from human dominion, which is meant to be peaceful and other-affirming, to something altogether different—a relationship that is built upon terror.

Naive Experience, Religious Root Unity, and Human Identity

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
James W. Skillen
Keyword(s):  
Cosmic Time ◽  
Image Of God ◽  
The Other ◽  
Common Denominator ◽  
Human Identity ◽  
Human Community ◽  
To Come ◽  
The Image Of God ◽  
The Way

Abstract Resolving Dooyeweerd’s temporal/supratemporal dialectic opens the way to a deeper appreciation of naive experience and human identity as the image of God. This essay makes a case for that proposition, building on my critique of Dooyeweerd’s idea of cosmic time published previously in this journal. There I hypothesized that time—temporality—should be recognized as the first modal aspect rather than as a transaspectual common denominator of the other aspects. The religious root unity of the human community is not a supratemporal, spiritual concentration point but rather humans themselves in their generations answering to God in all that they are and do. Humans are not temporal bodies directed by imperishable souls but whole persons-in-community, subject to all the modal laws and norms (including the temporal), living by faith in the true God or in false gods throughout this age, which opens to creation’s fulfillment in the age to come.

Known by God: C. S. Lewis and Dietrich Bonhoeffer

2005 ◽  
Vol 77 (4) ◽  
pp. 343-352
Author(s):  
Brian S. Rosner
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Image Of God ◽  
The Other ◽  
Christian Theology ◽  
Human Relationship ◽  
Dietrich Bonhoeffer ◽  
Introductory Essay ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Pastoral Value ◽  
The Image Of God

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.

God′s Body: Epistemic and Ritual Conceptions from Sanskrit Texts of Logic

Paragrana ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-63
Author(s):  
Gérard Colas
Keyword(s):  
Image Of God ◽  
The Other ◽  
Religious Images ◽  
Natural Laws ◽  
Sacred Texts ◽  
Technical Requirements ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Image Of God ◽  
The Universe

AbstractDiscussions on the nature of the relationship between a god, his body and his material representation are almost non-existent in the Hindu devotional perspective, where such concerns are superfluous. Hindu theological and ritual Sanskrit texts, on the other hand, applied procedures of reasoning with regard to that relationship. This rationalization however accommodated rather than conflicted with the devotional attitude. Their attempt to clarify their stand vis-à-vis god′s body and material image followed from ideological or technical requirements. This was done sometimes systematically, as in the Viśiṣṭādvaita school of philosophy where the ritual image is declared to be “a divine descent (of God) for the purpose of worship”; sometimes incidentally, as in ritual manuals, where the process of changing statues into divine bodies is described.But why should gods have a body at all? While some contend that they do not possess any body, others assert that they possess several at the same time, yet others infer the necessity of a body for God to create the universe, to reveal sacred texts, etc. These are some arguments and counter-arguments found in theological texts. The nature of the hierarchy between divine descents and images (which may or may not be considered as real bodies of gods) is another aspect of the discussion.Another question is the various ways in which ritual texts consider the relation between a god and his image. While immediacy characterizes the relation between the devotee and the image of god, the relation between ritual and image is far from being spontaneous. Rituals insure the presence of a god in an image through a technico-mystical process consisting of successive stages and involving patrons, astrologers, artists, priests and others. The final product, namely a concrete god-cum-image, is fit for devotion, but remains for ever fragile, dependent on the continuity of rites and on the material preservation of the image. Behind the ritual perspective also lies the notion that this process of creating a body for a god is in keeping with “natural” laws. Hindu ritual prescriptions are applicable only to the religious images which, though man-made, are considered as “natural”. Supra-natural divine images, known as “self-manifested” images, must be worshiped, but are beyond the range of these prescriptions.

On the transcendence and immanence of God

2018 ◽  
Vol 0 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Nestler
Keyword(s):  
Image Of God ◽  
The Other ◽  
Knowledge Of God ◽  
Divine Punishment ◽  
The Absolute ◽  
The Image Of God

Transcendence and immanence are two terms used two differentiate two realities, one of transcending worldly experience and the other of an inner-worldly experience. In scholastic theology (kalām), a respective distinction is being made regarding the image of God, whereby transcendence (tanzīh) is set against anthropomorphism (tašbīh) to solve the problem of how to deal with Quranic expressions that attribute human - formal or essential - characteristics to God. Also, in mysticism, the notion of transcendence and immanence of God plays a central role, for instance, in the teachings of Ibn al-Arabi. He mainly discusses this distinction in the chapter of Noah in Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam (»The Bezels of Wisdom«), regarding knowledge of God. He rejects a pure theology of transcendence as it describes only a part of the divine reality. However, he points out that even though His immanent reality can be experienced, it is not comprehensible, because it is unlimited. Both realities interlock through the idea of the Oneness of Being or Unity of Existence (waḥdat al-wuğūd), because ›in reality‹ they are nothing else than God. Ibn al-ʿArabī illustrates this ontological dependency by the example of Noah’s legend, by showing that the prophet supported the belief of the absolute transcendence of God, which was unacceptable for his people, not because they negated God’s existence, but because they had an immanent image of God. Accordingly, Ibn al-Arabi interprets the divine punishment, instead of misfortune, as immersing in the sea of knowledge of God. In this way the soul becomes a place of manifestation or a mirror of the divine reality.

Patristic Divergences about the Image of God in Man

2007 ◽  
Vol 43 ◽  
pp. 69-79
Author(s):  
Stuart George Hall
Keyword(s):  
Human Body ◽  
Image Of God ◽  
Male And Female ◽  
Genesis 1 ◽  
The Image Of God ◽  
The Church

The pathologically pious heresy-hunter Epiphanius, bishop of Salamis from 365 to 403, might be reckoned a champion of uniformity in the Church. Notoriously he promoted the campaign against Origen in Palestine, and in his Panarion attacks Origen’s theology at length. Never the brightest of the Fathers, he was confused by the question of the image of God in man. He comes to it when considering the sect of Audians, who were anthropomorphites; that is, they held God to have a bodily form which the human body replicates. According to Genesis 1: 26–7, God made man, male and female, in (after, according to) the image and likeness of God When Epiphanius gets to the detail of the Audian argument, it is plain that they argued from the use in Scripture of bodily language about God’s eyes, hand, feet, and other organs, and from the Lord’s appearances to Moses and the prophets, to demonstrate his bodily shape. Epiphanius can refute this in detail, but is aware of other suggestions about wherein what is ‘in the image’ consists, and regards none as wholly coherent with orthodox faith and Scripture. He mentions the theories that it is the soul that is in the image, or that it is virtue, or that it is the grace received in baptism, or that it applied to Adam only before his sin.

Genesis 1-3 as Source for the Anthropology of Origen

2008 ◽  
Vol 62 (3) ◽  
pp. 213-232 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anders Lund Jacobsen
Keyword(s):  
Human Body ◽  
Image Of God ◽  
Clear Picture ◽  
Genesis 1 ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Image Of God

AbstractAccording to Origen Genesis 1-3 is an anthropological key-text. The account of man's creation in Gen. 1,26f deals with the creation of the inner non-material man in the image of God, whereas Gen. 2,7 deals with the creation of the human body, the outer man, which is not created in the image of God. Some later critics claim that according to Origen Gen. 2,7 is about the creation of a non-material luminous body. In Origen's opinion only the inner man can reach perfection. The outer man can never be perfect, but will be destroyed. To deepen our understanding of, how Origen understands the mortality of the human body, some short sayings about the meaning of Gen. 3,21 are interpreted. In the few places where Origen refers explicitly to Gen. 3,21 there is no clear picture of how he interprets this verse. The most precise observation we can make is that in his view the skin coats denote the mortal corporality that surrounds the inner man.

Theophany

Portrait ◽  
2018 ◽  
pp. 72-75
Author(s):  
Jean-Luc Nancy
Keyword(s):  
Image Of God ◽  
The Other ◽  
Human Face ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The One ◽  
The Image Of God ◽  
Made In

In its weaving of Judeo-Greek themes, Christianity introduced a revolution into the mimesis of the human face and from there into mimesis in general. If man is made in the image of God, on the one hand, and if, on the other hand, God becomes man—that is, if God makes himself into his own image but within the mortal condition defined through its sin—then the image of man can oscillate between divine value and the value of human fallenness....

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document