Christ – Page 4 – Scribbling Theology

Propitiation and Redemption in the Book of Romans

09/07/202115/08/2025 scribblingtheology3 Comments

This was a recent essay I did in my Romans class at college. I’m proud of this because I got pretty good grades for it so I thought I’d share it with all of you. Enjoy 🙂

The themes of redemption (ἀπολυτρώσεως) and propitiation (ἱλαστήριον) can be found throughout the entire storyline of the Bible. From Genesis 3, where God makes the promise that a seed will come to destroy the serpent (Gen 3:15), then God takes an animal, slays it, and covers Adam and Eve in animal skin (Gen 3:21), through to the sacrificial laws in Leviticus, all the way to Jesus in the Gospels, these themes are richly integrated into the very fabric and thrust of the Bible’s entire narrative. Paul, in particular, picks up on these essential themes and, in his epistle to the Romans, he masterfully espouses a rich theology in light of the Messiah and the entire Old Testament Scriptures. However, the themes of propitiation and redemption in Romans have not been without controversy.

This essay will aim to trace Paul’s usage of both themes of propitiation and redemption throughout the book of Romans. This will be done by exploring critical passages in Romans where these themes occur, exploring the debate among scholars and the various interpretations of the terms, and finally exploring any implications that are applicable to the Christian life.

Redemption in Romans

First, it is crucial to have some historical context behind the idea of redemption to better understand how Paul uses the word in Romans. In the Greco-Roman world, to redeem someone was to liberate a slave by purchasing (or ransoming) their freedom (Morris 1993, 784). This understanding of redemption was true for all of antiquity, going back as far as the Exodus story where God frees (redeems and ransoms) Israel from servitude to the Egyptians (Ex 12-24). For Paul and his audience, the theme of redemption would have evoked memories of the exodus stories of freedom from slavery, crossing the red sea, wilderness wanderings, Passover, promised land, and exile (Wright 2002, 470-471).

Twice we come across the word redemption explicitly being used. The first is in Romans 3:24 “and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,” and then again in Romans 8:23 “And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies.” However, redemptive imagery can be found all over the letter such as in Romans 6, where Paul uses slavery language to demonstrate that those in Christ are now slaves to righteousness and God rather than sin and the flesh (Morris 1993, 785).

Redemption in Romans 3:24

As aforementioned, the first place we find the word redemption is in Romans 3:24 quoted above. In this passage, Paul is arguing that justification (the forensic declaration of being acquitted from sin) is a gift from God that comes via freedom from slavery (redemption) to sin (Hagner 2008, 70-71). Scholars debate whether redemption in this passage includes payment (or ransom) so that one can be set free. As already mentioned, the ancient world and secular Greek literature always assumed some payment would occur for the slave to be set free. However, when one considers both the Septuagint (LXX) and the New Testament, it is evident that a ransom is not always present in the idea of redemption (Schreiner 2018, 197-198). Nevertheless, most scholars agree that Paul most likely had both ransom and redemption in mind (Schreiner 2018, 198). Though, instead of the ransom being paid by God the Son to God the Father (Moo 1996, 230-231), it was paid by God in Christ to “the personified power of sin” mentioned in Romans 3:9 (Dunn 1988, 180).

Redemption in Romans 8:23

The second passage we find the word redemption is in Romans 8:23. Here we have Paul discussing the redemption of the created order in relationship with human redemption. Throughout the entire letter of Romans, Paul has an impressive theology of creation that culminates in this passage as he is concerned with the renewal of everything God has created, not just humans or His elect (Stenschke 2017, 261-289). Scholars agree that redemption is closely related to adoption as they are used almost interchangeably to demonstrate the now and not yet tensions in Paul’s argument. Paul argues that the Christian has already been redeemed (adopted), that they are being redeemed (spiritually), and that they will be redeemed (physically) at the eschatological end of the age (Moo 1996, 518-520). Mike Bird explains this well in his commentary when he says, “in the case of redemption, it is not just redemption from the penalty of sin, but the redemption of the body from the presence of sin that remains outstanding. The resurrection of the body will be the event that will consummate both adoption and redemption” (Bird 2016, 280).

Hilasterion in Romans

Propitiation or the Greek word hilasterion (ἱλαστήριον) occurs only once in all of Paul’s letters in Romans 3:25, “whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins,” making Paul’s use of the word a hot topic for debate among scholars. C. H. Dodd famously argued that the word should be translated as expiation (the removal of sin) as opposed to the pagan idea of God’s anger needing to be satisfied through sacrifice (Hodd 1935, 82-95). Later, the reformed interpretation of propitiation (to satisfy God’s wrath) was championed by Leon L. Morris in his book “The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross” (Morris 1965, 144-213) as he called into question the validity of Dodd’s interpretation of the word (Moo 1996, 198-199). Additionally, others have argued that the hilasterion should be interpreted as “mercy seat” where atonement took place in Leviticus 16 (Gundry-Volf 1993, 279-284).

Propitiation

Some scholars argue that hilasterion should be translated as “propitiation”, meaning “the removal or satisfaction of God’s wrath.” Interestingly, there is some debate among exponents of propitiation as to whether “sacrifice” exists in the passage. Scholars agree that a sacrifice is not found in the atonement, making it difficult to argue for a sacrifice in Romans 3:25. However, some would argue that Paul innovatively develops the idea of a present sacrifice in the propitiatory theme (Moo 1996, 236). On the other hand, scholars would reject the idea of a sacrifice being present that Paul’s expression means “to make atonement” not “to offer a sacrifice.” They argue that, at best, sacrifice is in the back of Paul’s mind, not in the forefront. Nevertheless, advocates all agree that “Christ adverted the divine wrath from sinners” (Morris 1988, 181).

Scholars argue for propitiation in Romans 3:25 in two primary ways. First, scholars explain that the common use of the word in the ancient world was to either satisfy or remove wrath (Kidner 1982, 119-136). Second, proponents of propitiation argue that the biblical context of Romans 3:25 is that all of humanity are sinners under the wrath of God (Rom 1:18-3:20), insinuating that if hilasterion does not mean the removal of wrath, then humanity is still under it (Mounce 1995, 117).

Expiation and Mercy Seat

Other scholars argue that hilasterion should be translated as expiation meaning that Christ’s death “is how God does away with his people’s sin – not symbolically, as in the ritual of Leviticus 16 in which the material mercy-seat figured, but really” (Bruce 1985, 111). In other words, God removes sin or cleanses a person via Christ’s blood and His death. Scholars who advocate for this view recognise the Old Testament connections that Paul is making to Exodus 25 and Leviticus 16, where the lid of the ark or “the mercy seat” was the place where sin was dealt with. It is where the high priest during the Day of Atonement would sprinkle blood as a sacrifice to cleanse the temple and himself so that he would not die in the presence of God (Wright 2002, 474). Additionally, the priest would lay the sins of the people on the head of a goat and literally remove the sin by sending the goat away from the camp. All of this was in Paul’s mind in Romans 3:25 (Dunn 1988, 171). These same scholars point out that in these rituals there is no mention of judgement or wrath being vicariously satisfied through the animals on behalf of the people. In fact, the killing of the animals was never part of the atonement, they were slain elsewhere, and it was the blood that was used at the alter (Wright 2016, 295-355). Finally, these scholars are quick to point out that the word hilasterion nearly always means or refers “mercy seat” in the LXX (Bailey 2000, 155-158) and in it means mercy seat in its other New Testament occurrence in Hebrews 9:5 (Stott 2001, 114).

Satisfy or Cleanse?

So out of the interpretations discussed in this essay, which are the most convincing? Both. When all the evidence is considered, there is no reason not to believe that Paul here has both in mind the secular use of the word hilasterion (propitiation) and the biblically canonical one (expiation and mercy seat). As N. T. Wright says in his commentary, “But that fact remains that in 1:18-3:20 Paul has declared that the wrath of God is revealed against all ungodliness and wickedness and that despite God’s forbearance this will this will finally be meted out; that in 5:8, and in the whole promise of 8:1-30, those who are Christ’s are rescued from wrath; and that the passage in which the reason for the change is stated is 3:25-26…” (Wright 2002, 476). In other words, the redemption of humanity comes via Christ’s hilasterion, that is, His expiating sacrifice as that removes sin and, in turn, wrath from those who are united to Him by faith (Bird 2016, 119).

Implications for Christian Ministry and Living

The themes of redemption and hilasterion are among some of the most important themes in all of Scripture as they relate to the death of Jesus and our salvation. These themes are central to the Gospel, and therefore, central to the Christian life and ministry. For some, the nuance and semantics might lead some to dismiss the question of there being any implications in these fleshed out themes. However, without a nuanced understanding of our salvation, the Christian is left deficient in their ability to espouse the Gospel that saved them. These themes affect Christians in two main ways, in our church ministries (i.e., pulpit ministry) and how we live out our vocation as image-bearers (Gen 1:26).

Ministry

Gospel-centred preaching is at the heart of our church services and ministries. Preaching God’s Word is how we teach, rebuke, correct, and instruct our members in righteousness so that they may be equipped to live out the Christian life (2 Tim 3:16-17). Therefore, having a nuanced and concise understanding of how we are saved shapes the way we live our lives. Is the emphasis of the Gospel on being saved from an angry God who hates humanity until we trust in Jesus, or is that we have been freed (redeemed), cleansed from sin (expiated) so that we can now live out our vocation as God intended? If it is only the former, then that simply solves God’s attitude towards humanity. The latter however, free’s humanity, in Christ to live as they were meant to, a kingdom of priests imaging God (1 Pet 2:9). This freeing and vocational calling needs to be the focus of our sermons.

Christian Life: Our Mission

If we get the Gospel nuances right in our pulpits, then we can live biblically in our lives and mission. If we see that Jesus’ death has freed us, ransomed us, cleansed us from sin for a purpose, we are starting to get to the heart of the Gospel. God has always intended humanity to be a new creation in Christ that images him and lives as genuinely human. N. T. Wright sums this up well when he says, “through the cross of Jesus won the Passover Victory over the powers, that he did this precisely by dying under the weight of the world’s sin, and that Christian mission consists of putting this victory into practice using the same means” (Wright 2016, 408). Love your neighbour (Mk 12:30-31) and enemies (Matt 5:44), even to the point of death so that they may “taste and see that the Lord is good” (Ps 34:8).

Conclusion

In this essay, we explored the themes of redemption and propitiation in Paul’s epistle to the Romans. Paul’s use of the word redemption in Romans 3:24 indicates a clear theology of the individual being set free from sin, and 8:23 indicated Paul’s theology that the entire created order groans as it eagerly awaits to be set free (redeemed) from sin on the eschatological day of judgment when Jesus comes to make all things new. Furthermore, this essay explored Pauls use of the word hilasterion, which could either be translated as propitiation or expiation (and mercy seat taken from Leviticus 16). From all the evidence considered, it seems that Paul emphasises a theology of expiation with a propitiatory theme implicit in the text. This means that Jesus’ death cleanses the believer from sin, sets him free and then because of that expiation, God’s wrath is turned away from the believer (an implied consequence of Jesus’ death, not an explicit one). Finally, with that in mind, it is clear that this emphasis on expiation, when preached from our pulpits, results in a vocational calling for the Christian instead of simply an attitude shift from God’s behalf towards the person.

List of References

Bailey, Daniel P. 2000. “Jesus as the Mercy Seat: The Semantics and Theology of Paul’s Use of Hilasterion in Romans 3:25.” Tyndale Bulletin, no. 51.1: 155-158.

Bird, Michael F. 2016. Romans. 2^nd ed.The Story of God Bible Commentary. Edited by Tremper Longman III and Scot McKnight. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.

Dunn, J. D. G. 1988. Romans 1–8, Vol. 38A. World Bible Commentary. Dallas: Word Incorporated.

Bruce, F. F. 1985. Romans an Introduction and a Commentary. Tyndale New Testament Commentary. Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press.

Gundry-Volf, J, M. 1993. “Expiation, Propitiation, Mercy Seat” in The Dictionary of Paul and his Letters, edited by Gerald F. Hawthorn, Ralph P. Martin, and Daniel G. Reid, 279-284. Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press.

Hagner, Donald A. 2008. “Romans” in The Expositors Bible Commentary, Vol. 11, edited by Tremper Longman III and David E, 19-238. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.

Hodd, C. D. 1935. The Bible and the Greek. London: Hodder and Stoughton.

Kidner, Derek. 1982. “Sacrifice – Metaphors and Meaning.” Tyndale Bulletin no. 33: 119-136.

Moo, Douglas J. 1996. The Epistle to the Romans. The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Morris, L. 1955. The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdman Publishing Co.

Morris, L. 1988. The Epistle to the Romans. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI; Leicester, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Inter-Varsity Press.

Morris, L. 1993. “Redemption” in The Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, edited by Gerald F. Hawthorn, Ralph P. Martin, and Daniel G. Reid, 784-786. Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press.

Mounce, R. H. 1995. Romans, Vol. 27. The New American Commentary. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

Schreiner, Thomas R. 2018. Romans. 2^nd ed. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic.

Stenschke, Christoph. 2017. “Human and Non-Human Creation and Its Redemption in Paul’s Letter to the Romans.” Neotestamentica, no. 51:2. 261-289,

Stott, John. 1994. The Message of Romans: God’s Good News for the World. The Bible Speaks Today. London: Inter-Varsity Press.

Wright, N. T. 2002. “Romans” in The New Interpreters Bible, Volume X. 393-770. Nashville: Abingdon Press.

Wright, N. T. 2016. The Day the Revolution Began. New York: Harper Collins Publishers.

Jesus The: Sage

27/04/202114/08/2025 scribblingtheologyLeave a comment

A short series of short reflections on the person of Christ in the Scriptures

For me, Jesus is The Sage. He is enlightened, inspiring, and His teachings reach into the very depths of one’s soul. Out of all that Jesus said and did, the sermon on the mount (Matt 5-7) is probably among some of His greatest teachings. From “blessed are the poor in spirit” (Matt 5:3), “salt and light” (Matt 5:13-16), the lord’s prayer (Matt 6:5-14), to the golden rule (Matt 7:12-14), Jesus’ teachings drip with wisdom for all to come and drink from. If the Bible is anything, it’s wisdom literature that reaches its crux in the teachings of Jesus (Ps 19:7). As I walk through the pages of God’s Word, I can almost feel Jesus leading me by the hand from Genesis 1 to Revelation 22 into a life long journey to wisdom. The Bible says in Proverbs 4:6-7, “Do not forsake wisdom, and she will protect you; love her, and she will watch over you. Wisdom is supreme; therefore, get wisdom. Though it cost all you have, get understanding.”

The cost of following The Sage is your life. Yet, The Sage will protect you and watch over you if you love Him. However, a life walking after The Sage feels like anything but. I believe wisdom’s most effective tools in the classroom of life is time plus suffering. Jesus Himself spent a life full of suffering up to the cross itself, and no servant is greater than The Master (Jhn 15:20). The Sage has taught me much about suffering, much about self, much about God. The greatest lesson? “to fear God, keep His commandments, and to love others as yourself” (Ecc 12:13; Lev 19:18; Mk 12:31).

“By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.”
― Confucious

Thoughts on the Sacraments

09/04/202114/08/2025 scribblingtheologyLeave a comment

Hey guys. I’ve written elsewhere on church here and here and this is sorta in that same vein with a focus on the sacraments. Enjoy 🙂

Church. It is vitally essential for the life of a Christian. A church is a place where people from all tribes, tongues, and nations can come together to worship their King Jesus as one body; one family unified to one another in Christ. Churches look different all over the world from place to place, from context to context. However, there should be fundamental biblical principles that guide every church in how it looks. Why? Because Jesus is the head of the Church, and it’s up to him, not us, in how it is ultimately governed, in how it runs. Where do we turn to then to discover what a biblically healthy church is? Well, of course, the Bible.

As good Christians, we believe that “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness so that the man of God may be complete, fully equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16-17). Notice the implications of this passage. Scripture (the Bible) is:

“God-breathed.” This means the Bible comes from God Himself and therefore carries a certain weight of authority that no other text does.
“Useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness so that the person of God may be complete, fully equipped for every good work.” This means that the authoritative scriptures have everything we need in them to live the Christian life. Or in other words, if you want to know how to build a healthy church, read the Bible (especially the New Testament).

Of course, that doesn’t mean it’s always as simple as picking up the Bible and knowing exactly what God wants for the church. The Bible is by no means an exhaustive treatise on building a church, but the New Testament does give the standard for one. Here are some of those principles now:

The Word. God speaks in different ways (through nature, people, and other sources). However, the most straightforward and most authoritative way God has spoken is through the Scriptures. Therefore, coupled with the idea of 2 Timothy 3, it makes complete sense then to have faithful teaching as the centrepiece of church.
The Sacraments.

The Lord’s Supper: the sacraments have had various use throughout church history and have all been interpreted differently. Yet, one thing in common remains; among nearly every major Christian tradition, these two sacraments have been observed regularly in one way or another. Why? Because it’s thoroughly biblical. Every Gospel mentions Jesus having Passover (the Lord’s Supper) with his disciples (Mt. 26:17–30, Mk. 14:12–26, Lk. 22:7–39 and Jn. 13:1–17:26). The early church carried on this tradition (Acts 2: 42, 46; 20:7), where they did it regularly in remembrance of Jesus (1 Cor 11:24-25). The Lord Supper took on three principal dimensions. 1. The remembrance of Jesus’ death and resurrection (the new covenant) and the churches unity to Christ. 2. the unity believers had with one another. 3. The covenant’s performance or drama. As the local church takes up the elements (the bread and wine), they are acting out the establishment of the new covenant as the Spirit draws them closer into the presence of Christ and one another.
Baptism: The occurrences of baptism in the Bible are numerous. First, we see Baptism in the New Testament performed by John the Baptist (Matt 3) and subsequently, Jesus being baptised (Matt 3:13-17). As He was being baptised, Jesus said, “Let it be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfil all righteousness.” Whatever this means, it at least proposes that baptism is extremely important, so much so that Jesus expected us to baptise people as part of the great commission (Matt 28:19). The early church took up this sacrament as it was an integral part of their life and ministry (Acts 2:38). It was an important part of the salvation process (Acts 2:38, “repent and be baptized”) and was accomplished via confession and prayer “in the name of Jesus Christ” (Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:48; 19:5). Like the Lord’s Supper, Baptism took on three principles dimensions. 1. The symbolism of a new believers passage from death in the world to life in Christ (Rom 6:1-11). 2. The unity they now had with Christ (Gal 3:27). 3. the unity they had with other believers (1 Cor 12) hence the need for it before one becomes a member of a local church in some traditions (i.e. reformed traditions). As a local church baptises a new believer into the faith, they are publicly declaring their identification and unity to Christ and that new believer as the Spirit works through the drama of passing from death to life. What about Spirit baptism? Both baptisms are taught in the Bible and typically are inseparable (Jhn 3:5). No one denies that Spirit baptism is a thing, but to be baptised by the Spirit without water would have been an unthought of practice in the early church and vice versa.

As I’ve explained, these sacraments are essential to any church for three main reasons. 1. The Bible and, in turn, God expects a church to practice them (this in itself should be reason enough). 2. They’re transformative in that the Spirit works through the practice of them to sanctify the participant in a similar way that He works through the Word. 3. They supplement good preaching and demonstrate the Good News to new believers and people we invite to church.

Finally, all this presupposes the assembly of a local church which consists of members (1 Cor 12:21-26), elders and deacons (1 Tim 3:1-13; Tit 1), and discipline (Matt 18:13-17).

With all these elements in place, a local church can image God and fulfil the great commission. Without them, a local church will become deficient and simply unbiblical. We should never trade a biblical principle for a pragmatic one, no matter how much it seems to work. If something is working, it might be cause for us to re-evaluate our theology, but never to compromise on it. God’s standards are there for a reason, and it’s our job to simply obey even if droves of people aren’t coming through the doors.

Major on the Majors & Minor on the Minors

06/08/201914/08/2025 scribblingtheology5 Comments

Five hundred years ago, the hammer fell, and the nail-pierced the door at Wittenburg, which gave birth to the Protestant movement which, over time, grew into the theologically diverse Church that we have today. Some say this is a bad thing, that Protestants never agree on anything, everyone in a sense is their own Pope, their ultimate authority. People argue that the Protestant movement is so fractured that it works against the unity that Scripture promotes (John 17:23; 1 Cor 1:10; Eph 4:11-13; Col 3:13-14). Indeed I say, the Bible encourages unity and even commands it. But you know the old saying; sometimes you have to crack a few eggs to make the perfect omelette. That omelette is still cooking (we’re always reforming).

However, I believe as one friend told me a long time ago that the diversity in the Protestant movement is apart of God’s will to deliberately hold the entire Church accountable to interpreting His Word correctly. Rather than relying on just one or a few people to interpret Scripture accurately for us (this is the priesthood of believers). This was a huge part of the Reformation. The Word was placed into the hands of all of God’s people, not just a few “qualified” men. Praise God for that. We can’t, though, turn a blind eye to apparent differences in our movement. One can walk down a street and note a Presbyterian church next to a Uniting, next to a Baptist, next to a Lutheran, next to an Anglican, all within thirty seconds of one another. With the wealth of information (mostly thanks to the internet) and the progression of theological scholarship, even just one local church can have a diverse theological membership or leadership within its congregation. So, how do we then “major on the majors, and minor on the minors” so the speak? How do we minister with the vast range of theological differences even within our local churches?

Short answer – it depends. Read on.

1. Confessions or statements of faith:

Throughout church history, many confessions, creeds, and statements have been written and nutted out by men greater than most of us that usually major on the majors. These majors include the nature of God, the hypostatic union, the nature of humanity, inerrancy and inspiration concerning Scripture, the atonement, sacraments, and in one way or another the Gospel (repentance, faith, Jesus’ life, death and resurrection etc.). Reading through some of these confessions and even potentially adopting one for your church (or even for just yourself) will go a long way in avoiding potential pitfalls in the future.

2. Humility and grace:

We must remember, especially those of us who are theologically trained, to maintain a position of humility and grace to those we disagree with on the minors. Minor doctrines are positions we might take that we believe to be evident in the Scriptures but don’t necessarily affect one’s standing with God. These minors issues might include eschatology, Calvinism/Arminianism/ Molinism, the age of the earth or universe (evolution and science etc.), continuationism/cessationism, again the sacraments (depending on one’s view, you can categorise some of these in different tiers), complementarianism/egalitarianism. We must always be ready to be wrong on minor issues while still believing we’re right on what we believe (otherwise, why believe it?).

3. Ecclesiology, prayer, and coffee:

Almost every Protestant denomination majors on the majors. You should be able to walk into a Presbyterian church, a Baptist church, a Lutheran church, and hear the same Gospel being preached to their members. However, secondary issues can affect how we minister together practically. For example, pedo vs credo baptism understandably affects the way one does church, and it has some bearing on how the Gospel is displayed, but the differences aren’t salvific. Something like this I would categorise as a secondary issue – significant enough that it affects our ecclesiology, but not so important that I wouldn’t consider the person I disagree with a heretic. A third-tier issue is something like eschatology or the age of the earth, these don’t necessarily have a bearing on your ecclesiology but are important enough to how one largely interprets the Bible and in turn the Christian life. These things can affect how we do church (depending on how militant the person is about their position), but they don’t have to. Third-tier issues can inevitably tie into second and even major tiered issues, so it’s understandable why, in some cases, people may not be able to minister together. However, if leaders and members can somehow embrace the differences, it would make for a theologically, robust church.

This kind of unity is fostered by taking the command to love one another seriously (John 13:34-35), to maintain a humble yet open disposition displayed first from the leadership and then by the members. Lots of prayers, as I’ve heard it said, you can’t hate someone you pray for often, and lots of conversations over good quality coffee with an open Bible. Finally, I’d say encourage mature theological discussion and training. Whether it’s from a seminary, college or your church, people can only grow if you’re willing to teach. If we can encourage this kind of unity and maturity in our theological development, it will hopefully flow out into our churches. It’s hard but not impossible, and I think the rewards are worth it. At the end of the day if the differences end up being too great, at least walk away in love trying to keep the unity of the faith.

The Image of God: Genesis 1-11 Part V

02/08/201915/08/2025 scribblingtheology7 Comments

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 God created man in his own image,

in the image of God he created him;

male and female he created them. – Genesis 1:26-27

The Imago Dei or the image of God has been discussed at length for a long, long time. Throughout history, some have assumed that the image of God refers to intelligence and the ability to discern between moral choices. Others have thought it’s more about the soul or spirit of a human. I believe that the image is something functional (something we do) and ontological (something we have). Let’s explore.

One of the most distinguishing characteristics of Yahweh is that He wants to be known, and He wants to know His creation as well. This is somewhat bizarre because most gods in the ancient world weren’t really concerned with the affairs of humanity unless thought they could get something out of them. Yahweh, on the other hand, is entirely driven by love, order, shalom and holiness. So what does this mean for the Imago Dei?

In the ancient world, kings were known to be the earthly representatives of their god. In Egypt, for example, the pharaoh was thought to be the incarnation and representation of whatever major or popular god that was in at the time. Furthermore, these representative kings were to rule over their nation as though the god itself was ruling, thus displaying all of the god’s attributes and character. Other examples in the ancient world also show how the representatives of the gods also played a mediatory role; a sort of middle man between the god and the nation. In Genesis 1-2, there is a similar message. Humanity (both male and female) are created and endowed with something of the Creator God. They intrinsically possess the divine (ontology) as they were made to image or display their Creator to the rest of creation (function). According to the passage, humanity was to image Yahweh by “having 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” (Genesis 1:26) and to work and keep the Garden of Eden (Genesis 2:15). What does this mean for us then?

In Genesis 3, classically entitled as the Fall, humanity meets a weird talking serpent (sin incarnate), they’re tempted, they take from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. They are then exiled from the Garden because they failed in their vocation to be keepers of Eden and to rule over creation. Instead of ruling over the serpent (sin), they are ruled by it. Instead of protecting Eden (Yahweh’s dwelling space), they let chaos and sin come in and take over. So when someone does terrible at their job, they’re fired. So were Adam and Eve.

Genesis 1-3 is unique. There are several ways one could interpret and understand the story. One way I think we should understand Genesis 1-3 is that it’s the story of all of humanity. God has tasked all of us (Christian or not) with a divinely appointed job to lovingly rule over creation, to work it and to keep it so that God can live among us. From before even the very beginning, God’s intention for His creation and humanity especially was that He would dwell and live in loving harmony with them. This is where the Imago Dei kicks in. Every single one of us has been created to reflect and show God’s very being by doing the above tasks. Reflecting or imaging is inescapable for us, it’s a part of our nature. Now, however, we image and reflect the other gods (idols) we worship, namely death and chaos. Reflect on this quote by one of my favourite scholars G. K. Beale:

“People will always reflect something, whether it be God’s character or some feature of the world. If people are committed to God, they will become like him; if they are committed to something other than God, they will become like that thing, always spiritually inanimate and empty like the lifeless and vain aspect of creation to which they have committed themselves.”

Now consider this passage from Psalm 115:4-8:

Their idols are silver and gold,

the work of human hands.

They have mouths, but do not speak;

eyes, but do not see.

They have ears, but do not hear;

noses, but do not smell.

They have hands, but do not feel;

feet, but do not walk;

and they do not make a sound in their throat.

Those who make them become like them;

so do all who trust in them.

If there’s one thing humanity loves more then themselves its flat out drama (chaos). We’re confusing little things. One the one hand we protest and petition for peace on earth, we desire to see the end of famine and disease, we boil and rage at corruption in government, and we weep and wail over death and genocide. Yet we send people into war (sometimes a necessary evil). We spend $50 on a shirt made in Taiwanese sweatshops. We hate sexual abuse and fight against rape culture, yet we watch porn and get excited over shows like Game of Thrones that perpetuate that culture. We “know” what’s wrong and what’s right, yet we’re in a constant struggle to live consistently. You could say that we “suppress the truth in our unrighteousness” (Rom 1:18). All the technology and scientific advancements in the world won’t give us what we need, a new heart, with new desires, and the ability to live consistently (Ezekiel 36:26). Once, that’s solved, then we can once again image and reflect God who is life and love rather than the gods of death and chaos. How do we obtain new hearts?

Great question. Ezekiel 36:26 (cf: Eze 11:19-20; 18:31; Ps 51:10; Jn 3:3; 2 Cor 3:3), is something God wants to do to everyone in Christ to restore the Imago Dei and have them return (to greater heights) to their intended role in the cosmos. Jesus lived, died and rose from the dead as a perfect human being, as our representative (Rom 5:12-14), so that by grace, through faith (Eph 2:8-9) we can be united to this new and perfect human (1 Cor 15:22) by the Holy Spirit (Jhn 3:5-6). When we’re united, we’re then washed clean and made pure (1 Cor 6:11) – we’re made genuinely human in the Messiah Jesus. Now we’re able to truly love, rule, reflect and keep as God created us to be.