Created or creating in the image of God? Gen. 1:27

[Farlsborough]

So, apologies for this being the second L. Ray Smith prompted post this week, but I do think many on these forums would subscribe to a lot of his teaching.

I was fascinated by his insistence that the word translated as "created" in Gen. 1:27 ("bara") is the imperfective when it refers to being created in His image, unlike the perfective used twice in the same verse. I'm no Hebrew scholar so unfortunately I can't say how true this is.

The implications drawn from this are vast; that quite apart from the doctrine of the "imago dei" being within each human already, that creation is one huge process by which we steadily are conformed to the image of God.

However, researching the doctrine of imago dei I found that it is also mentioned in a few other places. In Corinthians, it is mentioned in relation to men and women; this is tricky, and can't convincingly be used to argue against Ray's point because if we are saying that Paul insists that man is "the image and glory of God" in the full sense, we must also conclude that women aren't, as they are "the glory of man".

But James 3:9 seems to refute his point more strongly: "With it we bless the Lord and Father, and with it we curse men who were made in God's likeness!" - the word is "gegonotas", it is definitely perfect, a complete action. Surely it is impossible in the light of James to insist that this hasn't happened yet?

Somewhat selfishly, I wish Ray was still alive so I could ask him what he thinks!

[gregoryfl]

Shalom Farlsborough

He is correct in saying that the first use of the verb ברא is in, what is actually called the incomplete state, which is an action in progress. He is mistaken though, in thinking that this means that this action is something that has not been completed yet. One has to understand how the Semitic peoples thought when they wrote. When the incomplete is used, (and it is many, many times to indicate things that clearly are not still in process) it is the writers way of putting the reader right there with the action, as if they were personally witnessing it take place.

Aside from James, which does indeed speak of man having been made in God's likeness, all one needs to do is go back and reread the entire Bereshiyt account and you will see that this exact form of the verb, with the nikkud (the little dots and dashes indicating vowel sounds) is found in one other place, back in verse 21...

And Elohim is creating the great monsters....etc.

No one suggests that this is also something that is still being done, correct? In fact, in looking at the verbs forming the first part of those verses in Genesis, all the through the entire Scripture, they are also incomplete. Again, this is simply a Semitic way of drawing the reader into what is being read, connecting them to it as if they were there witnessing it all.

Also, the completed (what you call perfective) state found in the same verse with regard to man speaks of the certainty of it having been done.

Because the English culture does not write that way, it can, and has lead, to things being taken from the text that were never intended.

Ray is correct about the grammar, but not so about the conclusion he comes to regarding it.

When I read Paul's words, I see man (the male) as the image and glory of God, and I see women as the image of God as well, but the glory of man. I see her as just as fully the image of God as a man is, just expressing different aspects and facets of his image.

Ronen

[joeteekay]

Col_2:10  And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power
:2c:

[WhiteWings]

It likely doesn't come as a surprise at all but not all scholars agree the correct translation is "created in the image". The alternative is "created as a representative".

[gregoryfl]

Col_2:10  And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power
:2c:

:thumbsup:

[gregoryfl]

It likely doesn't come as a surprise at all but not all scholars agree the correct translation is "created in the image". The alternative is "created as a representative".

I agree. צלם is related to the marriage root צל, which refers concretely to the shade made by a shadow of something. I translate it as being prepared in his shadow. Many beautiful and deep meanings from this I believe, not merely an statue type of image, such as an idol would be. We live and move and have our being in him, just as a shadow does with its source.

:dsunny:

Ronen

[WhiteWings]

No doubt there will be as many opinions as people on what representative means.
For me it's about someone spreading God's word. Even ruling in God's name.

In his shadow reminds me of yet another view that it means outline.

[micah7:9]

It likely doesn't come as a surprise at all but not all scholars agree the correct translation is "created in the image". The alternative is "created as a representative".

I agree. צלם is related to the marriage root צל, which refers concretely to the shade made by a shadow of something. I translate it as being prepared in his shadow. Many beautiful and deep meanings from this I believe, not merely an statue type of image, such as an idol would be. We live and move and have our being in him, just as a shadow does with its source.

:dsunny:

Ronen

Just curious, you say, " I translate it as being prepared in his shadow."  Isnt that saying something is being done, so it is not finished or complete?
:dontknow:

[WhiteWings]

It likely doesn't come as a surprise at all but not all scholars agree the correct translation is "created in the image". The alternative is "created as a representative".

I agree. צלם is related to the marriage root צל, which refers concretely to the shade made by a shadow of something. I translate it as being prepared in his shadow. Many beautiful and deep meanings from this I believe, not merely an statue type of image, such as an idol would be. We live and move and have our being in him, just as a shadow does with its source.

:dsunny:

Ronen

Just curious, you say, " I translate it as being prepared in his shadow."  Isnt that saying something is being done, so it is not finished or complete?
:dontknow:

I think this is the answer:

When the incomplete is used, (and it is many, many times to indicate things that clearly are not still in process) it is the writers way of putting the reader right there with the action, as if they were personally witnessing it take place.

So the you are present during Gen 1:26

Quoting from my lexicon on the word "make"

Imperfect

The imperfect expresses an action,  process or condition which is
incomplete,  and it has a wide range of meaning:

1a) It is used to describe a single (as opposed to a repeated) action
in the past; it differs from the perfect in being more vivid and
pictorial. The perfect expresses the "fact",  the imperfect adds
colour and movement by suggesting the "process" preliminary to its
completion.
He put forth his hand to the door
it came to a halt
I began to hear

1b) A phrase such as "What seekest thou?",  refers not only to the
present,  but assumes that the search has continued for some time.

Why do you weep?
Why refuse to eat?
Why are you distressed?

These relate not so much as to one occasion,  as to a
continued condition.

2) The kind of progression or imperfection and unfinished condition
of the action may consist in its frequent repetition.

2a) In the present:

it is "said" today
a wise son "maketh glad" his father

2b) In the past:

"and so he did"       -  regularly,  year by year
a mist "used to go up"
the fish which "we used to eat"
the manna "came down" -regularly
He "spoke"            -repeatedly

3) The imperfect is used to express the "future",  referring not only
to an action which is about to be accomplished but one which has
not yet begun:

3a) This may be a future from the point of view of the real
present; as:

Now "shalt thou    See what I will do"
"We will burn" thy house

3b) It may be a future from any other point of view assumed; as:
He took his son that "was to reign"
she stayed to    See what "should be done"

4) The usage of 3b may be taken as the transitive to a common use of
the imperfect in which it serves for an expression of those shades
of relation among acts and thoughts for which English prefers the
conditional moods. Such actions are strictly "future" in reference
to the assumed point of relation,  and the simple imperfect
sufficiently expresses them; e.g.

of every tree thou "mayest eat"
"could we know"
He "would" say

5a) The imperfect follows particles expressing "transition",
"purpose",  "result" and so forth as,  "in order that",  "lest"; e.g.

say thou art my sister,  "that it may be well with thee"
let us deal wisely with the nation,  "lest it multiplies"

5b) When however there is a strong feeling of "purpose",  or when it
is meant to be strongly marked,  then of course the moods are
employed; e.g.

raise me up "that I may requite them"
who will entice Ahab "that he may go up"
what shall we do "that the sea may be calm"

The moods are also employed to express that class of
future actions which we express in the "optative"

"may I die"
"may" the LORD "establish" his word
"may" the child "live".

[micah7:9]

Im not the smartest person when it comes to rules of grammer or anything like that but the idea that God is creating us is supported in a few scriptures even without an in depth word study... This verse helps me understand why I believe we are being created,

Gen 3:22
22 And the Lord God said, "Behold, the man has become as one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat and live for ever"—

Eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil made man more like God than he was before he ate. So Man could not have already been made in the perfect image of God.

[WhiteWings]

I think we never are the perfect image of God in the way you seem to mean it. Simply because I think we never become as great as the Father Himself. Not even in billions of years.

I think perfect means perfect for the intended task.
- The task of a perfect surgeon is to save all lives.
- The task of a perfect marine is to end all lives.

I think how smart you are, has nothing or little to do with it. Just look at many very smart scholars who end up with a zillion doctrines.

The biggest stumbling block is often old habits. I'm chatting with Ronen and am learning what a day is. 10 PMs already and still going strong  :doh: It's not that I'm the dumbest person on the planet. I'm also open to new views. But it's quite difficult to stop your old thought patterns block the learning process.

[anna274]

WhiteWings and Ronen... again thank you so much for your very helpful  posts.  I'm still learning and continue to be very interested in learning; and so appreciate any word studies that people share on this forum.

I especially appreciate Lexicon on "make" and smiled when I read WW's opinion on "representative"... in my notebook I wrote:

representative=spreader of God's word
                       ruler in God's name
============================================
Although I do have a different opinion of what "representative" means, WW's opinion has given me a different way to consider "representative", image, likeness.
My opinion is still too sketchy to share publicly.  Sometimes, I feel very much a parasite (Greek parasitos=somebody who eats from another's table  (sitos transliteration   grain, food)... it seems that the type of food that Father wants me to bring to this particular "table" are devotionals, meditations, reflections...

[sheila]

  for sister Anna........now how is it when you come togather 'some' have a psalm or song or scripture!!!!!!!!!!!!!

   ... I have wittnessed you cntinually bringing forth such things,Anna........... get that idea of your contributions

  being neglible outta that head!          :HeartThrob:  :friendstu:

[sheila]

 Isaaih 30; 30-32.........   the Lord will cause men to hear His voice...........the voice of the Lord will shatter

  Assyria.....every stroke the Lord lay's on them with His punishing rod[rules nations with rod/I see as Jesus

Christ threshing out His truth]  WILL BE TO THE MUSIC OF TAMBOURINES AND HARPS

  ....actually....when reading one of your posts the other day...it was called to my attention your'e always

presence with a psalm/song of worship..but I didn't say anything.........maybe I should have commended

  you then? and then you wouldn't have felt so.  my apoligies,sister.... :friendstu:

[anna274]

Oh my, no need for apologies Sheila.  Actually, lately I have been feeling like I am interrupting discussions ... and so felt a great need to share that I believe Father wants me to share devotionals, meditations, reflections BUT wanted those of you who consistently and constantly and graciously and generously offer much toward the ongoing discussions to know that I sincerely appreciate the very helpful word studies.  Thanks Sheila... May His peace, His truth, His grace, His life, His Light shine evermore brightly in all of us. Anna

[gregoryfl]

It likely doesn't come as a surprise at all but not all scholars agree the correct translation is "created in the image". The alternative is "created as a representative".

I agree. צלם is related to the marriage root צל, which refers concretely to the shade made by a shadow of something. I translate it as being prepared in his shadow. Many beautiful and deep meanings from this I believe, not merely an statue type of image, such as an idol would be. We live and move and have our being in him, just as a shadow does with its source.

:dsunny:

Ronen

Just curious, you say, " I translate it as being prepared in his shadow."  Isnt that saying something is being done, so it is not finished or complete?
:dontknow:

If I worded it wrong in English, I apologize. I do mean it in the sense of having been done...finished...complete. What I see in scripture in a nutshell is that man was created in God's image and likeness. Man came to believe a false identity and thus act in a different way than he truly was. Yeshua came to demonstrate, redeem and restore that original image, and now we are being conformed to it, by an ever increasing awareness given by what he reveals in us, through us, and to us.

Ronen

[sheila]

  well,Anna...I feel it was the Holy spirit that showed me your contribution..and I failed to express it.

   ....and as far as 'feeling like your interupting' goes...I'm problably chief in that. :Oops: But..unlike in spoken

conversations....people can 'skip over'  my 'interrupting posts' and remain in the 'meat' of their discussin.

.....consider it ..a littlesalt and pepper here and there..sprinkled about...'interesting asides'

    a few 'side dishes' along with the main course?   :doh:  lol!

   and PS  I realize there are some forums thatare not as accomadating as the 'Tent"

[gregoryfl]

Im not the smartest person when it comes to rules of grammer or anything like that but the idea that God is creating us is supported in a few scriptures even without an in depth word study... This verse helps me understand why I believe we are being created,

Gen 3:22
22 And the Lord God said, "Behold, the man has become as one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat and live for ever"—

Eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil made man more like God than he was before he ate. So Man could not have already been made in the perfect image of God.

Even though we would understand this verse differently, I can see how this could be seen the way you are seeing it. If I understand you correctly, you are saying that man originally did not have the knowledge of good and evil, and so, since God did, man was missing that aspect of God's likeness and image. Is that correct?

[gregoryfl]

  well,Anna...I feel it was the Holy spirit that showed me your contribution..and I failed to express it.

   ....and as far as 'feeling like your interupting' goes...I'm problably chief in that. :Oops: But..unlike in spoken

conversations....people can 'skip over'  my 'interrupting posts' and remain in the 'meat' of their discussin.

.....consider it ..a littlesalt and pepper here and there..sprinkled about...'interesting asides'

    a few 'side dishes' along with the main course?   :doh:  lol!

   and PS  I realize there are some forums thatare not as accomadating as the 'Tent"

I like that analogy there.  :cloud9: That reminds me of some discussions I have been involved in where there was more 'salt and pepper' than the 'meat'  :eek:

[sheila]

...and it looks like this could become one of them..so, I leave it to you!!  :declare:  :friendstu: ps..wonderful things  your'e discussing!

[gregoryfl]

...and it looks like this could become one of them..so, I leave it to you!!  :declare:  :friendstu: ps..wonderful things  your'e discussing!

Not at all sis.  :friendstu:

[micah7:9]

Shalom Farlsborough

He is correct in saying that the first use of the verb ברא is in, what is actually called the incomplete state, which is an action in progress. He is mistaken though, in thinking that this means that this action is something that has not been completed yet. One has to understand how the Semitic peoples thought when they wrote. When the incomplete is used, (and it is many, many times to indicate things that clearly are not still in process) it is the writers way of putting the reader right there with the action, as if they were personally witnessing it take place.

Aside from James, which does indeed speak of man having been made in God's likeness, all one needs to do is go back and reread the entire Bereshiyt account and you will see that this exact form of the verb, with the nikkud (the little dots and dashes indicating vowel sounds) is found in one other place, back in verse 21...

And Elohim is creating the great monsters....etc.

No one suggests that this is also something that is still being done, correct? In fact, in looking at the verbs forming the first part of those verses in Genesis, all the through the entire Scripture, they are also incomplete. Again, this is simply a Semitic way of drawing the reader into what is being read, connecting them to it as if they were there witnessing it all.

Also, the completed (what you call perfective) state found in the same verse with regard to man speaks of the certainty of it having been done.

Because the English culture does not write that way, it can, and has lead, to things being taken from the text that were never intended.

Ray is correct about the grammar, but not so about the conclusion he comes to regarding it.

When I read Paul's words, I see man (the male) as the image and glory of God, and I see women as the image of God as well, but the glory of man. I see her as just as fully the image of God as a man is, just expressing different aspects and facets of his image.

Ronen

I just don't accept this. I do not see a completion in Gen. 1:26-27. What is the definition of image and likeness or even a shadow as a finished thing? I do not believe HE is done with what he was speaking in Genesis.
I am finding out I am not near as quick and smart as some of you, especially Ronen. I find his work a good tool for learning, but I do not see it as  an absolute.
In my opinion if what we read in Gen. 1:26-27 as complete in image and likeness, the man, no not man, but his bone of bone and flesh of flesh  called woman would not have been so spiritually weak to SEE and then eat.
Then again I may be misunderstanding the entire concept of the post. This is just my reading. He is Risin! :dsunny:

[gregoryfl]

Shalom Farlsborough

He is correct in saying that the first use of the verb ברא is in, what is actually called the incomplete state, which is an action in progress. He is mistaken though, in thinking that this means that this action is something that has not been completed yet. One has to understand how the Semitic peoples thought when they wrote. When the incomplete is used, (and it is many, many times to indicate things that clearly are not still in process) it is the writers way of putting the reader right there with the action, as if they were personally witnessing it take place.

Aside from James, which does indeed speak of man having been made in God's likeness, all one needs to do is go back and reread the entire Bereshiyt account and you will see that this exact form of the verb, with the nikkud (the little dots and dashes indicating vowel sounds) is found in one other place, back in verse 21...

And Elohim is creating the great monsters....etc.

No one suggests that this is also something that is still being done, correct? In fact, in looking at the verbs forming the first part of those verses in Genesis, all the through the entire Scripture, they are also incomplete. Again, this is simply a Semitic way of drawing the reader into what is being read, connecting them to it as if they were there witnessing it all.

Also, the completed (what you call perfective) state found in the same verse with regard to man speaks of the certainty of it having been done.

Because the English culture does not write that way, it can, and has lead, to things being taken from the text that were never intended.

Ray is correct about the grammar, but not so about the conclusion he comes to regarding it.

When I read Paul's words, I see man (the male) as the image and glory of God, and I see women as the image of God as well, but the glory of man. I see her as just as fully the image of God as a man is, just expressing different aspects and facets of his image.

Ronen

I just don't accept this. I do not see a completion in Gen. 1:26-27. What is the definition of image and likeness or even a shadow as a finished thing? I do not believe HE is done with what he was speaking in Genesis.
I am finding out I am not near as quick and smart as some of you, especially Ronen. I find his work a good tool for learning, but I do not see it as  an absolute.
In my opinion if what we read in Gen. 1:26-27 as complete in image and likeness, the man, no not man, but his bone of bone and flesh of flesh  called woman would not have been so spiritually weak to SEE and then eat.
Then again I may be misunderstanding the entire concept of the post. This is just my reading. He is Risin! :dsunny:

Shalom Micah,

I do not see what I share as an absolute either my dear brother, and I hope no one ever tries to take it that way.  :friendstu: I also believe that he is not done with his work, while at the same time I do believe his work was finished all the way back then. I am fully aware that my saying this will open me up to criticism, but this is the result of my cultural way of thinking, where two things can be in tension with each other and yet co-exist. Could it be (I am just thinking out loud here) that man was originally made in his image and likeness, but that his experience and appreciation of it is still being worked out with us individually, starting with the acquisition of the knowledge of good and evil? Like a butterfly, for example. Everything needed to exist as a butterfly is in the caterpillar, so in that sense it is complete. However, the experience of it as a butterfly is not complete until it goes into a cocoon and emerges. Same with a seed. The leaves, trunk, roots, fruit, bark, etc, of a tree are in a seed. The seed is complete, none of those parts need to be added later to make a tree. All that needs to happen is for the seed to fall to the ground and die, and then it will finds its experience over time as a tree.

If the things I write at least cause you to think, or to understand where I am coming from, even if you do not agree with me, that is perfectly fine, because I used to make an idol out of 'being right', and realize the foolishness of it.  :cloud9:

Ronen

[micah7:9]

" I also believe that he is not done with his work, while at the same time I do believe his work was finished all the way back then."

"...he is not done with his work......".....his work was finished all the way back then." 
I maybe out of place but what you said seems like an oxymoron.

For me, with my small understanding, if someone is not done, then that someone is not finished, so for me to understand that his work was finished way back then......still his work work was not done leaves me wondering.

I, me, personally, that's my opinion, believe that the creating spoken in Genesis was and is not finished, it began, and as His Name
I Am ...be or become, come to pass ....to be, become, come to pass, exist, happen
is still a work in process. :dsunny:  and i am very happy knowing that.

[gregoryfl]

" I also believe that he is not done with his work, while at the same time I do believe his work was finished all the way back then."

"...he is not done with his work......".....his work was finished all the way back then." 
I maybe out of place but what you said seems like an oxymoron.

For me, with my small understanding, if someone is not done, then that someone is not finished, so for me to understand that his work was finished way back then......still his work work was not done leaves me wondering.

I, me, personally, that's my opinion, believe that the creating spoken in Genesis was and is not finished, it began, and as His Name
I Am ...be or become, come to pass ....to be, become, come to pass, exist, happen
is still a work in process. :dsunny:  and i am very happy knowing that.

You are not at all out of place. It is definitely an oxymoron. And we both are happy with and rest in what we know, for we, like Paul, 'run to win that which Jesus Christ has already won for [us].' (Php 3:12) Which I see as another oxymoron. I would like to read more of how you understand image and likeness, if you are so inclined, so that I may understand your heart more completely in this.