"...in our image, after our likeness"

In my previous article, I discussed the use of the divine plural in Gen 1:26: “Let us make human beings in our image, after our likeness…” Now I would like to examine what is meant by “in our image, after our likeness”.

As I discussed in the previous article, God is speaking to himself in this verse, so the image/likeness being discussed is God’s image/likeness. But the God of the OT is not supposed to have an image. In fact, there is a commandment expressly forbidding the creation of any images of God. How do we explain this seeming contradiction?

One theory that has been proposed is that humans resemble God in a way other than physical form: a spiritual quality (the soul), self-consciousness, intellect, or reason. This was a popular theory in early Christianity, operating under the Greek idea of a duality between body and spirit. Humans could not resemble God by virtue of our bodies – because God is pure spirit – but we are the image of God in terms of our spiritual nature. The problem with this theory is that the Hebrew understanding of human nature was unitary; body and spirit are one.

A clue to what the author intended can be found in the following verse, 1:27:

And God created the human in his image,
In the image of God he created it;
Male and female he created them.

Even in translation, there is a clear parallelism between “image of God” in line 2 and “male and female” in line 3. Are we supposed to interpret “male and female” as a metaphor for the image of God? Perhaps the relationship between men and women is analogous to the relationship between God and humanity. But if that is the case, then the image of God must be located in human interactions or in humanity as a whole and not in an individual man or woman.

Does a study of the words involved provide a clue? The word “image” (tselem) in the OT usually refers to a concrete, physical object, such as a statue or idol. “Likeness” (demut) has a more abstract meaning of “resemblance”. These words are used together (but in opposite order) in Gen 5:3: “[Adam] became the father of a son in his likeness, according to his image, and named him Seth.” The meaning here seems plain: as the son has a resemblance to the father, but is not identical to the father, humans have a resemblance to God but are not identical to God. There certainly does seem to be an implication that a physical resemblance is intended.

Taking this back to 1:26, we have already rejected the notion of a crude physical resemblance between God and human beings. We have also rejected the theory that humans resemble God in some spiritual fashion that does not involve our physical nature. Based on Gen 5:3, some have proposed that, just as Adam and Seth have a relationship, not just a physical resemblance, so do God and human beings. Following this interpretation, God creates a being with whom he can communicate, with whom he can have a relationship. But if this relationship is the “image of God” in which humans are created, that implies a relationship within the Godhead and we’re back to something like the Trinitarian interpretation. While that could be a valid interpretation for us today, it is certainly not what the ancient author intended.

Another proposal is simply translating the Hebrew differently. Instead of reading “let us make human beings in our image,” it should read “let us make human beings as our image.” In the ANE a king would set up a statue of himself and it was believed that statue had a spiritual link with the ruler it represents. Indeed, kings were sometimes referred to as “images” of the gods. Just as the gods ruled over heaven and earth, the king ruled over his kingdom. The king’s authority to rule came from the gods.


United Colors of Benetton ad (1998)

If this reading of the words is correct, it clears up a lot of the problems that we have struggled with in trying to understand the meaning behind being created "in the image of God”. The author of Genesis 1 is stating that God, the divine ruler, has created human beings – male and female – as his image, as his representatives on earth. In the next verse (1:28), God’s special blessing establishes human beings in a position of authority over the other creatures on the earth (“have dominion over” or “rule over”), much like a king’s relationship to his subjects. When Adam’s son Seth is born, his “image” is passed down to him just as the king’s royal authority is passed down to his son.


Benetton ad celebrating 50th anniversary of the UN Declaration of Human Rights

Specifying humans were created “male and female” has nothing to do with perpetuation of the species.  The other animals are given the charge to procreate, but are not designated as “male and female”. Humans are also given the charge to procreate, so the use of “male and female” is not related to their fertility but to the uniqueness of humankind and to how they image God. Men are images of God, sure, but so are women. Together, male and female are given dominion over nature, but not over each other. Male and female are created simultaneously, so there is no primacy of position, as there would be with a first-born. It is a very radical statement of equality between men and women.

In the Babylonian creation myths, humanity was created by the gods as slaves, to do the menial work the gods did not want to do. Just as with other aspects of Babylonian creation myths, the author of Genesis 1 is intentionally subverting those myths by asserting that humans were not created to be slaves, but were created by God to rule over the earth and the other creatures living on it. For the biblical author, it is not just the king who is created as God’s image, but all of humankind is created as God’s image.

In closing, I will leave you with a couple of verses (vv. 5-6) from Psalm 8. Psalm 8 is something of a biblical commentary on Genesis 1:1-2:3 and totally appropriate to wrap up our discussion:

Yet you have made them [human beings] a little lower than God,
And crowned them with glory and honor.
You have given them dominion over the works of your hands;
You have put all things under their feet. (NRSV)

"Let us make human beings..."

In the account of the creation of heaven and earth in Gen 1:1-2:3, the portion concerning the creation of humanity in Genesis 1:26-30 holds a special place. Occurring, as it does, as the final creative act, it appears to be the culmination of all the others. The heavens and earth were first created as a place for humans to dwell. The land and seas were then commanded to bring forth vegetation and animals, but humans were not products of earth or water; they were created in the “image of God.” Only humans are specifically created as male and female and only humans are given dominion over the earth and the rest of the animal kingdom.

Perhaps no other passage in the first chapter of Genesis has generated more analysis and debate than v. 26, not only amongst bible scholars, but also with theologians as well. Here is the verse:

Then God said: Let us make human beings in our image, after our likeness. Let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, the tame animals, all the wild animals, and all the creatures that crawl on the earth. (NABRE)

The two big questions this passage raises are: 1) Why is God speaking in the first-person plural? And 2) What is meant by the “image and likeness” of God? I had intended to address these questions in just one blog article, but that response got so long that I needed to break it up into two separate articles. Therefore, in the rest of this article, I will deal with the first question on the use of the divine plural. In my next article, I will complete the discussion on the “image of God”.

“Let us make human beings in our image…” Who is God talking to here? The divine plural is used only here, in Gen 3:22 and 11:7, and in Isaiah 6:8. The passage from Isaiah is particularly instructive. The prophet describes a vision of the Lord, seated on his throne, with seraphim stationed above him. There are other examples in the OT of God presiding over an assembly of heavenly beings (1 Kings 22:19-22; Psalms 82; Job 1:6; 2:1). When Isaiah hears the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? Who will go for us?” it is understood that God is addressing the heavenly court.


God surrounded by the host of heaven in Michelangelo's "Creation of Adam" on the Sistine Chapel.

This is perhaps the most common explanation for the use of the divine plural here and in the other passages in Genesis, but there are some problems with this explanation. Unlike Isaiah, a heavenly court has not been described in Genesis. If the reader were to assume such a heavenly assembly, those being addressed are not merely being consulted, but are also included in the act of creation (“let us make…in our image”). Finally, the following verse (1:27) states that this image is, in fact, the “image of God”. So if this explanation of God addressing a heavenly court were correct, the author would be saying that the assembly of divine beings are part of God. Since the author of Genesis 1 goes to great pains to assert that God is unique and acting alone in the creation, this seems unlikely.

Since the early days of the Christian Church, this passage has been interpreted as referring to the Trinity. God the Father is addressing either the Son or the Spirit, or both. Gen 1:2 could be translated as saying either “a mighty wind” or “the spirit of God” was hovering over the abyss. Some commentators, latching on to the “spirit of God” translation, claim this as evidence of at least a duality within the Godhead: the creator and the spirit. But there are problems here as well. The idea of the Trinity is unknown in the OT and there is nothing to suggest the divine plurality in the verse is limited to three persons. In v. 29, the author is back to using first-person singular (“I give you every seed-bearing plant…”), so the divine plural is not used for direct dialogue. (This would also eliminate the possibility that the divine plural is similar to the royal “we” used by a king or queen. Also, there are no examples of the royal plural in the OT.)

Since we only see the divine plural used (in Gen 1:26, 3:22, and 11:7) where God is addressing himself and not in other instances (such as Gen 1:29) when God is addressing human beings, perhaps the best explanation for the use of the divine plural is one of self-deliberation or self-decision, much as we might say to ourselves, “Let’s see” or “Let’s do this.” A parallel for similar usage would be Song of Songs 1:9-11 where the lover speaks in the first-person, using the same words of Gen 1:26: “Let us make ornaments of gold studded with silver.”

If this interpretation is correct, then there’s no great theological point being made with the choice of words. It is simply a rhetorical device on the part of the author. One may, of course, choose to believe that the divinely-inspired author is – maybe subconsciously – revealing the germ of a Trinitarian understanding of God that can only be fully understood in retrospect, in light of later church doctrine. Such an interpretation is not impossible, but it hardly seems to be the intention of the human author.

With that out of the way, we’ll look at what the “image and likeness” of God means in my next article.