It's been an interesting week where we talked about humanity in the theology class (the notes below is mostly from Erickson, plus some things discussed by lecturer Miyon Chung)! What is a human? A machine? An animal? A sexual being? An economic being? A pawn of the universe? A free being? A social being?
What is the image of God in the human?
What is the constitutional nature of the human? Trichotomy, which is the concept of the "body, soul, spirit", used commonly in the evangelism, is actually not biblical!
這週的神學課很有趣，主題是人性! 人是什麼? 機器? 一隻動物? 宇宙中的一顆棋子?
人是按神的形象所造，但什麼是所謂的「神的形象」呢?
我們時常聽到的「靈、魂、體」三元論，其實沒有什麼聖經根據的! 反倒是一元論(全人/一個整體)比較有根據!
(以下的內容是大多來自於神學課本Erickson，和神學課老師Miyon Chung的講課。很有趣但沒時間翻成中文)!
這週的神學課很有趣，主題是人性! 人是什麼? 機器? 一隻動物? 宇宙中的一顆棋子?
人是按神的形象所造，但什麼是所謂的「神的形象」呢?
我們時常聽到的「靈、魂、體」三元論，其實沒有什麼聖經根據的! 反倒是一元論(全人/一個整體)比較有根據!
(以下的內容是大多來自於神學課本Erickson，和神學課老師Miyon Chung的講課。很有趣但沒時間翻成中文)!
(Just a little song questioning what it means to be a human: https://youtu.be/Fn7NLWHJw4s)
Images of the human
l
A machine: what the human
is able to do, strength and energy, skills or capabilities. The employer
“rents” the employee. Health is of interest in terms of working efficiency. In
church, people may be valued according to what they can do.
l
An animal: The only
difference is one degree: a somewhat different but not necessarily superior
physical structure, a larger cranial capacity, a more highly trained stimulus
response mechanism. Human motivation is understood primarily in terms of
biological drives. Knowledge of humans is gained not through introspection, but
by experimentation on animals.
l
A sexual being: Freud developed
a whole theory of personality around human sexuality.
l
An economic being:
Focuses on the material dimension of life and its needs. Adequate food,
clothing and housing are the most significant needs of the human. Ideology:
communism, dialectical materialism. This ideology sees that first came slavery,
then feudalism, then capitalism. Eventually the time will come when there will
be no private ownership of the means of production and the economic gap between
the classes will disappear, and in this classless society, evil will wither
away.
l
A pawn of the universe:
Humans are at the mercy of forces in the world that control their destiny but
have no real concern for them. These can be seen as blind forces of chance, or
personal forces. This is basically a pessimistic view that pictures people as
being crushed by a world that is either hostile or at best indifferent to their
welfare and needs. The result is a sense of helplessness, of futility.
l
A free being: Sees the human
will as the essence of personality. This is often evident in conservative
political and social views. Here the freedom from restraint is most important
as it permits humans to realise their essential nature. The role of government
is simply to ensure a stable environment in which such freedom can be
exercised. To be fully human, one must accept the responsibility of self-determination.
All attempts to disavow responsibility for oneself are improper: common excuses
are genetic conditioning (I can’t control my behaviour, I inherited it from my
father), psychological conditioning (I was raised that way), or social
conditioning (As I grew up, I didn’t have a chance, there was no opportunity
for me). Similarly, any effort to deprive others of their free choice is wrong.
l
A social being: An individual
human is a member of society. Membership in and interaction with a group of
persons is what really distinguishes humanity. The person is the set of
relationships in which he or she is involved. The church can help a person
realise his or her destiny by providing and encouraging positive and
constructive social relationships.
l
The Christian view:
l
None of the above is fully satisfactory as a view
by which to live. Some views fail because even when what they consider the fundamental
human needs are met (eg. economic needs), there is still a sense of
emptiness and dissatisfaction. The problem with the relational view
is that someone who’s a psychopath is incapable to relating with anyone
else. Completely egocentric, cannot sense other people’s feelings. No signs of
empathy: if any empathy it’s just mimicking gestures. If you only take the
relational view, then you’d be saying this person does not take on God’s image.
l
The Christian view of humanity is that a human
being is a creature of God, made in the image of God. Humanity is
to be understood as having originated not through a chance process of evolution,
but through a conscious, purposeful act by an intelligent, infinite God.
l
The image of God is intrinsic and indispensable to
humanity. What sets humans apart from the rest of the creation is that we are
capable of having a conscious personal relationship with the Creator.
l
Human also have an eternal dimension.
l
We cannot discover our real meaning by regarding
ourselves and our own happiness as the highest of all values. Our value has
been conferred on us by a higher force (Mark 8:35).
l
Jesus: although 99 of his sheep are safe, he
sought the one that was missing, this is how God regards each human. (Luke
15:3-7).
The problem of the Neolithic elements in Genesis 4
l
The pre-Adamite theory says that Adam was not the
first human in the anthropological sense.
l
Cain and Abel were not immediate descendants of
Adam. Eg. Cain the son of Adam, Cain the murderer, and Cain the city builder.
l
The Hebrew word ‘adam is often used symbolically of
the entire human race.
l
Perhaps Cain and Abel were not really domesticators
of plants and animals.
l
Domestication of plants and animals may be much
more remote in time than the Neolithic period.
The theological meaning of human creation
l
The humans came into being because God willed.
This should cause us to ask the reason for our existence.
l
Humans are part of the creation: The human, whose
origins go back to one of the days of creation, is linked far more closely with
all the other created beings than with the God who did the creating. It is the
human that introduced the disharmony to creation. That we are part of creation
also means that we have much in common with the other creatures.
l
The human has a unique place, being made in the
image and likeness of God, to have dominion over the rest of creation.
This means, humans are not fulfilled when all of their animal needs have been
satisfied.
l
There is kinship among humans. Each of us is
a distant cousin to everyone on this earth. All human beings are our
relatives.
l
Humanity is not the highest object in the universe.
We must never elevate our respect for humans to the point of virtually worshipping
them.
l
There are definite limitations upon
humanity.
l
Limitation is not inherently bad. Increases in
sophistication seem to give humans opportunity for more ingenious means of
sinning, eg. computer technology. Reduction of our limitations does not lead
inevitably to better human beings. Human limitations are not evil in
themselves.
l
Proper adjustment in life can be
achieved only on the basis of acceptance of one’s own finiteness.
l
Humanity is, nonetheless, something wonderful. A
God who could make such a wondrous creature as a human being is a great God
indeed.
Image and likeness:
l
That the Bible says we are created in the image and
likeness of God has led some (notably Roman Catholics) to conclude that there
is a difference between being in the image and being in the likeness of God. Although
some follow Irenaeus in drawing a distinction between “image” and
“likeness.”
l
The majority view is that these terms are
used synonymously as an expression of the device of synonymous parallelism
in Hebrew poetry: the structure of the biblical language indicates that image and
likeness refer to the same thing.
l
We are the icons of God, creatures made with a
unique capacity to mirror and reflect the character of God. Greek scholars thought
these were two different things. Eikon
or more simply ikon: Icons are a
hallmark of Orthodox churches.
l
The idea of “imaging,” is to say God impressing his
image on his creature. To be made in God’s image is to be able to hold His
Spiritual Life within us, even though He made us out of the dust. Likeness, omoiosis: To have the likeness of God is
to be God-like. The image designated the potential or capabilities inherent in
all human beings, i.e., qualities such as reason; the likeness meant true
likeness.
l
After the flood narrative, God reiterates the image
part. The word likeness does not reappear. The Eastern church thinks the image
is retained by the likeness is lost. The likeness can only be recovered through
the work of the Holy Spirit.
The image of God: is it broken, or is it
perverted/damaged?
l
The second seems more consistent with the Biblical
data. Several Scripture verses suggest that the image of God (at least the
essentialist or foundational aspect of the image of God) was not destroyed
through the Fall.
l
In Gen. 9:6, human life is portrayed
as sacred, underscored by capital punishment for murderers. The
basis for this respect for human life is that “God made man in his own image”
(Gen. 9:6). Clearly, the originally created image of God remains intact to some
degree even after the Fall.
l
Being a sinner does not necessitate that humans
have lost the image of God; in fact, being able to sin presupposes the image
of God. Animals and other created things are not morally accountable as
are humans. So being a sinner and sinning are possible precisely only if we remain
to some degree in the image of God.
l
The Fall thus damaged but did not destroy the image
of God–causing a fall from created moral righteousness, turning away from our
spiritual nature, blurring human rationality by perverted perspectives,
breaking our relationship with God, turning our will toward sin, and utilizing
creativity for evil purposes.
l
But the image remains intact with a moral
conscience, a spiritual capacity, limited rationality, the possibility of
restored relation to God, a will that can be turned back toward God, and the
opportunity to utilize creativity to enhance God’s kingdom.
The nature of the image
l Genesis 1:26-27, what does it mean
to be made in God’s image?
l V26begins with the process of God’s
creation of human beings. We are creatures.
l
In a very real sense, the only true human
beings were Adam and Eve before the fall, and Jesus. All the
others are twisted, distorted, corrupted samples of humanity. What is the
image?
l
The substantive view:
n
Image of God to be an aspect of our physical or
bodily make up, eg. reason, thinking.
n
Men
and women possess the attributes of personality, as God himself does. To
have personality means one must possess knowledge, feelings, and a will.
This God has, and so do we.
n
Animals
possess a certain kind of personality, but does not reason as men do. It
only reacts to certain stimuli, conforms to certain behaviour patterns. It does
not love, it only reproduces. It does not worship.
n
Image
of God as morality: Freedom and responsibility. If humans are free
beings, then they are responsible for their actions.
n
Spirituality:
man is made for communion with God.
n
Some say the image consists of a physical resemblance, ie. man looks like
God. However, God is invisible. The case for identifying the image of God with
man’s bodily form is therefore unproven.
n
Note
that the Old Testament knows nothing at all of a separation of a person’s
spiritual and corporeal components; it sees the person as a whole. Imago Dei
describes the human being as a whole without limiting itself to anything
taken in isolation. (F.K. Schumann)
n
Luther held that all aspects of the image of God in
humans have been corrupted; what is left is a relic or remnant of the image.
Calvin adopted a similar view.
l
The relational view: Image of God as the
experiencing of a relationship.
n
The person as God’s counterpart: one whom God can
address as “you” and an “I” who is responsible before God. An
ability to enter into a relationship. (Barth).
n
The image of God and human nature are best
understood through a study of the person of Jesus, not of human
nature per se.
n
We obtain our understanding of the image from the divine
revelation.
n
The image is a matter of one’s relationship with
God: the relationship is dynamic rather than static.
n
Paralleled by the relationship between humans.
V27: man and women were created. Humanity exists in community, as one beside
the other. People have been created to live with each other. Every deliberate
detachment of male from female, can endanger the very existence of humanity as
determined by creation.
l
The functional view: Genesis 1:26, to rule
over. As God is the Lord over all of creation, human reflect the image of God
by exercising dominion over the rest of the creation. Psalm 8:5-6: “you
made them a little lower than the angels and crowned them with glory and
honour.”
l
The image of God is universal within the
human race. Humanity was created in God’s image.
l
The image of God has not been lost as a result
of sin. This is where the talk of human rights emerged.
l
There is no indication that the image is present
in one person to a greater degree than in another. There is no superior
race. However, there are different cultures.
l
The image is not correlated with any variable.
l
The image is primarily substantive or
structural: it refers to something a human is rather than something a human
has or does.
l
The image refers to the elements in the
human makeup that enable the fulfilment of human destiny. Humans, like
God, are capable of interacting with other persons, of thinking and
reflecting, and of willing freely. The human was intended to know, love, and
obey God, and live in harmony with other humans. Humans are most fully human
when they are active in these relationships and performing this function,
fulfilling their telos, God’s purpose for them. When your love is
healthy, you can feel the other person’s feelings/thoughts but at the same time
recognise you two are different persons. Relational capacity has to do with
spiritual capacity. To transcend our bodily existence and relate to others and
to God.
l
Jesus as the example:
n
Jesus had perfect fellowship with the Father.
(John 17)
n
Jesus obeyed the Father’s will perfectly.
(Luke 22:42)
n
Jesus always displayed a strong love for humans.
(Matthew 9:36)
n
God intends that a similar sense of fellowship,
obedience, and love characterise human’s relationship to God.
The constitutional nature of the human
l
These are tentative views, but it affects how we do
ethics and view resurrection.
l
More cultures have beliefs about afterlife: People
worship ancestors and believe in reincarnations. Therefore, resurrection is
something we have to teach carefully.
l
The only one who defeated death is Jesus Christ.
l
Trichotomy: The first
element is the physical body. The second element is the soul, which is the
psychological element, of reason, emotion, social interrelatedness, and the
like. The third element is the spirit, which is the religious element that enables
human to perceive spiritual matters and respond to spiritual stimuli. Popular
in Protestant circles, it is most commonly used in evangelism as it seems to
work well. However, it is biblically difficult to maintain the distinction
between soul and spirit. There is no biblical evidence to support the saying: “Your
spirit is dead until it’s regenerated by the Holy Spirit”. The major foundation
of trichotomism is certain Scripture passages that either enumerate three
components of human nature or distinguish between the soul and the spirit. 1
Thessalonians 5:23: … spirit, soul and body… Hebrews 4:23: … double-edged
sword… dividing soul and spirit…
l
Dichotomy: More accurate
than trichotomy biblically speaking. The view that the human is composed of two
elements, a material aspect (the body) and an immaterial component (the soul or
spirit). The body is the part that dies. The soul survives death. The
dichotomist objects to trichotomism on the grounds that if one follows the
principle that each of the separate references in verses like 1 Thessalonians
5:23 represents a distinct entity, then Luke 10:27 has four entities! There are
numerous passages that suggest a body-soul dualism. At his death Jesus gave up
his spirit with the cry, “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.”
l
Monist: Humans are not
thought of as in any sense composed of parts or separate entities, but rather
as a radical unity. To be human is that we need both body and spirit, as a
single composition. To be human is to be or have a body. We cannot exist in a
state without the body, and there is no possibility of a future life apart from
bodily resurrection. The term “flesh” refers to the whole person. To refer to a
“person” exclusive of his or her body is odd language (eg. My uncle died at age
eighty, or my uncle’s heart, lungs, and brain ceased functioning at the age of
eighty, but he as a person lives on). The Hebrew has a unitary view of human
nature. Paul adopted the Hebrew conception or framework. Therefore, neither the
Old Testament nor the New Testament teaches a dualistic view of human nature.
At the same time, biblical teaching on the nature of human does not rule out
the possibility of some type of compound character, or at last some sort of
divisibility, within the human makeup.
l
Conditional unity: An
intermediate point between dualism and absolute (materialistic) monism. We have
noted in the OT that the human is regarded as a unity. In the NT, the body-soul
terminology appears. The normal state of a human is an embodied unitary being.
Humans are not urged to flee or escape from the body, as if it were somehow
inherently evil.
n
An analogy is the chemical compound as contrasted
with a mixture of elements. In a mixture, the atoms of each element retain
their distinctive characteristics because they retain their separate
identities. In a compound, the atoms of all the elements involved enter into
new combinations to form molecules. These molecules have characteristics that
are unlike those of any of the elements of which they are composed. We might
think of a human as a unitary compound of material and an immaterial element.
The unity is dissolvable: dissolution takes place at death. At resurrection a
compound will again be formed.
n
Another analogy is that the body be thought of an
extremely complex computer. It is possible to construct two identical
computers. At the resurrection the body will be physically re-created and the
brain programmed with the same data that one had while living on earth.
n
Another analogy involves the states of being:
Humans can be thought of as capable of existing in two states, a materialised
and an immaterialised state.
l
Intermediate state: In
limbo. The body decays but we are somehow spiritually alive, in an alert state
until we are re-embodied again during resurrection. A Catholic view, but no
didactic passage supporting it. Passages that seem to indicate an intermediate
state are Luke 23:43, when Jesus told a thief on the cross “Today you will be
with me in paradise” and Luke 16:19-31, the parable of the rich man and
Lazarus.
l
Soul sleep: a doctrine asserting that when believers die, the soul becomes
completely inert until the time of the resurrection of the dead. The concept of
“soul sleep” is not biblical and is primarily taught by Jehovah’s Witnesses and
Seventh-day Adventists. Ecclesiastes 9:5 and 12:7 are verses used to defend the
doctrine of soul sleep.
l
Coma: dead or not?
hearing is the last thing people lose. Near death experience: just very short
span of time, not like the Lazarus experience, where he was dead for days. Human
beings are much more than just body, that’s for sure.
l
Ethical implications:
abortions, people with little mental capacity. However, spiritual capacity is
something very mysterious, eg. John the Baptist leaped in the womb! Holy
Spirit’s power to communicate with unborn babies and all things!
