The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum The Image of God

The Image of God

Over the years I have read and heard a lot of teaching on how mankind was created in the image of God.
I would say that since God introduced me to Reformed Theology; I have heard even more teaching on the image of God.
Much of it had to do with how original sin did not stop mankind from having the image of God.

Today however; (maybe I missed it) was the first time I have ever heard Reformed Christians say that mankind lost the image of God in the fall.

When I read it, I decided to read afresh how some of my favourite theologians viewed the subject.
I then decided to engage the person, showing Scripture for the position I believe in Biblical.

I received the following reply.


That is the response I got back concerning the image of God.

I have not decided yet on if I am going to respond.
However, I thought I would get some others thoughts on what this person said.

Is this an issue, worth the discussion?

Thanks
Tom

1. I typically want to ask such a person what they believe are the implications are with both views (total or partial loss) of the image of God, particularly after the Fall.

2. Having been associated in the past with the Dutch Reformed Tradition, I never heard taught in seminary or from the pulpit by conservative men the "total loss" view. I'm wondering what sources this person read/heard that taught that view?

Good questions,

I am not particularly familiar with the Dutch Reformed position.
Other that the accusation to beware of many of their “hyper-Calvinist tendencies.”
Of which I tried to ignore, because at the time I had more pressing things going on.

He did however mention, that this was the Lutheran position.
I am not sure if that is correct, but my experience in dialogue with Lutherans
is not a good one.
Mainly, that they tried to convince me that the Reformed position that states:
“We are saved by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. But not by a faith that is alone.”
He says by adding “but not by a faith that is alone.” Is works based righteousness.
Another thing they did was try to tell me that CT (Covenant Theology) is unbiblical and told me that NCT is biblical.
They made sure they added that this is no trivial issue and they were very concerned about me. They recommended that I listened to some sermons by a theologian by the name Gay.

I noticed something else he said in the quote I gave. He seemed to indicate that his position is in line with the Reformed Confessions and the Canons of Dorte’.


I ended up unfriended both of them.

From the little you wrote about them, they definitely appear to be 'modern' Lutherans which tend to deny their roots as do so many in various denominations today. Although Luther did have bad feelings about James Faith is EVIDENCED by works not works is evidence of salvation. It's similar to my own adage, You aren't saved without right doctrine but you aren't saved because you say you believe right doctrine.

Pilgrim
Amen!

I will say however, if an old pastor of mine is correct. He said to be fair to Luther, his statement about James being an epistle of straw are often over-emphasized. My pastor went onto say that later writings of Luther showed that Luther understood James properly, realizing his misunderstanding.

I also learned quite a bit from RC Sproul concerning Luther, especially Luther’s book ‘The Bondage of the Will’.
Sproul said, Luther actually spoke/wrote more about “predestination”, than even Calvin did.
I talked to one Lutheran about this and he stated that it was obvious that when Luther wrote ‘The Bondage of the Will’; he was not a stable man anymore.

Kind of blows my mind, that people like that would call themselves “Lutherans”.

Tom