Psalm 17:15 As for me, I shall behold thy face in righteousness; I shall be satisfied, when I awake, with beholding thy form.
You described this verse and commented saying,
David contrasts himself to the wicked previously described. David has divine assurance of the imputed righteousness of Christ. After death, the image of God will be fully restored to David but not to the wicked who lack any righteousness being spiritually dead and in bondage to sin.
By “fully restored” do you mean David has “some” of the image of God now and is only missing his true righteous, knowledge, and holiness, or do you mean he is missing the “image of God in totality? You probably meant the later. However, I DO NOT see where this Psalm said that David does not have ANY of the image of God NOW (
see Van Til’s attachment). As matter a fact you are attempting to proof text and have removed its context. Calvin states,
I shall be satisfied. Some interpreters, with more subtility than propriety, restrict this to the resurrection at the last day, as if David did not expect to experience in his heart a blessed joy until the life to come, and suspended every longing desire after it until he should attain to that life. I readily admit that this satisfaction of which he speaks will not in all respects be perfect before the last coming of Christ; but as the saints, when God causes some rays of the knowledge of his love to enter into their hearts, find great enjoyment in the light thus communicated, David justly calls this peace or joy of the Holy Spirit satisfaction.
Needless to say your analysis of the text does away with the faith of all the OT saints (i.e. no one had the image of God till after Christ). Did David have the Holy Spirit? Is the Holy Spirit in the “image of God,” one might say, “the express image of His likeness?”
However, if you restrict this Psalm to “the last day” (against Calvin, but like Wesley) then in reality you do not believe man will have the image of God till the final resurrection, or as Wesley says, “the image of God stamped upon my
glorified soul.” Thus, no one is yet saved! <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/drop.gif" alt="" />
Speratus articulates,
God made man in His image. Although knowledge of God, righteousness, and truth have been lost, unregenerate man remains a rational creature with an immortal soul. The law restrains his murderous impulses.
Your explanation fails to explain HOW the SCRIPTURE says man is STILL in the image of God AFTER the fall. Re-read the text:
Genesis 9:6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: For in the image of God made he man.
This Scripture DOES NOT merely say man remained a rational soul, it rather says he is made in the image of God! R.C. Sproul states, “Since man is created in the image of God, an attack upon the human person is considered an attack upon God himself. To slay the image-bearer is to insult the One whose image is borne" (
Chosen by God). In addition, you spoke of the law. As Pink stated, (
An Exposition of the Sermon on the Mount),
The “image” of God was broken and His “likeness” was greatly marred, though not completely effaced, for, as the apostle points out, the heathen which had not the Law in its written form “did by nature [some of] the things contained in the law,” and thereby they “showed the work of the law written in their hearts,” their conscience being proof of the same (Romans 2:14, 15). At the Fall, love for the Divine Law was supplanted by hatred, and submission and obedience gave place to enmity and opposition.
And Edwards adds (
Religious Affections),
As there are two kinds of attributes in God, according to our way of conceiving of him, his moral attributes, which are summed up in his holiness, and his natural attributes of strength, knowledge, etc., that constitute the greatness of God; so there is a twofold image of God in man, his moral or spiritual image, which is his holiness, that is the image of God’s moral excellency (which image was lost by the fall), and God’s natural image, consisting in man’s reason and understanding, his natural ability, and dominion over the creatures, which is the image of God’s natural attribute.
Moreover, while the dominion in Genesis 1:28 granted man is not the image, it is a consequence of man being the image of God. The dominion is a function of man, and not a quality of his nature. As John Owen notes (
The Glory of Christ), “This representation, I say, of God, in power and rule, was not that image of God wherein man was created, but a consequent of it.” It was specifically commanded to man, upon the completion of His creation. Dominion was assigned to man over the whole world (Gen 1:26–27; Psa 8; 1 Cor 15:24–28; Heb 2:5–8). This dominion was the rationale for the “creation mandate” to fill the earth and subdue it (Gen 1:28). Being by nature equipped to have dominion over the earth, man has sought to fulfill this function,
even as a sinner. Thus, the very act of a sinner desiring dominion reveals he still remains in the “image of God” in part!
