Born in God's image vs. sinful nature

[VeritasLuxMea]

If man is both born in God’s image, but also has a sinful nature and is fallen, how do you square the two of these beliefs philosophically?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but the phrase God’s image is no longer taken to mean the same kind of physical body that God has, but rather, it means something spiritual related to our goodness.

 

[seagal]

Correct me if I’m wrong, but the phrase God’s image is no longer taken to mean the same kind of physical body that God has, but rather, it means something spiritual related to our goodness.

The phrase “made in God’s image” never meant any kind of physical similarity since God is pure spirt and possesses no physicality.

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

The phrase “made in God’s image” never meant any kind of physical similarity since God is pure spirt and possesses no physicality.

Well, ok, in the Old Testament there are many times where God is a physical being. The first that pops to mind is when God is walking around the garden of eden, but there are other examples.

But as to the actual question, how do we square these two ideas with each other?

 

[Barbkw]

The Catechism is available online at:

scborromeo.org/ccc/index/m.htm

The numbers are hotkeyed and will take you directly back to the paragraphs in the Catechism.

Man

as the author, center, and goal of economic and social life, 2459
dependent on the Creator, 396
in the earthly paradise, 374-79
happy only in God, 1057
a man and a woman, 369, 371-72, 383, 400, 1605-06
as a moral subject, 1749
mystery of man becomes clear in the mystery of the Word, 359
“new man,” 1473, 2475
not abandoned by God after the fall, 410
sin as an offense against human nature, 1849
ultimate end of, 260, 356, 1024

consequences from the sin of man, 399-400
all are implicated in Adam’s sin, 402-03
commonality of destiny of the material world and of man, 1046
condition of weakness and insignificance, 208, 396, 150, 2448
death entered the world, 1008
destroyed harmony of creation, 400
human nature wounded, 405
invasion of sin into the world, 401
man deprived of God’s likeness, 705
man injured by the work of Satan, 395
man subject to error and inclined to evil, 1714
original sin and man’s abuse of freedom, 396-401
presence of sin already at our birth, 403
rupture of the original communion, 1607
struggle between the spirit and the flesh, 2516

dignity
communion with God as the reason for man’s, 27, 357, 1700
of creatures cooperating with God, 306-08
equal dignity of a man and a woman, 2393
manifested in moral life, 1706
requires man to act out of conscience and free choice, 2339
right to exercise freedom as a requirement inseparable from, 1738
as the source of human rights, 1930
wounded by sin, 1487

equality and diversity of men
all men have the same nature and the same origin and end, 1934
diversity of talent, 1936-37
human dignity as the foundation of equality, 1935, 1945
unjust inequalities, 1938

in the image and likeness of God
before and after Christ’s Redemption, 1701
created in God’s image, 225, 356-61, 1702, 2713
restoration of likeness with God, 705, 2809

man and humanity
mutual need of all men, 361, 1947-48
origin and common end of humanity, 842
unity of the human race, 360

man and vocation,
call to
enter the Kingdom, 543
eternal life, 1998
form the new people of God, 804, 831
God as the common call of all men, 1878
life in the Holy Spirit, 1699
love, 1604
marriage, 1603
union with Christ, 521, 542
divine call as the ultimate call, 1260
See also Vocation

man in creation
creatures’ interdependence willed by God, 340
God creates everything for man, 358
hierarchy of creatures, 342
laws of creation must be respected by man, 346
man as the only creature worthy to receive a law from God, 1951
man’s importance in creation, 343, 355
man’s respect for creatures, 339
man’s responsibility for the world, 373
original harmony, 374-79, 384

man as a creature
created by God’s love, 1, 315, 1604
created to know and love God and to serve Him, 358
endowed with intelligence and free will, 311, 396
endowed with reason, 1704
made of body and soul, 327, 355, 362-65, 383
“Male and female he created them,” 1605, 2203, 2331, 2334
was created good, 374

man’s special features and his ways of acting
always fighting with evil, 409
comes to a knowledge of God by knowing nature, 32, 46
desires happiness, 1718
gifted with
freedom as a sign of the divine image, 1705, 1730
reason and will to seek and love what is true and good, 1704
a spiritual and immortal soul, 1703
led naturally toward the truth, 2467
listens to the voice of conscience, 1706, 1713
moved to do good, 1706-07
in need of divine help and salvation, 1949, 2090
in need of social life, 1879-80
perfections resonating something of the infinite perfection of God, 370
as a religious being, 28, 44-45
tending naturally toward the virtues, 1803-04
See also Sexuality

relations between God and man
communion with God in the Church, 773
faith as adherence of the whole man to God, 176
faith as man’s free response, 160, 307
God has first place in the profession of faith, 199
inequality between God and man is without measure, 2007
Jesus the one intercessor with God on behalf of all, 2634
man rejecting God, 29, 398, 1739
prayer as relationship between God and man, 2564
submission of men to God, 143, 154, 341, 2712

rights of man
to act on one’s conscience and freely, 1782
to choose a school, 2229
to freedom of religion, 2106
to a good reputation, 2479, 2507

seeks God
always seeking God and His will, 2566, 2826
difficulty of knowing God by the light of reason alone, 37
distinctive inquiry of God, 285
God calls man first, 2567
God does not cease to call man, 30
God speaks in human words, 101, 109
men in the course of history seeking God in many ways, 28, 31, 34, 285
by reason, 36, 50
in revelation, 35, 50, 52
ways of seeking God, 31, 34

 

[tonyrey]

Well, ok, in the Old Testament there are many times where God is a physical being. The first that pops to mind is when God is walking around the garden of eden, but there are other examples.

But as to the actual question, how do we square these two ideas with each other?

Not every statement in Genesis should be taken literally. The Creator of the entire universe does not need legs!

 

[Barbkw]

These areas may be of the most help to you:

scborromeo.org/ccc/index/m.htm

Man

in the image and likeness of God
before and after Christ’s Redemption, 1701
created in God’s image, 225, 356-61, 1702, 2713
restoration of likeness with God, 705, 2809

 

[stephe1987]

If man is both born in God’s image, but also has a sinful nature and is fallen, how do you square the two of these beliefs philosophically?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but the phrase God’s image is no longer taken to mean the same kind of physical body that God has, but rather, it means something spiritual related to our goodness.

Being in God’s image simply means that we have a will and an intellect. It has nothing to do with a visual image or physical appearance, especially since God is spirit.

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

Being in God’s image simply means that we have a will and an intellect. It has nothing to do with a visual image or physical appearance, especially since God is spirit.

Hey, preaching to the choir. Ok, I believe someone called me heretical for not believing that the snake talked so I thought we were all going literal all the sudden. Guess I have plenty of areas for study now.

Barbkw, thanks for finding those sections for me… will check it out!

 

[grannymh]

If man is both born in God’s image, but also has a sinful nature and is fallen, how do you square the two of these beliefs philosophically?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but the phrase God’s image is no longer taken to mean the same kind of physical body that God has, but rather, it means something spiritual related to our goodness.

Made in God’s Image (according to Catholicism) means that we are called to share in God’s life through knowledge and love.

According to Catholicism, our human nature is good, but due to the original sin, our nature is wounded or flawed. Cathlolics should have no trouble with these two beliefs.

Blessings,
granny

Human life is sacred.

 

[perro_sarnoso]

If man is both born in God’s image, but also has a sinful nature and is fallen, how do you square the two of these beliefs philosophically?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but the phrase God’s image is no longer taken to mean the same kind of physical body that God has, but rather, it means something spiritual related to our goodness.

Properly stated man is Made in God’s image and so being born into original sin no longer has a conflict with God’s intention for each an every one of us.

Original sin is a consequence of of Adam’s and Eve’s sin. And they were created in God’s likeness and image.

Because God knows all things as an eternal now, the prototype for: two arms, two legs, head eyes, intellect, will etc etc already existed in the person of Jesus Christ - second person of the Blessed Trinity.

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

Made in God’s Image (according to Catholicism) means that we are called to share in God’s life through knowledge and love.

According to Catholicism, our human nature is good, but due to the original sin, our nature is wounded or flawed. Cathlolics should have no trouble with these two beliefs.

Blessings,
granny

Human life is sacred.

I don’t understand. So God made man to be good, but failed, and now man is bad?

I know the two things we’re talking about here, I’m just having trouble getting clarity on how they could possibly mix.
perro sarnoso:

Properly stated man is Made in God’s image and so being born into original sin no longer has a conflict with God’s intention for each an every one of us.

Original sin is a consequence of of Adam’s and Eve’s sin. And they were created in God’s likeness and image.

Because God knows all things as an eternal now, the prototype for: two arms, two legs, head eyes, intellect, will etc etc already existed in the person of Jesus Christ - second person of the Blessed Trinity.

I have no doubt that you’re smarter than I am. Speak to me like I’m a child.

Man has a sinful nature, which doesn’t matter anymore because before he had a sinful nature, he didn’t have a sinful nature?

Is it possible that we just look like God looks after all? I mean, it just makes so much more sense. It sounds like we are talking about a square circle.

 

[grannymh]

I don’t understand. So God made man to be good, but failed, and now man is bad?

I know the two things we’re talking about here, I’m just having trouble getting clarity on how they could possibly mix.

These questions often appear in various forms. It seems to me that it is grammar which is causing the trouble.

Let’s look at the grammar in your question. Instead of saying “God made man to be good” try saying “God made the first man good!”

God made the first man Adam good! “How is that possible?” one can ask. It is possible because God created Adam in His image which means that he has the capability to actually share in God’s own life. Adam has the capability to share in God’s life through knowledge and love.

Yet, Adam was not the same as God. Adam, the created, could live in God’s friendship only in free submission to his Creator.

If you recognize the difference between “made to be good” and the first man **was **made good, please let me know. Also what questions pop into your mind?

 

[belorg]

Made in God’s Image (according to Catholicism) means that we are called to share in God’s life through knowledge and love.

According to Catholicism, our human nature is good, but due to the original sin, our nature is wounded or flawed. Cathlolics should have no trouble with these two beliefs.

Our nature is good but is wounded and flawed?

Which of the two is it?

It seems to me if it’s good it cannot be wounded and flawed.
And if it was originaly good, there could have been no ‘original sin’. In order for original sin to be pôssible, man’s nature could not have been good in the fiirst place.

 

[puzzleannie]

If man is both born in God’s image, but also has a sinful nature and is fallen, how do you square the two of these beliefs philosophically?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but the phrase God’s image is no longer taken to mean the same kind of physical body that God has, but rather, it means something spiritual related to our goodness.

Our nature as God created us is not sinful, rather as he says in Genesis, we are created in his image. Our sinful fallen nature came about after creation, with the choice of our first parents to turn away from good, to embrace evil, to put themselves on par with God. So your statement is a paradox because you mis-state the situation. We are created in God’s image, our nature therefore as created conforms to good. Having been perverted by sin we are therefore born with an inclination away from good. Our inherent nature remains conformed to God but sin draws us away from him. It is Jesus’ saving action that makes possible our return to God and removes what is sinful in the nature into which we are born.

 

[grannymh]

Our nature is good but is wounded and flawed?

Which of the two is it?

Wounded and/or flawed are Catholic terms. They counter one of the Protestant versions which claims that human nature was destroyed—thus, it became bad.

It seems to me if it’s good it cannot be wounded and flawed.

If one breaks a leg, do the arms work?

And if it was originaly good, there could have been no ‘original sin’. In order for original sin to be pôssible, man’s nature could not have been good in the fiirst place.

Human nature, itself, is good because we have the capability to love God. Protestants and Catholics sometimes forget the meaning, use, and necessity of free will which was part of Adam’s nature. Both Adam’s original sin and our personal sins are possible because Adam and we can understand what is necessary to remain in God’s
friendship.

 

[inocente]

If man is both born in God’s image, but also has a sinful nature and is fallen, how do you square the two of these beliefs philosophically?

I think if you go back to the original Hebrew, the meaning behind being in God’s image is more about man representing some features of God but by no means all of them. So for instance we might represent His presence in the world, but not necessarily His goodness.

 

[grannymh]

I think if you go back to the original Hebrew, the meaning behind being in God’s image is more about man representing some features of God but by no means all of them. So for instance we might represent His presence in the world, but not necessarily His goodness.

Someone once said that the reason he joined the Catholic Church was that it had the guts to be authoritative…

That is why I prefer the Catholic version. Made in God’s Image (according to Catholicism) means that we are called to share in God’s life through knowledge and love. This also makes sense. In order to communicate with God, we would have to have the spiritual means. Being in God’s image, we have the necessary spiritual means.