And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. (Rom 1:23)
In this text, Paul is, in part, basing his comments on the following Old Testament passages:
Thus they changed their glory into the similitude of an ox that eateth grass. (Psa 106:20)
Hath a nation changed their gods, which are yet no gods? But my people have changed their glory for that which doth not profit. (Jer 2:11)
Commenting on this text, the Reformed New Testament scholar, Leon Morris wrote:
The summit of their folly was realized in their acceptance. They exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images . . . Paul sees it as stupid to make a god of one’s own. It is to exchange something of real worth (the glory of God) for something of no value (an image). The word rendered immortal is more literally “not corruptible.” From the thought of not decaying it is an easy transition to immortal, so we need not cavil at the translation. But it is not worth noting that Paul is speaking not so much of eternity of being as of the total absence from God of that liability to decay which is inseparable from our physical existence and which is incompatible with the glory of which he writes. “The glory of the incorruptible God” is a striking expression, bringing out something both of the greatness and the majesty of God.
They exchanged all this for images made to look like mortal man . . . , or more literally, “for the likeness of an image of corruptible man.” The “likeness” and the “image” are much the same, but the tautologous expression emphasizes the unreality of it all. It was for nothing more than substantial than an imitation that they exchanged that wonderful reality, the glory of God. And the imitation was “corruptible” at that, forming a further contrast with “the incorruptible God”. When people could and should have worshipped a God not subject to decay of any sort, they chose to worship not even man, but the image of man who wastes away. But the sorry story does not end even there. To the images of man idolaters added those of birds (amply documented in Egyptian worship), of animals (cf. Ps. 106:20), and of reptiles (cf. the serpent of Gen. 3; or the general concept cf. Deut. 4:16-18; Jer. 2:11). Paul links these with “and”; idolaters make all these kinds of images. IT adds up to a determined substitution of their own way for that of God. (Leon Morris, The Epistle to the Romans [Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2012], 86-7)
In a footnote, Morris noted the parallel with the Wisdom of Solomon in the Apocrypha:
In the manner of Isa. 40:19-20; 44:9-2, the author of Wisdom ridicules the idolater. He speaks of the woodcutter as making something useful from the wood of a tree: “But a castoff piece from among them, useful for nothing, a stick crooked and full of knots” he shapes in his leisure time into the likeness of man or animal, “giving it a coat of red paint and coloring its surface red and covering every blemish in it with pain”. He makes a niche for it: “So he takes thought for it, that it may not all, because he knows that it cannot help itself . . . For health he appeals to a thing that is weak; for life he prays to a thing that is dead; for aid he entreats a thing that is utterly inexperienced; for a prosperous journey, a thing that cannot take a step; for money-making and work and success with his hands he asks strength of a thing whose hands have no strength” (Wis. 13:11-14). Such polemic effectively illustrates the point Paul is making—the folly of idol worship. (Ibid., 86 n. 244)
Catholic New Testament scholar, Joseph Fitzmyer, offered the following insight into this text:
23. and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for an image shaped like a mortal human being. Lit., “they changed the glory of the imperishable God for a likeness of the image of perishable man,” i.e., instead of praising and thanking the immortal God, pagans turned in their folly to give honor and glory to mortal creatures. Paul echoes Ps 106:20, “They exchanged their glory for the image of a grass-eating bullock,” which alludes to the worship of the golden calf at Sinai (Exod 32:1–34). This rather clear allusion to the golden calf makes highly unlikely an implicit allusion to the Adam narratives. Cf. Jer 2:11; Deut 4:15–18; Wis 11:15. In using of the pagans the same vb. allassein as is found in the LXX, Paul implies that their “exchange” was just as guilty as that of the Israelites. He will use the same verb again (compounded with meta-) of guilty activity in vv 25, 26. For instances of pagan gods in human form, see ANEP, 160–87 (statues and reliefs from ancient Syria, Mesopotamia, Egypt, and Anatolia).
Idols were thus preferred by pagans to what was Israel’s “glory,” viz., the abiding doxa of Yahweh, the radiant external manifestation of his presence in the Tabernacle or Temple, what was called kĕbôd YHWH (e.g., Exod 24:17; 40:34–35). In Hebrew kābôd basically denoted the weight of esteem or honor that a king or important person enjoyed (1 Kgs 3:13). This concept was extended to Yahweh and to what made him impressive to human beings, the force of his self-manifestation and the radiant splendor of his presence. He was regarded as melek hakkābôd, “the king of glory” (Ps 24:8; in the LXX, ho basileus tēs doxēs). But “glory” was also ascribed to what God had wrought: the earth was full of his glory (Isa 6:3).
Paul also seems to be echoing Deut 4:16–18, where in the LXX both homoiōma, “likeness,” and eikōn, “image,” occur in parallelism. This may account for the awkward syntax of this clause. It is scarcely an allusion to Gen 1:26, pace Hooker and Hyldhal (“Reminiscence”). There eikōn does occur, but not homoiōma; the word is instead homoiōsis. Nor does the use of anthrōpos necessarily mean that Paul is alluding to Gen 1:26; not every use of that word implies an allusion to such a Genesis passage. How else could he say “human being”? Although Paul alludes to an incident in Israel’s history, it becomes for him an example of what happens to the world without the gospel; so he can apply the idea even to pagans. Cf. 1QH 5:36, “According to the mysteries of sin they change the works of God by their guilty transgression.”
like birds, four-footed creatures, or reptiles. The idolatry of pagans was directed not only toward human beings, but even toward animals of various sorts. At Ugarit “Father Bull El” was worshiped (ANET, 129). In Egypt the god Anubis was worshiped in the form of a jackal, Horus in the form of a hawk, and Atum in the form of a serpent (see ANEP, 185–89). Even Jeroboam is said to have introduced the pagan worship of golden calves at Bethel and Dan (1 Kgs 12:28–31). Cf. Wis 12:24, “For they wandered far astray on paths of error, accepting as gods those hideous and contemptible animals, deluded like foolish children.” Thus in vv 19–23 Paul singles out the sin of the pagans against God himself and castigates pagan idolatry. Cf. Acts 7:41–42. Paul uses peteina, tetrapoda kai herpeta, words that are found in the LXX creation account of Gen 1:20, 24; but again, pace Hooker (“Adam,” 300), that does not mean that he alludes expressly to the Adam story of Genesis. How else would he express such things? (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, Romans: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary [AB 33; New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008], 283-84)