While agreeing with the “dominion” interpretation, proposed by Von Rad for the meaning of “image” in Gen 1:26, Carol Kern Stockhausen argued that
. . . physical resemblance to God
should not be excluded. Psalm 8:5 stresses the glory (εικων) of man. Ezekiel 28:11-17, usually
related to the Priestly Pentateuchal narrative from which the Genesis
references are drawn and to the figure of Adam to whom they refer, also
stresses to an even greater degree man's beauty. The linguistic data concerning
both צלם and εικων indicates
that the most basic level of meaning for both terms is physical likeness or
resemblance to something else. Given that it is God in whose image Adam was
created, we must conclude that Adam resembled God. Since early Semitic thought
did not possess the "dual anthropology" which could split man's
"bodily" from his "spiritual" nature, we must allow that
the presumption of the biblical story originally was that Adam resembled his
creator in his whole person— his bodily form, his intellectual and spiritual
being and his authority. Speculation about the image as archetype did not occur
during the biblical period. Only a hint of it is present in the wisdom
literature. Such speculation blossomed
in a later period, however, as we shall see. (Carol Kern Stockhausen, “Moses'
Veil and the Glory of the New Covenant: The Exegetical and Theological
Substructure of II Corinthians 3:1-4:6” [PhD Dissertation; Marquette
University, September 1984], 306-7)
Further Reading:
