Made in the 〉image of God〈: The concepts of divine images in Gen 1-3

Zeitschrift fur die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft

Volumn 117, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 1-20

  Schüle, Andreas ^a  

^a NONE   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 64349116071     PISSN: 00442526     EISSN: 16130103     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1515/zatw.2005.117.1.1     Document Type: Review

References (74)

1. For comprehensive studies of the role of sacrifice cf. F. A. M. Wiggermann, Theologies, Priests, and Worship in Ancient Mesopotamia, in: J. M. Sasson et al. (eds.), Civilizations of the Ancient Near East III, 1995, 1857-1870;
2. further B.Gladigow, Opfer und komplexe Kulturen, in: B. Janowski/M. Welker (eds.), Opfer: Theologische und kulturelle Kontexte, 2000, 86-107.
3. One can summarize that the majority of scholars working in the field of religious history hold that concerning the use of cultic images ancient Israel did not differ in principle from its neighboring cultures. There is also consensus that the Babylonian exile marks the turning point towards a religion that rejected divine images not only on the level of the official cult but also with regard to family religion and personal piety; cf. The contributions of I. Corneliuz/A. Berlejung/H. Niehr/C. Uehlinger, in: K. van der Toorn (ed.), The Image and the Book: Iconic Cults, Aniconism, and the Rise of Book Religion in Israel and the Ancient Near East, CBET 21, 1997;
4. K. Schmid/A. Schuele (eds.), Theologie in Israel und in den Nachbarkulturen, ATM 9, 2004;
5. O. Keel/Chr. Uehlinger, Götter, Göttinnen und Gottessymbole. Neue Erkenntnisse zur Religionsgeschichte Kanaans und Israels aufgrund bislang unerschlossener ikonographischer Quellen, QD 134, 1992;
6. M. Dietrich/O. Loretz, Jahwe und seine Aschera. Anthropomorphes Kultbild in Mesopotamien, Ugarit und Israel. Das biblische Bilderverbot, UBL 9, 1992.
7. Especially T. Mettinger has made a strong case that there was a de facto aniconism in ancient Israelite culture which was, however, tolerant towards iconic representation of deities. The explicit prohibition of images in both versions of the decalogue mirrors a theological development that arises no earlier than the sixth century BCE (cf. Mettinger, No Graven Image, Israelite Aniconism in its Ancient Near Eastern Context, ConB.OT 42, 1995;
8. Israelite Aniconism: Developments and Origins, in: van der Toorn, The Image and the Book, 173-204).
9. 7, 82.
10. Cf. Jos., Ant, XIV.
11. Cf. J. F. Kutsko, Between Heaven and Earth. Divine Presence and Absence in the book of Ezekiel, Winona Lake (IN) 2000, 63-70.
12. In the aspect of images as 〉living〈 intities cf. A. Angerstorfer, Hebräisch dmwt and aramäisch dmw(t). Ein Sprachproblem der Imago-Dei-Lehre, BN 24 (1984), 39.
13. Recent studies of the creation reports have called the traditional view into question according to which Gen 2,4b-3,24 marks the opening section of an older literary source (〉J〈) that precedes the priestly writer. According to Blenkinsopp, Pentateuch, 67 the Eden story is a »sapiental reflection in narrative form on the historical experience of Israel« that presupposes P. Correspondingly, E. Otto, Die Paradieserzählung Genesis 2-3. Eine nachpriesterliche Lehrerzählung in ihrem religionshistorischen Kontext, in: A. A. Diesel u.a. (eds.), »Jedes Ding hat seine Zeit ...«. Studien zur israelitischen und orientalischen Weisheit. FS D. Michel, 1996, 167-192, views Gen 2f. as a 〉weisheitliche Lehrerzählung〈 that combines motives of post-exilic wisdom literature with deuteronomic covenantal theology.
14. A somewhat mediating position is taken by D. Carr, R. G. Kratz and H. Spieckermann. Indebted to Westermann's analysis these authors assume that there was an older tradition, roughly Gen 2,4b-9.18-24, about the creation of man and woman to which in (post-exilic) times the paradise story was added. This, however, changed the meaning of the myth: whereas in the older tradition the creation of the woman and the joyful life in the garden of Eden was highlighted, the later revision gave it a negative turn: Eve trespasses the divine commandment and in so doing she destroys the paradise world (cf. Carr, The Politics of Textual Subversion: A Diachronic Perspective on the Garden of Eden Story, JBL 112 [1993], 577-595;
15. Kratz/Spieckermann, Art. Schöpfer/Schöpfung II. Altes Testament, TRE 30, 258-283).
16. For an overview of the discussion about the ending of the P-Source see Blenkinsopp, Pentateuch, 237-239;
17. E. Otto, Forschungen zur Priesterschrift, ThZ 62 (1997), 1-50
18. and most recently R. G. Kratz, Die Komposition der erzählenden Bücher des Alten Testaments. Grundwissen der Bibelkritik, 2000, 226-248, esp. 247.
19. 11, 37.
20. On the interpretation of 〉let us make〈 as a pluralis deliberationis, a plural that expresses a specific intention see the detailed discussion in P. D. Miller, Genesis 1-11, JSOT.S 8, 1978, 9-20
21. furthermore Westermann, Genesis, 200;
22. T. Williams, Who will go for us? (Is 6:8). The divine plurals and the image of God, OTE 12 (1999), 173-190;
23. H.-P. Müller, Eine neue babylonische Menschenschö pfungserzählung im Licht keilschriftlicher und biblischer Parallelen - Zur Wirklichkeitsauffassung im Mythos, Or. 58 (1989), 61-85.
24. A good number of exegetes express the 〉plastic〈 aspect of the image in Gen 1,26f. by translating with 〉statue, cf. Gross, Gen 1,26.27; 9,6: Statue oder Ebenbild Gottes, JBTh 15 (2000), 12;
25. M. Weippert, Tier und Mensch in einer menschenarmen Welt. Zum sog. dominium terae in Genesis 1, in: H.-P. Mathys (ed.), Ebenbild Gottes - Herrscher über die Welt. Studien zu Würde und Auftrag des Menschen, 1998, 41.
26. 4 3, 1159;
27. 2, 170-175.
28. A particularly helpful summary of the role of the king as a mediating figure between the divine and the human world has been provided by J. Assmann, Ma'at. Gerechtigkeit und Unsterblichkeit im Alten Ägypten, 1990, 201-212.
29. The literature on this particular aspect is extraordinarily rich. For a general overview on the Egyptian and Mesopotamian material that needs to be considered in this regard cf. Gross, Ebenbild oder Statue?, 13-18;
30. K. Koch, Imago Dei - Die Würde des Menschen im biblischen Text, 2000, 13-24.
31. Koch explicitly talks about the »democratization of political ideology« (»die Demokratisierung einer politischen Ideologie«). T. Mettinger, Abbild oder Urbild. Imago Dei in traditionsgeschichtlicher Sicht, ZAW 86 (1974), 414, mentions the connection between »Königsideologie« and the tradition of the »Urmensch« that, according to his reading, Gen 1,26-28 shares with Ps 8 and Ez 28.
32. Cf. M. Noth, Überlieferungsgeschichte des Pentateuch, 1948, 259-264;
33. M. Weinfeld, Sabbath, Temple and the Enthronment of the Lord - The Problem of the Sitz im Leben of Gen 1:1-2:3, in A. Caquot/M. Delcor, Melanges bibliques et orientaux. FS F. M. Gazelles, AOAT 212, 503;
34. E. Zenger, Gottes Bogen in den Wolken, 170-175.
35. This aspect has recently been highlighted by O. Keel/S. Schroer, Schöpfung. Biblische Theologien im Kontext altorientalischer Religionen, 2002, 177-181.
36. From a hermeneutical point of view Ph. Trible has traced the gender aspect of the imago dei especially into the wisdom literature of the Old Testament, cf. Trible, God and the Rhetoric of Sexuality, 1978.
37. It is one of the exegetical quandaries that neither and nor the prepositions and in Gen 5,1-3 are used and placed according to the syntactical pattern of Gen 1,26-28. There has been an extensive debate whether this indicates a difference in the meaning of these terms (cf. C. Dohmen, Die Statue von Tell Fecherije und die Gottebenbildlichkeit des Menschen. Ein Beitrag zur Bilderterminologie, BN 22 (1983), 98-101;
38. M. Weippert, Tier und Mensch, 40-43).
39. But this does not seem likely as by now most exegetes assume (cf. W. Gross, Die Gottebenbildlichkeit des Menschen im Kontext der Priesterschrift, ThQ 161 [1981], 244-264). Since all these elements are used in exactly opposite positions in 5,1-3 this would be understood better as skillful variation in style that is intended to mark the correlation between these passages.
40. This is possibly what is suggested in LXX by the term which is used in Gen 5,3 only, not in 1,26 (cf. M. Rösel, Übersetzung als Vollendung der Auslegung. Studien zur Genesis-Septuaginta, BZAW 223, 1994, 124).
41. 9, 134;
42. v. Rad, Das erste Buch Mose, 48.
43. One of the major arguments against the position taken by P. Volz, Der Elohist als Erzähler, 1933, 125-142
44. and F. M. Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic, 1973, and others that P never existed »as an independent narrative document«, but »framed and systematized JE« (Cross, 324f.).
45. There have been extensive debates whether these two terms could be sufficiently differentiated on the lexicographical level; for an overview of the most important arguments which cannot be laid out here in detail cf. J. Barr, The image of God in the book of Genesis - A study of terminology, BJRL 51 (1968), 11-26;
46. J. M. Miller, In the »image« and »likeness« of God, JBL 91 (1972), 289-304;
47. A. Angerstorfer, Hebräisch dmwt und aramäisch dmw(t), 30-43;
48. W. Gross, Die Gottesebenbildlichkeit des Menschen nach Gen 1,26.27 in der Diskussion des letzten Jahrzehnts, in: N. ElKhoury/H. Couzer/R. Reinhard (eds.), Lebendige Überlieferung: Prozesse der Annäherung und Auslegung, 1992, 118-135;
49. The most comprehensive research report available is provided by G. A. Jónsson, The Image of God. Genesis 1:26-28 in a Century of Old Testament Research, OTS 26, 1988.
50. Editio princeps: A. Abou-Assaf/P. Bordreuil/A. R. Millard, La statue de Tell Fekheriye et son inscription bilingue assyro-araméenne, 1982.
51. Cf. A. Abou-Assaf, Die Statue des HDYS'Y, König von Guzana, MDOG 113 (1981), 3-22;
52. Num 33,52; Ez 16,17; II Reg 11,18.
53. A. Berlejung, Die Theologie der Bilder. Herstellung und Einweihung von Kultbildern in Mesopotamien und die alttestamentliche Bilderpolemik, OBO 162, 1998;
54. M. Dietrich, Der Werkstoff wird Gott. Zum mesopotamischen Ritual der Umwandlung eines leblosen Bilderwerks in einen lebendigen Gott, MARG 7, 1992. 105-126;
55. T. Jacobsen, The Graven Image, in: P. D. Miller/P. D. Hanson/S. D. McBride (eds.), Ancient Israel Religion. Essays in Honor of F. M. Cross, 1987, 15-32;
56. C. Walker/M. B. Dick, The Induction of the Cult Image in Ancient Mesopotamia. The Mesopotamian mîs pī Ritual, in: M. B. Dick (ed.), Born in Heaven, Made on Earth: The Creation of the Cult Image, 1999, 55-121.
57. For older editions of (parts of) the ritual texts see H. Zimmern, Das vermutliche babylonische Vorbild des Pehta und Manmbuha der Mandäer, 959-967;
58. E. Ebeling, Tod und Leben nach der Vorstellung der Babylonier, 1931.
59. J. B. Pritchard, The Ancient Near East Vol. I, 1958, 31-85.
60. Cf. A. Schüle, Schöpfer des Himmels und der Erde. Religionsgeschichtliche und systematische Konzepte zu einer alttestamentlichen Gottesbezeichnung, in: S. Brandt/B. Oberdorfer (eds.), Resonanzen. FS M. Welker, 1997, 297-316.
61. For a good survey cf. H.-J. Fabry, Art., ThWAT 6, 14-21.
62. Cf. H.-P. Müller's notion of a 〉entsprechendes Gegenüber〈 (Müller, Mythische Elemente, 28).
63. The Hebrew term occurs rather seldomly in the OT. It occurs in particular where God makes people fall into a state of complete faint and in which they, nonetheless, have especially deep revelatory experiences (Gen 15,12; Job 33,15).
64. Cf. P. A. Bird, Genesis 3 in der gegenwärtigen biblischen Forschung, JBTh 9 (1994), 7.18.
65. A similar interpretation has recently been suggested by K. Schmid, Die Unteilbarkeit der Weisheit. Überlegungen zur sogenannten Paradieserzählung Gen 2f. und ihrer theologischen Tendenz, ZAW 114 (2002), 37: »Im Paradies hat der Mensch gerade keine Weisheit, sondern er erlangt sie erst mit der Vertreibung - an derselben Stelle, an der sie der Urmensch von Ez 28 verliert.«
66. According to R. Albertz, »Ihr Werdet sein wie Gott« (Gen 3,5), in: Was ist der Mensch ...?, FS H. W. Wolff, 1992, 22f., in order to reach wisdom Adam had no other choice than to trespass the threshold of the divine commandment. If one traces this line of thought, the deeper insight of Gen 2f. becomes that both life in and out of Eden have a price: naiveté on the one hand disobedience on the other, and it is, then, the quandary of human existence that it cannot avoid both at the same time.
67. H. Spieckermann, Ambivalenzen. Ermöglichte und verwirklichte Schöpfung in Genesis 2f., 367-369, has rightly emphasized that the ambivalent character of life 〉out of Eden〈 is of programmatic value. It characterizes human life beyond the state of 〉dreaming innocence〈 (Spieckermann takes up Tillich's famous phrasing here) that Adam and Eve had to leave behind in order to 〉grow up〈.
68. This, it seems to me, is the very reason why one should not categorize Gen 3 as an anti-wisdom-story as has been suggested by Blenkinsopp, Pentateuch, 63-67;
69. Carr, The Politics of Textual Subversion, 577-595
70. and Otto, Paradieserzählung, 190-192.
71. According to their reading Gen 3 is essentially wisdom critical because wisdom leads to the kind of miserable and violent life that is depicted in subsequent 〉J-Stories〈 like Cain and Abel or the deluge. An additional problem with this way of looking at Gen 3 is that wisdom is by no means seen to be misguiding. Wherever the terminology of Gen 2,5-7-〉knowledge of good and bad〈, the 〉opening of the eyes〈, 〉becoming wise〈 (SKL) - occurs in wisdom literature it has positive meaning (cf. Albertz, Ihr werdet sein wie Gott, 13).
72. So there is no doubt that wisdom is indeed seen to be of divine character and that by acquiring it humans become like one of the Gods (cf. Schmid, Unteilbarkeit, 29).
73. Spieckermann, Ambivalenzen, 366f.
74. This has been rightly seen by J. Van Seters, Prologue to history: The Yahwist as a historian in Genesis, 1992, 110.