Introduction
Having created heaven and earth, the world of flora and fauna, God formed humankind thousands of years ago from the dust. Therefore, in every person, there is an eternal principle and the image of God. The formula imago Dei, borrowed from Latin, is one of the central theological concepts in Christianity, Judaism, and several sects of Islam. Various divines and thinkers have for years discussed it, aiming to realize its essence. In the essay “Grace without Nature,” Kathryn Tanner also strives to explain this concept and find out whether human nature exists as something definite and unchanging. This work includes several important arguments related to theological anthropology. Therefore, the essay by Kathryn Tanner significantly contributes to expanding human understanding of the meaning of the formula imago Dei.
Imago Dei: Meaning and Essence
It is necessary to consider the definitions of this term given by other theologians to understand the originality of Tanner’s ideas and their influence on the realization of the concept of the image Dei. Although in “Grace without Nature,” the author does not aim to understand whether the terms “image of God” and “likeness of God” mean the same or different phenomena, this issue should not be overlooked. It contributes to understanding what Tanner has meant, claiming that people do not image God in themselves and supposing that human nature can be “radically reworked into the image of God” (Tanner, 2010, p. 364). Thus, Tanner’s essay can be correctly interpreted and analyzed only through the prism of the opinions of other researchers.
Definition of the Term
The majority of thinkers come to terms that, unlike all other living beings, only humans carry the image of God in their souls, which forms in people’s spirituality, rationality, and morality. According to the Genesis verse, “God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness” (Genesis 1:26). When God created man, he endowed him with reason, free will, and the ability to distinguish good and evil and choose the way. Therefore, these features that distinguish people from other creatures are generally accepted to form the image of God in any person.
A lot of theologians present their point of view on this concept, but this term still has several different definitions. Herzfeld, for instance, uses three significant categories: substantive, functional, and relational, to account for the essence of the concept “image of God” (cited in Sonessa, 2021). The first one interprets it as a set of traits that each person gets from God. Functional interpretations explain this concept due to the acts of people as representatives of God on earth. Relational ones describe it as a result of certain interactions (cited in Sonessa, 2021). Like many other researchers, Sonessa (2021) concludes that all people are God’s image-bearers. However, Tanner claims something new: “the image of God is primarily divine and not a human one”; therefore, “human beings do not image God in and of themselves” (Tanner, 2010, p. 364). Thus, although the impact of this concept on human nature cannot be doubted, its meaning is still discussed.
Image of God and Likeness of God
To understand the meaning of imago Dei, it is also necessary to compare the essence of the terms “the image of God” and “likeness of God.” These words used in Genesis can be interpreted as synonyms and parallelism. However, in the Greek Septuagint, the conjunction “and” is utilized between these terms, making people think they can mean enough different things. The first one who explained the difference between these concepts among Greek Fathers was St. Irenaeus Lyons. He divides humans into perfect, who have both features, and imperfect ones, who have only the image (cited in Arnold, 2019). Therefore, the image of God is the feature inherent in all humans, while the likeness of God can be lost in cases when people lead unrighteous life.
Many thinkers and theologians have also strived to explain this issue, doing it in different ways. For instance, Soskice (2020, p. 38) suggests that the Priestly writers of Genesis texts “were deliberately vague on the matter, clouding the waters in their mention of both an ‘image’ and a ‘likeness’.” Desiring to claim the distinction between humankind and animals clearly, they did not want to explain the precise nature of the divine ‘image’ in person (Soskice, 2020). Crisp (2017) considers that these two terms mean the same: a human who acts as the divine representative. Thus, the image of God is a crucial feature of the human condition, which should make people develop and become better.
Interpreting of the Term by Kathryn Tanner
Since Tanner offers ideas related to the concept image of God, which is not generally accepted but is valuable for understanding the human condition theologically, it is necessary to view these ideas from different sides. The theologian claims that people can “come to image God only when they take on that divine image and are deified formed according to the divine Word as Christ’s humanity was” (Tanner, 2010, p. 364). She identifies this feature exclusively “in the divine person, in the person of Christ” (Tanner, 2010, p. 364). Tanner (2010) believes that it would be wrong to consider this concept a part of human nature due to its instability. Hence, to realize the level to which her study impacts exploring issues related to the imago Dei, the merits and potential of her ideas should be critically assessed.
Merits of Tanner’s Arguments
Although Tanner’s ideas are not always easy for the average person to understand, they undoubtedly have a right to exist. She claims that though people are different from other creatures, they cannot be equated to God (Tanner, 2010). According to her, the image of God refers not to all people but to “the second person of the Trinity” (Tanner, 2010, p. 364). Even when people strive to correspond to God, “they become God’s image, rather than God’s image becoming theirs” (Tanner, 2010, p. 365). Tanner is one of the first who pays attention to this statement. Due to “Grace without Nature,” it becomes possible to interpret imago Dei not as a crucial feature, which makes all people the representative of God on earth. This concept begins to mean something another: it is a standard all people have to strive for. However, even after this, they will never own the image of God because God “is different from others by not being a kind of thing” (Tanner, 2010, p. 367). Thus, this essay discovers a new view on this concept and its essence.
This essay helps realize the features of human nature and the human condition. According to Tanner’s opinion, human has no specific and firm nature, and their primary trait is plasticity. Her concept of plasticity shows that people, unlike other creatures, have flexible behavior and become what they absorb (Tanner, 2010). This idea also touches upon the question related to the way people come to God: when humans “take in God as their proper nourishment, they are reworked according to God’s image” (Tanner, 2010, p. 365). Tanner’s idea of plasticity intersects with the opinions of other theologians about the likeness of God. However, while antique theologians have claimed that humans can lose their likeness, leading unrighteous life, Tanner considers they cannot get it until they start leading a righteous one. Therefore, several ideas of Tanner are confirmed by the opinions of other theologians.
The significant merits of “Grace without Nature” include the fact that it presents the complete picture of understanding the concept of Imago Dei. Firstly, the author claims that people do not carry the image of God since God is above ordinary people. It is a pretty new idea in theology, without which it is undoubtedly impossible to realize the meaning of this concept fully. Secondly, she says that human nature still tends to “be reworked in the image of God” if people choose the right way (Tanner, 2010, p. 364). Thirdly, her idea of plasticity indicates that a person can change, and “humans take on new identities according to the uses to which they put themselves” (Tanner, 2010, p. 365). Therefore, this essay should be considered an essential pillar of understanding the concept of imago Dei.
Counter Arguments
Although Tanner’s opinions have enough merits, they contradict the opinion of most other theologians in some cases. Claiming that people do not image God, Tanner argues with Jancovic (2019, p. 202), for example, who considers that it is impossible to “think of any human being as not bearing the image of God.” Tanner’s idea that people should come to the image of God due to radical transformability contradicts Kilner’s (2017) opinion that people who do not have certain traits cannot be less in God’s image than others. Hence, Tanner’s ideas do not always coincide with the views of others, which does not make them less significant.
Use of Tanner’s Ideas for Understanding the Human Condition Theologically
Kathryn Tanner presents her views not only on the image of God but also on human nature. She offers ideas that help understand the human condition from the theological point of view. According to “Grace without Nature,” people distinguish themselves from other living creatures not only due to the divine image inside them, as many researchers think. Unlike animals and plants, humans do not have a limited nature, which allows them to transform. This changeable and plastic nature is one of the critical features of any person (Tanner, 2010). The above Tanner’s arguments related to the image of God also raise the level of people’s understanding of this concept and allow consider it from another point of view.
Theological Potential of Tanner’s Ideas
The ideas presented by Tanner have considerable theological potential and can be developed further. The author shows that there is a potential to make people go beyond their usual thinking. She starts to do it: due to her work, it is already clear that humans should become better, not to be equal to God, but to correspond to Him and His great intention. Thus, the author engages well with the theological potential of her ideas.
The Range of Sources Included by the Author
To write such a comprehensive and well-founded essay, Kathryn Tanner utilized a number of reliable sources. The author used the work of bishops and theologians of antiquity, such as Gregory of Nyssa and Gregory Nazianzen. Her paper also includes the opinions of one of the most influential theologians of the 20th century Henri de Lubac. Tanner almost loses sight of theological studies of the 21st century; maybe they might also be included in her essay. For instance, she could utilize several works about the image of God and the human nature of the theologian Doug Baker and the church planter Philip Rose. On the other side, perhaps the author does not need it. Using older research, she comes to conclusions different from those reached by some other theologians. Maybe in this essay, the author could also consider the difference between the image and likeness of God to allow readers to understand her position completely. Despite everything, Tanner touches upon several topics and discovers them using a wide range of appropriate sources.
Ideas I Agree or Disagree With
Tanner presents a range of ideas I agree with; I think her arguments are well-grounded and reasonable. Although many theologians (Sonessa (2021), Kilner (2017), and Jancovic (2019)) claim that all people carry this image, I find Tanner’s explanation that this feature is divine but not humanly logical. God is above people, and the fact humans are created in His image distinguishes them from animals but does not equate them to Him in any way. It is also difficult to argue with the ideas of plasticity and the absence of limited human nature, which can “be reworked into the image of God” (Tanner, 2010, p. 364). Crisp (2017, p. 9) also concludes that “God makes human nature capable of bearing union with the divine.” Thus, Tanner’s opinions seem to me to be close and those that can be generally accepted.
Conclusion
The essay “Grace without Nature” by Kathryn Tanner aids human understanding of the imago Dei as one of the primary human features. The author presents her point of view on this concept: the image of God is a divine image, and even when humans approach it, they are still far from God as other beings. Due to this essay, it becomes possible to go further than just considering this concept as a part of any human being, which distinguishes them from animals. It discovers the absence of precise nature, which allows humans to have a nature that imitates God. Therefore, this essay raises several significant issues which contribute to human theological education and understanding of the concept of the image
Reference List
Arnold, J. B. (2019) ‘”To behold its own delight”: the beatific vision in Irenaeus of Lyons’, Perichoresis, 17(2), pp. 27-40.
Crisp, O. (2017) ‘Christological model of the Imago Dei’, in Farris, J. R. and Taliaferro, C. (eds.) The Ashgate research companion to theological anthropology. London: Routledge, pp. 1-20.
Genesis 1: 1-31, Holy Bible. New International Version.
Jancovic, J. (2019) ‘Imago Dei: an exegetical and theological reappraisal’, ET-Studies, 10(2), pp. 183-206.
Kilner, J. F. (2017) ‘The image of God, the need for God, and bioethics’, Christian bioethics: Non-Ecumenical Studies in Medical Morality, 23(3), pp. 261-282. Web.
Sonessa, W. L. (2021) ‘Imago Dei and the tensions of ethnic identity’, Journal of Ecumenical Studies, 56(1), pp. 116-147. Web.
Soskice, J. M. (2020) The kindness of God metaphor, gender, and religious language. London: Oxford University Press.
Tanner, K. (2010) ‘Grace without nature’, in Albertson, D. and King, C. (eds.) Without nature? A new condition for theology. New York: Fordham University Press, pp. 363-375.