Remember my preference


Table of Contents

Part I

Part II

Part III

Part IV

Part V

Part VI


Vol.3: Man in Adam and in Christ

Part III:



Table of Contents

Chapter 1.  The Creation of the Image
Chapter 2.  The Image Lost
Chapter 3.  The Likeness Achieved

Publishing History:
1964: Doorway paper No. 49, published privately by Arthur C. Custance
1977: Part III in Man in Adam and in Christ vol.3 in The Doorway Papers Series, Zondervan Publishing Company.
1997: Arthur Custance Online Library (HTML)
2001  2nd Online Edition (corrections, design revisions)


     pg 1 of 3      


     SOME YEARS AGO, I had the privilege of speaking on several occasions to a number of foreign students attending universities in this country. One of these was a professor of Buddhism at the University of Tokyo. For a little while after the meetings, we corresponded. His "English" was quite fascinating. He was fully persuaded that all men are God's children, and could not accept the Christian view that there is any alienation on account of sin. He concluded one of his letters in which he had been expounding this view with a note of triumph by saying, "For after all, they are all little sons of God, don't they?" His faith in this respect is one very widely held. Indeed, a major source of offense to people in the presence of Christians is our insistence upon the fact that God is not the Father of all men.
     Not infrequently, however, even Christian people themselves become confused when they meet those who, while they do not share their faith, yet have enjoyed specific answers to prayer. So frequently, in fact, do men recount such experiences -- who otherwise have no Christian faith whatever -- that one is forced to conclude with Peter that God is indeed "no respecter of persons" (Acts 10:34, 35). But does this mean that such men have really achieved a relationship with God which is analogous to that claimed by Christian people, but by an entirely different route? Are there, in fact, several avenues of salvation? And if so, what exactly are we to do with the Lord's categorical statement, "No man cometh unto the Father but by Me" (John 14:6)? Could it be that a man may find his way to God through Jesus Christ -- unknowingly?
     I believe that the answer to these questions is to be found by a careful study of what is stated in Scripture with respect to the "image" and "likeness" which God appointed for man at the time of his creation. Moreover, I think it important to distinguish carefully between these two words "image" and "likeness," although there are many

     pg.2 of 3     

great scholars (James Orr [1] was one of them) who believe that the words were merely synonyms used repetitively for effect.
     Now we may well be accused of a too pronounced literalism in this study. But I find myself becoming impatient with those who, though undoubtedly sincere Christian men, nevertheless treat Scripture as though it were a kind of semi-poetic prose, a form of literature the words of which convey meaning but not with precision. Yet I believe this attitude towards Scripture robs the Word of God of much of its power of communication, for in an extraordinary way it has an inner consistency which becomes more and more apparent as one pays greater and greater attention to its exact wording.
     There are instances, of course, where although the text is part of Scripture, yet it is not part of the Word of God. For example, the words of Satan are quoted in Genesis and in Job; upon occasion, a historical record is to be found perhaps extracted from some pagan source (such as a King's decree); and here and there some spoke unwisely, as when Job's wife told him to curse God and die (Job 2:9), or Peter said, "Be it far from thee, Lord" (Matthew 16:22). These are all part of Scripture and included by divine appointment, but they are not strictly the word of God spoken by inspiration. It is not these portions of Scripture which I am thinking of in the matter of precision but rather those in which men were clearly speaking for God. Here at least one must surely assume that exactly what was said is exactly what was meant. The point is relevant to the study of the phrase, "in our image and after our likeness" (Genesis 1:26), for if such phrases are merely redundant for effect, Scripture is to my mind robbed of its precision and the reader discouraged from paying any more than casual attention to its terms. It is the experience of a very great host of men among whom have been numbered some of the world's most profound thinkers (Augustine, for instance) that the more carefully one studies not merely the Word of God but the words of God, the more they will be found to bear minute examination. It is like all else of God's created things, as it is examined more closely, the more manifestly perfect does it prove to be.
     What follows, then, is a critical examination of the words "image" and "likeness." Upon the precise meaning of these hinges much that makes Christianity a system of beliefs differing from all other religious faiths. In the first place, it demonstrates the unique way in which redemption is achieved. In the second place, it demonstrates the unique way in which Christian character is achieved. With all due respect, I think my Buddhist friend was mistaken.

1. Orr, James, God's Image in Man, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, 1948, p.54.

     pg.3 of 3     

Copyright © 1988 Evelyn White. All rights reserved

Previous Chapter                                                                      Next Chapter

Home | Biography | The Books | Search | Order Books | Contact Us