Christians have labored to define what it means for humans to be made in the image of God. Although a general consensus has been reached on certain points, there is not yet agreement on the essence of what is means to say humans have been created in the image of God.
There is a long history of linking the image of God with exercising dominion over the earth due to the wording of Genesis 1:26-28. However, not all agree with including functional aspects in the definition of the image of God. For example, John Hammett/Katie McCoy and Craig Blomberg conclude function follows from the image, but it is not part of the image itself. Others, such as Scott Rae, fear that including function in the definition could lead to devaluing persons who are incapable of exercising that function.
In contrast to their positions, this paper will argue that ruling as God’s representatives under his authority is an intrinsic part of what it means for humans to be made in the image of God. This paper will begin with Genesis 1, but it will then move on to demonstrate how humanity’s function of representing God also flows from the New Testament understanding of Christ as the image of God. This paper will not be arguing for a Christological definition of the image of God, though. Rather, it will found its position on Genesis 1 and then continue the argument through considering New Testament passages on humans in the image of God and Christ as the image of God. For example, when Colossians 1 speaks of Christ as the image of God, this entails the idea of him representing God, because he is God. This representation is not a consequence of him being the image of God, but it is intrinsic in the statement that “He is the image of God, the firstborn of all creation.” Likewise, this paper will argue, the statement in Genesis 1:26-28 that humans are to exercise dominion over animals is intrinsic to God creating them in his image. This is an essential aspect of what it means to be made in the image of God, and one that would have been understood by the original audience of Genesis 1. In this way, the paper will tie together material presented in the Old and New Testaments.
In response to concerns of excluding anyone through incorporating function in the definition of the image of God, this paper will be careful to clarify that any human who is not exercising the functional aspect of the image is still equally created in the image of God. Although sin has marred the image of God in humans, all people have retained the image. The functional view (or the substantive or relational), when carefully constructed and communicated, is capable of protecting that truth.