Journal: Southern Baptist Journal of Theology
Volume: SBJT 29:2 (Summer 2025)
Article: Jesus Christ, The "Imago Dei" Eternally And Incarnationally
Author: P. Mark Simpson

Jesus Christ, The Imago Dei Eternally And Incarnationally

P. Mark Simpson

P. Mark Simpson serves as Pastor of the School of Ministry at Crosslink Community Church, Harrisonburg, Virginia, and as an instructor for Liberty University Online. He is currently a PhD student in historical and theological studies at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, Kentucky. He is married to Holly, and they have two grown children.

Introduction

The testimony of the Bible reveals an important connection between anthropology and Christology. The Old Testament (OT) opens with the account of creation, culminating in the creation of humanity created in God’s own image (Gen 1:27). A great deal of ink has been spilled by individuals seeking to discern what constitutes this image through the centuries. Beyond two additional references within the book of Genesis, little is revealed within the OT about this reality that humanity is unique among God’s creation because of being created in God’s image and likeness. There is no explicit reference to Jesus’ relationship to the imago Dei found in the OT. The New Testament (NT) affirms the creation of humanity in God’s image while adding a wrinkle to the mystery. Jesus is clearly identified as the image of God (2 Cor 4:4; Col 1:15). Richard Middleton observes that in the NT, “only two texts speak of human creation in God’s image (1 Corinthians 11:7 and James 3:9). The rest either exalt Christ as the paradigm (uncreated) image of God, or address the salvific renewal of the image in the church.”1 In addition, Marc Cortez points out: “The image of God has long been one of the primary ways in which theologians have connected Christology to

SBJT 29:2 (Summer 2025) 111

anthropology, viewing Jesus as the ultimate expression of this fundamental anthropological truth.”2 Essential to this connection between anthropology and Christology is the imago Dei.

Cortez’s comments affirm the important connection between anthropology and Christology highlighting the imago Dei as central to that connection. Still, questions remain regarding similarities and distinctions between the image as it relates to Christ and as it relates to humanity. For example, is Christ the image of God because of the incarnation or is “image” something that has been identified with the second person of the Trinity eternally? Further, is the term “image” as it relates...