Talk:Image of God

Organization Revision

I am doing some reading and intend to do some work in refining this page. I plan to do the following. 1. Make the summary section more representative of the article 2. Refine the Biblical sources section to focus more on the biblical texts and less on interpreting them. 3. Removing the Historical context / modern interpretations section and using some of that material to enhance the 3 interpretations section. 4. Relabeling and expanding the 3 interpretations section to be the main section for explaining viewpoints on the doctrine. 5. Adding a section on the Christian understanding of Christ as the image of God as seen in the NT texts. Grouping the sections on human rights and transhumanism under a section possibly labeled influences or implications of doctrine. I would value thoughts on this plan and would also be very interested in further Jewish sources on this doctrine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dadaw (talk • contribs) 02:24, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Post Biblical?

The New Testament is certainly not post-biblical, and most Christians would disagree that Wisdom of Solomon and and Ben Sirach are extra-biblical, let alone post-biblical.

Positive view of transhumanism section

This whole article is a mess, for the reasons mentioned in the templates and others, and doesn't at all reflect an orthodox, mainstream or traditional understanding of the concept in Christianity, glossing over the vast weight of Christian writing and teaching that had accumulated in the subject in favour of fringe 20th and 21st century political theorists.This section is particularly misleading, however, as it gives undue weight to a minority viewpoint--the view of a single unknown scholar, in fact, and presents it as if it represented one side in some evenly-matched intra-Christian debate, which it doesn't. Presenting these two juxtaposed sections of roughly equal length is misleading because it gives the impression that two views have equal weight within Christianity or that there is some sort of significant debate between them, whereas in fact the former is the overwhelming attitude of all major Churches, and the latter of a tiny minority of Western progressives working in secular academia, and the issue of 'transhumanism' in relation to the Image of God isn't one that tends to arise at all in mainstream theology or Christian discourse, and when it does, the attitude taken is almost always the cautious one the article refers to as 'negative'. To equate the positions of the Catholic church, the single largest religious organisation on the planet, and that of single obscure scholar as if there something even approaching parity between them is ridiculous, and, again, highly misleading to the reader. St Judas the Lazarene (talk) 05:18, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Translation

Could I change the translation references from the KJV to the NRSV? The NRSV is an objectively better translation and the archaic language of the KJV can sometimes make understanding difficult. GramCanMineAway (talk) 17:52, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Consensus democracy

According to v:Ethics/Life after death#Image of God heaven can also be seen as a consensus democracy:

The monarchy of heaven is thus rather a democracy, but a democracy with the unimaginable perfection to act in consensus, according to the will of God, thus every voter is a constituent of the group that confirmed or defined the will of the sovereign of heaven. By human standards this could easily be discarded as impossible to achieve, but in heaven this is the goal, because "one is civilized" and all voters thus strive for the perfect consensus as a cultural dimension. --K. L. Wandel (talk) 10:14, 25 June 2024 (UTC)