Replies

I'm seeing two different usages of the word "image".

In the article at the top of the thread the term "image bearers" is used in a universal sense to designate all of mankind. Hence the prohibition on the taking of human life for we are all made in the image of God.

Calvin's commentary on Genesis, on the other hand, of which you have posted excerpts, seems to indicate that the restoration of the image of God in man is contingent on man's embracing the Gospel. At least that's how I read it. Here's what I'm reading;

Paul says that we are transformed into the image of God by the gospel. And, according to him, spiritual regeneration is nothing else than the restoration of the same image. (Colossians 3:10, and Ephesians 4:23.) That he made this image to consist in righteousness and true holiness,

Ergo, those who do not accept the Gospel are not "restored" into the image of God. Is that correct? That's a sizable portion of humanity.

If Calvin is insisting that the "image" of God consists of "righteousness and true holiness", doesn't it follow that not everyone has been "restored"? He's talking of spiritual regeneration, right?

I'm confused, too.

In the article at the top of the thread the term "image bearers" is used in a universal sense to designate all of mankind. Hence the prohibition on the taking of human life for we are all made in the image of God. Calvin's commentary on Genesis, on the other hand, of which you have posted excerpts, seems to indicate that the restoration of the image of God in man is contingent on man's embracing the Gospel. At least that's how I read it....If Calvin is insisting that the "image" of God consists of "righteousness and true holiness", doesn't it follow that not everyone has been "restored"?

FWIW I think you're reading it right, and no IMO not everyone has been "restored". Calvin did not teach the heresy of universalism. But also, when he talks of the image being destroyed, he is not speaking of an utter annhiliation here. Even the original quoted section mentions "obscure, vitiated and maimed lineaments" that are "remaining in us". The image is totally broken, not totally missing. All mankind, including the unrepentent elements, still retains some part of it.

He's talking of spiritual regeneration, right?

Not spiritual regeneration only, and defintiely not in the context of individuals only. His view on what makes up the whole of the image of God is consirably broader than just an image residing in an individual. Modern evangelicalism, and the Anabapists elements of the Reformation itself, do not see regeneration extending to groups and societies at large. Reformers like Knox and Calvin did, however, and thus for them the whole image of God would reside in the whole of mankind, not complete within standalone individual men. It helps if you make a distinction between Man and Mankind, and also between the original unfallen image and it's current tattered state, when you read the Commentary sections.