Fesko's "Last Things First" 2

The first chapter centers on the topic of man’s image, a concept which is fundamental to understanding deeper issues such as how man relates to God (covenentally). To know in what sense God made man in His own image, Fesko begins by first seeking to understand a little bit about the context of the statement, specifically by understanding the nature of God as it was presented in Genesis 1-3.

Most notable is the use plural form of the verb in Genesis 1:26. After careful examination of two alternatives, Fesko claims that this is an adumbration of the Trinity. This fits the progressive facet of divine revelation Fesko has elsewhere stressed. The plural cannot be a reference to God and the heavenly court, because the Hebrew word for “create” in verse 27 is only used in reference to direct creative acts by God. The other suggestion, that the plural represents God’s majesty, does not fit well with the facts that the passage was viewed by Jewish interpreters as an oddity in need of resolution and that the next explicit of the plural in this way is not seen until Ezra 4:18.

Fesko rebuts objections to this interpretation in the following way: The author may have been unaware of Christ’s involvement in creation just as he may have been unaware of how the proto-evangelium would come to pass, but neither possibility suggests the respective passages do not in fact convey meaning relevant to those doctrines which are made explicit in the New Testament. Genesis 1:2 mentions the involvement of the Holy Spirit, so it would not be inconceivable for the author to have some idea of the Trinity which we now know with clarity, and it is in any case a mistake to assume what the prophets knew (e.g. Jude 14). Moreover, considering the whole of Scripture, we know God is Triune. That God would plant seeds of this truth in His early revelation should not come as a surprise.

Regardless because we are made in God’s image, it is to be expected that we analogously possess plurality and unity. As the Larger Catechism states, “God endued [Adam and Eve] with living, reasonable, and immortal souls [and] made them after His own image, in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness…” (Genesis 1:27-28, 2:7; Ephesians 4:20-24; Colossians 3:10). In what sense we were made in God’s image can be further understood by the following points:

- “Image” and “likeness” are used interchangeably throughout Scripture.

- “Image” cannot refer to physical qualities, because God is incorporeal (Deuteronomy 4:15-16).

- Man’s image must be understood with respect to his given tasks as well as the capacities used to fulfill said tasks: man’s task was to have dominion over earth as God does in heaven, to relate to God, and to create in analogical fashion; man’s capacities included untainted spiritual and intellectual faculties such as righteousness, personality, and reason (Genesis 1:26-29, 2:15-25, Psalm 8:3).

- Historical background indicates that, in the near East, monarchs were regarded as demigods in the image of the gods over their regions of rule. Because man was given dominion over all the earth, the implication is that Yahweh rules all the earth.

- The unity in male and female reflects the communal nature of the Trinity.

- Man, as male and female (cf. Genesis 1:27), is the apex of creation, as no other created thing is said to possess the image of God.

Because the first Adam fell, man’s image was corrupted. In addition to looking at in what way we are renewed, it is necessary to look to the incarnate Christ, the second Adam, as the indefectible image of God (2 Corinthians 4:4, Colossians 1:15, Hebrews 1:3) in order to understand completely what it means to be in the image of God (1 Corinthians 15:48-49). Jesus represents what man ought to be, and so the goal of sanctification may be neatly summarized as perfect Christ-likeness (Romans 8:29, 2 Corinthians 3:18). Ultimately, Fesko makes the interesting point that Christology defines anthropology, and this must be kept in mind when considering Genesis 1-3 and man as the image of God.

Fesko's "Last Things First" 1

A recent book I've purchased, J. V. Fesko's "Last Things First: Unlocking Genesis 1-3 with the Christ of Eschatology," promises to be a good read. Essentially, Fesko's purpose is to shift the lens through which many read Genesis 1-3 from creative to protological; that is, instead of narrowly regarding Genesis 1-3 as little more than a purposeless amalgamation of scientific facts, Fesko argues we should reexamine our presuppositions and: (1) understand the intent of Genesis 1-3 to be multi-faceted but primarily Christological and eschatological, (2) categorize what we learn from these chapters under a more general locus like "protology" or "first things," and (3) understand what these first things are by means of (but not exclusively) what Scripture reveals to be "last things." Although I have the bad habit of failing to review books in full, if I shall again fall short, I hope what I do cover will spark someone's interest.

Introduction

As Christ’s redemption of the elect is the principal means by which God’s glory is manifested, one’s hermeneutical presuppositions should reflect Scripture’s high emphasis on Christology. It should be unsurprising, then, that the significance of Genesis 1-3 is understood by Christ, the apostles, and the prophets to be protological rather than simply and specifically creative. While scientific issues enjoy prevalence amongst contemporaries, God’s revelatory purpose in the first few chapters of Genesis lie elsewhere. After distinguishing between the typical dispensational and evolutionary approaches to Genesis 1-3, Fesko wittily observes:

“God asks a volley of questions regarding the how of creation to prove that Job does not know how the Lord created the world. If one assumes the common interpretive theory on Genesis 1-2, Job could have replied to God, ‘Yes, I do know! I’ve read Genesis!’”

In fact, the first dozen chapters in Genesis leave unanswered many questions about world history. Why? Because such information is not essential to God’s revelatory purpose. More to the point, Genesis 1-3 does explain that God created by fiat, yet specifics as to how He created beyond that are not mentioned; the reason any specifics are mentioned may sufficiently be explained by the following reasons: typological significance, utility for contrast to the special nature of the creation of man, and historically relevant elements (e.g. that which may have been regarded as gods by neighbors to the original audience is said to have been created by God, exemplifying His sovereignty).

Genesis 1-3 has less relevance to modern debates about lengths of days and evolutionary processes than either side are want to admit, and even if it were not so, noting similarities between the first and second Adams would be a more pertinent – if less attempted – goal in light of the aforementioned fact that, when Scripture is allowed to be its own interpreter, the focus upon Genesis 1-3 is clearly Christological and eschatological. The introduction provides a parting gem best summarized in Herman Bavinck’s depiction of the first Adam:

“He is the prophet who explains God and proclaims his excellencies; he is the priest who consecrates himself with all that is created to God as a holy offering; he is the king who guides and governs all things in justice and rectitude. And in all this he points to the One who in a still higher and richer sense is the revelation and image of God. To him who is the only begotten of the Father, and the firstborn of all creatures. Adam, the son of God, was a type of Christ." (The Image of God: Human Nature pg. 562)

Relevant passages: Job 38; Isaiah 65-66; Luke 24:27; John 1; Romans 5; 1 Corinthians 1, 15; Revelation 2:7