2:4-7 The Creation of man

Genesis 2:4-7 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they
were created. When the LORD God made the earth and the heavens and
no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth and no plant of the field
had yet sprung up, for the LORD God had not sent rain on the earth and
there was no man to work the ground, but streams came up from the earth
and watered the whole surface of the ground the LORD God formed the
man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath
of life, and the man became a living being.
Genesis chapter one centres upon Gods work of creating the whole
universe. Genesis chapter two focuses on the place man has in the earth. In
Genesis 1:1 the order is heavens and the earth but in Genesis 2:4 the order
is the earth and the heavens. In the first chapter the activity embraces the
entire cosmos, in the second chapter the activity centres on Gods making of
our first parents in the Garden of Eden. We have been given the setting for
the creation of man, and now that is to be described in fuller fascinating
detail.

So this is a new section and we are made aware of it by Moses writing, This
is the account of . . . something (v.4). It is a common heading in the book of
Genesis. It is saying that this is a new genealogy, literally, a new begetting,
a new chapter in this history. In it we are going to hear much of the LORD
God. This title for the Almighty, Jehovah God, occurs twenty times in
Genesis chapters two and three, but in all the rest of Moses writings it is
found in a single place.

Verses four, five and six are not straightforward and let me briefly give you
my understanding of them. Moses seems to be referring back to the third
day of creation. On the second day the sky and the seas were made. On the
third day the continents of the earth were created and the plants covered
them, but Moses is telling us in verse 5 that two kinds of plant had not yet
appeared, the shrub of the field and the plant of the field. They could not
appear yet because of the absence of two things. Firstly, showers of rain on
the desert would be needed to create the shrub of the field because they
are the type of plants that rapidly spring up in a wilderness after rain, but
there was no rain yet. Then secondly men would be needed to cultivate the
plant of the field; these are what we can call Garden crops, thinking of the
great plantation that was soon to be made and called the Garden of Eden as
the county of Kent is dubbed the Garden of England. But there were no
crops yet because there was no man to tend them; there were no grain
fields, just wild vegetation. So we are faced with the absence of two
necessities; waters to make the crops grow, and man to cultivate them; the
Lord God must create man, and he must also send forth the rain. Both those
problems are dealt with in our text.

Firstly, something translated in the N.I.V. as a stream would rise up from the
earth which would water the ground. This is a rare word; it occurs in only
one other place in the entire Bible and its meaning is just as perplexing
there. The word could also be translated as rain clouds, or a mist, or as a
flow, or as waters of the deep. What is made clear is that there is one God
in the whole world who creates and commands forth these waters, and that
is Jehovah God. He has to send them forth and create fertility and life. It is
not Baal the Canaanite storm god who does that. The one living Jehovah
God sends rain upon Canaan, and this will be seen one day in the contest
on Mount Carmel between the prophets of Baal and Elijah. Who will hear
from heaven his servants prayers and send forth the rain? So, firstly, the
absence of rain is answered by God causing these waters to come forth.
Then secondly man himself must be created and this also is dealt with. We
are told, the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living
being (v.7). So let us proceed to examine the distinct creation of man. It is
also the opportunity for us to embrace those features from the first chapter
which we temporarily laid aside. That man is a special creation of God is
underlined in a number of ways.

1. MANS CREATION WAS DISTINCTIVE IN THE DIVINE COUNSELS THAT FIRST

OCCURRED.

And God said, Let us make man (Gen.1:26). The word create has been used
sparingly in this chapter, just in verses on and also verse twenty-one, but
now in the creation of human beings the word appears three times in one
verse (v.27). In all the earlier acts of creation before this God simply gave
the command. And God said, Let there be . . . and there was . . . But when it
came to the creation of man God, as it were, paused and deliberated with
himself saying, Let us make man. It was not that he gave a command to the
earth, Let the earth bring forth man as it had been with the living creatures
(vv. 20 and 24). Gods approach to mans creation was with the weightiest
consideration. Something extraordinary is going to be made. God was
preoccupied with what he was about to create when comparing a human
being to all the other creatures in heaven and earth which hed made. Man
from his origin was not on a par with the other creatures. There was the
distinctiveness of God speaking when he said, Let us make man.

2. MANS CREATION WAS DISTINCTIVE IN THE NATURE MAN WAS GIVEN.

Let us make man in our image, after our likeness (Gen. 1:26). This phrase is
unparalleled in the rest of Gods creative acts. Everything else God formed
was made after their kind. Look at verses 24 and 25 of the first chapter,
And God said, Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds:
livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each
according to its kind. And it was so. God made the wild animals according to
their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that
move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was
good. On five occasions we read the phrase according to their kinds; it
means in accordance with Gods design for these creatures, and then we
come to the creation of man. What a change! What a radical differentiation
from all the other forms of life, man not made according to his kind. Yes,
there is a kind, that is, a template and an exemplar that God has for the
man he plans to make, but it is not some likeness God has considered, the
pattern is God himself! Mans identity consists of Gods own image; it is that
which belongs to God intrinsically. This creature is going to be made like
ME!, God determines. Man is made in the very image of this mighty God of
Genesis one and two! What an endowment! What dignity! When David the
psalmist thinks of that he is constrained to cry, What is man that you are
mindful of him, the son of man that you care for him? You made him a little
lower than the heavenly beings and crowned him with glory and honour
(Psa. 8:4&5).

Now what does it mean that man is made in the image of God? Is the man
in the street today made in the image of God? The psychopath, or the
drunkard, or the atheist? Yes, he is. The image is marred and defaced, like
the castle in Aberystwyth, utterly ruined, but a ruined castle, not a ruined
cottage. Men have lost their original righteousness through the fall of their
father Adam and their own sin but the image has not been totally
obliterated. Traces of the divine image remain even in serial rapist, a Hitler
and a Mao Tse-Tung. For example, we see in chapter nine of Genesis and
verse six these words, Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his
blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man. The horror of
murder is this that it is the destruction of someone made in Gods likeness.
Then we must ask what elements of the image of God remain in man? Let
me select four;

i] Firstly, knowledge. Men have a mind and a conscience. Yes a great deal
has been lost. Mans intellect has been disordered. Man is often mistaken as
to matters of fact, origin, purpose, destiny. Man is fallacious in his
reasoning, but he is still a rational being; he is capable of investigation, of
forensic science, or deliberation, or maintaining the rule of law. He may be a
competent scientist, a brilliant reporter, worthy of credit in his field as those
politicians of whom Paul wrote, the powers that be are ordained of God. The
theory of relativity is not invalid simply because Einstein was an agnostic
Jew.

Every human being knows the rudiments of the moral law. He knows the
wrongfulness of pornography, theft, betrayal and greed. The Romans knew
that even as they practised their perversions those who did such things
were worthy of death. Felix was not uncomprehending or blas when Paul
reasoned with him of righteousness, self-control and judgment to come. He
trembled because his conscience told him Paul was right. He knew! His
tragedy was how to stop doing what was wrong and do what was right.

Man knows that the world was made by an omnipotent and glorious God.
He understands that truth from the things around him which have the
handiwork of God all over them (Roms. 1:20). The sunsets over the Irish Sea
and the flight of the flocks of starlings both tell him of the living Creator who
made them, but he refuses to glorify God as Creator. He clamps down on
this truth in his unrighteousness. He knows the being, the power, the
goodness and the wrath of God. That is part of the ineradicable mental
equipment of every human being, but he suppresses and distorts this
knowledge. He says, I will not have this God rule over me. The unbelief of
men and women who have long sat under a biblical ministry is not due to
their ignorance of the Christian message but to their disobedience and
defiance. So the fact that men are made in the image of God means that
men do have knowledge.

ii] Secondly, freedom. Men possess a vestigial freedom. God freely created
all things. Of course, in his natural state man suffers from the bondage of
the will. His will tells him to reject Christ, ignore the Bible, never think of his
eternal soul, dismiss any thoughts of prayer, never question what lies
beyond death, and never to seek to know God for himself. Man, the slave to
King Sin, resolutely obeys his master. Galatians 3:22, But the Scripture
declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin. You understand man
freely submits to sin. He chooses to do so. He is not programmed to
respond at the touch of a button. He has not been computerized. He makes
his own decision to have nothing to do with his God. He is a free agent
acting under no external compulsion. He is not being forced to say no to
Jesus Christ. There is no absolute necessity to reject the gospel. This is his
own free choice.

You understand how important this is. It is not because of mans animal
ancestry that men kill other men. It is not some necessary stage in
humankinds development. It is not because of glandular reactions or other
purely biological phenomena. Christians are no friends of determinists.
Christians do not parrot the words whatever will be will be. Yes, all our lives
as believers have been determined by the loving fore-ordination of our
Father in heaven. We sing,

His decrees who formed the earth

Fixed my first and second birth;
Parents, native place, and time,
All appointed were by Him.

Times the tempters power to prove;

Times to taste the Saviours love;
All must come, and last, and end,
As shall please my heavenly Friend.

Plagues and deaths around me fly;

Till He bids, I cannot die;
Not a single shaft can hit,
Till the God of love sees fit. (John Ryland, 1753-1825)

That, however, is very different from saying that my life is mapped out for
me by remorseless factors in the environment like the influences of my
parents, and working conditions, and companions, and education, and the
political leaders that mapped out my society and its values. None of those
factors forced me to lie and cheat and kill and rape. I did that. I freely chose
to do those things. Everything is gone if we throw out mans freedom.
Morality is gone if everything is determined and we are mere puppets. We
are not prisoners of fate. Hold fast to the doctrine of mans freedom!

If you ignore this then you diminish mans sense of responsibility. What a
baleful effect that will have on crime and punishment. In Genesis three we
are presented with man in the most perfect of environments and we see
him falling into sin. Later on in this book we are presented with young
Joseph far from home, meeting the seductions of a married woman and
saying no. He overcame temptation and maintained his integrity in a very
hostile environment. I am saying that your guilt and shame cannot be off
loaded onto other factors. Pleading, The devil made me do it is thrown out
of court. You cannot plead the pressures of your companions or your own
personality or your genetic inheritance. It is possible to transcend all those
pressures. Your guilt is yours! You answer to God. You minimize that and
imperil the dignity of man. We refuse to stand before a man found guilty of
a crime and say, He is not to be punished. He cannot help it. What he needs
is treatment. Inject him and brainwash him. That is a gross insult. Yes, there
are a tiny group of mentally deranged individuals who cannot even plead in
a court of law, but the vast majority of law breakers are dignified men who
when caught suffer just retribution. We ask from the legal system that the
offender receive precisely the punishment his crime deserves, and when he
has served his sentence that he be freed again, his debt paid.

iii] Thirdly, the image of God in man means that man retains an aesthetic
sense, in other words, man has a sense of beauty; he can create and
appreciate form and sound and can respond to it. That is how temptation
came to Eve, when she saw that the tree was pleasing to the eye (Gen.
3:6). But dangerous it is man has a sense of beauty; it is a veritable powder
keg. Nevertheless tribute is paid in Exodus to a man called Bezaleel whose
gifts were especially in these areas, that God; has filled him with the Spirit
of God, with skill, ability and knowledge in all kinds of crafts to make
artistic designs for work in gold, silver and bronze, to cut and set stones, to
work in wood and to engage in all kinds of artistic craftsmanship (Ex. 31:2).

We cannot ignore that aspect of human personality, for example in our

evangelism. We are talking about how we can better advertise a visit to
Aberystwyth of a Christian named Sam Rotman whom I baptized when he
was converted 35 years ago. He was then a student at the New York Julliard
School of Music and he is going to speak and play the piano for us later next
month. It is an evening with an artistic emphasis and so wed like the
invitations to reflect the fact that we are not philistines, and a number of
suggestions have already been made. The people reading them and coming
along will not be Christians but they will have an aesthetic sense because
they are made in the image of God.
Of course God overrules the ugliness of our presentation as he does the
errors of our doctrine but that justifies neither. What care is shown these
days in printing books. The dust-jackets are attractive, and the type face is
large, and the margins are wide. We are not to be obsessed with these
things but we are not to ignore them either. Hugh Miller said that the first
essential of a book is that it be interesting enough to be read, and for
judging a preacher that his sermons be sufficiently engaging that people
will attentively listen to him. Without that all the merit of his orthodoxy and
righteousness is of little avail.

But isnt the history of this town a warning against the dangers of
magnifying the aesthetic sense? This is a community which in 1859 was the
centre for a great work of God in Wales. It is not such a community today.
Other gods are worshipped today, but there is no redemption in the
National Library of Wales, it is only in Christ. There is no salvation in the Arts
Centre. There is no birth from above at the University. There is no divine
conversion in writing, sculpting, painting, composing and playing. They are
not mans chief end. We are not to live for those things. Culture is not our
religion; the worst crime is not to be philistine. How many are utterly
blinded by their appreciation of beauty of form? We know that that
attractiveness and style can serve to obscure the evil of the content. It
encourages a godless message to be received because the package in
which it was offered was attractive. Much contemporary literature and
television is basically degrading.

All works of art have a message and the nature of that message is an
important factor in the evaluation of the work as a whole. In the parables
and discourses of our Lord, in the poetry of Isaiah and David, in the
narratives of Luke and in the epistles of Paul, beauty is the handmaid of
truth. Goyas genius proclaims the brutality of war. Shakespeares analyses
the subtleties of the human heart. Pascals exposes the sophistries of the
Jesuits. In Bunyan, Chalmers and Spurgeon art is wedded to the theology of
the Reformation. But modern art proclaims with almost unanimous voice
the tenets of ungodliness, and if we apply aesthetic criteria alone the evil
goes undetected. Novelists, dramatists and poets have consecrated their
genius to the commendation of secularism, permissiveness, violence and
despair and the beauty of the form is too often used to excuse the
obscenity of the substance. For them it is enough that the work is well-
written. It is irrelevant that it degrades. In this situation we must realize,
first of all, how easily and how totally we [and our children] are influenced
by what we see and read; and [to quote Eliot again] that it is just the
literature that we read for amusement or purely for pleasure that may have
the greatest and least suspected influence upon us. Hence it is that the
influence of popular novelists, and of popular plays of contemporary life,
requires to be scrutinised most closely.

So far as scrutinising them most closely is concerned, the important point is

that literary and aesthetic criteria are not enough. We need more than the
assurance, It is well-written. We must ask, What is the message? And we
must evaluate the message in the light of ethical and religious
considerations. We must tirelessly criticise it, wrote Eliot, according to our
own principles, and not merely according to the principles admitted by the
writers and by the critics who discuss it in the public press. (Donald
Macleod, Gods Image in Man, Banner of Truth, issue 122, November 1973,
p. 13).

iv] Fourthly, the image of God in man shows itself in relationality, in other
words, mans capacity to experience close communion with other people.
There have been great friendships in the world, like Samuel Johnson and
James Boswell, and Coleridge and Wordsworth. One hears of the
contemporary friendship of Matt Damon and Ben Affleck in Los Angeles. In
the church there have been friendships like David and Jonathan, Paul and
Timothy, or William Cowper and Morley Unwin. How precious are our
friends. Yesterdays newspapers with their lonely hearts pages, show us men
and women advertising for a companion. The first article of the Christian
faith is that God is one, but the one God is not solitary. He is triune; there is
Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This is reflected in the life of man. It is not good
for a person to be alone. Take community away from him and he will be the
most miserable of creatures. Of course people are affected by sin in each
part of their beings but they are yet capable of natural affection. Husbands
and wives are bound together in the commitment of total, permanent and
exclusive love. Sacrifices are made for children. Obedience is rendered to
parents. There are many super non-Christian marriages. There are some
struggling Christian marriages. All men and women are made in the image
of God and so are built for other people.

The longing for communion shows itself in the fellowship of Christian

believers who come together for mutual support and affection. That is why
a division in a church destroys peace of mind, takes sleep away, ruins the
lives of many in the congregation because we need the friendship of the
family of faith. The loneliness of man is one of the basic characteristics that
the Gospel addresses. In the world he find competition, rivalry, prejudice
and animosity. A man finds Christ and finds at the same time the fellowship
of those who are also finders. The church is a healing community. Its ethos
and influences should be ruthlessly sanctifying. The victims of a callous
society should find acceptance, and love, and sympathy. To the Christian
not only Christ is precious, the congregation, the body of Christ is precious
too. But most of all we are made for communion with God. This was the
original relationship, one of peace and love, but its disruption hasnt
destroyed mans need for it. God has made us for himself and our hearts are
restless until they find their rest in him. Come to me and I will give you rest,
say the Son of God.

3. MANS CREATION WAS DISTINCTIVE IN THE LORDSHIP WITH WHICH MAN

WAS INVESTED.

Let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the
livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the
ground (v.26). All the animals, and birds and fish and insects have been
made. Finally man is made and given dominion over them. Man is the
image of God. Since God is sovereign then mans likeness to God involves
the exercise of a corresponding sovereignty. He is Gods vicegerent because
he is like God. King of all upon earth, but subject to the King above. It is
impossible to consider man on a par with other animals. In a multitude of
ways God has made him different from them and given him authority over
them. In his very anatomy this is evident. You have thought how mans
hands are unique; the tip of each of our fingers is able to touch the tip of
the thumb, and the thumb itself can move across the palm of the hand to
point to each finger. This is a star feature of the human hand. Man alone
has a hand like that. Again, man walks on two legs not four so the foot has
a large surface of contact with the ground; the hip socket is in a different
place in man. Man stands erect; his back bone is vertical not horizontal.
Man has frontal vision to see the way he is going. Man has an enlarged
brain, and a reduced jaw and weaker teeth, fewer in number. His body is
hairless; his palate is domed shaped like a letter C. When God made man he
made all these features together. They are the features needed for
dominion over every other creature before we consider mans superior
intelligence and powers of concentration.

4. MANS CREATION WAS DISTINCTIVE IN THE PROCEDURES GOD ADOPTED

IN FORMING MAN.

The LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed
into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being (Gen.
2:7). In Genesis 1 we have a big sweeping panorama; mans place is set in
the whole of creation. In Genesis 2 we have a more detailed account of the
making of both man and woman and there is a certain order; man was
made first without Eve. There is no hint of that in Genesis 1. So here in
Genesis 2 we are given details which are not present in the account of mans
creation in Genesis 1. So what is the distinctiveness of the formation of
man?

i] Man was made from the dust of the ground, that is, from previously
created stuff. Man was not made out of nothing but God took existing
material and formed Adam from it. Mans very constitution is the ground on
which we stand. God later said famously to man, Dust thou art. So, as a
result, man has an affinity with the ground which is beneath his feet to till
and dress it and from which he will cause the crops to grow. There is no
discrepancy between us and our environment. If we were set down in Venus
or Neptune there would be impossible discontinuity between ourselves and
those planets. It is not like that for man on this earth. Men who work on the
land and even possess their own land have a noted affinity with it. They will
hold a handful of soil and let it run through their fingers. I was once in dry
Kenya, and rain clouds gathered for hours and finally the heavens opened
and down came the prayed for rain. The farmer I was staying with couldnt
contain himself; out he walked into the rain and around his garden soaked
through to see the impact it was having on his land and crops. If there was
complete disparity between man and the dust of the ground how
incongruous would be mans habitat and environment. We would be aliens
on this planet.

Man also has an affinity with other creatures, because we are told in verse
19 in this second chapter that the LORD God also formed from the ground
every beast of the field and every fowl of the heaven. They too were made
from the ground. Man was made from the dust of the ground. There is that
little distinction in the wording but I dont know what it signifies. So there
are going to be similarities between man and the beasts of the field. God
does not spread diversity unnecessarily and so we will find such an
interesting likeness as this, that the heart of a sheep or the heart of a pig is
virtually identical to our hearts, and that an animals heart valve can be
transplanted to a human being and function in us with the help of various
chemicals for many years. We would expect to find that some animals, like
monkeys, have certain other resemblances of various kinds to man. We
were designed and made by the same Creator from the same ground, so it
would be unusual if it were not so.

ii] What else was distinctive in the making of man was that God breathed
into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being (Gen.
2:7). Now we are being told how different man is from the animals. There is
a dimension of being truly human which you cannot attribute at all to any
parallels with the animals. For man there was an interposition of the most
intimate kind. God held the man he had formed to himself, and almost
embraced him, virtually giving to him the kiss of life. Man was not alive until
that moment; he was still inanimate dust of the earth until that inbreathing
occurred. He became a living creature then, when the breath of God
entered him, and not before. God did not work on previously breathing stuff.
Livingness came when God inbreathed him. In fact he was not a man
without the breath of God. God could not talk to him; man could not
understand and obey and love God until first God breathed into his nostrils
the breath of life. Adam then could stand and look around and examine all
the other creatures God had made from the dust of the ground, but he
couldnt find one counterpart in all the animals of the earth. There was no
helper suitable to man. So we have no hint here that for a long time there
was other creatures, similar to men, alive and manlike, and that then God
worked on one of these pre-humanoids in a second stage of creation and
made a man out of this earlier creature. Adam was not alive and he was not
a man until God did one work in the dust of the ground breathing into its
nostrils the breath of life. Then he became both alive and a man. In one
divine action this occurred.

By a divine exhalation alone you can account for the nature of man; you
cannot explain the extraordinary phenomenon of man by reference to other
kinds of being like insects and reptiles and fish and birds and animals. You
may find interesting congruities but nothing in them can tell us what man is
without this distinctive divine creation. Mans origin was due to a special act
of God in his image and likeness. A process of evolution by forces and
potencies resident in the lower forms of life cannot by itself account for the
apostle Paul, Galileo, Shakespeare, Mozart, Rembrandt, Sir Isaac Newton or
Jesus of Nazareth. We readily acknowledge that there is development within
species. We must do that. There were two dogs taken onto the ark and
today there are several hundred breeds of dogs of all shapes and sizes as
they have evolved in different ways. There is a potency within creation itself
to evolve by its own power, and that is the theory of evolution. But once
you speak of a divine act coming upon the stuff then you are no longer
speaking of evolution; you are speaking of the power of the Creator. There
is this evolution; there is creation; but there is not creation by evolution.
Man himself owes his unique knowledge and freedom and aesthetic sense
and community awareness to the fact that God made him in his image from
the dust of the earth and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life. Before
that he was not alive; before that he was not a man.

What a disaster Darwins theory of human origins has been. It contradicts

the Bible, and even so, evolutionism has many supporters in the professing
church. This past week the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams,
deplored the teaching of creationism in schools. Charles Darwin was praised
in his own lifetime by many church officials, and when he died, he was
buried with great pomp in Londons Westminster Abbey even though Darwin
was not a Christian and did not pretend to be. He described himself as
agnostic and said, I do not believe in the Bible as a divine revelation, and
therefore not in Jesus Christ as the Son of God.

David Feddes has pointed out how one of the first preachers to believe
Darwin was Charles Kingsley, the author of edifying moral tales for children.
He was renowned as a social activist, author, professor, chaplain to the
queen, and canon of Westminster. Kingsley said he was in awe of Darwins
theory, even though it meant, as he put it, I must give up much that I have
believed. He tried to blend Darwinism with his own version of Anglicanism,
known as muscular Christianity. Kingsley taught that humans evolved from
apes and later received a divine spark, which enabled us to keep making
more and more progress toward Gods pattern of perfection. But what if
some people groups did not evolve as far as others, had no divine spark,
and couldnt grasp the gospel of progress? The Black People of Australia,
exactly the same race as the African Negro, cannot take in the Gospel, said
Kingsley. All attempts to bring them to a knowledge of the true God have as
yet failed utterly. . . Poor brutes in human shape. . . they must perish off the
face of the earth like brute beasts.

Those racist words upset John Paton. Unlike Kingsley, Paton was not a
powerful figure in society He was just a humble, godly missionary who knew
his Bible and personally knew people whom Kingsley had labeled poor
brutes in human shape. What Paton saw among these people, he said,
would shatter to pieces everything that the famous preacher had
proclaimed. Paton told how thousands of cannibals were transformed into
wise, loving people by believing the Bibles message of salvation through
faith in Jesus. Many went on to be preachers and teachers. Why had they
formerly been barbaric and murderous? Not because they hadnt evolved
far enough beyond apes but because they were sinners who did not trust or
obey their Creator. They didnt need to be dismissed as animals. They just
needed Jesus and the Bible. They needed to know that they were created in
Gods image, that sin had marred Gods image in them, and that Jesus had
come to save them from their sin and make Gods image shine in them
again.

Ironically, todays barbarians who seem least able to accept the gospel
have white skin. Throughout Britain, western Europe, and among North
Americas intellectual elite, a superstitious faith in evolution blinds many to
the gospel. Meanwhile, throughout the world, people with darker skin far
from being too primitive to grasp the gospel are flocking to Christ by the
millions. The apostle Peter was right when he said, God does not show
favoritism but accepts men from every nation who fear him and do what is
right (Acts 10:34-35). Its not race or class but faith and obedience that
matter most.

The gospel is the same for all. It begins by teaching that all humans have
the same origin: we are descendants of Adam and Eve, created to image
God and to rule creation on Gods behalf. Our spiritual dimension, our
mental ability, our emotions, our capacity for relationships, our position as
the crown of creation, even our bodies all these are part of what it means
to be human and to image God. Herman Bavinck writes, Among creatures
human nature is the supreme and most perfect revelation of God. We all
have the same origin, and we all have the same problem: All have sinned
and fall short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23). We have rebelled against
God, defiled and defaced his image in us, and despised and degraded
others created in Gods image. The gospel also presents us all with the same
solution: faith in the perfect life, sacrificial death, and resurrection of Jesus.
The gospel embraces rich and poor, genius and mentally disabled, infant
and elderly, male and female of every nation or shade of skin. Scripture
says we all must be saved through the blood of one man, Jesus Christ, the
man who perfectly images God and is himself divine. With his blood, he
purchased men for God from every tribe and language and people and
nation. . . And they will reign on the earth (Revelation 5:9-10).

Finally, the gospel says that anyone who trusts in the crucified and risen
Christ has the same future: to become like Christ, who is the image of the
invisible God (Colossians 1:15), and to rule with him over his new creation.
By Gods Holy Spirit, each believer is born again with a new self, which is
being renewed in knowledge in the image of its Creator (Colossians 3:10).
Believe this gospel, and you may be sure that the God who first created
humanity in his image will perfect his image in you, that you may glorify
God and enjoy him forever (David Feddes, The Radio Pulpit Back to God
Hour, Vol. 45, No. 10, Creations Crown, October 2000, pp. 14-17).

Geoff Thomas