In the Roman world, within the household, the position of child is the lowest in terms of power and hierarchy. Taking this into account, consider Mark 10:15:
I tell you the truth, anyone who doesn’t receive the Kingdom of God like a child will never enter it.
Rather than assuming our standard in pouring of innocence and naiveté into the phrase “like a child,” perhaps we are better served with assuming a Roman view of children, of powerlessness over others into this phrase.
Also consider Luke 22:25-27
Jesus told them, “In this world the kings and great men lord it over their people, yet they are called ‘friends of the people.’ But among you it will be different. Those who are the greatest among you should take the lowest rank, and the leader should be like a servant. Who is more important, the one who sits at the table or the one who serves? The one who sits at the table, of course. But not here! For I am among you as one who serves.
Here again we see the same theme – the relinquishment of dominance as a command of Jesus to his followers, to the members of the Kingdom of God.
If we do not relinquish culturally inherited claims of dominance over others and see them as true equals then ours is not the Kingdom of God.
Seeing people as the imago deis involves the complete removal of claims of dominance and superiority. This must be applied in terms of race and gender. It is a command to give up our claims of dominance over others.
I don’t think that the texts cited call for us to see each other as equals, rather we are called to view others as greater than ourselves. That to follow Jesus’ example is to become a doulos, as slave (not bond-servant but a slave). He came to be a servant according to Mark 10:45 and the apostle Paul says in that beautiful hymn of Philippians 2:5-8 (NET),
I just don’t think you go far enough in our views of others. We must be servants of others, not just equals. But overall, I like the post.
Di g what you are saying here, Hank. If I were to expound what living as fellow imago deis looked like I would proceed further and talk about a fellow servant relationship that mirrors that of the Godhead. In other words, I maintain what I said in the post, but if I were to expand upon it, I would most certainly move in the direction you are describing.
(What, we are agreeing? Is one of us, or both a Skrull?)
Um after reading Secret Invasion #1, I don’t who is a skrull around these parts anymore.
I’m not entirely certain on this…but I think a slave (doulos) would technically be lower on the hiearchy spectrum of a Roman household than a child. Children have the potential to become adults and thus transition to places of power in the Roman system. Slaves however don’t have that option. Even when becoming freed(wo)men, they have less rights/status than a citizen in the empire. With that taken into consideration, I’d say it gives an interesting spin to Paul’s employment of the term.
From what I understand, it all depends on the household. In some, there are are slaves that are seen as higher than children and wives, in others there are no slaves which are higher than any freed person.
But your point stands reguardless.
[...] Imler presents Relinquishment of Dominance as a Requirement for Citizenship in the Kingdom of God posted at Theology for the Masses. What does it mean to be “like a [...]