In the last issue of this article I introduced the fact that the translators of the Old Testament into Greek actually slightly changed the phrase found in Genesis about man being made in our image, after our likeness to the phrase as we now know it: made in our image and likeness. They used the two Greek words coupled together: eikon and homoiosis. At that time, under the influence of Plato the Greek Philosopher and his disciples, eikon could mean participation in a sensible mode whereas homoiosis referred to the spiritual resemblance toward which man must strive.

Several authors – not only those who used a Semitic language but also certain Greeks – did not take  this nuance into account and did not distinguish between image and likeness: Athanasius of  Alexandria, Didymus, the Cappadocians, pseudo-Macarius, and others (I always find it funny how God manages to work. I do believe that although they did not   understand totally the nuance of what they were suggesting by using these words, they advanced our understanding of what God did when He created us).

Irenaeus made systemic use of this distinction. For him the couplet image-likeness corresponded to the Pauline couplet fleshy man-spiritual man; it was therefore the Holy Spirit who for him established the likeness to God. Origen, followed by one strand of the Eastern tradition, utilized the dynamic character of the image. The image is but incipient deification: its goal is to become as like God as possible. This ascension from image to likeness will be completed in the glory of the risen body and in conformity with Christ’s prayer in unity.

According to Origen’s interpretation, man received the dignity of God’s image at his first creation – it seems that on this connection others speak of baptism – but man must acquire the perfection of this likeness for himself by his own diligence in the imitation of God (Christ). The image is like a seed: the soul conceives by this seed of the Word and the conceived Word is formed in it in conformity with the virtues of Christ.

Again we see the struggle that the Fathers had in coming to the fullness of this idea of the meaning and purpose of life and the ideas of: Theosis and man’s creation in the image and likeness of God.

Progress in the spiritual life develops from practice to theory – that is human understanding of the basic idea of life’s purpose flows from the experiences that they have in trying to comprehend what the meaning and purpose of life really is.

What do you think is the meaning and purpose of life?