Lints Idolatry And Summary

Amazing Essays
The author accomplished laying out his points to the reader. However, this book sounds like it is written for a very specific reason and audience. This is not a text that anyone could read and immediately understand. Rather the book fits someone seeking a more philosophical view on how mankind is created in the image of God and how mankind reflects the image of god (idols). If the book’s overarching purpose is to inform readers about these ideas, then he does succeed. However, I believe if the author’s purpose is to educate and be biblically sound in Scripture he does not fully succeed.
Chapter one of Identity and Idolatry concentrates on the description, definition, and what the image of God is. Lints focus is mainly on a few verses in the
…show more content…
Lints gives some biblical insight of how the Gentiles help aid in the creation of idols. “By contrast idols represent the inversion of the original theological order of representation and reflection. The idols depict an exchange of the glory of God for the foolishness of this world (Rom. 1:23)” (103). Lints specifically uses the New Testament to give reasons for rejecting idolatry as it provides a rare image of the Creator in the form of Jesus Christ. He explains idols were not created by the Creator but created by man and followed by man. They gave up the Truth of God in exchange for a lie that more resembled the shape and idea they were looking to …show more content…
There was very little provided in the text on who originally created this theological idea of cosmic temple or who has supported it. Based on my original understanding of these two chapters, Lints suggests that Adam and Eve were not the first humans on Earth. After further discussion and looking more in depth at the context around this section I instead gather that he is suggesting that the account of Adam and Eve and the details of the first seven days of creation should be viewed as a separate encounter. Either separate events as if there is a space of time in between these two events or separate as the second table is a more in depth account of the first table. I believe this contradicts the biblical understanding of Genesis and the rest of the

Related Documents