How Augustine Saw The Imago Dei

Across every society anthropology has recorded, those humans examined had a curious need to search for something beyond their senses. Donald Brown, an anthropologist, counts this belief in the supernatural sense among what he calls “human universals” or traits with no known exception within humanity. Brown identifies what he frames as “UP,” or “the universal people [who] have religious or supernatural beliefs in that they believe in something beyond the visible and palpable.” [1]

This anthropological framing suggests an outward lens through which to view something unknown but more profound. Yet Brown’s anthropology can only document the actions of the human reaching towards something, not identifying what lies beyond it.

It is Augustine of Hippo who offers the Christian believer a way to read that “universal” by an internal framework through which to view the footsteps of the Creator. However, where human instinct focuses their gaze outward, toward a vision in the sky, a burning bush, or spiritual sight in the world, Augustine focuses his gaze internally. The mark of the Maker, he insists, is not external at all. It is the Imago Dei, the image of God that is embedded in the rational soul of everyone. This paper traces how St. Augustine locates, finds, and understands that image, and asks what it means that the divine has left its likeness within each of us.

What is the Imago Dei

In his early encounters with the Bible, St. Augustine found the biblical Creation story a central and difficult text. For him, the challenge was surrounding the amount of intellectual power needed to understand the complexities found in Genesis’s early pages.[2] This led him to repeated efforts over nearly thirty years to interpret Genesis, including at least five commentaries on the subject.[3] These deep explorations into the text of Genesis sparked many scholarly, intellectual approaches to themes such as creation and the nature of Godself, the problem of evil and the fall of man, angels and the spiritual realms, and many other deeply philosophical and theological ponderings.

One such foundational theme focused upon by Augustine was the concept of God’s “image” and “likeness” found in Genesis 1:26:

"And God said: Let us make man to our image and likeness"^[4]

The text uses the terms “image” and “likeness,” yet does not provide a direct definition of a specific term in the overall narrative. For Augustine, this ambiguity offers a deeper well into which to explore the idea of the imago Dei.[5] Augustine’s own reading of the image of God, as presented in his commentary, appears to emphasize the concept that prioritizes what we humans are (reason) as the primary meaning, while also accepting aspects of what we do (dominion) and, to a lesser extent, who we are with (relationship).

Who we are (reason) finds its place among Augustine’s thoughts that humanity is made in God’s image via the human person’s rational soul, or mind.[6] He states the “pre-eminence of reason, with respect to which man is made to the image of God and his likeness.”[7] For him, the rational nature of the human soul is the innermost and principal element found within humanity, and it is this that reflects the divine image most clearly.[8]

And God said: Let us make man to our image and likeness; and let him have authority over the fishes of the sea and the flying things of heaven and all cattle and wild beasts, and all the earth... (Gn 1 :26).

Augustine understands the image as “what we do” (dominion) through his reading of Genesis, where humans are given absolute rule over animals and the Earth itself. However, he treats this understanding of dominion as a direct consequence or sign of the rational soul, and not the essence of the image itself. Governing the animals by reason rather than force is what Augustine calls “a wonderful way to rule them with the power of reason, not by brute force.” It is an outworking of the rational image in the soul.[9]

Augustine frames his understanding of “who we are with” (relationship) through engaging with 1 Corinthians 11:7-12: “... as he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of the man. For man is not from woman, but woman from man; in fact the man was not created for the woman’s sake, but the woman for the man’s.”[10] Augustine interprets the union of man and woman as a sign of the inner relationship between reason and the complementary part of the soul, framing it as almost a mystery pointing toward deeper spiritual truths.[11] Still, relationship is not the primary basis of the image; it is more the manifestation of the rational order within the soul and among humanity.

Augustine’s view of Genesis reveals a particularly careful, reasoned approach to the understanding of God’s image, specifically the thread of “what we are” (reason). For Augustine, the rational soul, rather than “what we do” (dominion) or “who we are with” (relationship), seems to be the focal point and the most effective way in which the human person can fully understand this internal image. He is continually grounding the image of God in the rational soul, or mind, that distinguishes humans from their animal counterparts. This enables the human person to know and love God.[12] This does not seem like a speculative choice by Augustine, but appears to be rooted in his broader theological and philosophical comments, especially those that engage with Neoplatonism and his deep opposition to Manichaean materialism.

The ambiguity within Genesis allows for several interpretations of “image” and “likeness” that can be both a strength and a weakness in Augustine’s thought. There is an openness that springs from this ambiguity. It invites deeper theological reflection and allows doctrine to be developed within the auspices of reason, tradition, and possibly pastoral needs.[13] Augustine expertly uses this ambiguity to explore the depths of human nature, the Trinity, and salvation. However, there is a paradox present: ambiguity that can open the human person to broader theological possibilities, but can also lead to confusion or doctrinal error, as seen in Manichaean heresies.[14] Without clear theological and philosophical boundaries, doctrine can become wild, misapplied, or misunderstood. Augustine understood this himself, and said, “You may choose whichever you prefer; only avoid asserting anything rashly, and something you don’t know as if you did; and remember you are just a human being investigating the works of God...”

Augustine’s view of the imago Dei centers upon the image in reason as it preserves the spiritual nature of humanity and the possibility of renewal through the “grace of justification.”[15] His viewpoint supports and affirms the Christian understanding of salvation, sanctification, and perhaps all people’s dignity. When placed in tandem with dominion and relationship, Augustine’s view offers a comprehensive picture of the internal structure of the imago Dei. Even so, within that structure, reason remains the primary, while dominion and relationship are best understood as expressions that flow from humanity’s rational and spiritual nature.

 

Augustine’s Platonic Inheritance

Augustine consistently indicates an affinity for the soul over the physical body, the inner world over the outer, and the intelligible over the tangible through his commentaries on Genesis. This is especially so as he denounces Manichaean materialism and advances, in his own right, a Christian-Neoplatonic epistemology and anthropology.[16]

He affirms strongly that the absolute image of God in humanity is not one of their bodies, but instead of the intangible, the rational soul, and the human mind. Augustine writes, “it was in the very factor in which he surpasses non-rational animate beings that man was made to God’s image. That, of course, is reason itself, or mind, or intelligence, or whatever other word it may more suitably be named by.”[17] His understanding clearly distinguishes the soul as incorporeal and more regarded than the body. “...it is still not the body that is the subject of sensation, but the soul through the body; so this, being itself incorporeal, activates the power of sensation through the finer, the least coarse kind of body.”[18]

Augustine frames his Neoplatonic understanding further by delving into a hierarchy of knowledge and vision by grading reality’s order. By this framework, all things flow from God, the Being itself, and through that emanation flows toward all levels of Creation. Nevertheless, he also brings along the intellectual, including angels (intelligent beings) and the rational soul, and the corporeal order, reminding his readers, “...spiritual vision is in need of the intellectual kind in order to have a judgement or assessment made of it, while the intellectual is in no need of this inferior spiritual kind.”[19] This once more calls forth the need for the intellect (the rational mind) to fully view the divine.

He speaks of the return, or ascent to God. Editor and translator of On Genesis, Edmond Hill, confirms Augustine’s view of ascent: “...creation is destined to find its fulfilment through a return to God. The creator awaits the free response of his creature.”[20] This view may be hopeful and affirming for Christian believers as it echoes Jesus’ own words in John 16:28 (NIV).

"I came from the Father and entered the world; now I am leaving the world and going back to the Father."

Augustine’s Imago Dei

When seeking a clear definition of Augustine’s idea of image (imago), readers find him recalling a reflection in a mirror (participation), an image that “Only then, you see, is a thing an image of something besides itself when it is, as it were, printed off from it.”[21] This is the closest Augustine comes to a concise, one-sentence definition within his work for the image: for him, it is something “printed off” or descended from its original, not simply something else alien in its image, but it is its own image in its own right, while simultaneously being separate. He further clarifies that not everything that is like something else is its image, but every image is like its original. For St. Augustine, the image in the mirror reflects likeness, which has its origin in the thing it images.[22]

He explains that not every likeness is an image; however, not every likeness is in its image.[23] As humans are made in the image of God (imago Dei), their rational soul (intellect) is descended from, and more importantly, patterned after the divine Word (Jesus), but not equal to God. He emphasizes that the image is properly found in the rational mind, or intellect. For him, the human mind is capable of loving and knowing God and thus recognizes its divine nature.[24]

To further this understanding through a Christian lens, Augustine also notes the hidden meaning of “us” within “let us make man in our image and likeness.” Who is “we”? Who is “us”? Readers may ponder and Augustine answers, “...that man was made to the image, not of the Father alone or of the Son alone or of the Holy Spirit alone, but of the Trinity itself.”[25] Here the inclusion of “we” and “our” suggests that perhaps this is the Triune God speaking to itself. Christian doctrine identifies Godself as three independent yet singular identities: Father, Jesus (Son), and Holy Spirit. When considering God’s triune nature, the reading takes on a more theologically significant weight, for God was speaking to Godself and in dialogue with the three aspects within Godself. Again, Augustine’s suggestion that it takes human intellect to properly understand Genesis cannot be underestimated as the rational mind needs to convince the incomprehensibility of a God that is three and yet one.

Augustine’s Neoplatonic view that all things flow from God invites a question about images: how does he distinguish the “vestige” (footprint) of God found within all creation from the “image” of God, which he locates exclusively in the rational soul of the human person? Augustine teaches, “All things, after all, have in them a certain worth or grace of nature.”[26] He understands that all created things bear a footprint of their Creator. He also writes that there is a remnant present in all things. This is because all things flow and are created by God and thus, as in a mirror, reflect in some way God’s wisdom and power.[27] However, that footprint is impersonal and does not confer within it the dignity or ability to be in relationship with God.

For Augustine, the “image” of God is found exclusively within the human soul, specifically within the soul’s ability to rationalize and think intellectually.[28] He is quite explicit in his view that while animals are included in God’s creation, the image of God is not in the body of the human person, nor within animals. Editor Edmond Hill calls upon Ambrose to understand that it is the realm of human intellect that allows the mind’s ability to know and love God.[29] Augustine goes a bit further: “man is said to have been made to the image of God, it is said with reference to the interior man, where reason is to be found and intelligence; and it is from this that he gets ‘authority over the fishes of the sea and the flying things of heaven, and all cattle and wild beasts, and the whole earth.’”[30] suggesting that this intellect also allows humanity to find dominion over animals. Considering this view, it appears that Augustine is reminding his readers that there may be an element of dignity offered to animals, recalling his earlier statements on how we can use our human minds to tame animals, not just control them through brute force or abuse.[31]

Augustine utilized his own lived experience as he approached his Genesis commentaries, and this may have influenced not only how he approached the concept of the imago Dei, but also how the image engaged in his own life. He presents God’s image as a dynamic, not static concept. He explicitly explains the image as something that can be defaced by sin and yet renewed and reformed by grace.[32] This concept of a malleable image that is alive and active may reflect his own understanding of sin and forgiveness. He explains that through sin, the image is not destroyed but disfigured and requires restoration. For the Christian reader, this repeated reflection, renewal, and forgiveness echoes Luke’s witness in Luke 5:31-32 (NIV), where Jesus teaches:

"It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance."

Here, Jesus offers exactly what Augustine suggests for the renewal of the image. Augustine appears to agree as he recalls Paul: “...Be renewed in the spirit of your minds and put on the new man, who has been created in accordance with God (Eph 4:23-24).”[33] And thus the image of God, for Augustine, appears to be both gift and journey: imprinted in the rational soul at creation, defaced by sin, and ceaselessly renewed by the grace of the One whose likeness it bears. Thus, the repetitive nature of self-evaluation, seeking forgiveness, receiving that forgiveness, and growing toward God is a feature and function of Augustine’s image.

Conclusion

Augustine’s understanding of the imago Dei is so much more than a doctrinal cry; it offers an innovative framework for how humanity might see itself and its place among Creation. His work reaffirms several Christian beliefs, chief among them being that humanity uniquely bears God’s image. He affirms human uniqueness among all creatures as one endowed with a rational soul and intellectual thought. For him, this unique image allows humans to know and love their Creator, and that love may spread to others within the Creation.

From these ideas springs a possible ethical framework and meditation: if every human bears the imago Dei, then perhaps every human carries an inherent dignity that demands recognition and care. This framework also extends outward, raising foundational questions about how humans should interact with the natural world. Moreover, it raises concerns about how humanity should treat animals and possibly how ecological care must be paid to all creation. If humanity, “the birds of the air,” and the animals of the land are crafted by the same Creator, and if dominion is meant to be exercised through reason rather than brute force, then humanity may find itself questioning how it addresses creation’s care. The image, once understood, does not become a private possession of the soul. It stirs something within the human, engages in seeking, and allows humanity to understand the Creator, if only dimly. For Christian believers, it can and possibly should become a call to live in harmony with each other, and with the natural world around us.

Bibliography

Augustine, Saint, Edmund Hill, and John E Rotelle. On Genesis. Hyde Park, Ny: New City Press, 2002.

Brown, Donald E. Human Universals. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1991.

^[1] Donald E Brown, Human Universals (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1991), p. 139.

^[2] Saint Augustine, Edmund Hill, and John E Rotelle, On Genesis (Hyde Park, Ny: New City Press, 2002), p. 16.

^[3] Saint Augustine, On Genesis, p. 13.

^[4] Saint Augustine, On Genesis, p. 150.

^[5] Saint Augustine, On Genesis, p. 16.

^[6] Saint Augustine, On Genesis, p. 499.

^[7] Saint Augustine, On Genesis, p. 146.

^[8] Saint Augustine, Edmund Hill, and John E Rotelle, On Genesis (Hyde Park, Ny: New City Press, 2002, p. 149.

^[9] Saint Augustine, On Genesis p. 390.

^[10] Saint Augustine, On Genesis, p. 99.

^[11] Saint Augustine, On Genesis, p. 82.

^[12] Saint Augustine, Edmund Hill, and John E Rotelle, On Genesis (Hyde Park, Ny: New City Press, 2002), p. 472.

^[13] Saint Augustine, On Genesis, p. 100.

^[14] Saint Augustine, On Genesis, p. 24.

^[15] Saint Augustine, On Genesis, p. 322.

^[16]  Saint Augustine, Edmund Hill, and John E Rotelle, On Genesis (Hyde Park, Ny: New City Press, 2002), p. 34.

^[17] Saint Augustine, On Genesis, p. 234.

^[18] Saint Augustine, On Genesis, p. 200.

^[19] Saint Augustine, Edmund Hill, and John E Rotelle, On Genesis (Hyde Park, Ny: New City Press, 2002), p. 492.

^[20] Saint Augustine, On Genesis), p. 15.

^[21] Saint Augustine, On Genesis, p. 174.

^[22] Saint Augustine, Edmund Hill, and John E Rotelle, On Genesis (Hyde Park, Ny: New City Press, 2002), p. 174.

^[23] Saint Augustine, On Genesis, p. 174.

^[24] Saint Augustine, On Genesis, p. 235.

^[25] Saint Augustine, On Genesis, p. 150.

^[26] Saint Augustine, Edmund Hill, and John E Rotelle, On Genesis (Hyde Park, Ny: New City Press, 2002, p. 229.

^[27] Saint Augustine, On Genesis, p. 253.

^[28] Saint Augustine, On Genesis, p. 149.

^[29] Saint Augustine, On Genesis, p. 27.

^[30] Saint Augustine, On Genesis, p. 56.

^[31] Saint Augustine, Edmund Hill, and John E Rotelle, On Genesis (Hyde Park, Ny: New City Press, 2002), p. 57.

^[32] Saint Augustine, On Genesis, p. 167.

^[33] Saint Augustine, On Genesis, p. 472