Image of God and Gender

It is Karl Barth who said that the image of God consists primarily gender - that is, we express our humanity in our identity as human beings that are either male or female in relationship with one another and God (see CD III/1.41.2, 1.41.3 and III/4.54). In so doing, Barth seeks to move away from describing the image and likeness of God in terms of attributes such as rationality and argues that our being is being-in-fellowship, and that fellowship is not just of two persons who are essentially the same, but rather male and female. To describe humanity as in the image of God (ie in Gen 1 and 2) thus affirms gender and gender differences, while not spelling out what those differences are.

How does this relate to the triune God? Moltmann argues in God in Creation:

'The one God, who is diffentiated in himself and is at one with himself, then finds his correspondence in a community of human beings, female and male, who united with one another and are one.' (218).

This is not to say that God is gendered, but rather demonstrates that within the triune God's eternal relations of Father, Son and Spirit that their is a being-in-fellowship between three persons who are other than each other. The Father is not the Son, nor is the Son the Father. Their is a differentiation within the persons of the trinity but not a separation.

In the same way, their is a differentiation in creation between male and female. When God observes Adam in the garden alone, he says it is 'not good'. In creating woman, he does not make a second Adam, but creates woman, out of the man, for the man, fit for the man - one who he is other than, but related to. Of the same substance, but not collapsing into him and loosing all distinction. And this difference is built into humanity being fit for the task for which they were created - together to rule over creation, to subdue it and to fill it.