Theo 9

It just occurred to me that Bearing God's image can fall under a legal covenant that discusses man's dominion over God's creation. As with any arrangement that substitutes one sub-ruler over another's domain. The sub-ruler cannot claim authority over that which lies outside of his own. To do so is equivalent to rebellion. (ie The forbidden tree is outside Adam's). The sub-ruler additionally in this type of covenant is suppose to rule and act like the main ruler. (ie dishonor the main ruler to do otherwise). The cultural mandate thus becomes the provisions and powers of this past covenant. This mandate likewise follows that the curses of the fall. The broken covenant meant there was a repeal of the provisions by instituting pain, suffering, and death in the pursuit of man's naturally rule. It does not destroy the image bearing outright. These rather make it too difficult for man to pretend that he rules every living thing exclusively. Man must eat his bread by sweat and return to the dust. Death and pain have become his master.

There is plenty of extra-biblical evidence for a sub-ruler covenant of this type that involves image bearing in the Egyptians. Pharaohs were images of Horus. At one time, pharaohs were merely followers of Horus, rather leaders that were incarnations of him.

Bearing his image meant physically acting like Horus to the Egyptians. This later boiled down to acting like the other pharaohs. Ptolemy I shows us this trend. He had to act like a pharaoh to remain one. He had to incestuously married his children.

Now the question remains could the covenant of works be replaced by such a different covenant. A different covenant with similar requirements but entirely different terms. The ramifications with respect to Christ as second Adam are minimal but easily discerned. It makes sense of why everything is to be put under His feet. It is part of being the second adam. Close the box again, quick!