{"id":516,"date":"2013-11-08T17:03:00","date_gmt":"2013-11-09T01:03:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/corbanblogs.wpengine.com\/ministry\/?p=516"},"modified":"2013-11-08T16:58:24","modified_gmt":"2013-11-09T00:58:24","slug":"the-significance-of-the-image-of-god","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.corban.edu\/ministry\/index.php\/2013\/11\/the-significance-of-the-image-of-god\/","title":{"rendered":"The Significance of the Image of God"},"content":{"rendered":"

In the movie, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen<\/i>, after USAF Tech Sergeant Epps sees the Autobot Optimus Prime transform, he muses, \u201cYou gotta wonder: if God made us in His image, who made him?\u201d[1]<\/a>\u00a0 Whether or not we answer Epps\u2019s question about autobots is secondary compared to his underlying conditional assumption: if God made us in His image. One of the foundations of the Christian worldview is that God not only created the heavens and the earth, but also humans in His image.\u00a0 This is tremendously significant.\u00a0 While the Bible only makes a few references to the image of God in man, they provide a key theological starting point for conceptualizing a biblical view of humanity (Gen 1:26-27; 5:3; 9:6; 1 Cor 11:7; James 3:9). \u00a0\u00a0These references are in a sense like \u201cproduct placements\u201d or advertisements in a movie, which underscore God as the Creator and Sponsor of His story.<\/p>\n

There has not been a Christian consensus as to what the essence of the image of God is (rationality, original righteousness, dominion itself, immortality, relationship with God, etc.),[2]<\/a> except that it is something that makes humans categorically different than all other animals.\u00a0 Moreover, Christians throughout the ages have generally agreed that the IOG (regardless of exactly how it is defined) is a crucial theological concept that speaks to how we relate to Him, to one another and to creation.[3]<\/a>\u00a0 This article will then try to stress what the Scriptures do say about the IOG and why it is significant for all humanity.<\/p>\n

Significance for Us as a Species<\/b><\/p>\n

That we humans are made in God\u2019s image is incredibly significant for us as a species.\u00a0 However, contemporary culture is fascinated with other \u201clife forms.\u201d So what makes humans distinct as a species if they are made in God\u2019s image?\u00a0 Since the essence of this idea in Scripture is more implicit than explicit, we must focus on how the concept is used and what it implies for the human species rather than fixating on an exact definition of what it is.\u00a0 Therefore there are a few key qualifiers that give focus to the image of God concept.<\/p>\n

First, being made in the image of God differentiates humans from the animal world or lower forms of life. \u00a0Humans are a copy (Hebrew selem<\/i>, Greek icon<\/i>) of something about God, while not some kind of carbon copy of God Himself.[4]<\/a>\u00a0 Mankind, male and female, is made \u201cin the image of God\u201d just as the tabernacle and its utensils were made \u201cin the pattern\u201d (Ex 25:9, 40) of what God revealed to Moses.[5]<\/a>\u00a0 Being made in God\u2019s image is never used for anything other than mankind.<\/p>\n

The Book of Genesis makes a clear distinction between species (\u201cafter their kind\u201d Gen 1:1:24-25).\u00a0 Humans and animals, as God\u2019s creations, do share breath, life, garden, desire for and ability to seek out food, and the ability to reproduce.\u00a0 However, God uniquely filled the nostrils of man with His \u201cbreath of life\u201d in a special moment, something not done to any animal (Gen 2:7).\u00a0 Yet the garden the LORD God planted (from the Hebrew gen<\/i>, from a Persian load word for a king\u2019s palatial garden) was the very place God placed man at the climax of creation for him to manage. \u00a0Furthermore, the pinnacle of God\u2019s creation of the garden itself was His creation of the tree of life and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. \u00a0Mankind\u2019s relationship to the two trees shows that animals do not have moral self-determination (and do not fulfill the creation mandate).\u00a0 Furthermore, this ability to exercise moral capabilities would result in intentions and actions of humanity that would be worthy of praise and blame, censorship or punishment (2:15-17).\u00a0 This distinction is followed by the capstone according to 2:18, in that there was no \u201chelper suitable for him\u201d or located anywhere.\u00a0 This anticipates the institution of marriage and its \u201cone flesh\u201d relationship so very distinct from the merely reproductive drive of animals.\u00a0 Therefore, Feinberg draws the following implications.<\/p>\n

The image of God constitutes all that differentiates man from the lower creation. It does not refer to corporeality or immortality. It has in mind the will, freedom of choice, self-consciousness, self-transcendence, self- determination, rationality, morality, and spirituality of man. The ability to know and love God must stand forth prominently in any attempt to ascertain precisely what the image of God is.[6]<\/a><\/p>\n

Thus the image of God distinguishes humans from animals not just in certain capacities but also in functional and relational expressions of an essential reality.<\/p>\n

Second, because God did not allow the position He gave to human beings to any other created thing, the Bible is explicitly clear that humans are the highest of God\u2019s creative achievements.\u00a0 The creation of Adam and Eve has a unique setting, that is, the climax in the Genesis narratives.\u00a0 All else that exists was the result of the \u201cLet there be\u201d of divine fiat (Gen 1:3, 6, 9, 14, 20).\u00a0 Yet mankind\u2019s origin is the result of divine deliberation, \u201cLet us make man in our image,\u201d[7]<\/a> and for a unique purpose, \u201clet him have dominion\u201d (Gen 1:26).\u00a0 This accords humans intrinsic value and worth, a crucial implication that will be developed below.<\/p>\n

Third, humans as special creations in God\u2019s image rules out that we are an accident of nature through the evolutionary process over millions of years.\u00a0 Even theistic evolutionists like John Lennox find humans as special creations in God\u2019s image distinct from animals an inescapable conclusion from the Bible.<\/p>\n

The image of God in man was not produced as a result of blind matter fumbling its unguided way through myriad different permutations.\u00a0 Thus Genesis challenges atheism\u2019s fundamental assertion that human life has appeared without the activity of God\u2019s mind, so that there is nothing special about human beings.\u00a0 I am tempted to add that it looks as if the writer of Genesis foresaw the contemporary debate![8]<\/a><\/p>\n

In his survey of the debate on origins, Rau states that while there are differences in the interpretations of the scientific evidence, \u201cAll agree that there is a God and that people, made in God\u2019s image, have innate worth.\u201d[9]<\/a> Thus it is incredibly important that humans are \u201cnot just hairless apes with cranial capacities slightly larger than those of other primates,\u201d[10]<\/a> but rather were made with intention.<\/p>\n

Fourth, regardless of a Christian\u2019s position on the effects of the Fall of Adam on the image itself, the image is a characteristic of humanness.\u00a0 Because there is such a strong distinction between humans and animals in the Scriptures, Bray shows the devastating implication if the image was lost at the Fall. \u201cMan would not merely behave like an animal, but would actually be an animal, and therefore hardly responsible for his behavior.\u00a0 The presence of the image is the presence of responsibility, which is at once the glory and the tragedy of fallen Adam.\u201d[11]<\/a>\u00a0 Thus the sum total of the essence of the human species is not mere biological life, but a responsible self in relationship with his or her Creator.\u00a0 Bray\u2019s words are especially poignant at this juncture.<\/p>\n

We see that the real importance of man\u2019s creation in the image and likeness of God is that, unlike the rest of creation, human life is not an end in itself.\u00a0 A dog or a rose may come into existence and complete its life-cycle without engaging its Creator.\u00a0 A dog may do any number of things which, if they were done by a human, would constitute a sin, and even a crime.\u00a0 Man is different.\u00a0 To him alone is given the privilege of fulfilling his earthly existence in relation to God, and this entails responsibility for his actions.\u00a0 The sort of ignorance which would be present if the image were removed is no excuse; there is no salvation by mitigation!\u00a0 In God\u2019s image is found man\u2019s primaeval uniqueness as a creature, his historical tragedy in Adam and his eschatological hope of redemption in Christ.[12]<\/a><\/p>\n

If the image was even severely damaged, which depends on one\u2019s view, the image-humanness remains and makes humans distinct.<\/p>\n

Finally, only humans as a species have been given dominion over all other creatures on the earth (Gen 1:28).\u00a0 Not only are they distinct from the rest, but they are also to rule over other creatures as in God\u2019s place.\u00a0 This significant distinction will be developed under the next main point.\u00a0 It must be noted, therefore, that humans cannot be reduced to just another link in the chain of creatures that stretches back to evolving energized amino acids in a pond millions of years ago.<\/p>\n

Significance for Our Life\u2019s Purpose<\/b><\/p>\n

That we humans are made in God\u2019s image is incredibly significant for our purpose.\u00a0 In the Scriptural data there are two main foci of how mankind expresses the imago Dei.\u00a0 First, humans were made mainly to reflect God.\u00a0 In 1 Corinthians 11:7, Paul argues that men should not have their heads covered in worship, \u201csince man is the image of God and the glory of God.\u201d \u00a0This reverent submission to God flows from man\u2019s two-fold identity and thus purpose.\u00a0 While Paul says man is the glory of God, \u201cwoman is the glory of man.\u201d\u00a0 In other words, man is a directly created reflection of God and thus subordinate to Him, while woman is a directly created reflection of man (taken from his rib) and thus has a subordinate role as helper.\u00a0 This obviously does not mean that women are not made in God\u2019s image or created to glorify God, they just do it some ways differently than men.<\/p>\n

While the image of God cannot be lost or retracted (cf. Gen 5:1-3; James 3:9), the glory of God, intended to be reflected in man, can be diminished.\u00a0 Since the Fall humans are falling short of God\u2019s glory by sinning or failing to live according to the standard of God\u2019s righteousness (Romans 3:23).\u00a0 In other words, while humans were created in the glory of God, they rebelled against it and sought another object to worship (Rom 1:23).\u00a0 Nevertheless, humans can and are to reflect the glory of God.\u00a0 Paul states, \u201cBut we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit.\u201d \u00a0Therefore, in salvation, believers are restored in the glory of Christ, and in sanctification, transformed in the glory of the Spirit (2 Cor 3:18; 4:4).[13]<\/a>\u00a0 The Westminster Shorter Catechism is surely correct when it answers the question of what the chief end or purpose of mankind is, \u201cto glorify God and enjoy Him forever.\u201d<\/p>\n

Second, humans have been given a functional purpose as image bearers.\u00a0 Genesis 1:26-28 shows that God created humans in His image so that they would have dominion over His creation as His governors or vice-regents.\u00a0 \u201cLet us make man in Our image\u201d is followed by \u201cand let them rule over . . .\u201d every other created thing on earth.\u00a0 God makes it clear that humans, through the marriage bond, create families that will not only populate the planet, but subdue it and have dominion over it.<\/p>\n

This lordship of God over all creation mediated by humans is the foundation of the Christian worldview.\u00a0 Thus humans have been made in the likeness of God with an ability to manage, fulfill responsibility, to relate, and be representatives.\u00a0 This concept is found in the Egyptian pharaoh\u2019s lordship over lower orders of creation as the image of God.[14]<\/a>\u00a0 The Bible, however, claims that all humans have this function.\u00a0 This responsibility not only calls for the creation of families, the population of the planet, and the cultivation of livestock and crops, but extends to the creation and management of tribes, towns, cities, and culture.\u00a0 All of this is done, not merely as humans see fit, but as representatives of God and His priorities and standards.<\/p>\n

This functional purpose also implies a responsibility for creation.\u00a0 It is more than just dominion; it is careful management of it as a resource and sacred trust.\u00a0 Every natural resource is God\u2019s and must be treated as such.[15]<\/a>\u00a0 Like the feeling one should have when driving someone else\u2019s car for the first time, humans should feel a sense of responsibility for God\u2019s property.\u00a0 It also means that further research and exploration of God\u2019s creation has always been and continues to be a warranted human pursuit and vocation.[16]<\/a><\/p>\n

Significance For Our Relationships<\/b><\/p>\n

That we humans are made in God\u2019s image is incredibly significant for our relationships.\u00a0 First, this is an amazing display of God\u2019s ability to craft a unique relationship that is beyond mere subordination.\u00a0 As we have seen, mankind\u2019s purpose flows from the imago Dei and is inextricably connected to this relationship.\u00a0 The use of the \u201cUs\u201d and \u201cOur\u201d in the creation narrative demonstrates God\u2019s desire to design a unique personal partnership with humans on the earth.\u00a0 Edwin Hui shows the profound nature of God\u2019s relationship with us His creatures.<\/p>\n

The created \u2018substantial\u2019 person comes about because the triune God intends to relate to a particular person as expressed in and actualized through the act of creation, specifically in God\u2019s making it possible for a particular sperm to merge with a particular ovum, through the conjugal act of a male and female joined in a marital covenant.\u00a0 The formation of a zygote affirms God\u2019s intention to create a new human being as his image and to relate to this unique human being.\u00a0 This points to an eschatological future.\u00a0 Potentialities and capacities are given from the moment of God\u2019s creative act as part and parcel of the created \u2018substance\u2019 and as tools needed by God\u2019s image-bearers to engage God and other creature in relations.\u00a0 But God\u2019s relation with the created human person (substance, image) has already been established through the personal, unilateral and specific act of creation.\u00a0 What is essential to human personhood is this God-creature relationship, intentionally and unilaterally established by God.[17]<\/a><\/p>\n

This purposeful relationship is demonstrated in Genesis 3 when God is seen walking in the Garden with man, and this then reverberates throughout the rest of Scripture.\u00a0 Therefore the very nature of what it means to be human is tied to being in relationship with God.<\/p>\n

Also, the image of God is significant for both males and females.\u00a0 Genesis 1:27 states, \u201cGod created man in own His image, in the image of God He created him, male and female He created them.\u201d\u00a0 Both genders are made in the image of God.\u00a0 This is very significant because it demonstrates that there is an equality of personhood and importance between genders.\u00a0 One gender is not more valuable or important than the other.\u00a0 Genesis 2:18 indicates that the woman was created as a helper to man.\u00a0 However, it does not say that she has less of the image of God or is less of a person.\u00a0 She just has a different role.\u00a0 But as the \u201cweaker\u201d sex with a different role (1 Pet 3:7), she is never to be objectified, used or exploited.<\/p>\n

Moreover, human relationships are to be governed by the foundational assumption that humans made in the image of God have inherent dignity.\u00a0 Because of this inherent value or worth, human life is sacred and must be protected.\u00a0 This assumption is made explicit in Genesis 9 immediately after the flood when God gives instructions for Noah and the rest of humanity.\u00a0 In Genesis 9:6, He declares, \u201cWhoever sheds man\u2019s blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for in the image of God He made man.\u201d\u00a0 In other words, innocent human life is not to be taken or murdered.\u00a0 Murder is associated here with the greatest of punishments.<\/p>\n

Human dignity from the image of God has crucial bioethical, and thus life and death, implications. \u00a0Bioethics as a personhood issue touches life from the embryo to the terminally ill elderly and thus includes, but is not limited to, abortion, reproductive technologies, eugenics, adult human stem cell research, human cloning, physician assisted suicide, euthanasia, genetic testing, and distributive justice in health care.[18]<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0 Thus all innocent human life, including the incapacitated and handicapped, has the \u201cright to life protection by the community\u201d.[19]<\/a><\/p>\n

Finally, since humans are made in God\u2019s image, they are never to be treated with distain or dishonor.\u00a0 James argues that it is a great inconsistency to use one\u2019s tongue to bless God and at the same time curse another person (James 3:9). \u00a0In that context, Jews who would recite the \u201cEighteen Benedictions,\u201d concluding with \u201cBlessed are You, O God,\u201d may have struggled with cursing non-Jews.\u00a0 However, the roots of prejudice in any age cannot co-exist with a right view of humanity. \u00a0Thus the initial element of a cure for all types of socio-religious evils from terrorism to tribalism is a robust understanding of humanity as made in God\u2019s image.<\/p>\n

Conclusion<\/b><\/p>\n

Humans, male and female, embryo and elderly, Jew and Gentile, all bear the image of God.\u00a0 Carl F. H. Henry, the senior statesman of 20th century evangelical theologians, provides a solid summary of the foundational biblical teaching and significance of humans made in God\u2019s image.<\/p>\n

On the ground of transcendent revelation it vouchsafes certain sureties:\u00a0 man is not merely an animal or even a product of animal ancestry; man is a special divine creation made in the image of God who fashioned him from dust and enlivened him for a distinctive role in relation to God, the cosmos and his fellowman; man was made for lifelong union in monogamy and for lifelong duties to his neighbors; man was made a responsible steward of this planet.[20]<\/a><\/p>\n

Even though there is disagreement among Christians as to what the essence of the image of God actually is, there is great agreement as to its significance.\u00a0 This is because it is not tied merely to a few isolated explicit references, but to much broader implications about the nature of humanity.\u00a0 Humans are created by God with a uniqueness and dignity unknown in the animal world.\u00a0 We are a significant species, with a significant purpose and with a significant relationship with our Creator that governs all other relationships.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

[1]<\/a>\u201cTransformers: Revenge of the Fallen-Quotes\u201d, http:\/\/www.imdb.com\/title\/tt1055369\/quotes<\/a>, Accessed: 6\/25\/2013.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[2]<\/a> Reformed theologians have written a fair amount assessing all of the views.\u00a0 See Anthony A. Hoekema, Created in God\u2019s Image<\/i>, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986), 33-65.\u00a0 See also John M. Frame\u2019s online summary of the views in \u201cMen and Women in the Image of God,\u201d https:\/\/bible.org\/seriespage\/men-and-women-image-god<\/a>, Accessed: 8\/5\/2013 and Rev. Angus Stewart, \u201cThe Image of God in Man: A Reformed Reassessment,\u201d http:\/\/www.cprf.co.uk\/articles\/imageofgod.htm<\/a>, Accessed: 8\/5\/2013.\u00a0 However, Gerald Bray\u2019s exegetical assessment of the views as well as many of the texts thought to reference the image of God (esp. in the NT) appears to be a more accurate view.\u00a0 \u201cThe Significance of God\u2019s Image in Man,\u201d Tyndale Bulletin<\/i> 42.2 (May 1991), 195-225.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[3]<\/a> One recent ecumenical example of this can be found in the very recently published volume, Imago Dei: Human Dignity in Ecumenical Perspective<\/i>, edited by Thomas Albert Howard, (Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2013).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[4]<\/a> Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 1-15<\/i>, Word Biblical Commentary, Volume 1, (Waco:\u00a0 Word, 1987), 29, 32.\u00a0 C<\/i>ontra<\/i> D. J. A. Clines, \u201cImage of God in Man,\u201d Tyndale Bulletin<\/i> 19 (1968), 75-80.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[5]<\/a> This does not support a platonic view of those like Philo who held that there was an ideal heavenly image given to humans at creation in physical form.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[6]<\/a> Charles Lee Feinberg, \u201cThe Image of God,\u201d Bib Sac<\/i>, July 1972, 246.\u00a0 See also, Rich Deem, \u201cThe Human Difference: How Humans are Unique Compared to All<\/i> Other Animals,\u201d http:\/\/www.godandscience.org\/evolution\/imageofgod.html<\/a>, Accessed: 8\/5\/2013.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[7]<\/a> Feinberg, \u201cThe Image of God,\u201d 238.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[8]<\/a> John C. Lennox, Seven Days that Divide the World: The Beginning According to Genesis and Science<\/i>, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2011), 70.\u00a0 See the rest of his chapter to see his take on the debate as to when the image of God was actually transferred to human beings and his definition of them before Adam and Eve.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[9]<\/a> Gerald Rau, Mapping the Origins Debate: Six Models of the Beginning of Everything<\/i>, (Downers Grove: IVP, 2012), 151-2.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[10]<\/a> D. A. Carson, The Gagging of God: Christianity Confronts Pluralism<\/i>, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 205.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[11]<\/a> Bray, \u201cThe Significance of God\u2019s Image in Man,\u201d 224.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[12]<\/a> Ibid., 224-5.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[13]<\/a> Ibid., 219.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[14]<\/a> Clines, \u201cImage of God in Man,\u201d 81-85.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[15]<\/a> Carson is indeed correct when he argues that it is important to get the issue of man\u2019s responsibility over \u201cnature\u201d right.\u00a0 \u201cDoubtless the divine mandates to rule over the earth (Gen. 1:28) and to work and take care of the garden (Gen. 2:15) have been used by some as rationale for raw exploitation; doubtless, too, they have been used by others to condemn biblical faith as being exploitative in principle.\u00a0 But the issues are surely more subtle.\u00a0 A faithful reading places human beings in positions of responsibility and authority in God\u2019s universe; it assigns to the Fall the selfishness and suppression of God that exploits and rapes with little restraint.\u00a0 The issues of ecology are thus tied not only to who we are as being made in the image of God, but also to the Fall.\u201d Carson, The Gagging of God<\/i>, 211.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[16]<\/a> See Nancy R. Pearcey and Charles B. Thaxton, The Soul of Science: Christian Faith and Natural Philosophy<\/i>, Turning Point Christian Worldview Series, (Wheaton: Crossway, 1994).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[17]<\/a> Edwin C. Hui, At the Beginning of Life: Dilemmas in Theological Bioethics<\/i>, (Downers Grove: IVP, 2002), 160.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[18]<\/a> See Dennis M. Sullivan, \u201cThe Conception View of Personhood: A Review,\u201d Ethics & Medicine<\/i>, 19:1 (Spring 2003), 11.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[19]<\/a> Scott B. Rae and Paul M. Cox, Bioethics: A Christian Approach in a Pluralistic Age<\/i>, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 132.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[20]<\/a> Carl F. H. Henry, God, Revelation and Authority Volume VI: God who Stands and Stays Part Two<\/i>, (Wheaton: Crossway, 1983), 27-8.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In the movie, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, after USAF Tech Sergeant Epps sees the Autobot Optimus Prime transform, he muses, \u201cYou gotta wonder: if God made us in His image, who made him?\u201d[1]\u00a0 Whether or not we answer Epps\u2019s … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":19,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-516","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p5W8wu-8k","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.corban.edu\/ministry\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/516","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.corban.edu\/ministry\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.corban.edu\/ministry\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.corban.edu\/ministry\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/19"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.corban.edu\/ministry\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=516"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.corban.edu\/ministry\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/516\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.corban.edu\/ministry\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=516"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.corban.edu\/ministry\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=516"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.corban.edu\/ministry\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=516"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}