We have spent several posts looking at Gen 1-3 and at Paul's understanding of Genesis and its role in his atonement theology in Romans 5. In the course of this discussion several different people have brought up Romans 8, especially verses 19-22 as another important passage to inform our thinking. Certainly Romans 8 provides another reflection on Gen 3 and the consequence of the Fall. In Gen 3 we read:
Then to Adam He said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, 'You shall not eat from it'; Cursed is the ground because of you; In toil you will eat of it all the days of your life. "Both thorns and thistles it shall grow for you; And you will eat the plants of the field; By the sweat of your face you will eat bread, till you return to the ground, because from it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return.
And in Romans 8
For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us. For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now.
This is a powerful, poetic, and dynamic passage. The whole earth is in bondage to decay on account of the sin of man and the curse of God. The whole earth is in anticipation, NT Wright says "on tiptoes with excitement" awaiting the coming renewal and the coming glory of the children of God.
This leads us to ponder : What is the curse of the ground and the bondage to decay that is set right by the inauguration of kingdom of God and how does it interface with our scientific knowledge of creation?
A broken relationship, not a change in fundamental physics: It seems clear that the curse is in the broken relationship between man and creation, between humans and the earth. The earth was subjected to futility by God, on account of the sin of adam. John Stott points out that the word used by Paul, translated futility above, is the same word used in the LXX to translate Ecclesiasties 1:2 Vanity of vanities! All is vanity.
The basic idea is emptiness, whether of purpose or result. ... For it expresses the existential absurdity of a life lived 'under the sun', imprisoned in time and space, with no ultimate reference point either to God or eternity. (p. 239, The Message of Romans (The Bible Speaks Today))
) This pointlessness and curse is corrected by the work of Christ; for to restore the relationship between man and God is to restore the relationship of man with creation as well. FF Bruce notes:
Man was put in charge of the 'lower' creation and involved it with him when he fell; through the redemptive work of the 'second man' the entail of the fall is broken not only for man himself but for the creation which is dependent on him. (p. 160, Romans (Tyndale New Testament Commentaries))
)N T Wright expands upon these ideas:
The answer, if the creator is to be true to the original purpose, is for humans to be redeemed, to take their place at last as God's imagebearers, the wise steward they were always meant to be. Paul sees that this purpose has already been accomplished in principle in the resurrection of Jesus, and that it will be accomplished fully when all those in Christ are raised and together set in saving authority over the world (see 1 Cor 15:20-28). That is why, Paul says, creation is now waiting with eager longing. (p.596 The New Interpreter's Bible, Volume 10).
). The restoration is not yet complete - although it is inaugurated through the atoning work of Christ.
A continuity and renewal: The interpretation of this passage impacts eschatology as well as origins. The image of birth-pangs in Romans 8 suggests a continuity between the current creation and the future new creation - we await revolution and
renewal not abolition of the current order. Wright makes this abundantly clear in all of his work, including his recent book Surprised by Hope - the subject of a long series on this blog last year (first, last). But these are not new ideas, both Bruce and Stott agree. According to Bruce:
- the subject of a long series on this blog last year (These words of Paul point not to the annihilation of the present material universe on the day of revelation, to be replaced by a universe entirely new, but to a transformation of the present universe so that it will fulfil the purpose for which God created it....But the transformation of the universe depends upon the completion of man's transformation by the working of God's grace. (p. 161)
And John Stott:
Although we must be careful not to impose modern scientific categories on Paul, we must hold to his combination of present suffering and future glory. Each verse expresses it. The creation's subjection to frustration was in hope (20). The bondage to decay will give place to the freedom of glory (21). The pains of labour will be followed by the joys of birth (22). There is therefore going to be both continuity and discontinuity in the regeneration of the world, as in the resurrection of the body. The universe is not going to be destroyed, but rather liberated, transformed and suffused with the glory of God. (p. 241 Romans)
Some have suggested that the curse upon the earth completely changed the nature of the world, resulting in volcanoes among other things - the geysers at Yellowstone are in an ancient caldera. But this does not seem consistent with either the text we have or the world we see. The curse on the earth related to a broken relationship between man as image of God with dominion over God's good creation and creation itself. The "fall" did not change the laws of physics. The curse did not result in earthquakes, tornadoes or volcanoes; carnivorous animals, parasites, or even sadistic cats. God's creative universe was good - but Paul suggests that the goal is even better still. The liberation and renewal awaits the transformation and regeneration of man. And we are in a period of tension: already - but not yet. Yet this is not stasis - a time of stationary waiting. We have a mission as we follow God and rest in the assurance of his redeeming work.
So - what do you think is the nature of the curse upon creation? And what is the Christian mission in the present stage - as creation yet groans in anticipation of the coming glory?
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
From the Creation and the Fall of Man until Jesus Death and Resurrect-
ion,man was set free.The Bible says in John3:16"For God so loved
the World that He gave His only begotten Son,that whosoever believes in Him,shall not perish,but have everlasting life".Everlasting life
i believe refers to "eternity'the original plan of God for men,can only happen to those who receive the "WORD",for our physical body,will decompose but we will be transformed into a new spiritual
body that will not decay,like Jesus'body after His Resurrection,He ascended to heaven with that new body.Annihalation issues of the world
is impossible!It may pass away but no one knows how?John3:16 again,For
God so love the world...so God is in control!
On the matter of Mr Kruse's thought, making me think as it did :
Oiling my rusty Greek and delving into its lexica, I’ve come to see 2Peter3:10 more precisely as: ‘But the day of the lord will have come like a thief, in which the heavens, with a (great) rushing sound, will come undone and, by way of intense heat, the elements will be freed of their bonds (molecular & otherwise?) and the earth and the works therein will be found out.’
'Will have come' has a future perfect sense implying that it'll come so fast that none will notice til it's already come, ...too late.
As stewards of the earth, we have worked not for the communal integrity of our stewardship, but against it, and concomitantly not for the earth but against this as well, which is to say, not for the health of it, for sure. Historical context places Peter as a believer in the 4 elements. I wonder if he considered the fifth.
The Greek word for work, transliterated as 'ergon' denotes
business, employment, that in which any one is occupied (=occupation); that which one undertakes to do, enterprise, undertaking; any product whatever, anything accomplished by hand, art, industry, or mind; an act, deed, thing done: the idea of working is emphasized as opp. to that which is less than work.
It thus connotes the work of humankind, whatever it be, be it kind or not. Thus ‘the earth and the works therein’ means ‘the earth and the human works therein’. That they 'will be found out' signifies that they will have been revealed, with an absent dative implicitly universal. To whom shall it be revealed anyway? Will all have been reduced to plasma? If so, then who will be left for the 'revelation' to matter? Maybe it is to the saints and surely to Him, despite our insistence on His masculinity, that in the end of the present age all shall be revealed.
Of course, since 'world' the word derives from the Anglo-Saxon
wera-ieldu, 'age of man', I tend to think of the end of the world
as the end of the present age, and not necessarily of the earth.
I would hate to think that the Lord would allow His creation to be completely undone because of our spiritual inanity.
____________________________________________________________
Re Mr Ken's thought : Its empiric illogic notwithstanding, Ken’s deduction that there likely was no rain before the purgative flood may be extended to include all the variations thereof : no ice, no snow, no clouds, not even enough moisture in the heavens to effect the appearance of a rainbow. Within a hair’s breadth of torrid aridity, the humidity might have been pleasant. And the flora were in need no water, or at least in no need of a heavenly sprinkle or two. The water table may have such that they thrived. Yet I wonder, does speculative knowledge such as this render us more salvageable from ignorance, more worthy therefore of salvation?
Why do I get the impression that this smacks of "Liberation Theology?"
The earth certainly underwent changes such as thorns and thistles as mentioned in Genesis! There is ample eviddence that most-if not all-dinosaurs were vegetarians, so the earth WAS changed. The return of Christ is NOT dependent on man's actions.Christ had a discernible and tangible body when he ascended and He has that body for all time. We don't know what type of body we'll have if we die before His return but our physical body will be reunited with whatever body we have been given in the interim. In the meantime we are to occupy until His return or our death. We can be politically active but not at the expense of truth. Being Christians does not exempt us from being responsible US Citizens and that involvevs speaking out against injustices, animal cruelty, the right to bear arms etc but without jeopardizing the cause of Christ.
Chaplain,
I'm not sure what 'evidence' you have of dinosaurs being vegitarians, but I'm pretty sure the large majority of scientists have rejeted the idea (including Christian Scientists). Likewise, why does this smack of 'Liberation Theology'? Can't we be interested in what the Bible says regardless of what title it seems to follow? Also, NO ONE here is saying Christ's return is dependent upon the actions of man; only that we have a mission to accomplish (pursue) in the interim.
RJS,
This is going to be quite odd to throw into this conversation, but have you read The Shack? Oddly enough, it seems to offer a great answer to the question that some of us seem to have been throwing around and considering throughout this series. That is, man, having eaten from the tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, decided for themselves (and continue to do so) what is "good" and what is "evil." Our judgments are based off of self-centered conceptions of the universe, and anything which seems bad to me, is bad, regardless of whether it accomplishes an overall, universal good (the example used was poisonous plants).
I find this to be a plausible answer which i was already considering, and it is consistent with the whole of the Biblical Story. Man is fallen, the relationship with creation, God, and mankind, is all broken and fallen. The restoration of mankind will be reason for celebration for all three parties, as all relationship will be restored, and everything set right.
To all,
This brings me to the question of "will physics change for the New Creation?"
I think the answer for me is becoming no. Why? Because that allows us to imagine what it might look like according to our fallen, broken concepts of Good and Evil. Maybe it will be very much the same as it is now, we will simply know the good in all of God's creation which is good. After all, God said "it was good," and we determined certain things were "bad." Then we decide "things must have drastically changed" even though this is never said in the Bible, instead of saying "we must have drastically changed" which is always said in the Bible.
Ben,
I have not read The Shack - perhaps at some point. Interesting reflections.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.