Re: A NT doctrine of creation (was canon within the canon)

From: Graham Morbey (gmorbey@wlu.ca)
Date: Mon Feb 05 2001 - 09:28:19 EST

  • Next message: bivalve: "Re: A NT doctrine of creation (was canon within the canon)"

    An interesting discussion of the link between the incarnation and creation
    and the doctrine of the Holy Spirit can be found in C.E. Gunton's CHRIST
    AND CREATION.

     
    ******************************************************************************
    Graham E. Morbey, Chaplain || Wilfrid Laurier University
    tel. 519-884-1970 ext.2739 || Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3C5
    fax 519-885-4865 || gmorbey@wlu.ca
    ******************************************************************************

    On Mon, 5 Feb 2001, george murphy wrote:

    > Jonathan Clarke wrote:
    >
    > > Hi All
    > >
    > > Thinking further about George's challenge to reflect on the theology of
    > > creation (TOC) in the NT (and not looking at the OT by way of
    > > discipline) I submit the following thoughts.
    > >
    > > WHAT DO WE LEARN OF CREATION FROM THE NT?
    > >
    > > 1. God is creator and sustainer of the entire universe (Rev 4:11).
    > >
    > > 2. God's power and glory is clearly visible in creation, so there is no
    > > excuse for unbelief. Sinfulness however blinds people to the evident
    > > signs of God's power and glory in creation (Rom 1:20-21).
    > >
    > > 3. Creation is temporary and will come to an end (2 Pet 3:5-10). This
    > > is in contrast with God, Who is eternal (Heb 1:10-12).
    > >
    > > 4. Humanity is sinful, estranged from God because of wrong choices made
    > > by the first man called Adam and a woman (Rom 5:12-21, 1 Tim 2:13-14).
    > > All creation suffers from the consequences of these choices (Rom 8:22).
    > >
    > > 5. God is saviour and redeemer and will redeem His creation (Eph
    > > 1:9-10). This redemption culminates in a new heaven and a new earth
    > > (Rev 21:1).
    > >
    > > All this repeats and emphasises what is in the OT. Is there anything we
    > > gain in the NT that is absent or unclear in the OT?
    > >
    > > WHAT IS ADDED TO THE TOC IN THE NT?
    > >
    > > 1. God is triune. The second person of the Trinity is active in
    > > creation and redemption (John 1:1-4).
    > >
    > > 2. The second person of the trinity is incarnate as the man Jesus (John
    > > 1:14), Whom even the winds and waves obey (Mk 4:41)
    > >
    > > 3. Redemption is effected through the incarnation and the cross (Col
    > > 1:20). The Resurrection is the demonstration of the effectiveness of of
    > > that redemption (Eph 1:19-21).
    > >
    > > 4. Salvation through Jesus is not God's plan B. It was always His
    > > intent from before the creation (Eph 1:4).
    > >
    > > 5. The indwelling Holy Spirit brings new life and the new creation to
    > > the believer, making them God's people (Eph 1:13-14)
    > >
    > > 6. This process will eventually extend to the whole of creation, which
    > > looks forward with anticipation to that day, when the new heavens and
    > > earth are complete (Rom 8:21).
    > >
    > > 7. God's position as creator can only be appreciated through the gift of
    > > faith, despite its evident nature (Heb 11:3).
    > >
    > > The great contribution of the NT to a TOC is the revelation that it is
    > > through Jesus that redemption, not just of individuals and peoples, but
    > > of the whole of creation is effected.
    > >
    > > Sorry George, I now have to let the OT creep in. What do we lose from
    > > the TOC if we confine ourselves to the NT?
    > >
    > > WHAT DO WE LOSE FROM THE TOC BY USING ONLY THE NT?
    > >
    > > 1. The statements about God as creator and sustainer in the NT are
    > > rather bald. I for one would think the doctrine poorer (though not less
    > > true) with out the rich illustrations of them from Job and Psalms. Not
    > > to mention the loss to our imaginations.
    > >
    > > 2. The context of the fall is rather cryptic without the OT. Who was
    > > Adam exactly? Not that we necessarily know the answer even with the OT!
    > > :-) However I was surprised how much of the essentials I could
    > > reconstruct from the NT.
    > >
    > > 3. Loss of the role of the Holy Spirit as creator and sustainer. I
    > > think this is the greatest loss to a TOC. I can't think of any NT
    > > reference to the Spirit's role in creation to match Gen 1:2 or Psalm
    > > 104:29-30. I would be happy to be proved wrong. Of course the
    > > significance of the Spirit of God in these OT references (which could
    > > also be translated wind or breath) is not clear until seen from a
    > > Trinitarian NT perspective.
    > >
    > > 4. Human accountability as steward of creation is not clear. We would
    > > lose much by not having Genesis 1 and 2 and Psalm 8 for reference. The
    > > best we could do would be to extrapolate from the use in Hebrews 2 of
    > > Psalm 8 and perhaps the parables of the servants.
    > >
    > > In conclusion I think this clearly demonstrates that the NT is built on
    > > the foundation of the old. It shows that almost all the essential
    > > aspects of the OT TOC (apart from little on stewardship and the possible
    > > exception of the Spirit) is repeated in the NT. Significant new
    > > revelations are the fact that the fall was not plan B of God, and that
    > > God's redemption of individuals, peoples, and the whole creation is
    > > worked out through the Incarnation. The NT is essential in that it
    > > provides the big picture, the whole timeline. The OT looks at the
    > > present and back to beginnings. The NT restates the theological facts
    > > about the present and the past but is focused on where things are going
    > > and what is to come.
    > >
    > > The NT shows the centrality of the cross to the whole creation drama,
    > > our faith, and our hope. This centrality of the cross (not of mere
    > > creation) shows the heresy (and I make no apology for such a strong
    > > word) of one AiG poster which I remember saying "Answers in Genesis.
    > > Help us make creation a foundation of faith".
    >
    > Carrying this further & also expressing some differences from your
    > comments:
    >
    > 1) Recall that I suggested that we "focus on relevant NT texts
    > (reflecting, of course, on related OT passages when necessary for
    > interpretation)." In many cases such reflection is essential if the NT
    > passage is to make sense. What would the reference to "Adam" in Rom.5 or
    > the quotation of Ps.8
    > in Heb.2 mean if we had no knowledge at all of the OT? But in these cases
    > the OT is interpreted by the NT & carried further. The NT doesn't simply
    > cite or validate the OT.
    >
    > 2) One significant feature of some NT writings is the eschatological
    > orientation of creation. The emphasis is on what God will do with creation
    > in the future rather than how God created it in the past. Ephesians 1 & 4
    > and Col.1:15-20 are especially noteworthy in this regard. & this future of
    > creation is Christ, "for whom" all things are created & "in whom" all things
    > are to be gathered up.
    > But we shouldn't move too quickly to speak of God's purpose as
    > "salvation". Eph.1:10 says that God's plan for creation is to unite all
    > things in Christ. That is God's purpose before sin and the need for
    > salvation are considered. I think that the answer to old question of
    > whether the Incarnation would have taken place if humanity had not sinned is
    > "Yes."
    > Related to this is the fact that what it means to be genuinely human
    > is known from Christ, not Adam and Eve. In the first place, the only thing
    > that the NT tells us about A&E is that they sinned! (& the OT doesn't tell
    > us a lot more!) But we're also told nothing about being conformed to the
    > image of A&E or "growing up" into their stature - as we are with Christ in
    > Rom.8:29, Eph.4:15, &c.
    > & in line with this, the use of Ps.8 in Heb.2 makes it clear that it
    > is through & in Christ that humanity is given true dominion over creation.
    > It is true that the NT does not have nearly the emphasis on care for
    > creation, & especially for the land, that we have in the NT - e.g., Lev.25.
    > But the fact that true dominion is possible only in Christ tells us a great
    > deal about the _kind_ of dominion we are called to - one of care & service
    > rather than simply exploitation.
    >
    > 3) We should be careful with statements like "Creation is temporary and
    > will come to an end (2 Pet 3:5-10)". That passage is followed by the
    > statement that "we wait for new heavens and a new earth, in which
    > righteousness dwells." By itself this suggests complete discontinuity
    > between the present creation & the new creation. But there are other texts
    > which suggest continuity - e.g., Rev.21:24-26. The whole picture seems to
    > be one of transformation, as Paul's discussion of the resurrection in I
    > Cor.15 indicates.
    >
    > 4) Your comment on the apparent lack of a cosmic role for the Holy
    > Spirit in the NT is interesting. What the NT does is to speak of a cosmic
    > role (& "role" is really yoo weak a word) for Christ, & Christ can't really
    > be spoken of without the Spirit. So the connection is somewhat indirect.
    >
    >
    > Shalom,
    >
    > George
    >
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Feb 05 2001 - 09:29:09 EST