Re: appendix

I agree with your summary below, except that I wouldn't refer to a fall occurring at the big bang. It's important to distinguish, at least conceptually, between creation as a theological concept & the beginning of sin.

God did not create a universe that was perfect in the beginning - i.e., a world that was what God wanted it ultimately to be. The inclusion of the sabbath in the 1st creation account is a pointer toward that, at least as the sabbath came to be understood in Judaism. God intended the universe - including humanity as a crucial part - to develop toward the final unity with God spoken of in Eph.1:10. So being a work in progress is something God intended. That is not sin. What is introduced with "the fall" - i.e., the disobedience of the 1st humans, however that may have happened - was humanity - and to some extent the rest of the world - getting off a proper path toward union with God and moving away from God. (The spatial metaphor isn't ideal but I don't know how better to say it.) The Incarnation then is not only the goal of creation but (through the cross & resurrection) the means of getting creation back on track. (Cf. Irenaeus ideas about recapitulation.)

When I say "to some extent the rest of the world" I don't mean any nonsense about human sin causing the 2d law of thermo or tectonic activity. But human sin clearly does affect the rest of the world - e.g., environmental degradation.
     
Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Don Winterstein
  To: asa ; george murphy
  Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 2:59 AM
  Subject: Re: appendix

  George Murphy wrote:

  "Interpreting he ktisis Rom.8:18-25 as referring only to humans seems to me very forced...."

  --Especially in view of v. 39 of the same chapter, where the word applies to inanimate things. A literal translation of the key words: "...neither height nor depth nor any other creation [ktisis] will be able...." ("Creation" here means "created thing.") These Romans 8 references seem to say that the whole creation, while good, has not yet achieved what God intended for it, and it "knows" it hasn't. I like this thought because I think the "fall" occurred at the big bang, and the world has always needed "saving." Note that Paul implies that God, not Adam's fall, subjected the creation to frailty (v. 20). Did Paul mean through Adam's fall? Possibly; but if he knew then what we know now about world history.... In any case, given our knowledge of many incidents of geophysical violence occurring more than 100,000 years ago, any claim that Adam's fall caused all of the geophysical violence since should not pass the laugh test.

  Don
Received on Tue Jan 4 08:55:10 2005