Re: [asa] E.O. Wilson "Baptist No More"

David -

Responding to your comments quickly & with no claim to completeness:

>-- how does the image of Rev. 21-22 relate to second temple Jewish eschatology with respect to the telos of creation, if at all? Coming out of a strongly >dispensational background (having moved into more of a reformed amillennial view), it's been helpful to me as I've re-studied the NT's apocalyptic literature to >learn about its cultural / literary context. I need to learn more here. (Anyone know of a collection of non-canonical second temple apocalyptic literature?)

Certainly 2d Temple eschatology provides some ideas & images of Rev.21-22 but we shouldn't try to put new wine into old wineskins. "See, I am making all things new" in Rev.21:5 is crucial.

>-- my understanding is that the telos of creation as a recapitulation of Eden is a strong theme in the tradition. I have started reading a little of and about Ireneaus, >but are there other strands of the tradition that support a non-recapitulation eschatology?

Irenaeus' view of recapitulation is not just the idea of a return to a primordial state. In fact, it's more the idea of Christ going through the whole course of a human life & death than a return to Eden. Here's a long quote from Gustaf Wingren, Man and the Incarnation (London: Oliver and Boyd, 1959) that I included in my chapter in Perspectives on an Evolving Creation:

"The content of the term recapitulatio is both rich and diverse. There is, for instance, the idea of a restoration of the original in the word, a purificatory movement pointing backwards to the first Creation. This restoration is accomplished in Jesus's struggle against the Devil in a conflict which repeats the history of Adam, but with the opposite outcome. The idea of a repetition is thus part of the conception of recapitulation, but in a modified form - modified, that is, by the idea of victory. But since man was a growing being before he became enslaved, and since he is not restored until he has begun again to progress towards his destiny, man's restoration in itself is more than a mere reversion to his original position. The word recapitulatio also contains the idea of perfection or consummation, for recapitulation means that man's growth is resumed and renewed. That man grows, however, is merely a different aspect of the fact that God creates. Growth is always receptive in character, something derived from the source of life. Man's resumed growth is for this reason identical with the life which streams from Christ, the Head, to all believers. And Christ is the Creator's own creative Word, the "hand" by which God gives life to man."

& it's also important to remember that Irenaeus didn't have the idea of Adam & Eve as mature & perfect humans. "The man was a young child, not yet having reached a perfect deliberation" and "It was necessary for him to reach full-development by growing in this way." (St. Irenaeus of Lyons, On the Apostolic Preaching [St. Vladimir's Seminary, Crestwood NY, 1997], p.47.)

While I think Irenaeus' ideas are helpful, I'd rather talk about the work of Christ as a reorientation of creation. I.e., while there may be an idea of return to an initial state, it's for the purpose of being able to strike out again but this time in the right direction.

>-- I'm concerned theologically that non-recapitulation eschatologies seem, in my perception, to tend towards a sort of universalism. There is a sense in the >recapitulation theme that the cross is the bridge past the seraph's flaming sword back into Eden. Many won't walk over that bridge. The idea that the eschaton is not >a recapitulation but rather is a completion of the redemption of the cosmos seems sympatico with the notion that everyone eventually will be redeemed. I would that >this were so, but it seems contrary to scripture, and certainly contrary to the tradition.

Texts like Rom.8:18-25, Eph.1:10 & Col.1:20 do in fact suggest "a certain kind of universalism." Rev.21:22 does indicate some problem with getting Hitler & Stalin into the New Jerusalem & I don't suggest that we just ignore such texts but I think we should start from those more inclusive texts & try to understand the more exclusive ones in their light rather than vice versa.

>-- how does a non-recapitulation eschatology relate to the nature of the atonement? If the atonement is fundamentally a penal substitution, that seems to fit the >notion that the final state is a removal of the curse of being banned from Eden. Does a non-recapitulation eschatology view the atonment primarily in terms of a >Christus Victor model?

IMO penal substitution is not the best - or at least the most profound or comrehensive - way of understanding atonement. The approach which I've been developing emphasizes the idea of atonement as new creation - the talk I gave at the Edinburgh meeting, "Science-Theology Dialogue and Atonement," is available, with other talks there, at http://www.asa3.org/ASA/meetings/Edinburgh2007/Edinburgh_paperlinks.html . Christus Victor can be seen as, among other things, a dramatic image of new creation - cf. the OT fragments that connect creation with the Chaoskampf motif.

>-- I don't see the recapitulation theme as a variant of cyclic world views. It's still linear and teleological. There's no indication of further falls and recapitulations -- the >eschaton is the final state.

Yes, but the fundamental theme is still the return to the primordial state. Ultimately history doesn't matter.

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/

.......................................

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Nov 29 11:24:00 2007