Re: [asa] Greg Boyd's Theodicy of Natural Evil

Aye, it was me. Ok, I'm over my post limit for today, but .... Well, the
truth is, I don't know that I've thought this through to the extent that I
could stake out a position. I think I'd agree that the scriptural reference
to the serpent in the garden is in itself too thin a reed to support the
notion that all of creation was tainted by Satan's fall prior to the fall of
man.

But, I think there may be other hints in the Christus Victor perspective on
the atonement (that the cross is a victory over cosmic evil as well as a
substitutionary payment for the sins of those who believe), and in the
apocalyptic Biblical literature that portrays the consummation of that
cosmic victory. In other words, the whole Biblical picture seems to suggest
that concerning evil's effect on the creation, there is more involved than
only the fall of man. I wonder sometimes if some of our difficulties
concerning theodicy result from scripture's selective emphasis on God's
realtionship with humanity, which leaves so much about the "spiritual" realm
of creation undisclosed.

And another interesting question which we've discussed before is temporal
causation, God's foreknowledge, and the kenotic perspective on creation. If
we say Satanic / human rebellion *caused* "natural evil," must that entirely
fit our linear understanding of temporal causation?

On 7/18/07, drsyme@cablespeed.com <drsyme@cablespeed.com> wrote:
>
> No it was David O.
>
> I dont know whether he means that the serpent indicates just the presence
> of fallen Satan, or does he think that it indicates that all of creation was
> tainted by Satan and his fall prior to the fall of Man.
>
>
>
> *On Wed Jul 18 14:30 , "David Campbell" sent:
>
> *
>
> > David said: "...the serpent in the Garden does seem to suggest that
> there is
> > rebellion in the creation before the human fall."
> >
> > I want to be clear about what you mean here. If you mean that this is
> > evidence that Satan has fallen (as he was part of creation) then I would
> > agree with you that this passage indicates that yes part of creation has
> > fallen. But if you mean that all of creation has been tainted, (because
> he
> > takes the form of a snake?) then I would disagree with that
> interpretation.
> >
>
> I think that David was me. Satan, being part of creation, was fallen
> before humans were. As George noted, there's very little to go on
> Biblically besides that. Ezekiel 28, often invoked as data on Satan's
> fall, is actually taunting the king of Tyre using Canaanite mythology.
> Geologically, it's clear that predation occurred as early as the
> latest Precambrian, but whether that is an evil is theologically
> problematic.
>
> --
> Dr. David Campbell
> 425 Scientific Collections
> University of Alabama
> "I think of my happy condition, surrounded by acres of clams"
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with "unsubscribe
> asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Jul 18 15:31:02 2007