-------------------------------------------------
Well, Paul, you've goaded me into a long-winded response. :-)
Paul Durham wrote:
> Loren raised several good questions with regard to the concept of a "good"
> creation and Christ's redemption, not only of man, but of all of Creation
> in general. Arthur Custance's thoughts are a catalyst for the idea that
> natural science finds it difficult to deal with the synthesis of the
> natural with the supernatural.
It is, indeed, difficult to craft a careful "synthesis." Sometimes,
though, it is all too easy to craft a weak and inappropriate "synthesis."
History gives us several examples of theological truths being tied too
closely to some "scientific truth," and then suffering when those
scientific ideas changed (as they sometimes do).
Nevertheless, I have read quite a few excellent articles and books by
Christians who have considered deeply how certain theological/
supernatural truths are reflected in the natural world. I'll briefly
describe seven examples, all of which have been mentioned or discussed
recently in this group.
1) The vastness of the universe; reflecting God's vastness and glory.
2) The continued, regular existence of matter and the continuity of
natural laws; reflecting God's moment-by-moment faithful sustaining of
creation and God's non-capriciousness.
3) The "big bang" and the historical development from an initially
"simple" universe to one with increasing complexity; corresponding to the
biblical story of creation.
4) The "fine-tuning" of natural laws necessary for stars, planets, and
life to exist; reflecting God's careful design of creation.
5) The open flexibility seen in quantum and/or stochastic processes;
offering one means by which God can interact with creation and exert
providential care.
6) The incredible complexity and flexibility of life, seen in the marvels
of developmental biology, the complexity of ecosystems, and the
flexibility given to species to adapt in ecosystems (microevolution); also
reflecting God's incredible design.
7) The large-scale changes seen in biological history; corresponding to
God's careful design and providential guidance, or corresponding to God's
occasional supernatural interventions in biological history, or both.
(Currently the main topic of discussion in this group. ;-)
I should add two things. First, none of these things observed in the
natural world *fully* reflect the supernatural truth. There is much
greater truth and richness in the supernatural truths than we will see in
our scientific studies; nevertheless, I think that they are important
_parts_ of the truth. Second, all of these must be held somewhat
tentatively, since our scientific views do, occasionally, change
significantly.
Are these sorts of considerations useful for Christians? Yes, taken in
moderation, they help us relate our daily studies to our spiritual lives,
and they inspire us to worship their Author.
--------------------------
O.k., this gives us a flavor for how science can and does find things in
the natural world which reflect a portion of supernatural truths. Now
let's turn back to the specific topic, "Christ and Creation."
What does it mean (for the natural realm) that "creation will be liberated
from its bondage to decay"? What does it mean that Christ "holds all
things together" and "will reconcile all things to him"?
First let me say that I really like the quotes Paul found:
> "The Son, the ruler of the kingdom of love, the effective agent and the
> appointed end of the whole creation, has been revealed in his office and
> function as head of the church and bearer of the whole pleroma of the
> Godhead. In this capacity, and with this endowment, he is now revealed
> as the effective agent of God in the reconciliation of the universe, in
> the making of a cosmic peace. The need of reconciliation implies a prior
> alienation of the universe from God; the need of peacemaking implies
> that the cosmos is rent with conflict. Nothing is said here of the how
> or why of this alienation; it is sufficient that this is the actual
> state of the world, and that Christ is appointed to effect the remedy.
> It is, however, of the utmost importance to Christian thought - which is
> here in fundamental opposition to the postualtes of the comtemporary
> philosophy, even in its highest forms - that this alienation from God is
> not inherent in the Creation, but is somehow a departure of the creation
> from its true relation to God. God is not dealing with an intractable
> stuff, which is in origin and essence independent of Him and
> incompatable with His nature, but with a frame of things that He Himself
> has brought into being "in, through, and for" Christ. Its alienation is
> therefore neither inherent or permanent; and it is His good pleasure to
> restore it to His true relationship with Him and to its true internal
> harmony; and this ultimate purpose is to be accomplished through Christ,
> who acts as God's agent in reconciliation as in creation."
> Francis W. Beare, The Interpretors Bible, Abingdon Press, 1955, in an
> exegesis on Collosians 1:20
> "Christianity is a historic religion. In complete contrast to the
> Colossian religion of intellectual speculation and philosiphising, Paul
> stresses the acts in human history by which God revealed the fullness of
> His nature and love in Christ and by which he perpetuates the saving
> influence of that self-revelation through the historic church, of which
> Christ is the head... the beginning, the first-born. The following
> points are to be noted:
>
> a) A cosmic redemption is being affected through Christ. The Christ
> through whom creation took shape becomes the incarnate Christ, the
> Christ of human history...
> It is through his redemptive work wrought out in the history of man,
> the highest order of creation, that the whole disordered world, and the
> universe itself, will be brought back to him as its center and goal (see
> 1Cor 15:27-28)
>
> b) The focus of Christ's redemptive action is in the life of man, not in
> the physical universe considered apart from man. It is not cosmic
> forces, nor natural and physical processes - the modern equivalent of
> the Colossian belief in the "elemental spirits of the universe" (2:8) -
> that will turn the world back to God, but the redemptive operations of
> God's love in Christ on the minds and will of men. The order of creation
> was first the universe, then man. The order of redemtion is the reverse
> of this. The redemption of human life and society is the crucial task
> which must precede, and when once achieved, will inevitably lead on to
> the restoration of the disordered universe to harmonious union with God
> (see Eph 3:10)...
>
> c) The universe is redeemable. The world and human life are not in their
> essential nature alien from God and necessarily evil. Redemption is the
> restoration of an original good relationship that has been distorted and
> lost. God is dealing with that which is his own."
>
> G. Preston MacLeod, The INterpretors Bible, abingdon press, 1955
Great stuff!
If I understand Paul's original proposal correctly, he was asking to
discuss how all of this might be reflected in the natural world, and what
impact this might have on our discussion of origins.
Over the years I've heard many different ideas, many different proposals,
on this topic. I'll list a few, and break them into four general
categories.
A. Ideas which have no clear "scientifically observable"
consequences, but which, IMO, have good scriptural support.
-----------------------------------------------------------
1. Humanity was given dominion over creation, and is in some sense the
"voice" of creation. Just as the nation of Israel could not properly
serve and worship God when their king was corrupt, so creation cannot
properly be at peace with God while humanity is sinful. The
reconciliation of all creation therefore proceeds from the
reconciliation of humanity in Christ.
2. When humanity sinned, God did not completely withdraw himself from
us (or from creation) because of the promised reconciliation of Christ.
If God had completely withdrawn himself from creation, creation would
cease to exist. In that sense, Christ "holds all things together" both
as the agent of creation AND as the agent of reconciliation.
3. As the story of the Flood shows, when God punishes sin, often, more
than just human beings suffer. As Christ's reconciliation restrains
God's just punishment, more than just human beings benefit.
4. The future of creation is tied to the future of humanity. Without
Christ's reconciliation, both humanity and creation are doomed to
destruction. With reconciliation, both can be redeemed.
5. With humanity's fall, some of God's supernatural grace has been
withdrawn, both from us and from all of creation. We have lost what
_might_have_been_ for us and for creation, had we not sinned. Christ
brings about a restoration of that grace.
B. Ideas which DO have (or eventually might have)
"scientifically observable" consequences.
-------------------------------------------------
6. Humanity is not properly taking care of creation as stewards, but is
sinfully abusing it. Creation is suffering. As Christ reconciles and
restores humanity, we can begin again to work as proper stewards.
7. As a result of the curse, there may be more parasites, diseases,
genetic weaknesses, etc. than there were (or would have been)
before/without the Fall. (Present-day science isn't able to determine
whether or not there was an increase over the last few thousand
years, though it might eventually be able to make such a determination.)
This would be analogous, on a global scale, to God causing/allowing
an individual to become sick, as a way of teaching the consequences
of sin and inviting repentance.
C. Ideas which, if true, might have "observable" consequences,
but which are, in fact, not observed.
--------------------------------------------------------------
8. There was no animal death before humanity sinned.
9. There were no parasites or diseases before humanity sinned.
10. The increase of entropy (2nd law of thermodynamics) is a part of
the "bondage to decay," so it must not have been in operation before
humanity sinned.
11. There was a change in the way natural laws operated after the
fall, so we cannot use present-day laws to do "historical science," and
therefore, "historical science" cannot help us understand present-day
laws.
D. Ideas which would have no "scientifically observable"
consequences, and for which I cannot find scriptural support.
-------------------------------------------------------------
12. Some or all of ideas 8 through 10 were caused by sin, but were put
into place much earlier than humanity's first sin, either due to the
fall of Satan or "retroactively" due to humanity's fall.
So, if you ask me how I think the supernatural truths of "Christ holding
all things together" and "reconciling all things to himself" might, to a
limited extent, be reflected in the natural world (and how this might
affect our discussion of origins), I would respond with A1, A2, A3, A4,
A5, B6, and possibly B7. I think they have good support, both
scripturally and (where appropriate) observationally. And of course, I'm
open to new ideas. If someone suggests adding C8, C9, C10, C11, and/or
D12, I would say that they are worth considering, but they seem to lack
the support needed for inclusion. (C8 and C9 can be argued from
scripture, but they do not _necessarily_ follow from scripture. And if
someone proposes a theological idea which should have observable
consequences, surely it's prudent to test those observations!)
-------------------------------------------
One final point:
LH> If you are suggesting that there WAS a fundamental change in the way the
LH> universe operated after the Fall, my answer is that astronomy, geology,
LH> and the other historical sciences strongly imply continuity.
PD> This takes us back to Custance's well made point. The historical
PD> sciences are currently incapable of synthesizing the interpretation of
PD> the natural with the supernatural, especially in a historical sense.
PD> Constance argues well for a new approach which in fact synthesizes
PD> science with faith through a variety of disciplines taught and
PD> practiced cooperatively.
I certainly agree that science alone (measurement, observational, or
historical science) is insufficient to synthesize the interpretation of
the natural with the supernatural. A variety of disciplines, including
philosophy and theology, are needed. The seven examples I gave at the
beginning of this post, and A1 - A5 later on, are all significantly
meta-scientific.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"... Another casualty of applied metaphysics." | Loren Haarsma
--Hobbes (_Calvin_and_Hobbes_) | lhaarsma@opal.tufts.edu