| Author | Message | ||
| Free2dance Registered user Username: Free2dance Post Number: 524 Registered: 2-2010 |
Kelleigh & Grace_alone, "LIKE"  | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 9533 Registered: 3-2004  |
Kelleigh and Grace-Alone-----LIKE! | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 13219 Registered: 12-2003  |
I believe the Romans 8 passage about the whole creation being subjected to decay likely refers to God's curse on the earth after Adam's sin. Of course, I don't believe any of this destruction was a surprise to God, nor do I believe He necessarily waited until Adam's sin to place the laws of physics as we know them in place...yet something happened in Genesis 3. (And yes—I have also often wondered about the rest of the world besides Eden...what was it like?} Genesis 3:14-15 contains God's curse on the serpent:
Genesis 3:16 contains God's consequences to Eve:
Genesis 3:17-19 contain His words to Adam. Notice Adam himself is not cursed; the ground is cursed:
God cursed the substance of the world. He cursed Adam's substance. That is a far worse curse than merely passing a sentence onto man. The curse of the earth meant that the stuff of which Adam and all of us are made is cursed, and our lives here live out the curse of our very substance. We as well as all animal and plant life are made from a cursed substance. We by nature decay and struggle to stay alive. Our substance opposes us; it grows weeds and demands our life energy to keep it working on our behalf. And in the end (of our earthly lives) the stuff from which we're made claims us and converts us back into the same cursed substance from which we're made. The curse on Adam was far worse than merely being cursed in his person. The actual building blocks of flesh were cursed, and, as Romans 8 explains, held in bondage to decay until the sons of God are finally glorified. When God finally restores us to physical immortality, the substance of earth and of all creation will also finally be released from its bondage to decay. Most interesting...I certainly have not plumbed the significance of all this yet...(as if I have the ability to plumb it ever! Ha!) Colleen | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1661 Registered: 7-2003  |
Jeremy, I think I can best answer your question with an analogy. When I'm dialoging with SDAs they often point out that the Bible says the Law is holy, just and good. They cite the Psalms that say the Law is good and even "perfect". They offer this as proof that there could not possibly ever be something that is better or higher than the Law since the Bible calls it "perfect". Since the Bible calls the Law "good" they would dismiss any suggestion of a "negative" aspect to the Law. However, the fact that the law was very good (and it was) and that it was perfect in it's purpose in no way rules out a "better covenant" with "better promises" that comes with more glory. Nor does calling the Law good and perfect change the fact that it's primary purpose was to condemn us in sin and drive us to the savior. The Law was certainly good, but it was not the end all or be all of God's over arching plan. I won't belabor the point on how this analogy applies to the first creation versus the new creation. It probably speaks for itself. Again, I'm not in the least bit dogmatic here. I just think it's less black and white once certain assumptions are removed. Which is probably why conservative, Bible believing, Spirit-indwelt believers have held differing views over time. | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1662 Registered: 7-2003 |
One other related point: we sometimes say things like, "Prior to the fall, there was no sin in the earth". Technically speaking, that's not exactly true in the strictest sense. While we can rightly say that sin entered the world of man through Adam, Satan was already on the earth prior to the fall of man. How much before we're not told of course. However, the point is that the earth was in a sense already something less than pristine via the presence of a being in active rebellion against God. "God saw that it was good" and yet Satan was allowed to be in the very center of the Garden. What other accommodations did God make (or allow if you prefer) as part of His over arching redemptive plan? | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3839 Registered: 10-2004  |
Chris, Thanks for your answer. You are correct that the Law is called good. But words such as "corruption" are not used of the Law. Again, I don't see any hint of "futility" or "corruption" in Genesis 1-2, and Genesis 3, in fact, implies that God's curse of the earth is what brought these things. I think it would be quite a stretch to say that Paul in Romans 8 is not referring back to the curse of Genesis 3. What I've learned is that when the NT tells us something, it is usually not providing new information/revelation but is referring back to what is already known, usually from the OT. In regard to Satan, Ezekiel 28:12-13 says: "You had the seal of perfection, Full of wisdom and perfect in beauty. You were in Eden, the garden of God; Every precious stone was your covering:" So I don't believe that Satan had fallen when God created the earth and saw that it was good. Again, I would simply stick with the only Biblical account we have of Satan's fall, which again is Genesis 3 where he tempts Eve and is cursed by God. After having all of the extra-Biblical "history" from EGW, I have learned that it is so important "not to go beyond what is written" (1 Corinthians 4:6) and add in additional scenarios. Jeremy | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1663 Registered: 7-2003 |
Jeremy, Again, I don't feel super dogmatic here, but I respectfully disagree (while readily admitting I may be wrong). The Law is specifically called "the ministry of death" so I do think the analogy holds up. In regards to your second point, are you saying that you think Satan first fell in the Garden in the act of tempting Eve? Interesting, I've never heard that scenario before. That doesn't seem consistent with the account of war in Heaven in Revelation 12. | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3840 Registered: 10-2004 |
Chris, I hold to the interpretation of Revelation 12 (not sure if it's the standard Dispensationalist view?) which says that the war in heaven is still in the future. Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on December 13, 2011) | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 13224 Registered: 12-2003 |
Very interesting, Chris. I do think the incarnation/cross was part of the plan and reason for creation. Very interesting. While I still see Romans 8 as referring to Genesis 3, nevertheless I do see that in the total picture, sin and decay were somehow "planned for". There was a beginning and there is a distinct end to time, and Jesus is the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. Colleen | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 13225 Registered: 12-2003 |
Jeremy, yes--I read that explanation in John MacArthur's book Because the Time Is Near. Again, I'm not dogmatic about this...but it is an interesting view. I'm not sure it precludes Lucifer's earlier-than-Adam's sin, though. I'm not sure how much we can conclude about what happened before the story of humanity began...we're not told much. Colleen | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3841 Registered: 10-2004 |
Colleen, That's just it--I don't think we can conclude that anything happened before Genesis 1:1 and "Day One." There was no time and no created thing. Only God Himself was "before" time, if you can even say "before time." "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (John 1:1-3 NASB.) I realize that this is a huge paradigm shift from what we were taught in Adventism. I just don't see where there could be long "eons" of time, as EGW said, before time/space/creation began. It seems as if Ellen was trying to make Satan (and the rest of the angels) almost "eternal" (despite the fact that she didn't believe in "eternity" apart from "history/time"). Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on December 13, 2011) | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 1394 Registered: 7-2004  |
Jeremy, One concern I have with the approach you explain is that it makes everything part of the physical kingdom existing within time. This is very consistent with the SDA view of time and nature (all physical not Spiritual). Personally, I find the explanation that God and His Kingdom exist outside of time to answer many of the apparent paradoxes of Scripture. I don't think we are given enough information in Scripture to dogmatically make the conclusions that you are. That isn't to say that your statements aren't reasonable conclusions drawn from Scripture. I just don't see the clarity in the Scriptures that would insist that any other conclusions plainly violate the passages being discussed. | ||
| Lori Registered user Username: Lori Post Number: 135 Registered: 11-1999 |
Gen 1:1: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth"--the Hebrew word for created is <bara> which means God created something out of nothing. Verse 2 begins with "NOW". NOW (what he created from nothing) the earth is formless and empty. It sounds like something he had already created sometime in the past became formless and empty. In verse 7 it says, "God made the expanse and separated the water....." The Hebrew word for made is <asah> meaning to make something out of something that already exists. To me, the account of creation sounds more like a re-creation of the earth than a creation. Regarding, Genesis being Day 1 and no created beings...in speaking to Job, does not the Lord confirm the existence of angels at creation? Job 38:4-7, "Where were you Job when I laid the foundations of the earth?......when the morning stars (angels) sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy? The Hebrew word for sons of God is <bene Elohim>. It is mentioned five times in the OT and is always used for angels whether elect or fallen. One can conclude that the angels were undivided at this point as it states ALL the sons of God shouted for joy. (Message edited by Lori on December 14, 2011) | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 1395 Registered: 7-2004 |
Lori, Great point from Job. I've read that verse plenty of times and didn't even think about that aspect of it. | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3842 Registered: 10-2004 |
Lori, Yes, I agree that Job is referring to the angels. But the angels are part of "the heavens" that God created when He created the earth. Rick, If the angels were outside of/before time, then they would be eternal like God. Jeremy | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 1396 Registered: 7-2004 |
Because the angels are created, they are different from God. That isn't complicated Jeremy, unless you want to make it that way in order to fit a preconceived notion.I'm not insisting that you are wrong, but I do hope that you are able to see how many assumptions you are building your own theology upon (while being critical of a brother in Christ for making similar assumptions). We all make assumptions about Scripture. Like the assumption that it is truly God's Word and that it is infallible. | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3844 Registered: 10-2004 |
Rick, Being "uncreated" and being "timeless" are interchangeable. This is why the Nicene Creed, for example, could speak of Jesus being "begotten" but not "made" because His generation from the Father was said to be "eternal" (outside of time). "...begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made,..." That old English translation of "eternally" (Greek aionon, lit. "before all of the ages") as "before all worlds" shows that the translators understood that before the universe was created there was nothing: no created beings, no time, only God Himself. It would be a contradiction to say that the angels are both timeless and created. And again, something cannot be timeless without being eternal. Angels, as created beings, are not eternal. Here is a direct Biblical passage which shows that angels are indeed within time:
The entire created universe, including both "the heavens and the earth," operates within time. Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on December 14, 2011) | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 1397 Registered: 7-2004 |
Interchangeable in your mind. But certainly not a requirement. Trying to bolster your assumptions by relying on widely accepted church teaching is fine, except that you are using that approach to attack a similarly widely held position. And many well versed theologians hold that both are true. Your viewpoint on the interpretation of Rev 12 is a minority position amend scholars, and is a recent-rather than historical-understanding of the passage. I understand that you firmly believe in your position, but your inability to acknowledge your own assumptions and speculations greatly weakens your credibility. I had hoped to show you reason for accepting brothers and sisters with differing viewpoints in place of dogmatic myopia. I am in agreement with both Chris and Colleen that the detail provided allows for conclusions, but not dogmatic one. I have tried to show why i believe that to be the case. Clearly I have failed to accomplish anything of the sort. | ||
| Goose Registered user Username: Goose Post Number: 39 Registered: 11-2011  |
Wow. This topic has sure drawn attention. But we seem to have gotten a little far afield of my original question. What is with the T-Tex, by all estimates a terrible, heinous, flesh eating monster. Did God create the T-Rex and if not, how did it come to existence? | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3845 Registered: 10-2004 |
Rick, If you're referring to the explanation you posted above of angels being created before time as a "widely held position" then you will have to show me that that is the case. As far as I know, most of those who believe the angels were created before (and perhaps fell before) the creation of Genesis 1 do not believe that they were created before time, but rather that time was created before Genesis 1:1. I don't understand why you seem to be so bothered by what I've posted or why you're trying to make it personal. I haven't attacked anybody. I haven't called anyone a heretic for disagreeing with me. To use another example, I believe the Bible is clear and unambiguous in teaching Calvinism, but that doesn't mean that I call everyone who disagrees heretics. Just because I don't believe something is left unclear in Scripture shouldn't mean that I can't post about it, should it? Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on December 14, 2011) |
