Might the Garden of Eden ever be considered a harm free zone?Following on from the last post about the benefits of gravity, lets consider some of its negatives. For example, a roof tile may fall from a house and kill the person below because of the gravitational pull acting upon on it. Likewise, just as gravity facilitates the flow of water to a watermill, it can also, on another occasion, result in a flash flood that washes away the mill. While gravity may keep us firmly drawn to the earth to do fun things, it also results in rockslides, avalanches, excessive flooding and things detrimental to human existence. But does the occurrence of these events mean that gravity is a bad thing? Or …

‘would we forfeit gravity rather than run the risk it might one day cause something detrimental to happen to us?’

And of course, the answer has to be ‘no’ because we all appreciate that the benefits of gravity outweigh any disadvantage we might encounter from time to time. But what has all of this to do with the world of Genesis 1 & 2?

Well … presuming that gravity is not a product of the fall – by that I mean an outcome from sin coming into our world – the most obvious conclusion is that gravity has always been with us and part of God’s plan. Which means that gravity existed during the time of Adam and would have affected him in pretty much the same way it affects us today. Obviously,  bungee ropes and snowboards were not available to Adam, but slopes, cliffs and canyons were. And if you are following my thinking, you might question what would happen to Adam if he missed a foothold or fell from a tree while clowning around trying to impress Eve? My guess is that he would fall and hurt himself in pretty much the same any of us would. Big shock – you can break a bone in the world that God has created good!

More in next week’s post.

Extracts and article idea taken from ‘The God of the Cruel World’ (Bob Eckhard)

Can the Garden of Eden ever be considered a perfect idyll?

Think of a world without suffering. Where nothing interrupts the direct line of communication with God.  A world where there is plenty of food and relationships are healthy. A place where work occurs without effort and most importantly, there is no death to spoil the party. But is the early world of Genesis consistent with what we understand about our physical  environment today? Moreover, is it perhaps a case of wishful thinking over the stark reality of life in the real world?

Perfect World syndrome?

The traditional understanding of Genesis is that people began life inhabiting a perfect world – an environment without disease or bacteria or natural disasters within it – nor anything else that might cause them harm. But is this a world that is ideal for humans? After all, the position is problematic given our understanding of the physical world today.

Issue of gravity

Let’s begin by considering gravity which exists for our benefit. After all,  spinning through space at thousands of miles per hour, we should all be very grateful that it allows us to live, work and play without fear that one day, by jumping too high, we will be carried off into outer space. We are probably also grateful for the benefits gravity provides in facilitating us to abseil, skydive, snowboard, ski, etc. Indeed, gravity is an essential element in the hydrological cycle enabling evaporated moisture to return as droplets of water (rain) rather than disappear upwards into our atmosphere. In short, gravity has a lot of benefits.

But there is another side to gravity that we sometimes fail to consider in which people die in avalanches and flash floods– but more about that in the next post:

Extracts adapted from ideas in ‘The God of the Cruel World’ (Bob Eckhard)

‘What if God has already judged us and provided a solution?

‘This is how love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the day of judgment: In this world we are like Jesus.’ ‘1John4v17

The idea of an austere God sitting in judgment over us is one that is common in many religions in the Western World. Likewise, our understanding of right and wrong, good and evil and a belief that we will be judged at the end of our lives. Moreover, our own failure in being  quick to judge others, while remarkably slow at identifying our own failings and holding ourselves to account.

Now, irrespective of whether a person subscribes to a belief in God or none at all,  the sense of existential angst experienced by most suggests many fear death and judgment. The observant among us will have noticed the Bible verses under each picture in these posts. The first seven paint God in a rather cold and arbitrary way, judging everyone and everything. However,  today’s (eighth) post is strangely positive and upbeat in comparison with its suggestion that people should in fact have confidence in facing the day of judgment. All of which brings us  nicely onto…

The ‘what ifs…’

The Christian perspective of God and judgment is that both are real and inevitable. But what if God’s judgement has already taken place? What if the Divine has already acted and made amends for His Creation? What if God provided a solution for angst-ridden people who worry about their mistakes and what they have made of their lives? What if God has done away with the old form and we no longer need to fear ageing, death or a meeting with our Maker.

The Christian belief is that God has already acted through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. A sacrifice from God for the many so that no one should live in this life with fear of death and judgment.

‘Is it fair to subject humans to temptation if they are judged on the decisions they make?’

‘…until the Ancient of Days came and pronounced judgment in favor of the holy people of the Most High, and the time came when they possessed the kingdom.’ Daniel 7v22

In this series, we have considered a range of issues related to the exercise of freewill. Today we investigate an aspect so far not considered – that of our ‘environment’ and whether it is conducive to humans making good choices.

But why is this important? Well, if we  believe that those who obey God in this world, fare much better than those who don’t in the next life, then some people might prefer to inhabit a world without freewill – or put another way, one in which God makes all the decisions on our behalf. A world in which freewill and temptation are removed from individuals who might otherwise make poor choices and end up being judged by God. While this deterministic world would never be as educational as a world in which freewill operates and choices have to be made, the fact that people are denied the opportunity to make mistakes also allows them to remain outside of hell. A small price to pay – but is it?

In the film, the ‘Truman Show,’ Jim Carey plays Truman Burbank – a young man who lives in a deterministic world that he believes is real but is actually a large television studio operating around him. Orchestrating Truman’s life through hidden cameras and microphones is artistic director Christof who is increasingly perturbed by Truman’s antics as he questions and attempts to leave this world, Christof placing a multitude of obstacles in Truman’s paths who still strikes out to be true to himself, his nature and desires.

Could this be why God grants us freewill? Not just because he doesn’t want automatons to pronounce their love for Him but rather the very nature of being human necessitates we have freewill to make our own choices, however small and inconsequential they might seem.

Christianity has a marvellously complex and nuanced doctrine of creation. At its core are two important concepts about God which we may call transcendence and immanence. Transcendence speaks to the central claim that God is wholly other, entirely different and outside of creation. He is not part of it ; he created it and stands apart from it,  not just different, but in a unique category of one. He is unlike anything we can name and there are no analogies.

Immanence is the complementary claim that He inhabits creation at its most fundamental level.  That indwelling is motivated by the very creative love that led Him to create, and is not passive but active. He has not just  abandoned it to run its course like a machine. Immanence makes God my God through Christ – it is why I am a Christian and not something else.

Immanence has been cited as helpful in a correct biblical assessment of creationism and evolution. A theologian called Aubrey Moore writing in 1889 at the height of the Darwinian debate, wrote “The scientific evidence in favour of evolution as a theory is infinitely more Christian than the theory of “special creation”. His reasoning was that it demonstrated the intimate immanence of God in nature, and the omnipresence of God in literally everything, all of the time.

He further said that “those who oppose the doctrine of evolution seem to have failed to notice that a theory of occasional intervention implies as its correlative a theory of ordinary absence.”  If we don’t believe that God is  active all the time, then we hold to universe where God is fundamentally absent most of the time. Moore actually suggested that Darwinism had given a helpful hand in restoring the doctrine of immanence of God to its rightful place in Christian theology, and in Christian living.  God is always there, right there, and always at work.

‘Is there a price to pay when humans judge one another?’

“But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you.” Matthew 11v24

The human need to judge is common in most cultures and happens so frequently that we are unaware when engaging in it.  Indeed, our experience of injustice occurs from an early age as:

  • a toddler takes away our toy leaving us to voice our complaint
  • we lament the miserliness of  a parent who denies us an ice cream
  • jilted by our first love, we console ourselves by telling their faults to everyone
  • we judge a mother who is unable to control her child and think them a bad parent

At the heart of these judgments is the notion of a moral superiority which asserts we are ‘right’ and others are ‘wrong’. Interestingly, within these exchanges there also seems to be an aspect of societal control embedded in sharing our judgments about people which works something like this: we make a judgement then share it only to assess the listener’s feedback to see if they are supportive of our position or not so we can:

  • seek out others more likely to agree with us
  • re-think our opinion rather than fall out with others
  • continue as before but being more circumspect with whom we share and what we say

Which brings us to the belief that God will judge the earth and its peoples. And herein lies the problem. While we might hope God will extend mercy to us, we are aware of our own failure in the countless unkind judgments we make of others every day. Judgments in which we condemn and discard the person without qualm and, in so doing, became an offender ourselves. This is the reason why our human propensity to judge others causes discomfort because we believe that one day the same lack of love and grace will be visited on us by the Maker of all things and we’ll be found wanting when the scales are held aloft.

 

 

 

John 5:17-18 : “My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I too am working.”

Last week we lost one of our greatest ever scientists, Dr Stephen Hawking. I was moved to look one of his lectures on line (found here at http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-beginning-of-time.html) where I read of his account of the non-static dynamism of the universe, and how people at various times had prefered the idea of a “static universe” or the “Steady State Theory”. When he was a young man making his reputation, the static universe was the favoured theory amongst the scientific elite. The universe had always existed, without beginning and end, and was essentially the same as it ever was.

One of the great revelations of modern science, in which Hawking was a prime mover, was the realisation is that the universe has not always been the same ; it is not a static state phenomenon. The galaxies  hurtle away from each other at increasing speeds, and our telescopes see  the birth, life and death of stars and galaxies. The whole thing is dynamic and changing, a cosmic pattern of birth, life, death and resurrection, changing over time .  Lots and lots of time is involved,  and lots and lots of change.

Earthly nature too seems to me to be invested with this quality – it has been included with a certain quality to modify itself, to remove and introduce species, and to spur itself on to change from within, to  adapt and evolve. Why on earth should that be seen by people of faith as a negative thing? God has created everything, and he inhabits creation and sustains it, so why might it not it possess some of his creative capacity?

This is not to say it is “divine” but rather that it is made with the potential to create from within itself.  It can only do this from existing matter and within existing physical and cosmic laws created by God.  But it seems very beautiful to suggest that creation is creative, that God moves through his creation changing things, moving them on.

Creations creative capacity comes nowhere near that of God himself – this is not what we call “pantheism”.  It is finite because it based on matter, which is not divine. But that matter, and the way it is organised and characterised, has the power to exert transformative creative purpose because God has endowed it with that potential. It is all not just set in motion and then left to go, but perpetually inhabited, sustained and guided by him. So why would it stay the same ?  The concept of evolution and change being at the heart of the cosmos and being guided over eons of time, should not worry the Christian at all. It is just another example of wonder, and an illustration that creation is moving somewhere – it is purposive !

”Where do we get our ideas about judgment and hell?’ (part 2)

‘But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God’s wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed.’ Romans 2v5

Jean-Paul Sartre in his play ‘No Exit’ tells the story of three people who find themselves trapped in a room. Desperate for love, each seeks love from another but all are continually frustrated by the end. Of course, for Sartre, the play is an outward expression of his belief that ‘hell is relationships.’ Not the type where people argue and fight – it is that too – but rather, the dissatisfaction and discontent of love frustrated.

In the last post we considered how people may imagine Divine judgment as God wielding a big stick and condemning people to hell in a ‘Dante’s Inferno’ type pit. While some extracts of the Bible support the idea of hell as a hot place – see Rich man and Lazarus  – the overriding intention seems to be to identify an environment that is alien to human existence. A spiritual location that is separate from God and His benefits. Not a prison as such but a loss of access to the stimuli of God’s creation.

This idea of hell in which humans are unable to interact with and enjoy physical, mental, emotional and spiritual experiences is more akin to ideas about separation from God’s goodness. In The Rich Man and Lazarus (see link above), the unkind landowner finds himself in hell because he lacked generosity to Lazarus who begged at his gate. The man’s request that Lazarus cross from heaven to hell so he might have some water elicits this response:

‘a great chasm has been set in place, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.’

There we have it! A description of Hell: a place outside of God where people no longer have access to enjoy the things they once had in their life. Moreover, the things they took for granted. A place quite different to the fiery Underworld in which devil and demons torture prisoners with glee.

”Where do we get our ideas about judgment and hell?’ (part 1)

And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day.’ (Jude 1v6)

For many people, this picture is how they imagine hell. A dystopian existence in an overcrowded pit where there is barely enough room to move let alone take a breath. A world where God is considered a sadist with people consigned to the fiery depths of Dante’s Inferno. But what does this say about the human perception of God? Moreover, the way we have judged ourselves in advance of any meeting we may have with the Divine?

Years ago, at university, I went to see the course leader asking for a reference. Now, I can’t remember how it happened but I left his office with the task of writing my own reference. Anyway, struggling to write anything that didn’t come across as self-effacing or deprecating, I returned to him three days later with my reference. Reading it, he replied:

‘Not bad but you’re far too hard on yourself. ‘

With reflection it seems the strict judgments we place on ourselves are because only we know the truth: the things we say about others; the lies we tell; our pride and refusal to take responsibility when we do wrong; and the good that we omit to do. Things that we condemn ourselves with, believing we are truly deserving of whatever judgment comes our way.

But is this how God really is? Yes, the scripture verse (above) speaks of judgment but there are just as many in the Bible that speak of God’s grace such as from the book of Isaiah (1v18) where God implores the guilty to:

“Come now, let us settle the matter,”says the Lord. “Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red as crimson, they shall be like wool.”

Evolution – Who’s Afraid of the Big Bad Monkey?

Ever since I was a boy growing up in Christian circles, my Christian friends and colleagues have not just been against the emerging consensus on evolution, but actually afraid of it. I have always found it interesting to ask, “Why ? Just what is at stake? Why do we seek to make enemies out of people who pursue rational truth?”

It is important because if a faith pins its credibility on a version of truth that is gradually, systematically, and emphatically disproved, then it will lose its foothold on the landscape of the people. When we put on blinkers and deny general revelation (creation), in defence of a narrow defensive interpretation of specific revelation (the Bible) then we lose traction with the minds of people God loves. To cling to a seriously outmoded way of thinking is to repeat the history of the Galileo incident. We just end up looking silly.

That means the greatest truth that we have, the truth of God in Christ, becomes hidden under a bushel – a big pot covering our light, made of denial, ignorance and an insistence that no good thing, especially knowledge, can ever emanate from anyone other than us. The world is blind and has nothing to say. So what are they (we) afraid of ? I am not being obtuse – I really do mean afraid. This is a question of fear.

The first problem is probably (I’m guessing) the truth of the bible. Everything seems to hinge on literal facts instead of transcendent truths. If we can’t take it at literal face value then the whole thing unravels like a badly made sweater. This, I believe is sad and unnecessary, and also unhelpful.   Evolution does nothing to undermine the truth of the bible, it merely illuminates it. It requires nothing to be rewritten, but requires certain things to be continually re-read and re-interpreted in the light of more empirical facts. That is very different. All scientific fact does this – it shines a light on what God has done and shows us how He did it.

Faith and knowledge walk hand in hand but they are not the same thing. The Bible doesn’t give us certainty about the way the world works, it serves a different purpose. When it is used wrongly it starts to fail in its more important purpose. It cannot point people to God if it has been discredited and it is discredited if it used for the wrong purpose – a double tragedy.

That is the history of the debate since perhaps the 1925 Stokes Monkey Trial, and sadly it continues today. The way, the truth and the life comes into disrepute through insecurities about our own interpretations of text and faith which compel us to defend the wrong causes. The truest story we know is the story of ourselves. We ought to address it honestly, in partnership with those that seek to understand it scientifically, and bring what we bring, the light of Christ, to the whole world.