a cursed and fallen world

[rmwilliamsll]

what prompts this thread is a posting in the YECist protected subforum at:
http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=31152136&postcount=2

We live in a cursed and fallen world. One may attempt to piece together information from this fallen world and apply it to scripture if they like, but it will end in the end prove false.

is this a cursed and fallen world?
or is mankind the cursed and fallen?
or a combination?
and just how badly cursed and fallen is it, if it is?


the is a strain of manicheanism in modern fundamentalism, especially the dispensational and premillennial kinds. They seem to see the universe as almost the domain of satan and not really worthy of God.

I'm going to restore to the two books metaphor and ask the question about the book of nature. is the situation that the book of nature is corrupted and telling us the wrong things or is it that the nature of human beings is corrupted and therefore we can not read properly the book of nature?

what does the curse to bring forth weeds in the garden mean? that the soil is cursed so that it only brings forth weeds? no, the curse is that the weeds will compete with the wheat, that the soil which was friendly to Adam is not bringing forth hostile weeds. It is not as if God cursed the soil and made it infertile and therefore unable to do it's originally assigned task., essentially what the manichean heresy teaches.

It is Adam who is cursed, it is the nature of mankind that is changed in the fall. We can not longer expect to read the book of nature properly, that is not a problem with the book (that is the cursed didn't scramble the letters making the words unreadable) but a problem with the reader. Our eyes and our minds will, like a dylexic mix up the letters. We may try to blame the text, but the problem is in us, not in the book of nature.

For instance, Romans 1 says that the universe speaks clearly the divine nature and awesome power of God. It doesn't say these things are muted or absence. It even goes on to say that people see them, clearly, but the fault is mankind's, repress the knowledge.

The Scriptures speak in several places as to stones crying out, the mountains speaking, all metaphors to show that the universe is still God's, it doesn't belong to satan in any way. he is the interloper, the stranger, the counterfeit.

Lots of things seem to have an influence on YECist theology and this is one influence that is wrong. The universe is God's, it is curses for man's sake, not fallen and speaking the wrong things but speaking clearly the things God intends for it to say to us.

It is not the information from the world that is wrong, it is how mankind uses it.

 

[billwald]

Humans are mesed up. This is a wonderful world, perfect for humans.

 

[Deamiter]

mswilliamsll -- I would go one step further and say that not only is our view and understanding of nature is corrupted, our understanding of the Bible is similarly corrupted.

Yes, the Holy Spirit guides us in many ways, but it is clear that the Holy Spirit does not guide all Christians in all things! Unless one were to claim that only those who interpret the Bible a certain way are Christian...

God will guide us where he feels necessary, but he expects us to do our part and use careful study and reason to inform our interpretation of scripture!

 

[OldWiseGuy]

The entire material universe, including earth and all in it were created by God, and then given to Lucifer and the angels for their use and enjoyment. (What does God need a Starship for?)

The re-created surface of the earth was a repeat of the ancient Eden that Lucifer enjoyed, but now includes man. The garden of Eden was a glimpse of that ancient world. When Adam and Eve sinned, replicating the rebellion of Lucifer, God changed the nature of the earth to what it is now- continuous carnage on an unimaginable scale, both in the human and animal world.

If the world is now perfect why is God going to change it? Prophecy clearly reveals that the earth will return to an Eden-like state.

 

[artybloke]

The entire material universe, including earth and all in it were created by God, and then given to Lucifer and the angels for their use and enjoyment.

That's an interesting variation on gnosticism. At least you're not saying that Lucifer created the world.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

That's an interesting variation on gnosticism. At least you're not saying that Lucifer created the world.

I don't think Jude:6 is a gnostic belief.

6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

They left their material estate and sought to acquire the spiritual estate of God.

 

[billwald]

Have you taken this up with any "IDers" who think our universe is designed by God right down to a gnat's hair?

 

[gluadys]

I don't think Jude:6 is a gnostic belief.

6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

They left their material estate and sought to acquire the spiritual estate of God.

What is the basis for asserting that their first estate was material? I have always heard that angels are created spirits.

 

[artybloke]

I don't think Jude:6 is a gnostic belief.

What has a somewhat obscure reference to the myth of angels marrying humans in Gen. 6:2 got to do with the idea that the angels were given the earth?

I suspect, in fact, Jude was a warning against the early stages of gnostic influence, which featured a lot of angelolatry and was very prone to just the kind of nonsense you're spouting.

 

[DailyBlessings]

I suspect, in fact, Jude was a warning against the early stages of gnostic influence, which featured a lot of angelolatry and was very prone to just the kind of nonsense you're spouting.

I'd say that's pretty certain.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

What has a somewhat obscure reference to the myth of angels marrying humans in Gen. 6:2 got to do with the idea that the angels were given the earth?

I didn't make that connection.

I suspect, in fact, Jude was a warning against the early stages of gnostic influence, which featured a lot of angelolatry and was very prone to just the kind of nonsense you're spouting.

Do you talk to everyone like this?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

What is the basis for asserting that their first estate was material? I have always heard that angels are created spirits.

What is your first estate, habitation? Mine is my physical body.

 

[gluadys]

What is your first estate, habitation? Mine is my physical body.

I'm not an angel. And neither are you.

But "first estate" need not apply even to a human body.

Spiritually, my first estate is innocence. And like all humans I (and you) have fallen from innocence into sin. What does my body have to do with my relationship to God?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I'm not an angel. And neither are you.



But "first estate" need not apply even to a human body.

Spiritually, my first estate is innocence. And like all humans I (and you) have fallen from innocence into sin. What does my body have to do with my relationship to God?

I was made a little lower than the angels, but the pattern is the same: I have both a spirit, and a body. The angels are disembodied now but once had the same kind of habitation (physical bodies) imo.

It was a rhetorical question. Of course our first 'state' is spiritual innocence, but we soon leave it. I believe that the 'habitation' spoken of in Jude:6 refers not only to the earth, but to a physical body as well. How else would angels enjoy the earth? I believe that Adam and Eve's first spiritual estate was innocence, but their habitation was their bodies as well as Eden. They lost both because of sin.

Whaaat? Don't you know that your body (habitation) is the temple of the spirit? As such it has much to do with our relationship with God, imo.

The theme of Jude:6 is found throughout the bible, but the examples are mostly as negative. There are positive ones however. Proverbs 31 is a positive example. (You have to stretch your mind to see it, however.)

 

[Mallon]

I was made a little lower than the angels, but the pattern is the same: I have both a spirit, and a body. The angels are disembodied now but once had the same kind of habitation (physical bodies) imo...

Whaaat? Don't you know that your body (habitation) is the temple of the spirit? As such it has much to do with our relationship with God, imo.

The theme of Jude:6 is found throughout the bible, but the examples are mostly as negative. There are positive ones however. Proverbs 31 is a positive example. (You have to stretch your mind to see it, however.)

Two doses of personal opinion, and one stretch of the mind. Do you ever wonder why people don't hold the same convictions you do?

 

[gluadys]

I was made a little lower than the angels, but the pattern is the same: I have both a spirit, and a body. The angels are disembodied now but once had the same kind of habitation (physical bodies) imo.

Glad to see the "imo". I don't know of any reason to share your opinion.

Whaaat? Don't you know that your body (habitation) is the temple of the spirit? As such it has much to do with our relationship with God, imo.

Keep the context in mind. Paul was referring to a negative use of the body--not its physical composition or form. Similarly, a temple is not profaned by whether it is made of wood or stone, or by its architectural features, but when it is used for the worship of false gods. So it is not the body itself that is the focus of the relationship, but how it is used.

The theme of Jude:6 is found throughout the bible,

But I don't see any reference to angels with material bodies in Jude 6. It is your opinion that this is what "first estate" means, but I need more than your opinion to be persuaded that this is so.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Glad to see the "imo". I don't know of any reason to share your opinion.




Keep the context in mind. Paul was referring to a negative use of the body--not its physical composition or form. Similarly, a temple is not profaned by whether it is made of wood or stone, or by its architectural features, but when it is used for the worship of false gods. So it is not the body itself that is the focus of the relationship, but how it is used.




But I don't see any reference to angels with material bodies in Jude 6. It is your opinion that this is what "first estate" means, but I need more than your opinion to be persuaded that this is so.

If we all agreed these forums wouldn't exist. I enjoy arguing much more than agreeing. But that's just me.

How the body is used is exactly what I meant. That makes it very important to God.

The first 'estate' in Jude:6 is the angels spiritual state of mind, and being in the good graces of God. Regarding their 'habitation', as defined by Strong's, appears to be their bodies as well the 'house' where they dwell, which in this case would be the earth:

Outline of Biblical Usage: habitation (Re: Jude 6, from Strongs')

1) a dwelling place, habitation
a) of the body as a dwelling place for the spirit

This works for me.

Proverbs 31 reveals this same relationship between the good wife and her husband. Her position and responsibilities are her 'estate', which also relates to her habitation, or her material world, but also defines her relationship with her husband and family. His 'estate' is revealed by his position 'in the gate', and is higher than hers. This replicates the relationship between God and Lucifer. As long as Lucifer kept his estate and habitation everything was fine. But he wanted the spiritual estate of God and sought to achieve it, leaving his material habitation on the earth and his material body. (Just as Christ shed his material body when he ascended, Lucifer shed his when he entered the third heaven.)

Of course the faithful wife of Proverbs 31 did not attempt to 'sit in the gate' with or in place of her husband. There's a really good lesson for today's women there. Imo, of course.

 

[gluadys]

The first 'estate' in Jude:6 is the angels spiritual state of mind, and being in the good graces of God. Regarding their 'habitation', as defined by Strong's, appears to be their bodies as well the 'house' where they dwell, which in this case would be the earth:


Outline of Biblical Usage1) a dwelling place, habitation a) of the body as a dwelling place for the spirit

Seems to me that one or both of two propositions still need to be established to support this POV.

1) that the bodies of angels were originally material.
2) that earth was originlly intended to be their dwelling place.

It seems to me that Jude could equally well be referring to the opposite--that the rebellious angels left their first habitation (spiritual bodies in heaven) and sinned by adopting material bodies on earth.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Two doses of personal opinion, and one stretch of the mind. Do you ever wonder why people don't hold the same convictions you do?

Everything posted here is personal opinion, including yours.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Seems to me that one or both of two propositions still need to be established to support this POV.

1) that the bodies of angels were originally material.
2) that earth was originlly intended to be their dwelling place.

It seems to me that Jude could equally well be referring to the opposite--that the rebellious angels left their first habitation (spiritual bodies in heaven) and sinned by adopting material bodies on earth.

I don't think that angels have the power to do that. I think that God created the material universe, including the earth, especially for the angels to enjoy, but after he had created them as spirit beings. The angels "sang for joy when the foundation of the earth were laid" This indicates that the spirit realm existed first.

I believe this refers to the ancient earth when it was first created. The angels were to inhabit it, enjoying the sensuality of taste, touch, smell, etc. of paradise, within wonderfully designed physical bodies.

After perhaps billion of (our) years (the one known as) Lucifer, having enjoyed everything in this material universe to the full ("When I have fed you to the full, you will depart from me.") wanted more.

This theme has repeated throughout history, and is part of the nature that we inherited through the rebellion of Eve and Adam. I hope you can see where I'm coming from here.