And God said it was good....

[Seeler]

Opening post - why did God make the mosquito?
It's all part of the circle of life, and of death.
Death is a part of life. Without death there can be no life as we know it - no birth (new seeds and plants, new babies), no growth, no change, no rebirth. Just everything the same day after day.
I suppose in a perfect world we would be born, live and grow, learn, love, reproduce and flourish with children and grandchildren, and then when we lived out our three score and ten, we would die and return to dust making room for that next generation to do the same.
But life doesn't happen that way.
Other creatures are also trying to live out their perfect life cycle. We clash. We humans cut short the life cycles of many plants and animals in our quest for food, shelter, clothing. Birds, bats, fish, larger insects (preying mantis, dragon fly), cut short the life of the mosquito in order to obtain their food. And mosquitos bit us, not out of some evil intent, not for punishment for original sin, but to obtain a bit of blood which is their food.
And in addition to mosquitos there are a few other things to annoy or make our lives difficult or cut them short - some of them cannot be explained so easily. Cancer -- why God did you make cells that sometimes go crazy and grow so rapidly and irregularly that they destroy their very source of life long before it has lived? Parkinsons -- perhaps it can be explained as part of the natural aging process, that as the body breaks down some people are going to hit in their neurological system, but why then does it hit some people in their 40s or even younger?
Life is good - life leads to death - and rebirth!

 

[revjohn]

John, if God thought it was good, why did God, as the creator, let it deteriorate?
or is it only the fault of humans. Does God hold no responsibility?

If we trust the narrative there is no doubt. Not only is Creation good but it is very good.

As to why did God allow Creation to deteriorate that becomes a bit complex. What do we mean by deteriorate is a good starter.

Depending upon the narrative one works with (Genesis 1 v Genesis 2) there comes a point in the narrative where God steps back from creating and turns to humanity and says, "You're on. It's your show now."

Why? Who knows for sure. God has remained silent on the why of this decision even though he can be heard elsewhere in the narratives regretting making this decision.

Humanity (depending on the translation you favour) has dominion/authority/custodial responsibility for Creation. We call the shots. We are minding the store. It also doesn't take long for the narrative to point out that we are in over our heads.

Assigning blame is a quirky part of the narrative which we see and fail to comprehend. When we look at God discovering naked and hiding humanity and the questions we ask we leap right to the curses laid upon all actors in the drama and we fail to consider the defences offered.

Adam says, "The woman you put here with me--she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it." Adam blames God and Eve while taking no responsibility. He admits that he ate and it is very clear that if God hadn't given Eve to Adam and Eve hadn't given the fruit to him everything would still be okay. God says nothing then to Adam but moves on to Eve.

Eve says, "The serpent deceived me and I ate." Not quite the same level of blame shifting that Adam went through and yet it is very clear that were it not for the serpent Eve would have managed not to eat that fruit. God says nothing then to Eve but moves on to the serpent.

The serpent is allowed no opportunity to defend itself God moves right to the curse. Once done with the serpent he turns back to Eve and explains her new reality to her and finally he turns to Adam and explains his new reality to him, cursing the ground because of him. To curse is to bind and in Genesis 3 Eve and all her children are bound in enmity to the serpent and all its children while Adam is bound to the earth which henceforth will be difficult to work.

That should be it for the blame game. Humanity should remember their commission and get on with it. And yet humanity still wants to point fingers elsewhere and shift blame. "Why didn't God stop us, why make that tree, why make us hungry, why make the serpent and on and on and on it goes. Humanity, it appears, is not particularly adept at taking responsibility for its own failings.

Which means what?

It means that things are broken and in need of repair and humanity has neither the will or the ability to fix them.

So God takes responsibility for redeeming.

You can't unsay a word but comfort can be given to the one hurt by it.

You can't unbreak a bone but it can be set properly so that it heals in strength.

You can't unscramble an egg but you can invite another to share in its eating.

God takes responsibility for all of that and in what is sure to be regarded as a brave and courageous act by some or a dangerously fool-hardy stunt by others God invites us to participate in that redemption to some extent.

An aside about the use of the word perfect with respect to Creation.

Perfect is not a word which appears in the Creation narrative. God does not pronounce Creation to be perfect or very perfect. God proclaims Creation to be good and very good. Those who argue for the perfection of Creation typically point to Deuteronomy 32:4

He is the Rock, his works are perfect and all his ways are just. A faithful God who does no wrong, upright and just is he.

Perfect is a nuanced word whether we like to admit it or not. It can mean without flaw (our most common use) or it can mean complete (not a common use). Which means that Deuteronomy may not be saying that Creation is complete so much as it is saying God's work of Creating is perfect.

I would argue for an understanding of the latter element. That God's work of Creation is perfect and the reason why God does not proclaim Creation to be perfect or very perfect is because it was not created to be complete as it stood. If Creation was complete in and of itself it would have no need for God nor would it have had need for humanity to be its steward.

A repeated element of the Creation story is the element of reproduction. Multiplication is essential to Creation. There is built in desire for more which sets up tension between lust (not necessarily sexual) and intimacy (again not necessarily sexual). This built in desire is behind Eve taking the fruit. It isn't because she is deceived it is because she wants. This built in desire is behind Adam eating. It isn't because Eve twisted his arm it is because he craves.

Interesting, don't you think, that they would be forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil as if there was no other source for the same kind of knowledge. They walk with God and talk with him couldn't they just ask God about what is good and evil? I mean there is also a tree of life in the garden which they are free to eat from but didn't God already give them life? What would that tree be good for I wonder.

And the intimacy that they knew with God. Did they value it more than God did or did they value it less? Did they understand what they were giving up for a piece of fruit? And if they did not value what they had with God how can they me made to understand what they have lost? Eviction from the garden and an end to daily walks with him.

Redemption seeks to restore that loss of intimacy and God is taking responsibility for that work as well.

The greatest loss in the Fall? Whose is it?

Is it Adam's because now he only eats by the sweat of his brow?

Is it Eve's because now she suffers pain through childbirth?

Or is it God's because he has been betrayed for a piece of fruit?

Kind of explains the beef God has against Esau a little better.

 

[Neo]

The serpent of Genesis is a metaphor for the duality that early man became aware of. If we can see the wisdom of unity hidden behind the duality (of good and evil) then we are on our way to becoming "at one" with the Universe and the forces that exist in and behind that manifestation.

Genesis is the story of the individualization of Humanty where we begin to wrestle with the pairs of opposites. It was all about awareness and our ability to rise above and see reality from a new point of view, one where there is unity in diversity.

Imho.

 

[jimkenney12]

I am glad to see Gord W posting again. Creation is not fallen, and I don't even buy into humanity as being fallen. The second creation story has many interesting quirks. One is that the descendants of Adam and Eve are not the only people around (Genesis 4:13-16). The myth that Adam is the father of all people is not well supported even in the Bible.

I believe the exit from the Garden is a metaphor for people being pushed to their task of developing their potential and to continue the work of creating greater complexity.

Viruses are not life, but dangerous by-products of life that play an important role in evolution and adaptation by living things as they transfer bits of other DNA while having their own DNA copied and spread.

There is such a close balance between competing functions in living cells that it is remarkable that we have as low a rate of diseases such as cancer or parkinson's that we do have. Almost all manufactured things have failure rates that are tens to millions of times as high.

Life is good. The world is good. Humans are essentially good. Some things go sideways. Life happens. Things are. It is time to quit trying to apply moral concepts like good and bad and evil to what just is.

 

[GordW]

It was perfect because God created it - and God is perfect.

However the text says nothing about Creation being perfect. It says it is good. Not even sure that that Parousia is described as a place of perfection (depending on how you read Revelation and the description of the New Jerusalem)

 

[Seeler]

Pinga, it is this point that makes me ask. Is the Creation story true ?

or is it a myth that some one wrote and the punch line

was " And God said it was good."?

Crazyheart - I believe it is a myth, a story developed by our oldest ancestors as they walked through the forests and grasslands, waded the streams, felt the sun on the beaches, and gazed at the skies -- a story passed down, like other creation stories -- and eventually set down on a scroll. Whether the oft-repeated punch line "... and it was good" was there in the original story, we cannot know. I think that the scribes who eventually wrote it down believed that 'it was very good'. I am impressed by the truth we can find in the stories, song and poetry of the past when we let go of the idea that they were recording facts.

 

[Seeler]

Rev.John and others - I try not to combine the creation stories found in Genesis. They are two separate myths that developed in different areas at different times. The phrase "God saw that it was good." is found in one story (my preferred story). The fall of Adam and Eve and all humankind is in the other.

 

[Seeler]

Here are my early thoughts:
http://ministerialmutterings.blogspot.ca/2014/06/looking-forward-to-june-22-2014-2nd.html

Gord - the reading from Genesis 1 is the one I used when I led worship last Sunday, June 15th. Did I get mixed up, or did you use different readings for Trinity Sunday/Father's Day and then go back to these?
If I got it wrong, I hope that their regular minister who will be back in the pulpit this Sunday uses a different reading - perhaps the Gospel - or comes at the Genesis reading (and/or Psalm 8) from a different angle than I used.

 

[GordW]

no I only used Corinthians and Matthew last week to preach on Trinity, saving Creation for this week

 

[Jaebius]

Now I'm thinking that I might choose to teach the story of creation to my Sunday School class this coming weekend. It seems to me to be a good next place to go in sharing with them about God's great mission of redemption. Last time we talked about God as their Father - and how he loves everyone. This time we can discuss God as their redeemer.

 

[Seeler]

Jae, what age level are you teaching. I've done all - from preschool to teen, and a combined class of elementary school aged. My favourite was teaching the youth.

 

[Jaebius]

Jae, what age level are you teaching. I've done all - from preschool to teen, and a combined class of elementary school aged. My favourite was teaching the youth.

Seeler - what age did you enjoy teaching most and why? My class is mixed in age. The youngest is 1 - and the oldest is 15.

 

[Pinga]

Rev.John and others - I try not to combine the creation stories found in Genesis. They are two separate myths that developed in different areas at different times. The phrase "God saw that it was good." is found in one story (my preferred story). The fall of Adam and Eve and all humankind is in the other.

Oh, Gord, i have missed your writing

 

[revjohn]

Rev.John and others - I try not to combine the creation stories found in Genesis. They are two separate myths that developed in different areas at different times. The phrase "God saw that it was good." is found in one story (my preferred story). The fall of Adam and Eve and all humankind is in the other.

They are two narratives. I am not convinced that they are separate. I'm not a big fan of documentary hypothesis. It meets the criteria of Occam's razor but rather ignores the fact that people are nuanced and people produce documents. Which is neither here nor there.

It is true that I am discussing facets of two different narratives. Christianity melds them in to our faith narrative. We shouldn't conflate the details of one for the other. Both are teaching and I believe the teachings of both work well together.

 

[Pinga]

(Ps. although I called out GordW, I really appreciate all the posters in religion and faith, and those who have been regular contributors. Guess a bit like the parent welcoming the prodigal son home.....we notice the one who has returned...and yet you are all important to us --- so thank-you!)

 

[Seeler]

I loved teaching teens. At first I was a bit intimidated by them - I wasn't really into the teen-scene when I was young - but as I got to know them I realized that they are each individuals. I enjoyed the challenge of trying to make their lessons interesting and meaningful to their lives - giving them a faith that they could relate to. I also enjoyed their questions. And sometimes they surprised me with their insights or their sensitivity.

 

[Seeler]

I too enjoy Gord's explorations of the lectionary passages as he struggles with the scripture for the week. Please continue, Gord. Maybe our questions and comments will give you some ideas to dig deeper. I know other people's comments do that for me.

 

[Jaebius]

I loved teaching teens. At first I was a bit intimidated by them - I wasn't really into the teen-scene when I was young - but as I got to know them I realized that they are each individuals. I enjoyed the challenge of trying to make their lessons interesting and meaningful to their lives - giving them a faith that they could relate to. I also enjoyed their questions. And sometimes they surprised me with their insights or their sensitivity.

That sounds great Seeler. I hope that in time I can develop some of that with the teen who I am teaching.

 

[Azdgari]

What is god perfect at? Perfection is only meaningful relative to a goal or standard (the latter of which is just another kind of goal - the goal of fitting that standard). "X is perfect" is an incomplete thought. Perfect at what?

 

[Jaebius]

What is god perfect at? Perfection is only meaningful relative to a goal or standard (the latter of which is just another kind of goal - the goal of fitting that standard). "X is perfect" is an incomplete thought. Perfect at what?

Well - I believe that God is perfect in his essential character - and that he is perfect in everything he chooses to do. Indeed - I believe God sets the standards.