 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
andersent
Member
| Joined: | Mon Apr 30th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 23 |
| First Name: | Todd | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Formerly united methodist, now Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat May 5th, 2007 12:25 am |
|
Hi all,
I've enjoyed the recent discussions about Genesis. I'm working through it and I am just posting questions here as they come to my mind. After reading the Flood account this thought came to me...while I understand the main theological point to be judgment upon sin, it also seems like what is going on is an attempt to create a covenant through a righteous man. But immediately after the flood Noah and his family get into trouble with sin. My question is, 50, 100, or 1000 years later, was mankind any different? In other words did the covenant bring about any change at all? Weren't the people just as sinful after the covenant than they were before? I can see the Christological foreshadowing of the story of Noah and the ark--that people who are on the boat (now the church) are saved by the waters rather than condemned and judged by the waters..etc. Perhaps we can say that the future work of Christ on the cross would bring the righteousness intended by the covenant with Noah and that this is part of the lesson--that a covenant between man and God will never work ultimately, unless the man making the covenant is divine. However, Noah's flood still leaves these questions in my mind 1) while we can never take an act of God in the OT separate from teh final work of Christ in the New Covenant, it still leaves me thinking "what is the point of the covenant and the flood?" The covenant doesn't really seem to make man any different or better at all from what we can tell. So it seems like a lot of effort and a lot of killing for God to perform and I'm not sure why really. Perhaps just to teach a lesson like I stated above but that still seems to leave a bit wanting for me. 2) also, what are we to think of the eternal judgment of these persons? Is this a judgment that is more so a statement to humanity living after the flood that would be preseverd in the scriptures so that we can see the serious consequenses of sin? In other words was this incredible act of destruction of all persons by God (except 8) already an eternal judgement upon all of these persons or was it moreso a judgment upon humanity as a whole that would speak to us in the years to come about the seriousness of sin and the people that died from the flood weren't necessarily sent to hell but each was judged as anyone else living before Christ, etc? They go to the place of the dead that all went to prior to Christ coming to "preach the gospel in hades" as Peter tells us. It seems overly simplistic to me and it somewhat defies our common experience with humams today to think that all of the people living then were totally evil and deserving of hell. Along the same lines it seems a bit much to suggest that Noah was the only righteous one at the time. So, I can kind of see some cool foreshadowing going on that points to the eternal covenant with Christ, but I can't seem to see the logic of such a drastic act at that point in history when it doesn't really seem to have changed mankind at all really and it also seems to bring problems surrounding the eternal fate of all the persons living then.
|
|
|
David W. Emery
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Brownsville, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 2429 |
| First Name: | David | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat May 5th, 2007 02:46 am |
|
The covenant doesn't really seem to make man any different or better at all from what we can tell.
What does St. Paul say about the Mosaic Covenant and the works of the Law? “For no human being will be justified in his sight by works of the law, since through the law comes knowledge of sin” (Romans 3:20).
We have here the judgment of mankind depicted in the form of a flood. So we know that sin exists, and that it is not of
God. We also have an inkling that the righteous man will be saved, while the evil will perish.
Let us look at the story of the flood for a moment from a more naturalistic viewpoint. We are aware from recent scientific studies that much of the eastern Mediterranean and Fertile Crescent area was once in ancient times inundated in a catastrophic manner. The most probable explanation was a bridging of the strait at what is now Istanbul. If we see this in retrospect as a natural disaster as well as an accumulation of sin, we might see our way clear to apply Luke 13:1–5. But why is this significant? I think the verses following, 6–9, show clearly what Jesus had in mind when telling the crowd, “Unless you repent you will all likewise perish.” Going a bit further, in vv. 10–13 we see his mercy on the woman who was bent over, showing that God is not “all judgment.”
This in turn reminds me of Romans 9:14–33, which cites various Old Testament scriptures in the course of its argument. Not the least of them is Exodus 33:19, which takes place in the context of Moses standing before the Lord, interceding yet again for the Israelites. Moses then goes a step farther: “I beg you, show me your glory.” (How would he dare say this except that he perceives that he is in God’s favor?) And God answers: “I will make all my goodness pass before you, and will proclaim before you my name, ‘The Lord’; and I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy. But you cannot see my face; for man shall not see me and live.” Nevertheless, God does consent to let Moses see, as it were, his “backside.”
Here is a mystery to ponder, dealing with the secret judgments of God. One he favors, another he subjects to misery and tragedy. Which is the “true” face of God? Does the one side have an advantage over the other? The Christian ascetical tradition answers a resounding, No. Whether one rejoices or suffers, it is all one. The important things is God himself and the dark cloud of mystery that surrounds him. For this reason we see many of the Desert Fathers (the monks of Egypt and Syria from the 3rd century onward) speak of the pillar of cloud and of fire as an essential characteristic of the Lord.
What are we to think of the eternal judgment of these persons?… or was it moreso a judgment upon humanity as a whole that would speak to us in the years to come about the seriousness of sin and the people that died from the flood weren't necessarily sent to hell but each was judged as anyone else living before Christ, etc?
The Fathers of the Church have varying views on this, and the Church has not made any pronouncement. So we are free to investigate the possibilities. I prefer to see it in light of the preceding, especially St. Paul’s reference in Romans 9:19ff. Is it beyond him to say, “Those who were not my people I will call ‘my people,’ and her who was not beloved I will call ‘my beloved’”?
David
|
|
|
lia
Member
| Joined: | Mon Dec 11th, 2006 |
| Location: | Quezon City, Philippines |
| Posts: | 98 |
| First Name: | lia | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Cradle Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 8th, 2007 04:11 am |
|
From what I understand of what a COVENANT means is that it is a vow to remain faithful whether the one you made a covenant with is not. So I guess made the covenant God made was not for His sake but for our sake. It's true that it seems God's covenant with us doesn't seem to change us for the better. I guess that's why He made the covenant. I think that's the point God made with His covenant with us. He knows how weak we are. God is true to His word, he has not flooded the world again even though we see so much evil in our times.
____________________
Man can't b forced 2 accept the truth.He can b drawn toward the truth only by his own nature, that is, by his own freedom w/c commits him 2 search sincerely 4 truth & when he finds it, 2 adhere 2 it both in his conviction & his behavior.-- JP2
|
|
|
Current time is 09:52 pm | |
|
|
|
|
|
