This is our discussion board for what we as a community look like. We’ve talked in Leadership the last few weeks that we are called, primarily, to Love God and to Love Others. What does this mean for us today, though? Do we love others by continuing to partner with Cimarron? By meeting with discussion, as we are doing now, or meeting in a more traditional worship setting with New Hope? How do we relate to all of creation? What else are we passionate about that we could be doing? What sort of giftings do we have?
Please comment on anything and everything!
Advertisements
February 23, 2008 at 7:28 pm
i think that part of what will keep the gathering on the path god has set for us, and also on a path where we always act out of our love for god, is to keep church and when we meet a time of thought — a time of learning and loving god and others. sometimes church turns into a sunday thing for people. on sunday we will take this time out of our day to worship god and then go back to our lives. this is not what the gathering wants to do. we want god to be a part of our lives everyday and every moment. by learning and provoking thought about god in church, we are walking this road. when we go home we will not just go back to our lives because we never left them. we will continue to think about god and act out of our love for god. people in the gathering and the community will develop personal relationships with god when they see the acts we do out of our love for god and because of our intimate relationships with him. we develop our relationship with god in church and out of church because of the way the gathering is run, so that in church and out of church is one continual way of life, and not a break from life. too often church becomes a break from life, as well as a place for a person to say, ‘god, i have sinned throughout the week, please forgive me,’ and then they can feel relieved and go right back to the same life they left behind, and do all the same acts again without thinking on god and their love for him. church should not become a routine so that we can feel better about ourselves, nor should we be allowed to trick ourselves into thinking we are following god just by showing up at church once a week, when we are not. this is why including people in a thought provoking discussion on god and ways to possibly or possibly not go about following him and showing our love for him on a daily basis is so essential. then we have not just shed our sins so that we can go home feeling relieved and free, but we started a pattern where we think about our lives and our actions and our motives, where we think about god and our love for him, and his love for us. this is what church is about. and it is also about community…sharing ourselves and our love for god and others with the community. when god sends us opportunities for partnering with places like cimarron, and the passion and means to help, it is a good thing. and when we know that our actions are out of our love for god and others, and we have the knowledge and courage to look into ourselves and make sure our motives are pure (and not for attention or love, or receiving anything in return), then we are in a good place, and the people we are helping in the community will see this. the gathering is a very personal place. our connections with god are personal and our connections with each other are personal. when you have this in your church, there is accountability. it is difficult to constantly check and re-check our motives for things. and i am thankful to have people i trust and love to help me if i ever lose my way. i am thankful my relationship with god doesn’t begin and end in church. i am thankful god’s love shines in everyone, and when people need a helping hand to find that light hidden inside of them, the gathering is willing to help.
February 24, 2008 at 5:04 pm
16. And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him. 17. Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world. 18. There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love. 19. We love him, because he first loved us. 20. If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen? 21. And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also. 1Jo 4:16 – 1Jo 4:21
it seems to me that if we love god, we will (inherently) love others. and if we do not love others, we are lying when we say we love god. for if we love god, we thereby have the gift of god’s love, and we can share this love with others, because it is from god — otherworldly and eternal. if we do not love god, however, we have the gift of love, this priceless beautiful gift, but we lack the means to share it. …of course, then i started to wonder, this passage says ‘brothers’, love your brothers. does this mean only humans are to receive our love?
2. By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments. 3. For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous. 4. For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, [even] our faith. 1Jo 5:2 – 1Jo 5:4
this passage states the same commandments, the same idea that if we love god, we will love our brothers, only it now refers to the ‘children of god’ instead of ‘brothers’. so who are they, the children of god? only man again…is only man ‘born of god’ like the passage says?
And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. Mar 16:15
the word ‘creature’ does not appear very often in the bible, and i have only seen it used so far to relate to all creatures on the earth who are alive. so is this passage saying all creatures can be taught of god and are worthy of god and can love, thereby deserve love? is it saying that even though we cannot understand how, other creatures know of god and have faith in him, and therefore we should not omit them from our own gospel? that all creatures have the capability of faith and love in god, just like we do?
And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, [be] unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever. Rev 5:13
here it seems to restate that creatures are listening, too, to the word of god — such that, they have some sort of faith, some sort of understanding and love, even if it is not exactly like a human’s. ‘and every creature which is in heaven’ is a very significant line. for it goes on to relate this to every creature in the sea…by which we must abstract that there are more than just humans in heaven, mainly creatures, which was a word used in the genesis to describe all animals who moved upon the earth. ‘And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl [that] may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that [it was] good.’ Gen 1:20 – 1:21
16. The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: 17. And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with [him], that we may be also glorified together. 18. For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time [are] not worthy [to be compared] with the glory which shall be revealed in us. 19. For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God. 20. For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected [the same] in hope, 21. Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. 22. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. 23. And not only [they], but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, [to wit], the redemption of our body. Rom 8:16 – Rom 8:23
here, ‘children of god’, ‘creatures’, and ‘the whole creation’ are mentioned together; and even ‘not only they, but ourselves also’ is mentioned so as to separate man from creature in understanding. the earnest expectation of the creature is for the manifestation of the sons of god (wherein all creatures know of god and have faith in him and wait for him). the creature was also made subject to vanity (a comparison of all creatures to man), and the creature itself will also be delivered from the bondage of corruption to become one of the children of god. all of creation travels together and moans together, waiting for the redemption of the body by god. thereby, all creatures can be redeemed by god, and become children of god, resurrected in heaven. (while the line, ‘And not only [they], but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit’ is significant, one could deduce that the love of all creatures for god is the same as ours, and god’s love for them, but on earth, the human is given priority, such that a man’s life is valued over a goats.)
conclusively, if it is true that we must love our brothers to be pure in our love for god (because if we love god we inherently love our brothers)…and the same word, brothers, can be interchanged with ‘children of god’, then is it not logical to deduce if we love god, we will love all creatures, and all of creation, considering they too wait to be redeemed by god, and have faith in god? can we truly say we love god if we do not love all creatures and all creation, when they too will be redeemed by god, and become children of god?
February 27, 2008 at 11:42 pm
Cole, you bring up some great questions. In an effort to dialogue about it, I’d like to bring up some more questions and thoughts…
1. Mark 16:9-20 is almost certainly not what Mark wrote, due to its absence from the earliest codices, its different style, and its many textual variants…it is probably the work of a later scribe to smooth out the ending of this Gospel, probably based largely on other “Jesus material” and well-known accounts (minus the potentially deathly v 18!). However, even with that considered, the context of v. 15 seems to be the proclamation of the gospel to humans, throughout creation (a limitless scope in geography). Animals are not baptized, do not speak in tongues, do not cast out demons, etc. Further, this account follows Jesus’ post-resurrectional appearances to His human disciples. Is it fair to assume that Jesus is commanding us here in v.15 to preach His Gospel (which then here effects baptism, signs, etc.) to creation in addition to humanity?
2. The book of Revelation is very difficult to exegete, given its genre, use of imagery, symbols, and often obscure content. From John’s other descriptions of the 4 creatures (i.e. Rev. 4:8), they are other than what God created in Genesis to inhabit the earth. Rev. 5:11-14 certainly points out that there are many various creatures in heaven worshiping God…indeed, that God’s reign and authority is over all of creation and will one day be universally recognized as such as it already is in heaven. This seems to me to be the main thrust of this passage. Are we justified to take this passage further and use it to base a claim that animals have a faith in God?
3. Rom 8:18-25 is an amazing passage, to be sure. I love the thought of all of creation eagerly awaiting redemption and renewal…a sense that we are all somehow in this together. Again, my comments will ask the question of if it is stretching what Paul is saying too far to assert that animals (creatures other than humans) will be bodily resurrected based on their love for God.
First, it is certainly true that Paul is using a comparison of sorts between humanity and the rest of creation (I’m taking the Greek “ktisis” to mean creation as a whole below the human level) in this fallen state before all things are made new. Back in Genesis 3:17ff., God curses the ground because of Adam…puts creation in a sort of “bondage” to fruitlessness, as it seems Paul is referring to in v.20. The Greek for “vanity” or “futility” (NASB), carries the idea of not reaching your purpose or use. Creation suffered because of man’s sin, yet creation will one day be renewed as a “new heaven and new earth” (Rev. 21:1). In this “new earth,” sin will no longer be an issue and all of creation will be free to be fully what God originally intended it to be (i.e. Rom 8:21). We, in a sense like creation, yearn for that. However, these passages stop short of suggesting a bodily resurrection for creation (animals, plants, etc.).
Secondly, in v.23, “and not only THEY or THIS,” Paul actually doesn’t use a noun or pronoun (“they” or “this”), so it is supplied by the translator. Yet whatever noun is supplied, the idea seems to be that not only is it a fact that creation is currently affected by sin and awaiting renewal, but we ourselves are affected by sin, yearning for redemption, and have this as a basis for hope. Only here does Paul speak of the redemption of the body, and that bodily redemption is referring to humanity’s redemption. Hope is the main idea of this entire passage (vv.24-25).
In my opinion, you are right on the money that we must love others if we claim to love God. The love of God overflows into our love for others. Also, certainly, creation is to be loved and respected and cared for…in a sense, we are in this together.
Yet I don’t see a biblical equation of humanity with the rest of creation. We are unique, as God’s pinnacle work in Genesis, uniquely created in His image. We have a responsibility when it comes to caring for the rest of creation, but we do not relate to creation as we would relate to another human. No where biblically do we have accounts of evangelizing creation, of God loving creation in the same sense as He loves humanity (animal sacrifices, all animals pronounced “clean” for food, etc.)It seems to me we are not the same, our relationship to God is not the same, and our duty to creation is not the same as our duty to fellow mankind.
Does this make sense or am I off somewhere?
These are just some of my preliminary thoughts on the topic. Let’s continue the conversaton and dig in on the worthy quest for God’s truth.
Thoughts? Comments?
February 28, 2008 at 5:45 pm
eric, thank you for clarifying, or at least adding a new perspective to the passages i used…i do not think it is fair to just have one opinion/interpretation…and i am not as knowledgeable about the bible as i would like to be.
i am not ready to assume either way (on the overall picture, at least). however, i do agree that man was made in god’s image, and no other creature. we are unique in god’s eyes and it was also us who sinned and our sin affected the rest of creation. animals do not sin, but are affected by sin. therefore our duty to animals and the rest of creation is not the same as our duty to humanity…who need to be saved and were saved by jesus dying on the cross for us, and only need to ask for forgiveness from god…recognize and accept god into their hearts.
my question still remains, if they (as in animals/creation) were made good and blessed by god and told to be fruitful and multiply, how can they be good and be blessed by god without some sort of faith and love in god? it didn’t seem to me that they were only made and told to be fruitful and multiply to be food for humans?
And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that [it was] good. 22. And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. Gen 1:21 – Gen 1:22
if god is speaking to these creatures here, don’t they have to be able to hear him and know him? and if they are good because they were made by god, and they were blessed by god, and they are affected by our sins, i feel they must hold some place on this earth more than food…and if they can be affected by sin, but were made good, also hold some place in heaven? or some place after earthly things, meaning, they mean more than just earthly things? (these are not real questions the way they are written, but they are, questions…hoping for other perspectives, thoughts, and interpretations to allow for learning in the quest for god’s truth on all sides.)
i completely agree though, we are all in this together, and must therefore respect one another accordingly. we were all made by god and his goodness, and we were all loved and blessed by god.
creation is god’s masterpiece. humanity is god’s image. we are all on the same canvas…this is the equation i see.
these are also just the beginnings of a worthy conversation, to me. i would like to continue to learn and discuss an un-definable thing…god’s love. it is so perfect, we cannot put it into human thought or words…only feel it.
i feel god’s love very strongly toward the rest of humanity, but also toward creation as a whole…what does this mean? and what does it mean toward everyday life?…and the afterlife, which must exist, in my own opinion, for love not to be empty (empty love being love in earthly things)?…such that, how deep is god’s love for creation and where does it lead? i feel a strong difference between my own love for, let’s say, a lamp (which is empty love that will be replaced by a new lamp), and my love toward a tree or an animal…i feel animals feel something back (even trees), unlike the lamp…and if that something is love, which only comes from god, how can they be denied god’s love in the end — after life on earth? i don’t feel god’s love for a lamp, but i do for a tree and an animal…
thoughts?
February 28, 2008 at 7:05 pm
as tyler said, a single passage in the bible can be used to support anything (hopefully i am quoting right here)…thank you again, eric, for looking at the larger picture.
i think this discussion has only just begun.
February 28, 2008 at 11:06 pm
Cole (and others)
Yeah, I hope this is just the beginning of the discussion…for this topic and other thoughtful topics in order to pursue God’s truth diligently.
Not only did God see that His creation of plants, animals, and humans was “good,” but also the seas, dry land, stars, the moon, and the sun. Do you feel these inanimate objects would also have a sort of faith and love for God?
I definitely agree with you that animals do not have as their sole purpose in life to be food for humans. I would venture to say they have many purposes, specifically in relation to humans, purposes such as pleasure (beauty), companionship, intrigue, sources of study for certain kinds of knowledge (ways to relate to the world, lessons about God, etc.), among many others. Animals are not here simply to serve humanity, but to be taken care of by humanity…perhaps similarly to a king’s relationship to his people (in a sense, both entities serve each other…minus the people being a source of food for the king!). After all, “image of God” in the days of ancient civilizaton often referred to a deity’s statue or idol…the idol represented the deity…it was the deity’s “image.” So, too, humanity is to represent God within His creation…to be a sort of royal regent…His “image” within this world and in relation to this world(Gen 1:26).
From what I can tell, the Bible doesn’t say anything explicit about a place in heaven for animals or not. Traditionally, folks have assumed no b/c of an apparent lack of a “soul,” but that is speculation as well. Personally, I find it hard to imagine a renewed earth (a sort of return to Eden) without the presence of plants and animals, as well as inanimate objects…but I stop short of suggesting that the same dog who died on this earth will be the same dog “resurrected” in a sense for the “new earth.”
Similarly, the land was affected by Adam’s sin (Gen. 3:17)…does that mean that the land has a love and faith in God?
Is it possible for God to bless someone (or something, as in Gen. 1:22) and yet that someone or something not “be saved?” Does God’s blessing always result in salvation? What about the humans who are blessed by God (rain falls on the righteous and wicked) and not “be saved?” Or is that different b/c they had a “choice,” whether they realized it or not? Perhaps God’s blessing of the animals here is less about a salvific relationship with Him and more about the ability to have offspring (it is a blessing to be able to have children).
Admittedly, many of these questions that you are raising (such as God’s exact relationship to the rest of creation…a truth we would probably only know if we were in that relationship, and exactly what animals think and feel) are probably impossible to answer definitively. We can only guess based upon what we do know and observe.
Surely the love you feel for creation…God’s love for creation…is healthy, worthy, and intended. Those are good things and are needed. Genesis provides for us a good corrective against some Greek philosophy that viewed creation, like our bodies, as essentially bad and only the spirit within us as good.
I am willing to think about this as far and as much as you’d like! Let’s continue to hash this and other worthy things out… I think it pleases God.
March 6, 2008 at 1:35 pm
wonderful. i hope we can continue this conversation and carry on many conversations like this in pursuit of god’s truth.
(i will try to speak more generally on the passages i use so as not to cloud the overall message which was being relayed.)
25. “Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life, what you shall eat or what you shall drink, nor about your body, what you shall put on. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing? 26. Look at the birds of the air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? 27. And which of you by being anxious can add one cubit to his span of life? 28. And why are you anxious about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they neither toil nor spin; 29. yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. 30. But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is alive and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you, O men of little faith? Mat 6:25 – Mat 6:30
clearly it is true that we are of more value to god on this earth than the birds and the lilies…mainly, the rest of creation. i see that jesus was simply using a metaphor to explain to us that if we hand our lives over to god and have complete faith in him, we will be taken care of for all our earthly needs, such as clothes and food. humans have made houses and farms and plantations to grow their food. we have killed for clothes in the past, and now we manufacture them all around the world. we toil for these things, not trusting they will be provided by god out of his love for us. whereas a bird simply goes out each morning and looks for food, and god makes sure he is fed. does the bird have faith that god will feed him then, unlike men of little faith, such that men of little faith will have to toil for their food? and even the lily…for god to have made the lily so beautiful (without it itself toiling for beauty), must it not have something imbedded in it, because it was made by god and blessed and made good by god? as jesus does not say that god would clothe and feed and take care of a human more than a bird or lily because he has more faith (moreover, any faith at all), but because we are of more value. even solomon in all his glory was not as beautiful as the lily, because he did not have total faith (do to the fact that man is clouded by the devil, whereas creation is not, only affected by man’s sin).
jesus was using metaphors to allow for understanding, but his words are true and of god, thus even a metaphor i believe is true to the nature of life as a whole, and in my opinion, should be discussed as well.
i completely agree with man being here to take care of creation, to keep it…like a king and his people. i also believe that humanity is here as god’s image on earth, to be the image of god on earth… ‘His “image” within this world and in relation to this world.’ to extrapolate on this, if we are in a sense ‘representing’ the image of god on this earth, and we are taking care of creation, i wonder if our job could go further than that…such that we are representing the image of god on earth for a purpose, not only for humanity to have faith in god, but also animals and so forth…like a parent, who is supposed to teach the child all they know, and be an example, an example of love. perhaps we were made to also be a shining beacon for the rest of creation, and we were in the beginning, with our pure faith in god and relationship to him…but then we sinned, and it seems to me we almost lost that superiority to creation, hurting them and ourselves because we were their shining light to god, and we were now dark. jesus forgave us our sins, however, and perhaps we are supposed to be shining beacons towards god for the rest of creation once more (and of course, each other). loving each other, such that if we love god, we love our brothers, and loving all of creation like a child.
3. And the second angel poured out his vial upon the sea; and it became as the blood of a dead [man]: and every living soul died in the sea. Rev 16:3
13. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. 14. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. 15. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. Rev 21:1. And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. Rev 20:13 – Rev 21:1
in the first death one of many things was all the souls in the sea dying. so i wonder in the second death, then, when the sea gave up all the dead within it, if this includes ‘all the souls’ (such as the fish and whales and so on) which died in it. now i do not see a mention of any creature other than man being judged thereafter, but is it fair to say this is because only man has sinned in his age, and therefore harmed the rest of creation, so even if other souls were released from the sea, they needed not be judged…and they were already in the book of life before the second death?
also, because it is mentioned that there is no more sea, i have to wonder what this could mean for the creatures of the sea if in fact their souls were given up by the sea before the second death. i am curious if perhaps they can take on other forms on the new earth, because they were not made in the image of god in the beginning…whereas man will remain in the image of a man, thus the image of god on the new earth?…
perhaps because the land was made by god, made to be good, this relates to the land having a piece of god in it. by which i mean, the land itself, or the sun and moon, the sea, what have you, do not have faith in god, but have a piece of god in them which was only tainted by our (man’s) sin because we were meant to take care of the land and all creation, like a parent, and our sins, whatever we do, affects our ‘children.’ all these ‘inanimate’ things created by god were pure and good and only of god in the beginning…our sinning has affected them, but not such that they are no longer of god; they would still have a piece of him in them (not faith, so to speak, but something) so that in the end they will (can) be redeemed and made to be good and pure again on the new earth.
when humans are redeemed, so too will be all creation they affected with their sin (i think we have determined and so it says in the bible)…but to go beyond that, and say all living creatures can be ‘saved’ by god, is still not clear. it seems to me god’s blessing is not automatic salvation, but we must have faith to receive this salvation in the end. of course, this goes back to whether other creatures have faith and know god. do other creatures understand this blessing? when god spoke to them and told them to go out and multiply, did they hear him, or was he just speaking so it would come about, as his words also created? was his blessing simply so that creation could have offspring? certainly the ability to have children is a blessing, but must we understand this blessing to have children? must it somehow be imbedded in us in some form of understanding (and not even in the mind, where most people feel all understanding is)? if we look at some of jesus’ works, we find infertile women whom he healed. jesus healed by returning that person’s faith to them…such that, if they believed and had great faith in god, they would be healed. the women, then, were healed due to their faith in god…they were able to have children due to their faith in god. of course, their are people in this world, clearly, who do not have faith in god who are able to have children. but i have to wonder if just because we see this person as not having faith, even if they proclaim themselves to not believe, somewhere in them (again, not in the mind) they understand the word and love and blessings of god, because they have a piece of god in them (and in the case of a human, i have to believe they have repented, in their soul, if not in the mind).
indeed, i completely agree that unless we were in the relationship ourselves (speaking on the relationship between god and the rest of creation), we will not be able to fully reveal this mystery, as only god reveals mysteries, and this seems to be one of those mysteries he has not yet divulged to mankind. it is good and healthy, then, to speak on the subject, to discuss god and what we do know, what mysteries he has revealed and how we keep this earth and observe, while also not to assume more than we know and come to a definitive answer in absence of god revealing the answer.
our love for creation, i believe, is directly related to god’s love for creation. we are his children, and he put us in the position to keep all of creation like our children. the genesis will remind us of this.
wonderful! there are no conversations more worthy, in my opinion, than when people learn and discuss how to relate with god and all things he created.
(also, i wanted to apologize if my not capitalizing of words offends anyone…i do not use the keyboard correctly.)
March 6, 2008 at 10:24 pm
Thanks Cole.
I would like to hear what other people who are reading this are thinking on these issues…
March 8, 2008 at 12:40 am
Stop the insane killing of bunnies!
No seriously though, this is interesting and I’m definitely reading it all I just don’t have much input on the subject. My primary concern as of last has been the downward spiral of women in our culture so that has me pretty preoccupied. Keep up the discussion though 🙂
March 8, 2008 at 11:54 am
😀
we should have gabe (hopefully you are reading) put in another discussion board for what has kept you preoccupied. i know we are all very interested to hear what your research and opinions are (at least your research, because we are all wary of our opinions making us look insane…but, don’t worry, there is only love here for everyone, insane or not!…and i’m sure our opinions are not insane, anyway).
so, let’s keep both conversations going, and many more, with as many people as possible!