Timothy & Countering The Culture (part 20)

According to stoicism, one’s life was to be spent gaining mastery over one’s passions and responses, cultivating the attitude of indifference, and aligning oneself with the cosmic force that was ultimately determinative of the events of one’s life, which could be observed in the harmonious operations of nature.  In conflict with the Hebrew position that humans were created in the image of the Creator God, and a celebration of the God-like attributions of humanity, stoicism sought to suppress human emotions.  This would lead to the attainment of virtue, which was observed as a detachment from all worldly concerns.  At death then, in accordance with the negative view of the physical world and its concerns, it was believed that the body would separate from the soul, existing momentarily in independence before being absorbed into the universal divine force that was known as “logos.” 

Accordingly, the supreme god was not personal in any sense at all, and was to be identified in the orderliness of creation, much like a painter is identified by his paintings.  Stoic belief, though based upon the presupposition that the natural world is inferior, can be identified as a monotheistic pantheism, which looks at everything within the natural order as being part of the one god.  Though this deification of nature appears to contradict the idea that the physical world is inferior, once one understands that the natural world is overlaid with the spiritual, therefore superseding the natural/physical component, it serves to demonstrate the consistency of the belief structure.  This, of course, stands in opposition to the Hebrew and subsequently Jesus-as-Messiah-based Hebrew (Christian) view of the Creator God and the world.          

On the other end of the philosophical spectrum against which Hebraic thought competed and which also was a dominant force in the world into which Christianity and its Hebrew-rooted, Resurrection-of-Christ-based claims concerning the Creator God’s rule and renewal of His once-good creation was introduced, stood the school of Epicureanism.  As part of its ethos of de-confirming the world and the value of the created order in favor of the spiritual, it ironically suggested an attachment to the world in which one found oneself, making the most of what was ultimately an existence of futility.

The essence of its teaching called for a devotion to the pursuit of personal happiness which led to the avoidance of pain.  This was not a call to a complete hedonism, as an absolute hedonism could eventually lead to suffering, which was obviously to be avoided.  Rather, life was to be spent pursuing pleasure primarily through food, drink, and sexual union (let us eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die), with peace of mind being achieved through this particular model that was labeled as virtuous. 

Clearly, this philosophy rejects the idea that there is a grand narrative into which humans have been inserted and in which they play a part, which is a component of the disavowal of the inherent goodness of the created order.  The created order is only good insofar as it is a means to experience pleasure during this exceedingly short sojourn of physical existence.  Upon death, the person, both body and soul, would dissolve and existence would cease.  Again, clearly, this leaves no room for resurrection.  The dissolution of the person, in body and in soul, continues to lend itself to the idea that there is no ultimate value to the physical.  Consequent to this outlook on life and death, a famous epicurean statement is “Death is nothing to us.”

Suppression Of Truth (part 2)

It is said that this suppression of truth occurred even though what could be known about the God of creation had been made quite plain to them (Romans 1:19).  Indeed, Scripture seems to indicate that Adam and Eve had a regular fellowship with the Creator, in His very presence, as it was following their eye-opening fruit-eating that “the man and his wife heard the sound of the Lord God moving about in the orchard at the breezy time of the day, and they hid from the Lord God among the trees of the orchard” (Genesis 3:8).  This could be taken as an indication that such was a regular occurrence.  In that time spent with Adam and Eve, it could be presumed to have been the case that it is to be understood that the covenant God made Himself and His ways and His expectations very plain to them. 

Based upon that, could it not be asserted that the experience of Adam and Eve is reflected in the next verse, where Paul writes “since the creation of the world His invisible attributes---His eternal power and divine nature---have been clearly seen, because they are understood through what has been made”? (Romans 1:20a)  Paul’s position is that though they would not have been able to tangibly see or feel the eternal power of the Creator God, it would most certainly have been the case that they would have been brought into an understanding of it by the very fact of their existence, along with that of the world.  They would have understood that power by observing what was all around them---what had been made. 

The Creator God’s divine nature would have been understood, especially by Adam, as having been made in and as the image of God, and undoubtedly having had that communicated to him as he was given the responsibility of naming all of the living creatures (according to Genesis 2:20).  This was part of the exercise of the stewarding authority over the creation that had been delivered to Adam.  Along with that, Adam had been placed in Eden, in the world, to care for it and to maintain it (2:15). 

These two things, along with the command in regards to the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, would presumably have given Adam a vision of God’s nature, as part of the bearing of the divine image (which would seem to entail some measure of a shared nature) was the authority over and responsibility for his God’s creation.  It is owing to this direct knowledge of and fellowship with the Creator God, with the explicit commands of that God and responsibilities that sprang from that knowledge and fellowship, that would have left Adam and Eve “without excuse” (Romans 1:20b) when it came time for their God to question them about the matter involving the serpent, the fruit, and their rebellion.      

Following the assertion that there is a lack of any excuse, as one continues to view these verses from the first chapter of Romans through the lens of Adam and Eve and the fall, one goes on to read “For although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God or give Him thanks, but became futile in their thoughts and their senseless hearts were darkened” (Romans 1:21).  Once again, it is appropriate to here reflect on the implied fact that Adam and Eve most certainly knew the Creator God, and in a way that would have been quite unique to them alone.  In the midst of this knowledge and this way of knowing, they still rebelled against Him and ate the fruit.  In that, there was most certainly no glory given to their God.  There was no thankfulness.