Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe
Sign in to follow this  
annio

Adam and Eve's relationship w/ God after the Fall and dispensationalism / covenant doctrines

Recommended Posts

Please guide me if there has already been a post on this topic, couldn't find it recently discussed- So! I have been realizing that the doctrine that A&E were totally separated from God/"died spiritually" immediately after falling in a totally black and white "picture", and the dispensational (administrations) doctrinal "boxing" taught by vpw et al has affected my life negatively. (I realize this is a huge topic, so will just throw out some  thoughts, and see if anyone is interested...)  There was zero Imago Dei teaching - that A&E were still functioning somewhat as God's image bearers. Or that GOD'S heart of unconditional love towards them did not change one iota; logically He would have grieved for the loss of the perfect relationship. And He had the plan for the Savior "ready to go". Eve believed she had birthed "a man from the Lord" - they still had many of the same Godly mental, emotional, etc patterns they had had, but now these would have been under attack, and the tempting, hindering, accusing, fear mongering, etc which is satan's influence in the world, would be influencing them. But they still had Truth deeply embedded and experimentally learned, correct?

I also think Dispensationalism keeps us (it did me) from really connecting Jesus' character to that of Jehovah, Elohim, (et al His names and "sides") in the Old Testament. So, yes, A&E became carnal, as we were/I was before getting born again. However, God had knit me together in my Mom's womb, He was working over-time to draw me to Him, and I was drawing towards Him years before I actually invited Jesus into my heart. And He still works thru many ppl and situations, and is not at all limited to just those who have His spirit residing them and have declared a life-long commitment to Him.  The "people without spirit are on the level of animals with just body and soul" teaching... That eroded humility and built up pride, and contributed to the "us/them dichotomy, like being the "special ppl", the born again ones, and then being in the "household" as well.

Covenant theology, the little that I know of it, seems much more revealing of a God of continual Presence, grace, relationship, mercy, support, and love. God had a covenant w/ A&E which they broke, but He was right there with the solution in Jesus; He just continually "adjusted things" to give room for man's free will. BUT all along He had His Plan A, what with foreknowledge and all. :anim-smile:  I think there is a lot more accurate continuity with the perspective that God is always interacting w/ His ppl (and often others) as the same covenanting Father, rather than thinking of Him primarily as a "boxer upper" of administrations...

And back to Adam and Eve - after they blew it, I think God got to really teach and help them, and then all mankind, right? (Well except for the nincompoops who just didn't listen.) Kind of like interacting with your teen-age adolescents - never a dull moment! Or like the younger son in the forgiving father parable, and the older bro as well...  After A&E turned away and disobeyed (maybe even just for a few seconds?), He could really reveal so much more about His character and person than they could have known before the fall, especially for us in Jesus and after Pentecost...

All for now. Blessings all!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we've discussed covenantal versus dispensational before, but I'm not sure what thread it was on, and I think we're due for a new thread, anyway.

 

This is all just my thinking, so make of it what you will.

The "dispensationalism" we learned (renamed "administrations" by vpw)  came to us by way of Bullinger.   His idea was that history (past, present and future)  were divided into times that could be explained in terms of differences in how God related to man.      If it's called "administrations", then it's described in governmental terms.  "Dispensation" doesn't speak to our minds, and the usage has changed over the last century.     Back in twi, I took the same Greek word "oikonomia", and preferred its translation "STEWARDSHIP" over its translation of "administration."    With "stewardship" I thought the obvious questions were-  what is being stewarded (God's Word, IMHO), and who is acting as stewards?    The form of "God's Word" and who were the stewards changed over time.

As it turned out, I was thinking more along the lines of basic covenantal rather than dispensational.   I see an Almighty God dealing with his stupid, prideful children on the Earth.  He gives them things, he warns them about dangers and tells them what to do after "avoid the danger",  and He continues to Love His children even though they continue to mess things up across the centuries and millenia.   God makes covenants and carries them out, God expects us to keep our end of deals going,  and humans invariably mess that up one way or another.        

 

BTW, dispensationals don't seem to agree with each other.  Outside twi, some of them believe in dozens of dispensations.  EWB and vpw both said 7-  but vpw disagreed which they were.  Both had the original Paradise, then the Patriarchal, then the Law (of Moses)  as 1,2 and 3.      EWB said the next one was Grace.   vpw said the next one was "Christ", which was the year JC preached and healed and so on,  followed by "Grace" as #5 (Pentecost and now.)   vpw said the next will be the "Revealing" (the apocalypse and so on), ending only after the devil is destroyed at the end of Revelation 21, leading to the final Paradise or "Glory".          EWB had said that the Law was in effect until the Ascension- Pentecost, and Grace was #4.  That made #5 the "Revealing" (apocalypse), leading to Jesus' victorious reign of 1000 years, which is "MILLENIAL" and #6.  That left 7 the same-  "Glory."   I think the 1000 years is more likely to be an "administration" than the single year, no matter how significant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, WordWolf said:

I think the 1000 years is more likely to be an "administration" than the single year, no matter how significant.

I personally think the notion of administrations/dispensations is malarkey. While I don't really view things the way covenant theology followers do, it still makes more sense to me.

Frankly, that "God makes the rain fall on the just and the unjust" suggests to me that the framework of the Bible is a box into which certain humans stuffed God based on the limits of human imagination at the time the various books were written. I believe there are things going on beyond what humans can perceive with our senses (as God) but they aren't limited to what are experienced by Christian believers.

That's just my two cents' worth of "insight." Ignore it if you choose. No skin off my nose and no prophecy of doom from me. :love3:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually dispensationalism wasn't Bullinger's baby so much as JN Darby's idea (Darby predates Bullinger by a few decades) - Darby was a cultie too, member of the Exclusive Brethren.  And his ideas (including "The Rapture" caught on big time in the USA, not so much in the UK.  The UK has an "established church" that didn't give much credence to Darby's ideas, but in newly-growing USA, wow, this new idea gave rise to a lot of fanciful new psalms and doctrines.

 

Anyway, this thread is not about dispensationalism, as WW suggests.  It's about ideas of "spiritual death" as taught by TWI.  The whole idea seems nonsense to me (it did at the time, but hey, I was trying to take on the "right way of thinking" at the time).  God is not some thing  that is limited by what we think.  God can communicate with human beings (and with other creatures) in whatever way he chooses - by putting ideas into one's heart, mind, by physical signs and wonders, by the awesomeness of the skies around us and by what we see in nature. 

I don't think that God never communicated with A&E again.  Perhaps he could not communicate in the previous way, because by now their minds had become cluttered and doubtful of their own ability to perceive - after all, together they had just made the very first and most monumental f-up.  If any one of us had (let's be kind) accidentally or without understanding the consequences done something that had caused the death of hundreds or thousands of people, wouldn't we be a little antsy and confused?  Hard to talk to?  How much worse for them?  Would others still communicate with us?  Yes.  In the same way?  Maybe; maybe not; definitely with a lot more caution, I'd think, and they wouldn't necessarily trust us in another similar situation.  

We do know that A&E had children after "the fall" and they brought up those children (we know of only two, but likely there would be many more) in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.  We know they made offerings to the Lord.  One offering was acceptable, the other not - not because of its content but because of the heart behind the giving.  How did A&E know how to bring up children?  They'd never seen children before, much less know what their special needs were.  So who do you suppose taught them, and how?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Course, all this thread presupposes that A&E existed as individuals and not as types or symbols. And also presupposes that the story is true and not a stylised form of storytelling or moralising.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎9‎/‎26‎/‎2019 at 6:41 AM, Twinky said:

Actually dispensationalism wasn't Bullinger's baby so much as JN Darby's idea (Darby predates Bullinger by a few decades)

And there were others, prior to Darby.   

https://www.amazon.com/Dispensationalism-Before-Darby-William-Watson/dp/1942614039

Personally, I think it dates back to Paul.  Of course, most that post or read here don't believe anything even remotely close to that, and contend that where ever that word is written in scripture it means something else.  However, not many see the difference that Paul refers to in Philippians 1:10, nor can imagine what all might be meant with the instructions to rightly divide the word of truth.

On ‎9‎/‎26‎/‎2019 at 6:41 AM, Twinky said:

I don't think that God never communicated with A&E again.  Perhaps he could not communicate in the previous way...

I'm inclined to agree...

   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...