The Religion of the Apostles: A Book Analysis (Part 6)–Creation and Chaos…and Christ…and Salvation…and Meaning and Purpose…and a few more things!

As we make our way through Stephen De Young’s The Religion of the Apostles, we now come to Chapters 6-7, both of which make up Part 3 of his book: “Creation and Salvation.” We’ll begin with Chapter 6, “Creation and Chaos.”

Creation: Being and Becoming, Order out of Chaos
In Chapter 6, De Young discusses the early Christian understanding of creation, in particular those early chapters of Genesis that I have discussed quite a bit myself over the years. Although I have heard and written about the same basic things De Young covers in this chapter, I found the way in which he presents everything was rather refreshing. It helped me see some rather familiar things in a slightly clearer light.

He begins by contrasting the way in which we in the modern world (Christians included) tend to view the idea of “being” and “existence.” To the point, we tend to view these things through the lens of materialism, namely in material terms. Either something exists in the material world or it doesn’t exist. “Being,” therefore, is contrasted with “nothingness,” and is thus seen as an either/or proposition. You see this underlying assumption in your typical atheist vs. Christian debate about the existence of God, or the never-ending debates over creation/evolution (particularly between atheists and young earth creationists like Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis).

De Young points out, though, that such a view was not the view of the ancient Greek world. In particular, the early Christian understanding of the question of “being” borrows a lot from Platonic philosophy that didn’t see existence in the sense of “being vs. nothingness,” but rather “being vs. becoming.” For Greeks, the concept of “being” was one of it existing on a spectrum. Aristotle elaborated on this by speaking of “potentiality” and “actuality.” On the “potentiality” end of the spectrum was basic “prime matter” that has yet to be formed into anything. On the “actuality” end of the spectrum is a being who is “pure actuality,” who doesn’t have to change into anything, because He ultimately is. Later Medieval scholastics like Thomas Aquinas developed this further in their understanding of who God is and who human beings are.

In addition to that, De Young also brings in the way existence was understood in the Old Testament, most notably in the opening chapters of Genesis. In Genesis 1, the opposite of existence wasn’t nothingness, but chaos. Sorry to break it to you, but Genesis 1 doesn’t tell us how God created ex nihilo (out of nothing), but rather out of chaos. By that, I mean that Genesis 1’s creation story is that of God bringing order out of chaos. It doesn’t really make any kind of “scientific statement” regarding whether or not the actual material universe “had a beginning.” That’s not the point. Rather, the point being made is that, from a biblical perspective, existence is directly tied to what is ordered and has purpose—that is what God is doing in Genesis 1. He’s bringing things into existence by establishing order and giving purpose to the material world.

This idea of existence being tied to order and purpose, De Young says, should help us understand the scriptural understanding of justice in a better light. God’s justice in the world is seen in those things that bring good order to His creation—those things that provide meaning and purpose. And tied to that is the idea that what defines life and existence more than anything else are relationships. Without relationships, “there can be no concept of purpose or meaning, but only brute material subsistence” (152).

Eden: The Place of God’s Dwelling
The next item De Young touches upon is the proper understanding of Eden from Genesis 2. As I have also written about extensively, De Young stresses that we shouldn’t understand Eden in terms of literal geography. Instead, he calls it “cosmic geography” and compares what we find in Genesis 2 to other mythological stories in from the ancient Near East. In that respect, I just state the obvious: we are dealing with the genre of myth here. That doesn’t mean it’s “not true,” but simply rather that it isn’t meant to be taken as literal history or actual geography.

In any case, when understood within that ancient Near Eastern context, Eden, far from being understood as some kind of “Amazon-like jungle,” is to be understood to be a mountain—specifically God’s Mountain. And thus, the Garden of Eden should be understood to be the walled-off royal garden of God, who is the king of creation. When we realize this, we should understand that when we are told that God placed Adam in Eden, we are being told something about Adam’s (and thus humanity’s) mission and purpose. As De Young says, “Adam was removed from the chaos of the world” to “live with God on His holy mountain” so that he would realize that his mission and purpose as God’s image-bearer was to “aid in bringing the creation to its intended perfection and bring himself to full maturity in the process” (155).

What that ultimately means is that God’s “original plan,” if you will, was for Adam (humanity)—who is created from the chaotic material world, created in God’s image, yet who is still in the processes of becoming like God—to develop and grow into full maturity as he lived out his vocation as God’s image-bearer, namely to assist God in bringing about order out of chaos, and by doing so, establishing God’s justice throughout His creation. Simply put, Adam/humanity becomes more like God as he takes part in the work God has for him to do in His creation.

Thus, if we understand Eden to be the place where Man encounters God, worships God, and is instructed by God regarding what he is to do, we will have a better understanding of the significance of the various mountains throughout the Bible, in particular, Mount Sinai, Mount Zion, and yes, even Christ Himself, when He equates Himself with Eden when He talks about Himself as the source of the water of life, or when He (and His body) is equated with God’s Temple…which is on Mount Zion…which is a representation of Eden, God’s Holy Mountain.

And since we’re talking about Christ, this helps us understand just what “image” and “likeness” mean, as well as what the predicament human beings find themselves in. This is something early Church Fathers like Irenaeus talk about as well. For time’s sake, I’ll simplify. The problem that we find with Adam in Genesis 3 and “the fall,” is that in his “image-bearing natural state,” Adam, in fact, wasn’t able to fulfill God’s purpose to take part in God’s work in creation—and that was supposed to be the way in which God intended him to grow into full maturity and truly become “in the likeness of God.”

Yet, with the appearance of Christ, we see that Adam’s “failure” wasn’t actually failure on God’s part, because God’ plan had always been for “Adam” to grow into full maturity and “likeness of God” by participating in God’s work in creation…and that “work” is manifested in the work of Christ, who is the image of the Father, and through whom we become like God…by becoming like Christ, who is God.

Thus, what Jesus Christ accomplished with His death and Resurrection was the restoration of human beings as God’s image-bearers. And, as De Young states, “this restoration brings about the descent of the Holy Spirit, [who] fills human persons in whom the image of God has been restored through baptism into Christ.” And thus, it is through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit that we as restored image-bearers are empowered to participate in God’s work in creation—the work He has prepared beforehand us to do (Ephesians 2:10) that will transform us into His likeness.

Creation: Old and New
De Young ends Chapter 6 by focusing on the significance of the Feast of Christ’s Ascension, as celebrated in the Orthodox Church. He says it “represents the culmination of the gospel that was proclaimed throughout the world by the apostles” (162), for it celebrates Christ’s enthronement in the heavens.

No, that doesn’t mean He is literally sitting on some “cloud throne” somewhere up in the atmosphere. Once again, the imagery and language is borrowed from the world of ancient Near Eastern myth. In the creation myths of the ancient Near East, a particular god is “enthroned” after he wages war and defeats a chaos creature-god. After that victory, that god sits enthroned and “at rest.”

Of course, what we find in Genesis 1 isn’t YHWH defeating any chaos-creature god, for He is the creator of all. “Chaos” isn’t a competing god, but rather just the state of the world, and God brings about order because He is king of creation. Now, it is true that in a few other verses of the Old Testament, YHWH is described as “defeating Leviathan” or “Rahab,” or the “sea-serpent.” Clearly the various Old Testament writers weren’t averse to using the language of ANE myth in their poetic description of YHWH.

But there is one passage in particular that De Young draws our attention to: Daniel 7. Specifically, the picture of the fourth beast out of the sea being destroyed, and then “one like the Son of Man” ascending on the clouds of heaven to be given all authority by God. To the point, what we see in Daniel 7 is an apocalyptic retelling of that old ANE creation myth, only the one who is enthroned is “one like the Son of Man”—a human being who is also enthroned with God and who is given all authority by God. This, De Young says, is how we should understand Christ’s ascension.

Again, He isn’t just “floating up” in literal clouds. The account of the ascension is a declaration that He is that “Son of Man” who has defeated Satan, the ultimate “sea beast,” and who is now invested with all authority re-make God’s creation. And taking part in that work is what the Church is called to do. Thus, Christ, who is the second hypostasis of God, became man, so that He could be the Son of Man who defeats the power of Satan (death), who restores natural humanity (Adam) to God’s image, and who then calls us to take part in His work as the King of Creation to re-create and sanctify God’s creation.

This is why it is so important to properly understand Genesis 1-3. A proper understanding of the biblical (and Christian) concept of creation, image of God, and likeness of God is crucial to having a proper understanding of who Christ is, what His work is, and what the purpose of the Church is. To understand salvation, the new creation, the work of Christ, and the mission and purpose of the Church, one has to understand the actual biblical understanding of creation and chaos.