The Lost World of Adam and Eve (21 page)

However we define original sin and its transmission, we have to be able to explain why Christ is not subject to it. Most have agreed that the virgin birth is central in arriving at an understanding, but it is less clear how it does so. In the Augustinian model, Jesus avoided original sin because he had no human father,
7
and thus sin was not passed to him.
8
This view has become increasingly problematic because the transmission of sin cannot logically be an issue of DNA. Only mystery remains since we cannot address the sources of Jesus’ DNA. How was the father’s side of DNA provided? Yet we also know that he was fully human as we all are. The Augustinian model, extrapolated to genetics as it must be when we apply the ancient theory to the modern understanding, cannot easily deliver.

Another critique of Augustine’s model comes from the recognition that he was working from a Latin translation of Romans 5:12. This is what led him to believe that Paul was saying that all sinned “in Adam” whereas the Greek text has been purported to actually say “in this way death came to all people, because all sinned” (
NIV
), indicating that we all sin
because
Adam sinned. This is a good illustration of what a big difference a little word can make, and in this case the result is a huge and longstanding debate among theologians as well as exegetes.
9
All of this makes it very tricky to sort out what biblical and/or theological claims are actually being made and what claims would need to be reconciled with scientific models.

Perhaps a more fruitful path can be proposed (with a nod toward Irenaeus) in recognizing that the virgin birth distinguishes Jesus as God. The sin of wanting to be like God (as we have defined the nature of the fall) cannot be pollution to one who
is
God. The Son of God cannot be the source of disorder or be subject to disorder, for he is the very embodiment of order—wisdom personified (wisdom being the perception and pursuit of order). His divine nature therefore immunizes him from the effect of disorder and the fall. During his life he subdued non-order (calming storms, casting out demons, healing sickness), and in his death and resurrection he imposed order by defeating disorder.

In a pollution model, we know well that one person can pollute a stream and everyone downstream suffers; one company can pour in toxic waste and everyone gets cancer; one industry can pollute the air and everyone suffers. When one person makes his or her own interests the center, that person can create a toxic environment for everyone. In Genesis, the toxic environment involves what we might call “disorder pollution,” but as in ecological pollution, all creation groans and disorder reigns. We are all born into that toxic environment, and we all suffer the consequences both universally and particularly, and therefore we are all in need of salvation. Though we continue to act out that disorder, the effects of sin are radical, not just behavioral. Mark Biddle describes the effects in sociological terms in which a system involves the infinite interactions of multitudes of individuals across generations.

We are all subject to the disorder that has been introduced into the system since that first moment when our representatives decided that they desired to be the center of order. Its manifestation is corporate and cumulative.
11
Not only are we victims of such a condition in the world; we all contribute to it. Jesus was born into such a world (thus he is human in every respect and tempted as we all are), but he was immune to its effect and did not contribute to its disorder. He is the personification and, indeed, the incarnation of order.

Death Before the Fall

We have now laid the groundwork for considering the possibility that there was death before the fall. In chapter eight we examined information to support the idea that humankind was created mortal. There we concluded that Paul’s statement about why we humans are all subject to death was that in sinning we had lost access to the antidote found in the tree of life. In chapter five (p. 57) we considered the idea that death and suffering would have been part of a non-ordered world rather than attached only to disorder. In that chapter we demonstrated how that would not be contradictory to the idea that creation was “good.”

If we consider the model in which there were humans either preceding Adam and Eve or contemporary with Adam and Eve, we need to contemplate their vulnerability to suffering and death. If death and suffering can be feasibly inherent in a non-ordered world and be retained in a partially ordered world, then any pre-fall human population would be subject to them. If, as Paul asserts (Rom 5:13), sin is only charged when there is law or revelation, then this human population would have been in a state of innocence (not sinlessness) since they were not yet being held accountable, even though they
were
in the image of God. In this scenario we would expect to find predation, animal death, human death and violent behavior. Endowment with the image of God and the initiation of sacred space would provide the foundation for accountability through law and revelation. When Adam and Eve sinned, as representative priests for humanity, their sin brought disorder and accountability and made the antidote to death inaccessible. That disorder infects each one of us when we come into existence as human beings. Non-order is not being resolved according to the original plan (God teamed up with human vice-regents), and disorder brought the need for resolution through the work of Christ.

In response to people who inquire as to why God would create such a world where there is predation, suffering and death, and how that could be called “good,” I would say we have to understand how all the pieces fit together. “Good” pertained to the
order
that was being formed in the midst of non-order. The
non-order,
then, was
not
good, though not evil either, but the plan for continued ordering involved a process by which all non-order would eventually be resolved. We know that because that
is
the eventual result in new creation (Rev 20). God’s creating involved assigning a place in the ordered world. So, it would not be coherent to speak of God
creating
(in terms of ordering) a world of non-order. The material world would originally have been not yet ordered (Gen 1:2). Whenever God uses a process (and he often does), his intentions are revealed in the final result and may not be evident in the stages along the way.

Those who believe that there was no death or suffering before the fall have associated those consequences with disorder rather than with non-order. It is easy to see how that association might be made, but if the evidence fails to bear it out, we can conclude that association with non-order is defensible from a biblical and theological perspective and enjoys more support from history, biology and anthropology.

Proposition 18

Jesus Is the Keystone of God’s Plan to Resolve Disorder and Perfect Order

The teaching of Jesus offers little information about how we should understand Adam. The role of Jesus and his contrast to Adam, however, are addressed a few times by Paul and have an important place in the discussion. The Pauline material will be addressed in chapter nineteen in the excursus by N. T. Wright, but here we will take a look at the larger movement of God’s plan and the roles that Jesus plays.

We currently live in an already/not yet situation in which a solution for disorder has been provided (the death of Jesus overcame sin and death), yet disorder still remains. Furthermore, the continuing process of bringing order can be understood through various phases that God initiated in the past as it waits for its final consummation in new creation.

In the interpretation that was presented earlier (chap. 3), the cosmology of Genesis 1 was constructed around the idea of bringing order into a non-ordered situation. This way of thinking about creation is commonplace in the ancient world and comports well with the text as it is presented in Genesis. The basis for this order was seen to be twofold: (1) the focus of this order was human beings made in the image of God, and (2) the center of order was where the presence of God was located. The cosmos became sacred space when God took up his residence in it, and his presence brought order. But he set up this ordered cosmos to function for people. This theological imagery concerns how God intends to relate to his people, and his presence inevitably brings order to our world.

Jesus has a very significant role in the continuing process of God bringing order to the cosmos. This is prominent in the Christology of Colossians 1:15-23. What observations could be made from this passage if we viewed it through the lens of the ideas proposed in this book? What new interpretive possibilities might emerge? How does Paul engage some of the issues of Genesis by elaborating or supplementing? With that perspective in mind we observe that

• Christ is the true image of the invisible God (harking back to Gen 1).
  
• He is the firstborn of all creation (placing him above Adam).
  
• In him all things were created (identifying him specifically as the Creator in every act of creation, including Gen 1).
  
• He created all things visible and invisible (the previous point identified
  who
  the Creator was/is; this one addresses
  what
  he creates; comprehensively includes both material and function/order in the human realm in that which is visible).
  
• He created all spiritual powers (expanding the range of creation to also include the spiritual realm).
  
• He is before all things (and therefore non-contingent).
  
• In him all things hold together. (Among the many ways that all things cohere in Christ, we might now include that he is the center and source of order—the role that belongs to God and that Adam and Eve aspired to in the fall.)
  
• He is the head of the church and the firstborn from the dead (bringing order, resolving disorder).
  
• The fullness of God dwells in him. (So he does not compete with God as center of order—he is the center as God always has been and he achieves that role as a human, attaining what Adam did not.)
  
• Through him all things are reconciled to God. (As Christ resolves the disorder of sin and the disorder brought by sin, he also provides for the eventual resolution of non-order in new creation.)
  
• We attain peace through his blood (related to “rest”).
  
• Once people were alienated, but now they are reconciled. (Among the many accomplishments through the death of Christ, he brings order rather than disorder; life through death.)
  

To see the whole picture, we have to trace God’s program and initiatives through history.

After order was all but eliminated by the flood (because of an advanced state of disorder), the geopolitical order known from the ancient world took shape (Gen 10, the Table of Nations representing the known world in the second millennium
B.C
.). But in Genesis 11, we find out that the impetus for that geopolitical order came about in an unusual way—through the building of a city featuring a prominent tower.

Most interpreters agree that the Tower of Babel should be understood as a ziggurat. Ziggurats were the famous towers that characterized all the major cities of ancient Mesopotamia. They were built adjacent to the temple and were part of sacred space. Modern readers are often confused about the tower, having assumed that the people building it intended to use it to ascend to heaven. In fact, however, all evidence points in the other direction. The ziggurats were provided to facilitate the deity’s descent and were intended to invite him to do so. The idea was that the god would have a convenient means by which to descend to the temple so that he could receive the worship of his people.

The problem in Genesis 11, however, is seen in the motivation of the people. We have already described the Great Symbiosis (chap. 9) as the means by which people in the ancient world were inclined to think about their relationship to the gods. When Genesis 11:4 says that the people wanted to “make a name for [them]selves,” the problem is not their pride (a common interpretation). The problem is the Great Symbiosis: they are constructing sacred space, but they are doing so for their own benefit—that their name might be exalted as a thriving, prosperous civilization. Making a name for oneself in the ancient world was a way to secure one’s memory through successive generations. Sacred space should exalt and establish the name of God, but these people see it only as a way to improve their situation. God will presumably be flattered and pleased and therefore bring prosperity to the people.

Genesis 11 therefore recounts the initiative of people after the flood to re-establish sacred space. Sacred space had been lost in the aftermath of the fall, and, believing the Great Symbiosis, people wanted to get it back again. Unfortunately, they were motivated by all the wrong reasons. God is not pleased, and he disperses the people by confusing their languages. This brings non-order to their community and makes it impossible to complete their project.
1
At the same time, it becomes the basis for the geopolitical order that is described in Genesis 10.

We might ask why Genesis is arranged with the Table of Nations preceding the Tower of Babel account. Clearly the tower account comes first since Genesis 10 keeps referring to the various languages. I would identify two reasons for the sequence of the chapters. First, Genesis 10 is treated before Genesis 11 because it is the practice of the editor of Genesis to follow the less important lines (e.g., Cain, Ishmael, Esau) before returning to the line that is the focus of the plotline. So, Noah’s sons are traced into history before returning to Shem and the line of Abraham.
2
Second, this arrangement most clearly juxtaposes Genesis 11 and Genesis 12. Genesis 11 (tower building) represents a human initiative to re-establish sacred space and God’s disapproval of it. Genesis 12 (the covenant) represents God’s initiative to re-establish sacred space because God is going to dwell again in the midst of people (Abraham’s family, Israel), in the tabernacle and then the temple.