Cosmos, Garden, & Tabernacle: A Three Story House for Yahweh

In his book, A House For My Name: A Survey of the Old Testament, Peter Leithart discusses the connection between the Creation & Garden symbolism of Genesis 1-3 and the Tabernacle/Temple symbolism as outlined in God's Law. Dr. Leithart writes:

The Bible's story begins by telling us about the world where the story takes place. In the Bible, the world is the real world that we live in, the world that God created. But the Bible describes the world in a particular way. In some places, the Bible describes it as a house. Talking to Job from the whirlwind, Yahweh asks:

Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?
Tell me, if you know understanding,
Who set its measurements, since you know?
Or who stretched the line on it?
On what were its bases sunk?
Or who laid its cornerstone,
When the morning stars sang together,
And all the sons of God shouted for joy?  (Job 38:4-7)

Earth, and especially mountains, are set on "foundations" (Deuteronomy 32:22; 2 Samuel 22:8, 16; Psalm 104:5) just like the foundations that hold up a house. Blue sky is stretched out above like a "tent curtain" (Isaiah 40:22). Pillars support the earth (Job 9:6) and heaven (Job 26:11). When God first appears in the Bible, He is building a house. 

...It takes God six days to build His house, six days that are just like our days with the sun coming up in the morning and going down in the evening. After that, God rests on the seventh day, a day known as the Sabbath day. 

...And so, at the end of the six days of creation, God has finished a "three story" house. Above is the "tent curtain" of blue sky, then the dry land, and finally the waters "below" the earth. 

The Bible mentions this three-story house many times. In the second commandment, God forbids us to bow down to an image of anything in "heaven above, or on the earth beneath, or in the waters under the earth" (Exodus 20:4). That means we must not bow down to images of anything. "Heaven, earth, and sea" means "the whole universe."1

...Once God has made His three-story house, He puts Adam and Eve in it and gives them a job to do.2 ...When Adam is first created, he is put in the garden of Eden. The Garden is one of several different areas that God makes in the world. Remember that God initially makes a "three-story" world. In Genesis 2, we learn that the middle floor, earth, is divided into three "rooms." The Garden is only one of them. Genesis 2:8 tells us that the Lord God plants a garden "toward the east, in Eden," which means that the Garden is on the east side of the land of Eden. Eden is larger than the Garden, and outside Eden there were other lands, which are named in Genesis 2:11-13. If Adam had taken time on the first day to make a map, he would have drawn a map with several areas: the Garden, the land of Eden, and the larger world. 

It is interesting to notice how these three "rooms" of earth match up with the three "stories" of the universe. To see fully how this works, another portion of the creation has to be considered, namely, the "firmament." Made on the second day of creation (Genesis 1:6), the firmament is not just the flat surface of the sky but the whole region that we call "outer space." We know this because the sun, moon, and stars are "in" the firmament (Genesis 1:14-19). It is also called "heaven" (Genesis 1:8). This means that God created a world with two "heavens": The heavens where God dwells and the visible heavens of outer space. When we add this to our picture of the three-story house, we see that the "attic" is divided into two sections.3

The house that Israel builds at Mount Sinai is a tent called the tabernacle. ...Within the tent are two rooms. The first is the Holy Place, and the second is the Most Holy Place or "Holy of Holies." The courtyard makes a third area. The tabernacle has three zones, and each of these zones is governed by a different set of rules. Any Israelite layman may enter the courtyard, but only priests may enter the Holy Place. Only the High Priest may enter the Most Holy Place, and he may do it only once a year on the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16:1).4

With these observations in mind, the arrangement of the tabernacle can be understood this way5: 

Cosmic boundaries        Earthly boundaries         Tabernacle boundaries
Highest Heaven               Garden of Eden               Most Holy Place (2nd tent, High Priest only)
Firmament "heaven"        Land of Eden                   Holy Place (1st tent, Priests only)
                                    

Land                             Land surrounding Eden      Courtyard (Covenant people)
                                                                             

World & Sea                  Nations across the sea       Outside the Courtyard (Gentiles)
                                                                         

Dr. Leithart also makes this following observation concerning the Tabernacle and the Garden of Eden:

A number of things in the tabernacle remind us of the garden of Eden. Like the Garden, it has a doorway on the east side (Genesis 3:24). The cherubim embroidered into the tabernacle curtains and built above the ark remind us of the Garden (Exodus 26:31-37). When a priest enters the Holy Place, he looks at the veil that has cherubim on it and is reminded over and over of the cherubim with the flaming sword in Genesis 3. Like the garden and land of Eden, the tabernacle is mostly off-limits. From the time of Adam to the time of Jesus, no one is allowed to go back into the Garden, past the cherubim, to enjoy God's presence. As Paul put it, the Old Covenant ministry is a ministry of death (2 Corinthians 3:7; see Hebrews 9:8-10). The tabernacle is a way of keeping the people of God at a distance.6 

1.  Peter J. Leithart, A House For My Name:  A Survey of the Old Testament [Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 2000] pp. 43-45
2.  p. 50
3.  p. 51
4.  p. 82
5.  The formatting presented here is my own, and is not identical with the formatting of Leithart in his book (p. 85), but the the arrangement is similar.
6.  Ibid. p. 85.

A New Creation

In The Temple and the Church's Mission: A biblical theology of the dwelling place of God, G. K. Beale offers some significant parallels between the creation account of Genesis and the construction of the tabernacle found in the book of Exodus. Beale compares Genesis 1:31; 2:1, 2, and 3 with Exodus 39:43, 32, and 33, and he references M. Fishbane's work as part of his commentary on these passages:

   ...Moses' work of constructing the tabernacle is patterned after God's creation of the cosmos, using the same language: 'Thus, "Moses saw all the work" which the people "did" in constructing the tabernacle; "and Moses completed the work" and "blessed" the people for all their labors. Fishbane concludes that the tabernacle's construction was intentionally portrayed in the image of the world's creation. 

   More specifically, both accounts of the creation and building of the tabernacle are structured around a series of seven acts: cf. 'And God said' (Gen. 1:3, 6, 9, 14, 20, 24, 26; cf. vv. 11, 28, 29) and 'the Lord said' (Exod. 25:1; 30:11, 17, 22, 34, 31:1, 12).1

This symbolism does not merely connect the construction of the Tabernacle and it's liturgically rich laws with the creation of the heavens and earth itself; it also connects God's dwelling-place with man as seen in the Garden of Eden with God's dwelling-place with man in the Tabernacle. The Tabernacle provided access to God by means of symbolically returning to the Garden of Eden -- the Garden as it was accessible before Adam fell into sin. 

1.  G. K. Beale, The Temple and the Church's Mission: A biblical theology of the dwelling place of God [Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press; 2004], p. 61

Fallen from God's favor

Last night I had a conversation with some good friends about meriting God's favor. In the end we all agreed that the language of "meriting" God's favor, even if it's being used in the narrow sense of pleasing God, is not wise in our current christian climate because it gives the impression that salvation can be earned. However, for those who know me personally, it probably won't come as a surprise that I had some lingering concerns about our current christian climate, and in particular the concern that christians shouldn't talk or think as though doing things -- literally any things -- could either decrease or increase God's favor upon an individual, especially christian individuals. This whole conversation arose from a study in Galatians chapter five. 

In Galatians chapter five, Paul speaks adamantly toward those Gentile christians within the Galatian church who are considering to accept the rite of circumcision on the terms of the "Juidaizers" who "wanted to distort the gospel of Christ" (Gal. 1:7) by teaching that God only justifies sinners in virtue of the Mosaic Covenant with Israel, through "works of the (Mosaic) Law." This first century controversy, in effect, convinced the Christian Gentiles of Galatia to voluntarily place themselves under the Old Covenant, thereby identifying themselves with the covenant-people of Israel, in order to receive a righteous standing before God; and that is patently false and contrary to the gospel of Jesus Christ and justification through faith in him alone (Gal. 2:15-21; Eph. 2:1-10). Paul even describes this particular worldview of judaism with which he was personally familiar as though it were a pagan and idolatrous system of worship that enslaved the human heart instead of freeing it (Gal. 4:8-11, 21-31; 5:1). And yet, after all of this contention with insidious Judaizers and the proselytes to Judaism which they nurtured and developed in Galatia, Paul declares emphatically that those Gentiles who have become tangled within this controversy and honestly think they are being justified by the Mosaic Law and its stipulated works "have fallen away from grace" (Gal. 5:4).

Now, in our current Christian climate, it is presumed that Paul did not truly believe that a Christian could fall away from God's grace, because that would imply a loss of salvation -- a salvation which was granted unconditionally. In other words, it is presumed that Paul was serious in the tone of his warning but not in the actual content of his warning. That is to say, Paul is speaking rhetorically for the effect of appearing threatening, but the propositional threat itself was not true. That, to me, seems more like an idle threat than good rhetoric. And under such urgent circumstances like the situation in Galatia, an idle threat would not only be foolish, it would also be useless. These Christian Gentiles cannot have possibly fallen away from something that they did not have. In this case, it's God's favor. 

The most logical inference of this allegedly "idle" threat is that previously these Gentiles had been viewed as having obtained God's favor. In other words, they had been viewed as Christians by the Apostle Paul, and other Christians within the church of Galatia believed they were Christians too. And one of the benefits of that Christian faith is they had received God's favor. Paul thought they had received God's favor. They thought they did too.  If they didn't think that, Paul's warning would be absolutely meaningless. And it is that position of favor from which Paul says they "have fallen away from" (aorist active indicative of ekpipto) God's favor or "grace."

The apostle Peter speaks this way also in one of his letters. He says, "You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose (ekpipto) your own stability" (2 Pet. 3:17). The author of Hebrews is even more explicit in his language: 

Anyone who has set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace? (Heb. 10:28-29) 

It seems to me that the apostles of our Lord Jesus christ were not speaking hypothetically when they described the certainty of God's promised, decreasing favor upon those who had been sanctified by the blood of His covenant and had outraged the Spirit of grace (i.e. the Spirit of favor).  Similarly, Paul speaks to the Colossian Christians as though they too could fall away from some kind of relationship with Jesus Christ. In Colossians 1:21-23, he writes:

And you, who once were alienated and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds, he has now reconciled in his body of flesh by his death, in order to present you holy and blameless and above reproach before him, if indeed you continue in the faith, stable and steadfast, not shifting from the hope of the gospel that you heard, which has been proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, became a minister.

In Paul's letter to the Gentile congregation in Rome, he writes concerning the covenant-body of Israel:

They [the covenant body of Israel] were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast through faith. So do not become proud, but fear. For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God's kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness. (Rom. 11:20-21)

The very clear inference of these statements by Paul is that the Gentiles who once were alienated and hostile in their minds toward God have now been graciously brought into a relationship with God where they (perceivably) are no longer hostile to God in their minds and are no longer alienated from God. Yet, Paul still speaks as though they were able, in some sense, to become lax, unstable, and irresolute in their faith, shifting away from the hope of the gospel that they heard and (apparently) received with favor. A few verses later (Col. 1:28) Paul states that all men need to heed this "warning" of God's gospel: "Him [that is, Jesus] we proclaim, warning everyone and teaching everyone with all wisdom, that we may present everyone mature in Christ." The obvious implication of this "warning" is that these identifiable Christians could "shift from" the hope of the gospel, at which time God's warning would be appropriately given to them -- that warning being the promise of God's hostility toward them, the deliverance from which they did not deserve in the first place. And if the sovereign kindness of God placed the people of Israel into a covenant relationship with Him, and He eventually did not spare them, allowing them to "fall" because of their unbelief and pride, how much more is God's warning appropriate for Gentiles who receive God's kindness and yet are tempted to do the same?

It seems to me that in some sense, God's kindness can be diminished with those who are in covenant with Him. If this is true, one logical implication would be that God's kindness could also increase with those who are in covenant with Him. 

Now, I realize that in our current Christian climate, especially among "Baptistic" and "Calvinistic" circles of Christianity, it is likely that I will be accused of being Arminian, Palagian, semi-Palagian, and possibly even a total pagan for believing that Christians in covenant with God can do things which increase or decrease God's favor. That would mean, or so they might think, that Jesus does not cover all of their sins, or that Christ only covers their sins intermittently (covering them and uncovering them, and covering them back up again, etc.). But is that really true? Must we deny substitutionary atonement by affirming that God's favor upon His covenant people can increase or decrease depending on their faithfulness? It seems to me that no matter which Christian tradition we come from, both substitutionary atonement for Christians and the ability of Christians to fall away from God's favor are part of the clear language of God's Word; and first and foremost, as Christians, we ought to commit ourselves to the Word of God above all traditions. But does this mean that by accepting this peculiar biblical language about "falling away from grace" that other biblical doctrines are being compromised, even the doctrines of sovereign grace? Does this diminish God's sovereignty over all? Does this diminish the sinner's accountability to God one bit? Does this even imply that God is not worthy of our love, adoration, and respect? I don't believe so, and I'll tell you why. 

The language of God's Word also, and just as clearly, affirms that all men are completely dead in their sins (Eph. 2:1) and by nature children of wrath (Eph. 2:2-3) and enemies of God by their very nature (Rom. 5:10) through their legal covenantal union with the first Adam who fell into sin in the Garden of Eden (Gen. 3; Hosea 6:7; Rom. 5:12-19). Because of their union with the first Adam they are by nature slaves of sin (Rom. 6:20). God's Word is also very clear that no man who is dead in his sins is righteous in himself (Rom. 3:9-20), or can do things in himself which merit God's favor, thereby causing or stimulate God to make him righteous or even to give him an alien righteousness. All men have fallen short of the glory of God (Rom. 3:23) and there is no one righteous, not so much as one (Rom. 3:10). Therefore the natural man, if he is to be righteous in God's sight at all, must be elected by God to partake of, and be covered by, His righteousness--the righteousness of the Righteous One (Rom. 3:19-26; 4:7; 5:1-21). 

Moreover, God does not base the foundation of His election on anything inherent within the individual sinner. God chooses to save sinners based on the gracious and kind intention of His own will (Eph. 1:4-8; Rom. 9:11). God's electing love, though sufficient for all and for all time, is for those whom God alone wills, and only for those whom He wills (John 6:37; 17:9). And because God has sovereignly, powerfully, and graciously saved a people for Himself, they have eternal security in Him (Rom. 8:1; John 10:27; I Cor. 10:13; Philip. 1:6).

And so, how does all of this fit together? How is the language of falling away from God's favor to be understood in light of God's favor originating and continuing from His completely sovereign grace?  

Are we to believe that God's favor is unlimited and static no matter what (that is to say, it doesn't move up or down or increase or decrease at all in time and history) for those who are in a covenant relationship with in Him? 

Are Christians, graciously placed within a covenant relationship with God, held to certain conditions which necessitate their faithful obedience, lest they fall away from God's favor?

I will gladly confess that it is a tremendous error to believe that spiritually dead men and enemies of God can do something to earn or "merit" God's favor in any sense. But is that true for those who are no longer spiritually dead and have been graciously placed within a covenant relationship with God? Is that true of people who are no longer considered God's enemies?  I get the funny feeling that Christians in our current climate get all flustered by this language because they equate a covenant relationship with God (something which contains blessings and curses and is objectively verifiable) as God's eternally electing, predestinating decree of salvation itself (something which man, in and of himself, could not possibly know because it's hidden within God's knowledge alone, Deut. 29:29). I also suspect that because such Christians don't want to attribute human perceptions of immorality to God (and His holy character), they don't like the thought of a God who would do such things as blessing them for obedience/faithfulness and cursing them for disobedience/faithlessness. They might think it's not "good" or "loving" or "gracious" for God to do that, especially if their righteous standing before God is because of the righteousness of another man who stands in their place (i.e. Jesus). 

But perhaps the most serious concern which stems from this apparent paradox is the thought that one could lose their regenerate or eternally elect status in God's sight if such things as covenant conditions (i.e. blessings and curses) were indeed true (and not just idle, hypothetical threats displayed for purely rhetorical purposes). The thought might be (i'm imagining) that no one can rest in any absolute assurance of salvation because God's covenant, through which he saves sinners, is conditional in some sense. And if it's conditional, after having already begun a work of regeneration, then one can lose his or her regeneration. Moreover, if it's conditional, God could not possibly predestine my eternal destiny, because it would change depending on something I do. 

Obviously, these apparent paradoxes are all serious concerns. And they all need to be addressed.

There is one thing Christians can be sure of, even when they are wrestling with this apparent paradox of "falling away from grace"; and that is the covenant faithfulness of God. God will always be faithful to the terms of His covenant with his people (Psa. 33:4; 36:5; 86:15; 89:1, 8; 115:1; Lam. 3:22-23; Rom. 3:3-4; I Cor. 1:9; 10:13; II Cor. 1:18; I John 1:9). But (and this is a big "but") if the terms of His covenant do include conditions, why would any professing "Christian" pretend as though His or her faithfulness will result in an eternal life in God's comfortable presence? In other words, why would a professing Christian presume that God's gracious covenant with them continues so that they could live sinfully? As the apostle Paul says, "Should we continue1in sin, that grace may abound?" (Rom. 6:1)?

In one of the following posts, I would like to offer a solution to this apparent paradox, but I can promise you that the solution won't be my own. In the following posts I would like to offer the solution presented by John Calvin, which was based upon his own study of God's Word. Now, I realize that our current climate of Christianity has many views, both pros and cons, concerning John Calvin the person and "Calvinism" as a theological think-tank, but I'm not going to offer a solution to this apparent paradox from our current "Calvinistic" climate. I'm going to offer John Calvin's own solution, which, as we'll see, is different from modern mainstream "Calvinistic" solutions. Stay tuned for those upcoming posts.

1.  The verb for "continue" in Rom. 6:1 is stated in the subjunctive mood, signifying possibility and potentiality. I prefer the HCSB translation which reads, "Should we continue...".  Other translations say "Are we to continue in sin?" (ESV), or "Shall we go on sinning..." (NIV). 

Dialog in Heaven

Below is one of my favorite scenes from Milton’s Paradise Lost.  It’s known as the “dialog in Heaven.” It comes from book 3, almost immediately after the first two books expound a major dialog in Hell between Satan and other demons who were cast there as punishment for their rebellion after their defeat in battle against Almighty God. Just before this dialog in Heaven begins, Satan and the other demons agree to exact revenge upon God by finding a way to entice Adam and Eve to rebel against God as well, and Satan freely offers to lead that rebellion. Satan then embarks on a cosmic voyage from Hell to Earth in order to exact his revenge.

In the heavenly dialog which follows, there are five distinctive sections. First, the narrator speaks, introducing the Heavenly Council in a glorious manner. Second, the Almighty Father speaks to His Son, followed by the narrator again. Third, the Only Begotten Son speaks in return to His Father, followed by a brief comment of the narrator again. Fourth, the Father replies to His Son, followed by an expression of silence among the angelic hosts (for the Father asks who, in all of heaven, would love mortal man and Divine justice enough to become moral themselves and satisfy man’s mortal crime with redeeming death). 

Last of all, the Son speaks in response to the Father, offering Himself as the redemption of the human race. Below is Milton’s sketch of that epic dialog in Heaven:

Now had the Almighty Father from above,

From the pure Empyrean where he sits

High Thron'd above all highth, bent down his eye,

His own works and their works at once to view:

About him all the Sanctities of Heaven

Stood thick as Starrs, and from his sight receiv'd

Beatitude past utterance; on his right

The radiant image of his Glory sat,

His onely Son; On Earth he first beheld

Our two first Parents, yet the onely two

Of mankind, in the happie Garden plac't,

Reaping immortal fruits of joy and love,

Uninterrupted joy, unrivald love

In blissful solitude; he then survey'd

Hell and the Gulf between, and Satan there

Coasting the wall of Heav'n on this side Night

In the dun Air sublime, and ready now

To stoop with wearied wings, and willing feet

On the bare outside of this World, that seem'd

Firm land imbosom'd without Firmament,

Uncertain which, in Ocean or in Air.

Him God beholding from his prospect high,

Wherein past, present, future he beholds,

Thus to his onely Son foreseeing spake:

Onely begotten Son, seest thou what rage

Transports our adversarie, whom no bounds

Prescrib'd, no barrs of Hell, nor all the chains

Heapt on him there, nor yet the main Abyss

Wide interrupt can hold; so bent he seems

On desparate reveng, that shall redound

Upon his own rebellious head. And now

Through all restraint broke loose he wings his way

Not farr off Heav'n, in the Precincts of light,

Directly towards the new created World,

And Man there plac't, with purpose to assay

If him by force he can destroy, or worse,

By some false guile pervert; and shall pervert

For man will heark'n to his glozing lyes,

And easily transgress the sole Command,

Sole pledge of his obedience: So will fall,

Hee and his faithless Progenie: whose fault?

Whose but his own? ingrate, he had of mee

All he could have; I made him just and right,

Sufficient to have stood, though free to fall.

Such I created all th' Ethereal Powers

And Spirits, both them who stood and them who faild;

Freely they stood who stood, and fell who fell.

Not free, what proof could they have givn sincere

Of true allegiance, constant Faith or Love,

Where onely what they needs must do, appeard,

Not what they would? what praise could they receive?

What pleasure I from such obedience paid,

When Will and Reason (Reason also is choice)

Useless and vain, of freedom both despoild,

Made passive both, had servd necessitie,

Not mee. They therefore as to right belongd,

So were created, nor can justly accuse

Thir maker, or thir making, or thir Fate,

As if predestination over-rul'd

Thir will, dispos'd by absolute Decree

Or high foreknowledge; they themselves decreed

Thir own revolt, not I: if I foreknew,

Foreknowledge had no influence on their fault,

Which had no less prov'd certain unforeknown.

So without least impulse or shadow of Fate,

Or aught by me immutablie foreseen,

They trespass, Authors to themselves in all

Both what they judge and what they choose; for so

I formd them free, and free they must remain,

Till they enthrall themselves: I else must change

Thir nature, and revoke the high Decree

Unchangeable, Eternal, which ordain'd

Thir freedom, they themselves ordain'd thir fall.

The first sort by thir own suggestion fell,

Self-tempted, self-deprav'd: Man falls deceiv'd

By the other first: Man therefore shall find grace,

The other none: in Mercy and Justice both,

Through Heav'n and Earth, so shall my glorie excel,

But Mercy first and last shall brightest shine.

Thus while God spake, ambrosial fragrance fill'd

All Heav'n, and in the blessed Spirits elect

Sense of new joy ineffable diffus'd:

Beyond compare the Son of God was seen

Most glorious, in him all his Father shon

Substantially express'd, and in his face

Divine compassion visibly appeerd,

Love without end, and without measure Grace,

Which uttering thus he to his Father spake:

O Father, gracious was that word which clos'd

Thy sovran sentence, that Man should find grace;

For which both Heav'n and Earth shall high extoll

Thy praises, with th' innumerable sound

Of Hymns and sacred Songs, wherewith thy Throne

Encompass'd shall resound thee ever blest.

For should Man finally be lost, should Man

Thy creature late so lov'd, thy youngest Son

Fall circumvented thus by fraud, though joynd

With his own folly? that be from thee farr,

That farr be from thee, Father, who art Judg

Of all things made, and judgest onely right.

Or shall the Adversarie thus obtain

His end, and frustrate thine, shall he fulfill

His malice, and thy goodness bring to naught,

Or proud return though to his heavier doom,

Yet with revenge accomplish't and to Hell

Draw after him the whole Race of mankind,

By him corrupted? or wilt thou thy self

Abolish thy Creation, and unmake,

For him, what for thy glorie thou hast made?

So should thy goodness and thy greatness both

Be questiond and blaspheam'd without defence.

To whom the great Creatour thus reply'd:

O Son, in whom my Soul hath chief delight,

Son of my bosom, Son who art alone

My word, my wisdom, and effectual might,

All hast thou spok'n as my thoughts are, all

As my Eternal purpose hath decreed:

Man shall not quite be lost, but sav'd who will,

Yet not of will in him, but grace in me

Freely voutsaft; once more I will renew

His lapsed powers, though forfeit and enthrall'd

By sin to foul exorbitant desires;

Upheld by me, yet once more he shall stand

On even ground against his mortal foe,

By me upheld, that he may know how frail

His fall'n condition is, and to me ow

All his deliv'rance, and to none but me.

Some I have chosen of peculiar grace

Elect above the rest; so is my will:

The rest shall hear me call, and oft be warnd

Thir sinful state, and to appease betimes

Th' incensed Deitie while offerd grace

Invites; for I will cleer thir senses dark,

What may suffice, and soft'n stonie hearts

To pray, repent, and bring obedience due.

To Prayer, repentance, and obedience due,

Though but endevord with sincere intent,

Mine ear shall not be slow, mine eye not shut.

And I will place within them as a guide

My Umpire Conscience, whom if they will hear,

Light after light well us'd they shall attain,

And to the end persisting, safe arrive.

This my long sufferance and my day of grace

They who neglect and scorn, shall never taste;

But hard be hard'nd, blind be blinded more,

That they may stumble on, and deeper fall;

And none but such from mercy I exclude.

But yet all is not don; Man disobeying,

Disloyal breaks his fealtie, and sinns

Against the high Supremacie of Heav'n,

Affecting God-head, and so loosing all,

To expiate his Treason hath naught left,

But to destruction sacred and devote,

He with his whole posteritie must dye,

Dye hee or Justice must; unless for him

Som other able, and as willing, pay

The rigid satisfaction, death for death.

Say Heav'nly Powers, where shall we find such love,

Which of ye will be mortal to redeem

Mans mortal crime, and just th' unjust to save,

Dwels in all Heaven charitie so deare?

He ask'd, but all the Heav'nly Quire stood mute,

And silence was in Heav'n: on mans behalf

Patron or Intercessor none appeerd,

Much less that durst upon his own head draw

The deadly forfeiture, and ransom set.

And now without redemption all mankind

Must have bin lost, adjudg'd to Death and Hell

By doom severe, had not the Son of God,

In whom the fulness dwells of love divine,

His dearest mediation thus renewed:

Father, thy word is past, man shall find grace;

And shall grace not find means, that finds her way,

The speediest of thy winged messengers,

To visit all thy creatures, and to all

Comes unprevented, unimplor'd, unsought,

Happie for man, so coming; he her aide

Can never seek, once dead in sins and lost;

Attonement for himself or offering meet,

Indebted and undon, hath none to bring:

Behold mee then, mee for him, life for life

I offer, on mee let thine anger fall;

Account mee man; I for his sake will leave

Thy bosom, and this glorie next to thee

Freely put off, and for him lastly dye

Well pleas'd, on me let Death wreck all his rage;

Under his gloomie power I shall not long

Lie vanquisht; thou hast givn me to possess

Life in my self for ever, by thee I live,

Though now to Death I yield, and am his due

All that of me can die, yet that debt paid,

Thou wilt not leave me in the loathsom grave

His prey, nor suffer my unspotted Soule

For ever with corruption there to dwell;

But I shall rise Victorious, and subdue

My Vanquisher, spoild of his vanted spoile;

Death his deaths wound shall then receive, and stoop

Inglorious, of his mortal sting disarm'd.

I through the ample Air in Triumph high

Shall lead Hell Captive maugre Hell, and show

The powers of darkness bound. Thou at the sight

Pleas'd, out of Heaven shalt look down and smile,

While by thee rais'd I ruin all my Foes,

Death last, and with his Carcass glut the Grave:

Then with the multitude of my redeemd

Shall enter Heaven long absent, and returne,

Father, to see thy face, wherein no cloud

Of anger shall remain, but peace assur'd,

And reconcilement; wrauth shall be no more

Thenceforth, but in thy presence Joy entire.

Earth felt the wound

I recently started studying John Milton's classic work, Paradise Lost, in detail, and today I came across that famous depiction of the Serpent tempting and deceiving Eve to eat of the fruit forbidden by God in the Garden. Perhaps there is no more vivid scene in the history of poetic literature which portrays the subtlety of Satan at his best; and so I had to share:

...the Tempter, all impassioned, thus began: 

O sacred, wise, and wisdom-giving Plant, mother of science, now I feel thy power within me clear; not only to discern things in their causes, but to trace the ways of highest agents, deemed however wise. Queen of this universe, do not believe those rigid threats of death: ye shall not die. How should you? By the fruit? It gives you life to knowledge; By the threatener? Look on me; me who have touched and tasted, yet both live, and life more perfect have attained than Fate meant me, by venturing higher than my lot. Shall that be shut to Man, which to the Beast is open? Or will God incense his ire for such a petty trespass? And not praise rather your dauntless virtue, whom the pain of death denounced, whatever thing death be, deterred not from achieving what might lead to happier life, knowledge of good and evil; Of good, how just? Of evil, if what is evil be real, why not known, since easier shunned? God therefore cannot hurt ye, and be just; Not just, not God; not feared then, nor obeyed: Your fear itself of death removes the fear. Why then was this forbid? Why, but to awe; Why, but to keep ye low and ignorant, His worshippers? He knows that in the day ye eat thereof, your eyes that seem so clear, yet are but dim, shall perfectly be then opened and cleared, and ye shall be as Gods, knowing both good and evil, as they know. That ye shall be as Gods, since I as Man, internal Man, is but proportional meet; I, of brute, human; ye, of human, Gods. So ye shall die perhaps, by putting off Human, to put on Gods; Death to be wished, though threatened, which no worse than this can bring. And what are Gods, that Man may not become as they, participating God-like food? The Gods are first, and that advantage use on our belief, that all from them proceeds: I question it; for this fair earth I see, warmed by the sun, producing every kind; Them nothing: if they all things, who enclosed knowledge of good and evil this tree, that whoso eats thereof, forthwith attains wisdom without their leave? And wherein lies the offense, that Man should thus attain to know? What can your knowledge hurt him, or this tree impart against his will, if all be his? Or is it envy? And can envy dwell in heavenly breasts? These, these, and many more causes import your need of this fair fruit. Goddess humane, reach then, and freely taste!  

Paradise Lost by William Blake, 1808

He ended; and his words, replete with guile, into her heart too easy entrance won: Fixed on the fruit she gazed, which to behold might tempt alone; and in her ears the sound yet rung of his persuasive words, impregned with reason, to her seeming, and with truth: Mean while the hour of noon drew on, and waked an eager appetite, raised by the smell so savoury of that fruit, which with desire inclinable now grown to touch or taste, solicited her longing eye; yet first pausing a while, thus to herself she mused: 

Great are thy virtues, doubtless, best of fruits, though kept from man, and worthy to be admired; Whose taste, too long forborn, at first assay gave elocution to the mute, and taught the tongue not made for speech to speak thy praise: Thy praise he also, who forbids thy use, conceals not from us, naming thee the tree of knowledge, knowledge both of good and evil; Forbids us then to taste! But his forbidding commends thee more, while it infers the good by thee communicated, and our want: For good unknown sure is not had; or, had and yet unknown, is not had at all. In plain then, what forbids he but to know, forbids us good, forbids us to be wise? Such prohibitions bind not. But, if death bind us with after-bands, what profits then our inward freedom? In the day we eat of this fair fruit our doom is we shall die! How dies the Serpent? He hath eaten and lives, and knows, and speaks, and reasons, and discerns, irrational till then. For us alone was death invented? Or to us denied this intellectual food, for beasts reserved? For beasts it seems: yet that one beast which first hath tasted envies not, but brings with joy the good befallen him, author unsuspect, friendly to man, far from deceit or guile. What fear I then? Rather, what know to fear under this ignorance of good and evil, of God or death, of law or penalty? Here grows the cure of all, this fruit divine, fair to the eye, inviting to the taste, of virtue to make wise: What hinders then to reach, and feed at once both the body and mind?  

So saying, her rash hand in evil hour forth reaching to the fruit, she plucked, she ate. Earth felt the wound; and Nature from her seat, sighing through all her works, gave signs of woe, that all was lost. Back to the thicket slunk the guilty Serpent. 

Humanity and its Goal

In his book, After You Believe: Why Christian Character Matters, Bishop N. T. Wright discusses the telos, or goal, toward which all of human existence aims. He writes:

Creation, it seems, was not a tableau, a static scene. It was designed as a project, created in order to go somewhere. The creator has a future in mind for it; and Human--this strange creature, full of mystery and glory--is the means by which the creator is going to take his project forward. The garden, and all the living creatures, plants and animals, within it, are designed to become what they were meant to be through the work of God's image-bearing creatures in their midst. The point of the project is that the garden be extended, colonizing the rest of creation; and Human is the creature put in charge of that plan. ...And that, as the New Testament declares, is also the goal for which we are aiming--indeed, the goal of all human existence.1

1. N. T. Wright, After You Believe: Why Christian Character Matters [Harper One: New York, NY; 2010] pp. 74-75