T. Rex in perspective. (Fair Use)
A Meditation on Tyrannosaurus Rex
Apokatastasis, Dinosauria and Armstrongism
By Scout
Dinosaurs were monsters and they reigned on earth for about 160 million years. Homo sapiens has been on earth for a short 300,000 years by comparison. I have puzzled over why there were dinosaurs. At one point I concluded that it was to provide our modern human society with fossil fuels. And fossil fuels were a necessary part of our learning experience. God furnished the classroom with fossil fuels. Like a nursery school playroom is furnished with blocks. But dinosaurs did not make a big contribution to oil deposits. Most of the deposits were created from the remains of tiny sea life. So, why was earth like a Monsterland for 160 million years? What does this tell us about God? I have a theory.
The Armstrongist View
The Armstrongists press has published a number of articles on dinosaurs and I looked at a few. While the writers support the view that dinosaurs died in a worldwide catastrophe, there is no direct statement about who created dinosaurs. The catastrophism comports with the scientific findings that posit a globally destructive asteroid impact that formed the Chicxulub Crater. But in these articles the origin of dinosaurs is vague. The assertion is that the earth was under the management of angels and the angels rebelled and the world became chaotic. And the reader is to deduce that the dinosaurs fit into this chaos in some way. Further thinking about the origins must have taken place although in my cursory review I could find nothing in print. But I did hear a WCG minister back in the Eighties make a statement about origins but I do not know who developed the idea. He said that God created all the creatures of the earth but angels manipulated the genomes of some creatures to produce dinosaurs. Angels cannot create directly but can modify what has already been created. I should have asked the pastor where he got the information but I was not in the habit of questioning WCG ministers back then.
There are issues with the Armstrongist theory that I will just mention briefly. The dinosaur world was not chaotic. It was a stable creation. It persisted for 160 million years and would have gone on longer if it had not been interdicted by an asteroid. And if it was a foul creation why would God have permitted it to go on so long? God did not balk at destroying the evil society of ancient Mesopotamia with a flood. The Chicxulub asteroid could have hit much earlier. And we know now that modern day birds are descended from dinosaurs so dinosaurs did not go extinct. They were instead moderated for the human environment. Something useful for humans came out of something that was initially something dangerous for humans had there been humans around back then. The important theme is not destruction but renewal. The fact is that T. Rex has only an abstract, perhaps literary, meaning for humans – humans have never co-existed with the monstrousness of T. Rex. I had a couple of eggs this morning for breakfast and enjoyed them. So, the Armstrongist history of sauropods fits uneasily on this data.
Apokatastasis (Restoration, Restitution, Regeneration)
Peter spoke of the Apokatastasis as he preached on Solomons’ Porch in the Temple (Acts 3:21). Peter said, “…until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.” The word for restitution in Greek is apokatastasis. Robin Parry, a British theologian and author, pointed out that the scenario for the Cosmos is: First the original creation in Genesis, then the Cross, and then the re-creation. There will be a New Heavens and a New Earth. In Rev 21:4, John of Patmos writes, “… for the former things are passed away.” John of Patmos also wrote something that he heard, “And he (God) that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.”
God created Jurassic Park but why this interest in something so horrifically monstrous? The horror of it is really a function of size. If you were the size of a flea, the insect biome in your backyard would seem like Jurassic Park. But God is not limited by size. He created the idea of size. If T. Rex were the size of a humming bird, he would be comic instead of horrific. He would be something that kids would buy for the terrarium. And we might be put off by the predator-prey cycle of these great carnivores. T. Rex ate other dinosaurs in order to live. But we eat animals, too. When an Armstrongist sits in a comfortable restaurant on a Holy Day and makes a gustatory assault on a steak, he doesn’t think of himself as a T. Rex. But it is the same principle of consumption. It is just that T. Rex is not as genteel and tidy. And, of course, he would have eaten us if we had been around. In the view of T. Rex, we would be just another snack. So, the horror and monstrosity are a matter of perspective.
My belief is that in the first creation, T. Rex was a monster from the human perspective. But in the future he will be renewed and made something useful for humankind. Maybe he will be a little multi-colored bird flitting happily through the forest giving cheer to all. It is conjectural but renewal may even focus on the original Tyrannosauri. They might be reconstituted but in a different form. If God creates something, does it ever really pass out of existence? Maybe it is, rather, transformed for good and will appear again in due season. As long as God knows something, it has the potential to be again. And he knows everything. James says in Acts 15:18, “Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the Age.” And T. Rex is one of his works. And maybe that work will not be finished until the Apokatastasis.
The focus of much apocalyptic theology is on the idea of God as Destroyer. God is going to come back to earth and destroy a bunch of stuff as the faithful watch the fireworks gleefully from some place of safety. In counterpoint, the Bible’s emphasis is on transformation and renewal. The reason why the destroyer motif does not fly is that the creation is a reflection of God himself. He invested his character in the creation. He did not create something alien when he made the Cosmos. He made something that will be ultimately useful and joyous. He will not leave it in a diminished state. Like the poet Robert Frost wrote, ”The question that he frames in all but words Is what to make of a diminished thing”. God will not leave the creation in a diminished state because it reflects what he is.
Conclusion: T. Rex Redux
For Armstrongists T. Rex is all about rebellion and destruction. For Christians, T. Rex is all about restoration and all things working for good. Has God ever created anything that he cannot save and renew – something that is just beyond his capabilities like Dr. Frankenstein? Is a creation that goes rogue forever without restitution not a kind of profound defeat? And how can a God who is absolute, who generates reality itself, be defeated? Evil will pass away. Evil has no substance. It is rather an absence of Good. When God created all things, he said the creation was good. Evil is a parasite on this goodness. I look forward to seeing what God will do with T. Rex in the Apokatastasis. Because he said in Isaiah, “But be ye glad and rejoice forever in that which I create.”
31 comments:
Scout, you were doing shrooms when you wrote this, right? :)
Dennis:
No. Just me and my laptop.
Scout
Food for thought Scout. Won’t think too much, my brain may explode lol.
We did live in an age where information was not readily available and accessible back in the Armstrong ‘church area’. Looking back we know the ministry were ill equipped for this coming information age. We can now ‘truth check’ doctrine and they and the ‘theology’ have been found wanting. Large portions of it indeed. I have further questions on your commentary, but that can wait. I dread to think that in some future time, perhaps not far away, we may have the ability to reproduce T Rex and the like. God help us if we are foolish enough to do so. Sadly the nature of man is not inclined to good but to that which is evil. As John would comment ‘time will tell’.
Anonymous 5:13
I don't think we will ever get enough intact DNA to do a T. Rex. Science may reconstitute something more recent like a Mammoth. It takes about 7 million years for DNA to degrade and dinos were wiped out 66 million years ago.
In Jurassic Park, they got dino DNA from amber which is not possible. And they used frog DNA to fill in the sequences they could not extract. But the interesting dinos are related to birds rather than frogs. T. Rex was really kind of a big wingless bird.
As I understand, some group of researchers have replicated the dire wolf. I don't think that is a good idea. Ugly beast. If someone tries to replicate the short-faced bear we should all riot. The thing was a monster. It could run as fast as a horse and stood six feet at the shoulder. Weighed about a ton and a half.
But many of these best of class predators were exterminated out by Native Americans. Not the Indians who live in North America now but the ones who live in South America now. They were probably the Clovis people. They made big spear points. The most dangerous creature on earth is a man with a weapon.
Scout
Dennis 2:40
This is probably a better answer. The following statement from Revelation has made quite an impression on me:
“And he (God) that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.”
Peter referred to the Apokatastasis and I believe the scripture above does as well. We have precious little data in the Bible about the future of the Cosmos. Because of that, there is an elasticity in the scripture above. I have unpacked it in a certain way, and I will readily admit that it can be unpacked in other ways. What I see in this scripture is that God is saying that he will take all those things that constitute the present creation and make them new. I mean everything. This Cosmos is not a discard but rather a foundation. And God will take barren planets orbiting distant stars and not throw them away but remake them. He will remake Neanderthal and T. Rex. And he will remake humankind.
Implicit in this is the idea that the present creation has not yet lived up to its promise. I think the present creation in all of its historical stages is important to God. An alternate translation of John 3:16 is “For God so loved the Cosmos …”. He created things for a reason and I think we will one day see the reason. That the lion will one day eat straw, I believe, is a metaphor for this renewal of all things.
Scout
We are all part of a very complex and sophisticated web of life which we are really only beginning to understand. In terms of genetics, we are probably still in the infancy stage of our understanding.
Some scientists believe that it may be possible to reverse engineer evolution someday - e.g. to take a bird back to a dinosaur, etc. Once again, the wisdom of resurrecting extinct species is open to serious questions.
Nevertheless, there does appear to be an extensive and complex record of our past in our genetic material. Some of us also believe that cellular memory is a legitimate phenomenon, and it has recently been demonstrated that it is possible for us to inherit certain traits through proteins (or even form memories through them on a cellular level). Yes, it is very clear to me that we presently see through a glass darkly!
I also believe that we humans are hardwired to question, seek answers, and explore. Indeed, learning and communication seems to be hardwired into all living things, including plants, fungi, and at least some single-celled organisms.
And, once again, just for the record, NONE of this threatens the notion of a Creator or Supreme God! If the notions that life may be abundant in our universe (that there may even be a multiverse), or that a primordial soup of chemical compounds stands at the beginning of the story of life threatens/destroys your faith, then your faith is built on a foundation of sand! Likewise, if these possibilities are the basis for your conclusion that there isn't any God, I would say that your logic is shaky and highly suspect!
Australia had 25-ft lizards as recently as 55k years ago. Dangerous to early humans but not as dangerous as the humans were to them, killing them off. Today their largest lizards are still an impressive 8-ft and 10-ft on nearby island of Komodo.
Revelations describes billions of people dying, including God destroying every living thing in the oceans. It's a type of the flood and dinosaur extinction. Gross sin brings about gross destruction. It's a "quality control" responsibility that God exercises.
Quality control ? It's punishment from God for the horrendous sins and human evil humans do to each other. How many billions of babies have been and will be aborted? If Jesus doesn't return humans would destroy each other.
This is a topic which is fascinating, but which really does not affect me today. The old W/RCoG used to claim to have all the answers (like Satan created the dinosaurs while he was still Lucifer), and to exploit those answers in ways which made them relevant to and solidified basic Armstrongite beliefs. It became part of their body of insider Gnosticism. In sales parlance, this is known as presenting your product as being the perfect solution to a problem or problems. There are always holes which are fairly easily found in that type of hyperbole, but as Armstrongites we were not permitted to find them. Bad attitude, rebellion, etc.
It is just so nice to have the freedom to revisit all of these topics, and to be able to approach them from the standpoint of intellectual honesty! And, yes, to have fun with life once again.
BB
In Western Society we have been heavily influenced by a viewpoint that sees Nature as an untamed and malevolent resource that must be subdued. So, our farmers are soldiers that wage war against Nature with insecticides, fertilizers and genetic modifications. They scourge the land into submission with the plow.
This viewpoint that Nature is obstreperous, I believe, migrates into Western theology. It is the viewpoint that the Cosmos is fallen along with humankind. And in the Western church we find the dualism that material is bad and the spiritual is good. Peter advances the idea that the Cosmos will be annihilated. Paul asserts that it will be liberated and renewed. But neither declares that God wasted his time in creating the Cosmos. There is no wasted motion with God. The Cosmos may be destroyed symbolically or actually but the Cosmos was not a mistake or hopelessly defiled. Man’s contaminating influence, after all, is confined to one obscure backwater planet. The Cosmos is the ideological and, perhaps, the material foundation for the New Heavens and New Earth. Notice that implicit in the terminology “the New Heavens and New Earth” is the idea that into eternity the Cosmos will be organized as it is now. The matter and energy may go away but the design remains.
What seems to be overlooked in the West is that God created the Cosmos and that it is a reflection of him. And he created it Ex Nihilo, out of nothing. He did not borrow the idea from somewhere; it is his innovation. Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks and God spoke the Cosmos into existence. Scripture does make the point that the Cosmos is not finished. We are in the middle of the movie. There is more to come. I do not see God leaving what he has created unfinished. He is not like a human engineer who makes discardable models as proof of concept. I am talking not only about the earth and the heavens but about people.
Scout
Anonymous 5:19 wrote, "Gross sin brings about gross destruction."
Without a doubt there is God-directed violence in scripture. But it is done within the larger context of ultimate renewal. I don't believe that God leaves loose ends or unresolved conflicts. Because the creation, in its final state, will accurately reflect him. The lion will eat grass like the ox and T. Rex will be updated and repurposed for good.
Scout
This is perhaps the goofiest post whoever ‘scout’ has ever posted. Why? What a stretch to condemn ‘armstrongerism’! Comical in one sense, pitiful in another. Understand it is an ‘opinion’, yet presented as fact. GOOFY!
I like it Scout. Good to be creative.
T. Rex brings us another insight. It is related not to his presence but his absence. He or his ilk are nowhere mentioned in the Bible. This is because the Bible is not a book of paleontology though many people feel it should be a book of everything and consider it deficient for not being so. This view, or course, is silly. If Genesis were augmented with just a smattering of relevant science, from its many different disciplines, the first chapter would be the size of a book. And none of it would make sense to anybody until somewhere in the early twentieth century. People would have discounted the Bible as lacking credibility because it contained so much gibberish.
The bit of history that Genesis gives us concerning the history of life on earth is based on knowledge contemporary to the period in which it was written. This could lead to a hermeneutic for all of us Bible readers. Peter Enns put it best when he said, “God let his children tell the story.”
On another issue, the Bible asserts no other Creator than God. And it is beyond the pale of scripture for anyone to declare that there was some other creator. And when you manipulate the genome you are essentially fabricating a new kind of creature. And when God made the earth and its living things, he said it was good. He even writes a note of appreciation for Leviathan, the closest parallel we have to a dinosaur in scripture, in the Book of Job and says, “One is prostrated at the very sight of him (JSB).” God says, “Lay a hand on him, and you will never think of battle again (JSB).” And in Isaiah God says, “But be glad and rejoice forever in what I create.” This is the data we must process.
Scout
Dude, when you get right down to it, EVERYTHING condemns Armstrongism. If you have not yet realized that, it's tragic. No goofy about it!
BB
I remember on a visit to a large amusement park, that has different worlds, there was a group of orthodox Jewish men in charge of a large group of children, all boys. It looked like a school or synagogue day out.
I noticed they ignored "Dinosaur World" and completely didn't go anywhere near it and took all the children away from it's direction of entry.
Later on I remember sitting in a Dinosaur egg incubator ride, with my children, being thrown all about thinking 'Are we doing right or wrong here!' I never knew Jews where so staunchly against Dinosaur's, until seeing those men, and then later researching that Jews absolutely don't believe in Dinosaur's.
Not Byker
Bob or Byker, I am none. And, Byker’s father is not my son. Just differentiating from Byker. Will normally do so in my name if I don’t slip up.
Anonymous 2:44 wrote, “…Jews absolutely don't believe in Dinosaurs.”
I was unable to establish that Orthodox Jews do not believe in dinosaurs. Judaism as a whole seems to have different viewpoints, just like Christianity. A theme seems to be that dinosauria was a part of an earlier creation, prior to the Adamic creation. What I have done is to take exception to what Armstrongists believe about dinosaurs. And that is that they are horrific creatures that do not reflect the nature of God and must have come from the Dark Side somehow. I don’t think that dog will hunt.
Jesus created everything. John is really explicit about this. John wrote, “All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made.” So, the exegesis is that Jesus created dinosaurs. But dinosaurs exhibited the predator-prey cycle and they were big and lizard-like and that makes them repugnant to many. But the Cambrian was full of smaller creatures who avidly participated in the predator-prey cycle and nobody seems to be disturbed by it. Dinosaurs have an image problem.
Many people do not realize that dinosaurs are still with us in the form of their modern-day descendants – birds. Somewhere along the way in Judaism, some birds became clean. The Torah prescribes them for certain sacrifices. And in the Christian era the Holy Spirit appeared as a Dove. And chickens do make a really good soup. Especially with noodles or dumplings. And God expresses a note of appreciation for Leviathan, even maybe hearkening to a bird-like derivation, when he says “Will you play with it as with a bird or put it on a leash for your young women?”
This leaves a dilemma for Armstrongists. They eat chicken. Chickens run around pecking up bugs just like T. Rex ran around snacking up whatever was smaller. Chickens and T. Rex have a common origin. The Torah says that certain kinds of birds are clean – those with a crop. But if Armstrongist reject Christmas because of its pagan origin, to be consistent, they should reject the eating of chicken and turkey, no matter what the Torah says, because they are dinosaur descendants and dinosaurs came into existence through, they believe, the rebellious intervention of the Dark Side.
I appreciate the responses to my essay. I believe these issues are worth thinking about. Though maybe Mark Twain was right about this topic. Twain said, “The less said about the pterodactyl the better.”
Scout
Wow. I wonder if they believe in what I'll call "precognitive" man, the thousands of years of human-like beings who had no language, and no method of recording their thoughts.
No offense taken, Burt! I agree with your comment to Scout.
BB
The concept ot theistic evolution (and by extension, dinosaurs) has been discussed in the context of Judaism for many years. Maimonides, and Nachmanides both addressed it, although through somewhat different approaches. I don't believe we can allow a unified or singular school of Jewish thought to be set by the "orthodox" Jews of today. They are considered to be the counterpart of the literalist/fundamentalists contingents of the Christian faith. There is much diversity of opinion amongst the Jewish community. That is one of the endearing qualities for which they are known.
BB
This is interesting. Why did God create meat-eating dinosaurs millions of years ago when the Bible shows His standard is the wolf dwelling with the lamb?
About three years ago I found a video by Joel Duff, a scientist and Youtube video maker, that discussed the idea that God, during the "gap" period, created a basic life form and then delegated the modification and branching of all life forms by intelligent design over millions of years to the angels on the earth. During this time, Lucifer and the angels rebelled, and thus their design of species became competitive, animal killing animal, not what God intended, but He allowed it. Dr. Duff discusses this idea, which he got from someone else, but his conclusion is that it is wrong.
But it is interesting nevertheless.
His video is dated June 26, 2022 and has the word "gap" in the title.
Anonymous 7:50 wrote, “Why did God create meat-eating dinosaurs millions of years ago when the Bible shows His standard is the wolf dwelling with the lamb?”
This is a profound question. I have an opinion. I don’t think anyone has an answer. A simplification of this question is, “Why do things have to get really bad before they get really good?” Why must all sentient beings come to know evil on the way to ultimate good? Jesus was not only baptized in water, he was immersed in this present evil world not as God but incarnate as a human being.
T. Rex was a meat eater and so are most humans. Even vegans eat non-sentient living things. We might ask ourselves, as another facet of this question, why do beings on this planet have to eat other forms of life in order to live? Why don’t we all eat manna like the angels? The geologic record shows that the predator-prey cycle existed from the beginning. There were no halcyon days. And the whole principle of consumption ultimately ascends to our consuming the Bread of Life in order to have eternal life. Jesus was the Bread of Life from the foundation of the Cosmos. This kind of consumption was going to happen. It is not a departure from some putative better way.
I could theorize about this at length, but I will cut to the chase. I believe that a sentient being who does not know evil does not have the depth and perspective of one that does. For human beings to be dependent on food in order to live is not a lesson in nutrition by in essential contingency. We are God’s dependents. And that is the order of reality. God takes things from a diminished state to a full state. He is a transformer and not an exterminator. So, the lion will one day eat straw like an ox in the Peaceable Kingdom. This is a metaphor of transformation. And the diminished state, while it is here, is painfully instructive and necessary.
This is the important issue of theodicy. Theodicy is a big topic and is probably where theological understanding is at its weakest in my experience.
Scout
Anonymous 7:50 wrote, " ... the angels rebelled, and thus their design of species became competitive, animal killing animal, not what God intended, but He allowed it."
From Google: "Fossil evidence suggests that early eukaryotic organisms, like protists, began consuming other cells through a process called phagocytosis around 1.2 billion years ago."
Life has always consumed other life. My guess is that this is has been going on since day one. The predator-prey cycle is a competitive cycle. Instead of positing intervention from the Dark Side, I think we need to bite the bullet and develop a theodicy that encompasses the idea that God created all of this for a purpose.
T. Rex was a carnivore but so are dogs and cats. And people are omnivores. Perhaps, one day the created order will change, and we will all eat mannna. And it will not be to sustain life but just for enjoyment. But for the present, we are omnivores. That's the church we attend now. Instead of regarding it as an unnatural intrusion, I think we should search for meaning in it.
Scout
I believe it was probably a case of backwriting modern problems into ancient history, but years ago, there was a tabloid rag article theorizing that the dinosaurs' own flatulence blew them off the face of the earth. Probably made up by some PETA member who read up on greenhouse gases and learned that methane from cattle was contributing mightily to climate change.
Anonymous 5:03 wrote, “the dinosaurs' own flatulence blew them off the face of the earth”
That does raise an interesting issue. It is clear that a biological regime change occurred when the meteor that killed off the dinosaurs smashed into Yucatan. Dinosauria went into abrupt decline and the age of mammals ensued. The direction of the development of life on earth suddenly pivoted. Three quarters of all animal and plant life became extinct. Other kinds of plant and animal life began to flourish. All of this was done in a plausible, in-context way. God could have done this in an obviously supernatural way but instead the agency was an asteroid known as the Chicxulub Impactor. If God had suddenly caused all the dinosaurs in the world to fall asleep, it would be an inexplicable anomaly in the geologic record. The Cretaceous-Paleogene extinction event, though highly unlikely, fit seamlessly into natural context. On the surface it was a natural event but behind the scenes it wasn’t.
Scout
Back in my WCG days, a member friend had the idea that God was basically experimenting with different forms of life. “Physical life was new to God,” he said.
I thought that sounded strange at the time. It fit with the Armstrongist Mormon-esque view of a growing and changing God, but I realized later it makes no sense for a God who “knows the end from the beginning.”
Armstrong warned against experimentation as a form of education. But my friend was trying, and he inadvertently spotted a big contradiction in Armstrongist philosophy.
Lee Walker
At one time I had some notes from at WCG ministerial conference that I got at Ambassador College Big Sandy. The part that interested me was a lecture by Herman Hoeh. I do not now have the notes but I recall the content.
Hoeh believed that God was like a human engineer. He had to build models in order to arrive at the finished product. This was why there were so many prototypical human-like beings in the fossil record. God was engineering humanity.
This idea is utterly false but fits nicely into the doctrine of an anthropomorphic god. The problem with the Armstrongist view is that a being who creates reality does not have to tinker and run test models to find a viable product. What Hoeh asserted actually flies in the face of traditional Armstrongism. In the Armstrongist view, evolution was false because there was no developmental advancement shown in the earth’s flora and fauna. Rather, each organism was precisely and excellently tuned to its environmental niche. Eohippus was not an early version of a horse but was a separate, fully developed creature. Hoeh introduced the idea of progressively more complex organisms as God figured out what he was doing. Hoeh’s view was more in alignment with the geologic record but it did posit a less capable God.
Scout
If correct about Hoeh saying that, it would fit with his Buddhist influences as well.
Post a Comment