Theologically, cosmology is to space what history is to time. Serious attention is now being directed to the purposeful relationship between spatiality and cosmology as once was given to the relationship between time and history. Theologians are looking for implications of the findings of science for interpreting theological perceptions about the cosmos and the meaning of human and nonhuman existence. Cosmology becomes theological cosmology when it considers the meaning of God as the Ultimate Reality at the heart of the cosmos. Physics finds facts or probabilities about the cosmos. Theology, depending on physical findings to open up new thinking about the theological dimensions of the cosmos, seeks to discover sacred meaning and purpose interwoven within that same cosmos.
A Christian cosmology’s main struggle is to describe adequately the relationship between God and the universe. Generally, it agrees about three concepts of this relationship between God and the cosmos.
First of all, for Christian cosmology God is the foundation without which there is nothing. Although philosophy argues that ex nihil nihil fit (“from nothing, nothing is made”), theology maintains that there never was “nothing.” On the contrary, God and God alone is eternal, uncreated. Existence is therefore completely dependent upon God. This cosmological assumption provides the root meaning of Christian claims that God is the Creator and Sustainer of the world, and the basis of the Christian historic claim of creatio ex nihilo (“creation from nothing”).
Second, Christian cosmology affirms that the universe has a beginning and ending. It is not eternal. Thus, existence and nonexistence of all things are in the “hand of God.” Not only is God found in nature, but the cosmos itself is ultimately in God. From this root meaning Christianity speaks about creation and eschatology, the final cosmic return to God. The cosmos begins and ends in God.
Finally, for Christian cosmology the universe and all that is in it is free. It is not manipulated, nor do events happen by necessity. Choices are made; evolutionary chance happens; malformations occur. Thus, cosmology drives discussions toward issues of human nature, free will, and theodicy. Many theological questions are evoked, such as: From whence comes evil? What part does God play in the chaos and order, good and evil of this world? How is the universe “free” if Christians affirm that it ends in God?
D. DIXON SUTHERLAND
Bibliography
Ian G. Barbour, Religion in the Age of Science.
Rolston Holmes III, Genes, Genesis, and God.
Arthur Peacocke, Creation and the World of Science.
Ted Peters, ed., Cosmos as Creation.
Ilya Prigogine and Isabelle Stengers, Order Out of Chaos.
Stephen Toulmin, The Return to Cosmology: Postmodern Science and the Theology of Nature.
Cross-Reference: Creation, Evil, Freedom, Natural Theology, Nature, Providence, Science and Christianity, Science and Theology, Space, Theism, Time.
COVENANT
A covenant ordinarily refers to an agreement that is arranged between two or more parties: It states their relationship and stipulates their future rights and responsibilities. Such an agreement rests upon the promise, ability, and full faith and credit of the parties consenting to it. Although covenants may recognize natural (e.g., kinship) relations, they do not rest upon them for social power. Covenant signifies a preeminently historical relationship, more like a social contract than an organic process.
The term “covenant” enters Christian theology from the biblical world, where it is said that God relates to all creatures, especially to Israel and the church, by a free decision and the gift of life together. In the Hebrew scriptures, covenant is prominent in the Deuteronomic tradition, in which God and Israel establish a moral relation that authorizes ethical relations between persons within Israel. E. P. Sanders refers to this as “covenantal nomism.” Whether as a social ideology for a premonarchic egalitarian society (Gottwald) or as a theological construct of the preexilic prophets to delegitimate established power (Nicholson), the idea of God’s special interest in and concern for justice and peace as the basis for human flourishing, and God’s promise to see to it that such a condition is realized, remain at the heart of the matter. In the stories of Israel, there are covenants with the patriarchs, with Moses and all Israel, with David, and, in the prophetic hope for Israel, with all people and the earth itself.
In the Christian scriptures, “covenant” is an important theological concept, especially in the texts concerning the Lord’s Supper and in Romans and Hebrews. The promise, “I will be your God and you shall be my people,” is fulfilled in the life and destiny of Jesus Christ, anticipated in the Christian community, and ultimately realized in the transfiguration of heaven and earth (Revelation). Paul uses covenant to speak of the economy of grace whereby God ordains salvation, life, and blessedness for us. While he contrasts an old and a new covenant in II Corinthians, it is clear that they represent one saving purpose of God (Romans 4).
Theologically, “covenant” signifies four complementary ideas. As an arrangement created by God who makes covenant, it is a gracious gift. As it stipulates a form of life based on the gift, it is realized in a response of faith and obedience. Because it is based on consent rather than coercion, it establishes a responsible moral relation between people and God; sociality becomes solidarity. And as it envisions a way of life pressing beyond the limits of any particular culture, it establishes a history of seeking a universal community of justice and friendship, “a blessing in the midst of the earth.”
The idea of covenant has always been one of the themes of Christian theology. It is present in principle wherever a history of salvation approach is taken, as in Irenaeus (c. 130–200). It was taken up especially in Reformed theology, in which it signified the entire relation of God to creatures and established a history of redemption and creation. Following Calvin (1509–1564), one gracious covenant was held to be the unifying purpose of all God’s ways and works, the framework for specific “covenants.” Beginning with H. Bullinger (1504–1575) and continuing through the seventeenth-century English Puritans to J. Cocceius (1603–1669) and the “federal theology,” the idea of a covenant of grace served as an organizing principle for systematic theology. Originating with an eternal election and ending with its realization in the final state of creatures, the divine design is woven into the fabric of natural and historical solidarities. The effect of this was to limit the covenant of grace to a select group, however, and to exclude all others on the basis of a covenant of works. A tension existed between the universal and the restrictive understanding of covenant.
In the twentieth century Karl Barth (1886–1968) used the idea of one covenant of grace to link God’s activity in creation and redemption, thus situating Christ in a cosmic context. When so construed covenant emphasizes the idea of the divine self-limitation as well as the central meaning and purpose of creaturely life and human history. God is the One who makes and keeps covenant, and human beings are those who are to co-exist in responsible relations of praise, love, and justice. In this view, Christ makes actual the divine election that embraces all, establishing the conditions for human partnership with God. The covenant of grace is unrestricted.
Socio-politically, “covenant” belongs to the establishment of a community rather than to its originating events (Bellah). It provides the arrangements within which ordinary life can flourish. It defines the common center of value that holds the community together and creates the conditions for free and responsible interactions. All historical covenants appear to have been