dominion mandate

[Preach]

When the LORD gave the dominion mandate in Genesis chapter one, was He giving it to both Adam and Eve, or just Adam? Moreover, was He giving it to Adam/them as believers, and or as human beings?What are the ramifications for the postmillenial hope in history?
Thanks,
Bobby

 

[SmokingFlax]

Good Question! and one that I'm eager to hear what others have to say about it...
I know that the theonomists and reconstructionists place a lot of emphasis on the "dominion mandate" and the Dispensationalists and charismatics (from which I came out of) place virtually NONE at all. In fact I NEVER even heard of it till a couple of years ago (after ten years as a believer).

 

[RamistThomist]

When did he revoke the dominion mandate?

 

[openairboy]

Originally posted by Preach
When the LORD gave the dominion mandate in Genesis chapter one, was He giving it to both Adam and Eve, or just Adam?

I would imagine "both", because it is awfully difficult to be "fruitful and multiply" by yourself. Adam, however, is the covenant head. Think of it as Christ and the Church.

Moreover, was He giving it to Adam/them as believers, and or as human beings?

He was giving it to them in covenant. There is no "human beings" per se in Scripture, but covenant man, a personal being, in covenant with YHWH, a personal God (It's like there is no "god" abstractly considered in Scripture, but the personal being that brought Israel up out of Egypt; hence part of my conviction of presupp apologetics). So, Elohim was giving it to Adam, the federal head.

What are the ramifications for the postmillenial hope in history?

It fits perfectly with the postmillennial hope, especially considering the Great Commission. Adam, the federal head, was to be "rule", "be fruitful and multiply" spreading God's image over the face of the earth. We are in the process of restoring God's image upon the face of the earth. The creation was "good" or "very good" and was to be developed, and I believe taken to glory. We are bringing all nations under Christ and look forward to the creation (Rom. 8) being brought to glory, the resurrection of the body, and a "New Heavens and New Earth."

openairboy

[Edited on 22-1-2005 by openairboy]

[Edited on 22-1-2005 by openairboy]

 

[Preach]

In what way does a nonbeliever today participate in the dominion mandate (ex. the nonbeliever's relationship to the animals, plants, etc)? Thanks.

 

[RamistThomist]

To the extent that he attempts to do something outside of Christ's lordship, he shows himself to be a covenant breaker. Quite likely he will not be furthering the dominion mandate. The very fact that he does something we would deem beneficial testifies that he is not being consistent with his worldview.

 

[ReformedWretch]

The very fact that he does something we would deem beneficial testifies that he is not being consistent with his worldview.

Excellent!

 

[SmokingFlax]

Yes...that's very Van Tillian of you Jacob...(it is excellent).

 

[openairboy]

Originally posted by Preach
In what way does a nonbeliever today participate in the dominion mandate (ex. the nonbeliever's relationship to the animals, plants, etc)? Thanks.

You may want to read Henry Van Til's "The Calvinistic Concept of Culture", I think it would get at a lot of these issues.

As Jacob pointed out, they are covenant breakers. Adam and Eve, as well as their descendents, were to cultivate all of creation to the glory of God. The unbeliever rejects this and pursues his own goals, see Babel. There is an antithesis (enmity between two seeds) and they, so to speak, are vying for power.

As Henry's uncle points out, "We don't understand any fact aright unless it is seen in light of its created nature." The unregenerate man still names plants, animals, and cultivates the garden, but he doesn't interpret creation in God's light, so he sees it erroneously, nor basically "glorify God and enjoy him". The unregenerate can still contribute to culture (we can "plunder the Egyptians"), but their direction of culture is sinful.

openairboy