Bradnick 0

Decay, Vitality, and the Spirit: A Pneumatological Perspective on Entropy and

Emergent Systems

David Bradnick
Regent University School of Divinity

RTCH 785: Science and the Spirit

Dr. Amos Yong
Summer 2007

Bradnick 1

Decay, Vitality, and the Spirit: A Pneumatological Perspective on

Entropy and Emergent Systems

An array of contemporary theologies, especially those with ecological concerns,

have stressed the intrinsic value of creation. These schools of thought express sentiments
in which the universe displays the fingerprints of the divine and has been endowed with a
God-given goodness. Creation is viewed as a sacrament or even metaphorically referred
to as Gods body, a holy expression of the divine presence imbuing all things with life
and intrinsic value. While constructive efforts in this area are to be commended for
greatly enriching our theology of nature, one would be hard pressed to overlook the
negative influences and destructive forces that dominate segments of creation. Natural
phenomena, like natural disasters reek havoc, death arises to steal away life, and
ultimately the universe itself appears to be on a possible course of complete dissipation,
the Big Freeze.1 Reasonably, the question arises, from where do these seemingly
contradictory principles stem? What is their ontological character, and how does one
account for them from a theological perspective?
The source of moral evil in most theological constructions is unproblematic in the
sense that they have commonly been ascribed to human downfalls and shortcomings.
Offenses like physical and sexual abuse, poverty, and murder are attributed to human
mortality, finitude, and a corrupt free will. Even problems materializing within natural
1

Certainly this is not the only theory regarding the future state of the universe. Other thoughts involve
the implosion of the universe (The Big Crunch) or the oscillatory model (The Big Bounce) whereby the
universe is in a perpetual state of expansion and implosion. For detailed examination of these theories see
Richard C. Tolman. Relativity, Thermodynamics, and Cosmology (New York: Dover Publications, 1987).

Bradnick 2

processes can be traced to human tampering and offenses against nature.2 Many
ecological perspectives assign evils performed towards nature to anthropocentric ideals
that arise from human consciousness and subsequently self-centeredness. Although an
advancement, this evolutionary feature may gives rise to the exploitation and devastation
of creation3. Conservative and Evangelical views commonly incorporate demonic
influences to explain moral sins and evils that emerge in the world. Despite these
justifications, there are still gaps beyond moral deficits that are left unaccounted. How
does one account for decay and decomposition in the natural order? What spawns the
natural phenomenon of corrosion, deterioration, and the tendency towards disorder in
morally neutral systems?
Original sin has served as the traditional theological response for the
decomposition and ruin found in nature and subsequently other systems. This perspective
affirms that the fall of humankind partially stripped creation of its original goodness
endowed by God, hence precipitating the physical ruin of creation, but science provides a
different explanation. Science also affirms the gradual putrefication of nature, but sets
forth the principle of entropy as the descriptive phenomenon whereby systems tend to
move towards disorganization. These schools of thought appear to be at odds with one
another: where human disobedience is blamed for generating the rise of turmoil in one
2

Callicott suggests that natural processes like erosion is accelerated by agricultural enterprises that strip
the soil of vegetation. See J.B. Callicott. Genesis and John Muir, in Covenant for a New creation: Ethics,
Religion and Public Policy, eds. C.S. Robb and C.J. Casebolt (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1991), 107140.
3
See Carl A. Newsom, Common Ground: An Ecological Reading of Genesis 2-3, in The Earth Story
in Genesis, eds., Norman C. Habel and Shirley Wurst (Cleveland: The Pilgrim Press, 2000), 69. Originally
published by Sheffield Academic Press. Newsom suggests that all ecological sins stem from
anthropocentrism and implies that this may be the root of all sin. This stance limits the primary influence of
original sin to the domain of humanity and makes nature the source of secondary causes, missing a vital
implication of the biblical account-all of creation was affected by the fall, not just humanity. Ironically, this
leads to anthropomorphism, the very concept that Newsom and other ecologically-minded theologians
attempt to avoid.

Bradnick 3

system, naturalistic laws give rationalization to disarray in another. While the causative
agents differ between these two notions, does a theological perspective need to be at odds
with scientific reasoning? Can a correlation between original sin and entropy be
established that satisfies both scientific principles and theological motifs?
In an attempt to contribute to the religions/science dialogue this paper challenges
the classical view of original sin, suggesting that the scientific principle of entropy offers
an enlightening dynamic and should be seriously engaged when constructing a theology
of nature. In fact, the concept of entropy will be equated to the naturalistic dynamics of
original sin, generating a theological and ontological bridge between the two terms, thus
reasserting the universality of original sin and evading the narrowness of
anthropocentrism. Moreover, where science ascribes increases in order to entropic
fluctuations across systems, this paper will assert that the Spirit of God acts within the
world to generate pockets of organization whereby these local entropic decreases can be
seen as proleptic (eschatological) events of Gods in-breaking kingdom.
The first section of this paper will offer an analysis of several perspectives on
original sin and the Fall in light of contemporary perspectives on the literary genre of
Genesis 3, yielding significant insights that will free up the doctrines to be correlated
with entropy in the second section. The final section will consider entropy fluctuations
and emergent systems of order from a pneumatological perspective, suggesting that the
Spirit generates proleptic acts.
I. Adam and Eve in a Scientific World: A Reevaluation of Original Sin and the Fall
The historicity of Adam and Eve has incessantly been challenged by critical
thought within and outside the Church, but orthodox Christianity has predominantly

Bradnick 4

maintained the reliability of the Genesis narrative. Augustine has played a significant
role, in maintaining this idea, emphasizing the necessity of upholding its literal
understanding. Although he suggests that the text may be interpreted in several different
manners (historically, allegorically, analogically, and aetiologically),4 the literal approach
is the dominant and rational interpretation, writing, One should not look with a
jaundiced eye, to be sure, on anyone who wants to take everything that is said here
absolutely literallyon the contrary one should hold up such a person as an outstanding
and wholly admirable understander of the text.5 He did not discount figurative readings
but only saw them necessary when literal interpretations failed to develop coherence, thus
following the tradition of the apostles in their interpretation of the Old Testament.6
Augustines emphasis upon the literal rendering of Genesis 3 dominated the
Church for nearly fifteen hundred years, but the advent of post-Enlightenment thought
saw a shift in ideological perspectives. As a result of historical critical studies, the
historicity of Adam and Eve began to become suspect in mainstream theological circles;
instead of viewing the narrative as a literal account of humanitys beginnings, it was
increasingly being interpreted as a symbolic myth. Eventually, scientific theories
contributed to the questioning of the Garden narrative, and perhaps, Brunner, more than
any other theologian of this time period offers a frank evaluation in light of contemporary
findings:
This whole historic picture of the first man has been finally and absolutely destroyed for
us to-day. The conflict between the teaching of history, natural science and palaeontology,
on the origins of the human race, and that of the ecclesiastical doctrine, waged on both
sides with the passion of a fanatical concern for truth, has led, all along the line, to the
victory of the scientific view, and to the gradual but inevitable decline of the
4

Saint Augustine, Unfinished Literal Commentary on Genesis 2.5 in The Works of Saint Augustine: A
Translation for the 21st Century, ed. John E. Rotelle, trans. Edmund Hill (Hyde Park, NY: New City Press,
2002), 116.
5
Saint Augustine, On Genesis: A Refutation of the Manichees 2.2.3 in Ibid., 72.
6
Ibid.

Bradnick 5
ecclesiastical view. Upon the plane of empirical research, whether that of history or of
natural science, which in the wide field of pre-history often merge into one another, no
facts have been left which could support the Augustinian ecclesiastical view of the
historical first man, or which could prove that the empirical origin of the human race
was to be sought on a specially elevated plane of spiritual existence. 7

He added, When we talk about the origin of many we are not speaking of a certain man
called Adam, who lived so many thousand years ago, but of myself, and of yourself, and
of everyone else in the world. Only in this way will the Christian doctrine cease to be bad
metaphysics; for in its old historical forms, without intending it, it was a metaphysic of
history, and thus bad theology.8 Ultimately, Brunner was attempting to maintain core
Christian doctrines while incorporating contemporary findings in other academic
disciplines, like evolution. In light of these advancements he could find no foundation
upon which to maintain the Augustinian tradition and interpreted Genesis 3 as a
universally applicable myth.
At the time of Brunner evolution was a relatively new field and viewed with some
reservations and caveats, but a similar trend of concession has continued in contemporary
theologies. Those arguing for this view include Patricia A. Williams who has used
methods in logical reasoning (the coherence test, the correspondence test, and the
consilience test) to assert a concise argument for the mythological character of this story.9
Additionally, Williams uses a balanced approach of logic, historical criticism, and the
natural sciences in order to substantiate her claims. In developing a concise argument
7

Emil Brunner, Man in Revolt: A Christian Anthropology, trans., Olive Wyon (London: Lutterworth
Press, 1939), 85-86.
8
Ibid., 88. For Brunner the Fall is symbolic of humanitys universal misuse of God-given freedom, and
the corruption of human nature as a result of our broken relationship with God (129-138). Each person is
their own Adam, choosing to disobey God with every act of sin (149).
9
See Patricia A. Williams, Doing Without Adam and Eve: Sociobiology and Original Sin (Minneapolis:
Fortress, 2001). She sees a weakness in liberal theologies, like Brunners, and maintains that the story of
Adam and Eve was developed in a particular context, an ancient agrarian society. As a result one should not
attempt to interpret the story as a universal account of the human condition. Williams prefers to maintain a
contextual interpretation for scriptures, like Genesis, while turning to more collective interpreters of
existence - in her case sociobiology (90).

Bradnick 6

Williams convincingly builds upon the foundation of various disciplines, representing the
state of mind for the majority of academics today regarding the historicity of Adam and
Eve. Biblical studies can no longer hold a monopoly on the doctrine of Original Sin, but
it must be evaluated in relation to all caches of human knowledge, including
philosophical and scientific proposals.10
The state of contemporary theology indicates that the reign of Augustinian
dominance has been significantly uprooted, and a new era of theological investigation
had been initiated; however, Fundamentalism and subsequently a very significant number
of Evangelicals, have pushed back on this understanding of the Fall. Bernard Ramm in
his book The Christian View of Science and Scripture expressed a desire to develop a
more fruitful interaction between science and theology, but he specifically questions
Brunners stance when he writes, Once again we wonder if he has not paid too great an
attention to criticism, and forced the Bible into an unnatural position. There is still the
third view that the Genesis account is neither literal science nor ancient mythology, but a
purified, non-postulational literary vehicle for conveying the revelation of God.11 In this
sentiment one can see what is at stake by demythologizing the Genesis account - the
authority of the bible. Ramm is willing to concede validity to some scientific discoveries,
but only in so much as they are able to illuminate the biblical texts as the source of
theological truth. For him, like so many others, the historical foundation of scripture is
imperative for understanding the nature of revelation as a vehicle for divine initiatives.
10

For additional resources in the area of biblical studies see James Barr, The Garden of Eden and the
Hope of Immortality (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993); Claus Westermann, Genesis 1-11: A
Commentary, vol. 1 (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1984); Gerhard von Rad, Genesis: A
Commentary (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1972); Bernhard Anderson, Creation versus Chaos: The
Reinterpretation of Mythical Symbolism in the Bible (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987).
11
Bernard Ramm, The Christian View of Science and Scripture (Grand Rapids: WM. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1956), 320.

Bradnick 7

Simply put, he is attempting to avoid the pitfall of appropriating the source of biblical
truth to human speculation and conjecture. It must be rooted in divine inspiration.
In this case positing the Adam and Eve narrative as an allegorical work is not
problematic, but the source of literary derivation becomes the motivating factor for
disagreement. Scriptural authority is not the motivation for this paper, but underlying this
develops the challenge to identify what doctrinal points can be gleaned from the Genesis
story. First, I propose that the doctrine of the Fall and original sin must adequately
express the fundamental nature of humanity, taking into account scientific knowledge
about the human condition. Second, these doctrines must express a universal condition,
not only in humanity but encompasing all of creation. In keeping with the thesis of this
paper entropy offers a means whereby these conditions can be met, enhancing the biblical
narrative in light of contemporary scientific principles. The next section of this paper will
give a synopsis of entropy in order to provide a foundational knowledge for a correlation
between the two concepts.
II. Entropy: An Overview of Its History and Applicaiont
Entropy is a challenging concept to grasp, not only because of its abstract nature
or mathematical derivation, but in part because of the various nuances applied to this
term. The diversity of fields in which entropy is employed include: thermodynamics,

Bradnick 8

statistical mechanics, biology12, and information theory.13 There is some debate within
scientific circles regarding the inter-disciplinary use of this term, as some maintain an
underlying universal principle of entropy, while others merely see it as an analogous term
with no ontological connectedness.14 For this reason a brief survey of the history and
usage of entropy is in order, establishing the manner in which this paper applies entropy.
Entropy was first introduced by Rudolf Clausius in 1867 as a result of his research
in thermodynamics.15 He mathematically defined entropy (S) as the quotient of a transfer
in heat (Q) divided by the temperature (T) of a controlled mass (S = Q/T). This
understanding, coupled with the second law of thermodynamics, led to the mathematical
consequence, the Clausius Inequality (Q/T < 0), establishing that entropy must increase
or at the very least remain at zero for any spontaneous process occurring within an

12

See Daniel R. Brooks and E.O. Wiley, Evolution as Entropy: Toward a Unified Theory of Biology. 2nd
ed. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1988), 36. Theoretical work in the natural sciences has also
used entropic principles in order to explain the behavior of biological systems, especially evolutionary
characteristics. While organisms are considered open systems because of the reciprocal energy exchange
with the environment, they are closed systems in terms of information exchange encoded within the genetic
material; therefore, this school of thought follows some of the same principles associated with information
theory (35). According to Brooks and Wiley, Instructional information is subject to the constraints of the
second law in a manner similar to the way in which energy flow is subject to constraintsCopy mistakes
arepurely entropic phenomena in the flow of information since they represent a randomization process
relative to the previous state of the system (34). In statistical mechanics systems tends to move towards a
greater degree of disorganization, and in a similar manner biological information develops increased
complexity through genetic variations and copy mutations. Brooks and Wiley propose that this increase in
entropy, or evolution, has led to greater complexity and the explosion in the myriad of species currently
found on earth. In this discipline entropy leads to greater complexity and disorganization in the genetic
material or microstates, but can enhance the overall condition of the macrosystem.
13
Due to space constraints an overview of entropy in information theory will not be covered; however, it
should be noted that Boltzmanns approach is significantly related to a condition of ignorance regarding the
microstates of the system, and as a result it has found many applications in the realm of information theory.
For an introduction to this discipline see J. Machta. Entropy, Information, and Computation American
Journal of Physics 67, no. 12 (1999): 1074-1077.
14
Ilya Prigogine, The End of Certainty: Time, Chaos, and the New Laws of Nature (New York: The Free
Press, 1997), 24. Prigogine rejects an ontological relationship of entropy and information ignorance. For
him entropy is related to irreversibility, and consequently it is not an epistemological gap in knowledge;
rather it is an ontological characteristic of the forward direction of time within the universe. In this section
he is specifically addressing an assertion made by Murray Gell-Mann in The Quark and the Jaguar.
15
See Rudolf Clausius, The Mechanical Theory of Heat (London: Macmillan, 1897).

Bradnick 9

isolated system.16 The second law [of thermodynamics] then implies the existence of a
function S, the entropy, which increases monotonically until it reaches its maximum
value at the state of thermodynamic equilibrium.17 This monumental development in
thermodynamics expressed that systems can only develop in a certain fashion due to the
parameters established by entropy. Systems characteristically tend to move towards
equilibrium and consequently strive for maximum entropic value,18 clarifying that in
thermodynamics entropy is closely associated with the amount of free energy within a
system.19 A.H. Wilson prominently states, The increasing property of entropy is
therefore equivalent to saying that energy is always being degraded into forms which are
more and more difficult to utilize for the production of work.20 Where energy was
initially easy harnessed, it undergoes a process of dissipation, thus adhering to the
Clausius Inequality. The available energy to contribute to the system decreases,
explaining heat lose within internal combustion engines, the impossibility of developing a
perpetual motion mechanism and other phenomenon that result in dissolution. Within this
framework of thermodynamics entropy emerged on the scientific front, acquiring its
original meaning and application.

16

By definition a closed system may exchange energy with, but not matter, beyond the borders of the
system, whereas open system may exchange energy and matter. The mathematical representation for
entropy in open systems is: S = eS + iS, iS 0 where eS represents the transfer of entropy across
system boundaries and iS expresses the change of entropy within a system. See Ilya Prigogine, From
Being to Becoming: Time and Complexity in the Physical Sciences (San Francisco: W.H. Freeman and
Company, 1980), 78. The later portion of this paper will address open and closed systems in more detail.
17
Illya Prigogine. From Being to Becoming, 5.
18
F.D. Fast. Entropy: The Significance of the Concept of Entropy and Its Applications In Science and
Technology (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1962), 6.
19
Basing his statement off of Callen (1960), A.M. Andersen writes, Entropy is a smoothly varying
function of the other state variables and is an increasing function of the internal energy U. in
Thermodynamics of Natural Systems (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1996), 49.
20
A.H. Wilson, Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1960), 27.

Bradnick 10

In the 1870s, building upon Clausius work, Ludwig Boltzmann developed an

entropic equation by combining classical mechanics with the theory of probability.21
Boltzmann set out to formulate a microscopic expression for thermodynamics and
experimented with ideal gases because of their relative simplicity: the tendency of the
particles to move in straight lines and the relatively limited interaction between these
particles.22 He observed that molecular collisions within these ideal gases eventually led a
system to equilibrium. Whereas in thermodynamics entropy is related to the tendency of
free energy within a closed system to decline, in statistical mechanics it involves the
pressure of the system, specifically the move toward an equivalent distribution in the
collision rate of molecular particles. Essentially he identified entropy in terms of the
measure of the total number of macrostates in relationship to molecular configurations (S
= k log P)23. The statistical entropy of a physical system is directly related to the
macrostate and thus to the configurational complexity of the system. The area of possible
configurations is directly related to the number of available microstates24 In other words,
entropy for Boltzmann is the probability of particle collisions and as a result an increase
in disorder due to the total number of possible arrangements within a system. The
maximum number of disordered states within a system substantially outnumbers the
ordered potentials, so it is far more likely that a system will move towards a higher state
of entropy; therefore, an increase in entropy denotes a statistical law of increasing
disorder.25
21

Joseph J. Kockelmans, ed., Philosophy of Science: The Historical Background (New Brunswick:
Transaction Publishers, 1999), 243.
22
Carl S. Helrich, Thermodynamics: What One Needs to Know, Zygon. 34, no. 3 (1999): 505.
23
The components of Boltzmanns relation consist of the Boltzmann constant (k ) and a logarithm of the
probability of molecular arrangements within a system (P). The Boltzmann constant is the ratio of the
universal gas constant (R) to the Avogradro number (NA). k = 1.38066 X 10-23 J/K.
24
Brooks and Wiley, 36.
25
Prigogine, From Being to Becoming, 9.

Bradnick 11

While great successes in physics have been accomplished as a result of

Boltmanns work, the universal application of Boltzmanns definition of entropy has
undergone heavy criticism. First, the properties of an ideal gas are not collectively shared
by all substances; therefore his observation only applies to certain initial conditions,
failing to cope with all situations.26 Secondly, no practical method exists to measure the
location and trajectory of every molecule within a system, so Boltzmanns equation is not
an exact dynamical approach and merely represents the probability of each possibility
within a system. His method does not provide a precise understanding of the microstates
within a process, opening room for discrepancies between macroscopic and microscopic
entropy.27 Helrich writes, Claims that the second law is a statement regarding disorder in
a system are based on Boltzmanns interpretation and are limited to gas systems at or near
equilibriumNo understanding of entropy can be formulated in terms of individual
molecular states.28 Ultimately Boltzmanns calculations are subject to reversibility, and
as a result they do not fall in line with the laws of thermodynamics. Ultimately they can
only provide a microscopic analogue of entropy in relation to thermodynamics.29
Despite these criticisms and limitations, Boltzmanns view of entropy has become
the most general and popular application of the term, becoming a catchall term for states
of disorder across academic disciplines. Andersen appropriately addresses this trend
when he writes, Statistical mechanics considers the behavior of large numbers of
particles and has developed another view of entropy, completely independent of
26

Ibid., 156, 167.

Ibid., 157.
28
Carl S. Helrich, Thermodynamics: What One Needs to Know. Zygon. 34, no. 3 (1999): 512.
29
Ilya Prigogine, The End of Certainty, 20. Attempting to correct Boltzmanns shortcomings, Gibbs
turned towards the use of ensembles, a collection of systems having the same macroscopic properties,
whereby the experimental subjects cannot be distinguished from one another by any measurement of
temperature, pressure, or number of molecules. This strategy of population dynamics provides a twopronged advantage, allowing for the study of systems where initial conditions are known or where there
may be multiple initial conditions possible (Prigogine 1980: 26).
27

Bradnick 12

thermodynamics[Here] entropy is shown to be related to the probability of events

occurring within a framework of possible eventsThis has led to the use (and misuse) of
the concept in almost every conceivable subject.30 For this reason it can become
challenging to determine how an author is employing the term, especially when it
inappropriately becomes convoluted with the laws of thermodynamics. When speaking
about entropy in relation to statistical mechanics one must differentiate its meaning from
thermodynamics and recognize their analogous relationship.31 This is not to say that
entropy in terms of disorderly states is not a scientific phenomenon. In fact, that would be
an erroneous notion; rather the explanatory value of Boltzmanns equations far outweigh
their limitations, hence their widespread application.32
Taking these factors into consideration, this paper will employ entropy as it
functions in statistical mechanics, namely the increasing disorder within a system. This
allows for a broader application of this phenomenon. Discussion will not be limited to
one technical field, like thermodynamics, but can be applied to multiple systems,
including the universe as a whole.33 Certainly this does not exclude thermodynamics, but
it expands the types of systems addressed. When speaking about the nature of the
universe, thermodynamics processes are only a fraction of the types of systems contained
therein, and entropy in statistical mechanics provides a means of speaking about general
disorder in the cosmos.

30

Andersen, 81.
Refer back to footnote #16. Prigogine has also asserted an analogous relationship rather than
ontological between entropy in thermodynamics and information theory.
32
Enhancing Bolzmanns approach, Gibbs also used statistical function to develop conclusions about
system, but instead of focusing upon the molecules he examined the systems themselves, determining the
average over all the systems to develop a probabilistic function. Gibbs work greatly enhanced ones ability
to make more accurate predictions for a wider variety of systems. See Helrich 1999: 506-507.
33
Entropy must be spoken of in terms of systems. See Carl S. Helrich, Is There a Basis for Teleology in
Physics, Zygon 42, no. 1 (2007): 108.
31

Bradnick 13

III. Original Sin and the Fall in Light of Entropy

It has become apparent that a reevaluation of Genesis 3 is an appropriate and a
potentially fruitful route, not only for the science/religion dialogue but also for the wider
implications of Christian theology in a multi-disciplinary environment. Contemporary
findings in a vast array of academic fields cannot be kept in solitude from theological
constructions, and Original Sin and the Fall have been popular topics to tackle with
interdisciplinary approaches, including biology, sociology, and anthropology.34 Certainly
not every approach can be considered, and this paper has focused upon the application of
entropy as a concept through which to analyze and understand these doctrines.
Revisiting the implications of the Garden narrative as an allegory, the Fall must be
understood in terms of a universal phenomenon. It is not limited to an event in human
nature but affects all aspects of created order, living and nonliving. The early Church
Fathers, like Origen emphasized the curse upon all of creation, writing, [The holy land]
still forms part of the earth, which was originally cursed for the transgression of Adam.
For these words, Cursed shall the ground be were spoken of the whole earth.35 No
corner of earth remains untouched, and it instantaneously and fully participates in this
plunge from perfection.36 Entropy offers an advantageous explanation because of its
34

For additional inter-disciplinary endeavors see: Jerry D. Korsmeyer, Evolution & Eden: Balancing
Original Sin and Contemporary Science (New York: Paulist Press, 1998); Philip Hefner, Biological
Perspective on Fall and Original Sin, Zygon 28, no. 1 (1993): 77-101; Patricia Williams, Sociobiology
and Original Sin, Zygon 35, no. 4 (2000): 783-812.; S. Trooster, Evolution and the Doctrine of Original
Sin, trans., John A. Ter Haar (Glen Rock, N.J.: Newman Press, 1968)
35
Origen, Against Celsus 7.28 in The Ante-Nicene Fathers: Translations of the Writings of the Fathers
down to A.D. 325, eds. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, vol. 4, Tertullian (IV), Minucius Felix,
Commodian, Origen (Buffalo: The Christian Literature Publishing Company, 1886), 622.
36
Tertullian emphasizes the propinquity of the effects of Adams action, stating, Immediately the earths
is also cursed, which before was blessed. Immediately sprung up briers and thorns, where once had grown
grass, and herbs, and fruitful trees. Immediately arise sweat and labour for bread, where previously on

Bradnick 14

universalistic touch within natural systems, directly influencing existence of all types.
The universe and its internal structures overwhelmingly tend to move towards disorder
and chaos, acting as an all-inclusive and perpetual law. Contemporary proposals
consistently develop anthropocentric understandings of Original Sin and the Fall,
essentially ignoring its effects on the rest of creation. Entropy puts forth a phenomenon
that pulls upon all things, irrespective of its makeup, constantly drawing them into a state
of deterioration and dilapidation. Here it seems appropriate to equate original sin and
entropy. Both describe the fallen state of creation, the unceasing tug of a mysterious
power towards dispair, and their inability to pull their selves out of its grip.
The lack of a satisfactory explanation to link human action as the causative agent
of the Fall, supplies a major weakness in nearly every attempt to construct an
understanding of the Genesis narrative. Traditionally, the decay and depriciation found
within nature has been linked to the actions of Adam and Eve, a consequence of their
disobedience to God. The biblical account expresses that the characters not only
generated individual hardships from their sin, but the earth would also share in this blight,
being cursed to produce thorns and thistles. Irenaeus wrote, Immediately after Adam had
transgressedHe pronounced no curse against Adam personally, but against the
groundBut man received as the punishment of his transgression, the toilsome task of
tilling the earth, and to eat break in the sweat of his face, and to return to the dust from
whence he was taken; therefore, creation does not participate in the sin, but shares in the
effects of Adam and Eves disobedience and becomes a medium through which God

every tree was yielded spontaneous food and untilled nourishment. See Against Marcion 2.11 in The AnteNicene Fathers: Translations of the Writings of the Fathers down to A.D. 325. Alexander Roberts and
James Donaldson. eds., vol. 1 (Buffalo: The Christian Literature Publishing Company, 1886), 306.

Bradnick 15

appropriates the punishment.37 While this mysterious transformation may have been
accepted without critical reflection in the past, the lack of a causative joint presents an
ontological problem for contemporary metaphysical understandings of the cosmos. What
pervading force did humans unlock? How can humans awake Maxwells demon?38
Many contemporary theologies have essentially ignored this dilemma, developing
an anthropocentric proposal wherein the human condition emerges from natural
conditions, ignoring natural systems beyond the realm of anthropology. For example, P.R.
Masani in his article The Thermodynamic and Phylogenetic Foundations of Human
Wickedness suggests that sin emerges out of the human condition from the evolutionary
acquirement of consciousness.39 This awakening of morality becomes the source of sin
because humans were endowed with the ability to reflect upon their actions. He has
attempted to account for non-human sin by proposing two falls: one that encompasses
destructive natural processes, like entropy and biological food chains (Fall I), and a
second that ascribes moral evils to human freedom and consciousness (Fall II).40
Appealing to the necessity of natural processes to sustain life, he writes:
This deductionclarifies how strife, violence, killing, and death are involved in the very
process of life. Indeed, such destruction and killing are essential ingredients of the very
homeostasis that sustains the ecological balance within a biotic community. For such
homeostasis depends on a flow of negentropy from the lower to the higher tiers of the
food pyramid, and this flow involves killing, ingestion, digestion, and excretion.

37

Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3.23 in The Ante-Nicene Fathers: Translations of the Writings of the
Fathers down to A.D. 325, eds. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, vol. 1, Apostolic Fathers, Justin
Martyr, Inrenaeus (Buffalo: The Christian Literature Publishing Company, 1886), 456.
38
For an explanation of Maxwells Demon see Harvey S. Leff, Maxwells Demon: Entropy, Information,
Computing (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990).
39
P.R. Masani, The Thermodynamic and Phylogenetic Foundations of Human Wickedness. Zygon 20,
no. 3 (1985): 283-318.
40
Ibid., 301.

Bradnick 16

For Masani these amoral acts are necessary for biological life and human nature arose out
of entropic principles in biological evolution.41 According to this view, entropy assists the
development complexity, but negentropy in one system comes at the expense of another
system. Can one be satisfied with this in light of Christian hope? Additionally, Masani
ascribes an element of temporality to the Fall that upholds and Adam-like ideal, prohibits
anything but an analogous comparison of entropy for Fall I & II. Masani moves us closer
to a universalistic understanding of Original Sin and the Fall but lacks a satisfactory
framework, and for this reason it seems necessary to turn to the thought of Paul Tillich.
According to Tillich, the Fall symbolizes a cosmic and suprahistoric event,
encompassing all of creation.42 The Fall is not an individual event, neither is it merely a
human event, but it is a story of humanity and nature, whereby nature, represented by the
serpent, acts alongside humanity.43 Tillich writes, [Humanity and nature] participate in
each other and cannot be separated from each other. This makes it possible and necessary
to use the term fallen world and to apply the concept of existence to the universe as well
as to man.44 He does not wait until after the Fall in order to bring creation into the
narrative but makes creation a central actor through the serpent, thus Tillich bridges the

41

Other theologians have used similar notions to give a constructive function to entropy. See Arthur
Peacocke, Chance and Law in Irreversible Thermodynamics, Theoretical Biology, and Theology, in
Chaos and Complexity; Scientific Perspectives on Divine Action, eds. Robert John Russell, Nancy Murphy,
and Arthur Peacocke (Vatican City State: Vatican Observatory Publication / Berkely, CA: Center for
Theology and the Natural Sciences, 1995); Peacocke, Arthur, Thermodynamics and Life Zygon 19, no. 4
(1984): 395-432; Jeffrey S. Wicken, The Cosmic Breath: Reflections on the Thermodynamics of
Creation. Zygon 19, no. 4 (1984): 487-505; H.J. Hammilton, Thermodynamic Theory of the Origin and
Hierarchical Evolution of Living Systems, Zygon 12, no. 4 (1977): 289-335.
42
Paul Tillich, Systematic Theology, vol. 2, Existence and the Christ (Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press, 1957), 33.
43
Tillich wrote, Biblical literalism did a distinct disservice to Christianity in its identification of the
Christian emphasis on the symbol of the Fall with the literalistic interpretation of the Genesis story
Theology must clearly and unambiguously represent the Fall as a symbol for the human situation
universally, not as the story of an event that happened once upon a time. Ibid., 29.
44
Ibid., 43.

Bradnick 17

anthropocentric gap advanced by evolutionary theologies and presents a creation that

groans in unison for transformation-a creation that fall and suffers with humanity.45
Tillich justified this move by presenting the Fall as a symbol of the fracture
between essential and existential nature; therefore, it cannot be bound to a single moment
in time or a stage in human evolution.46 He adequately summarizes this view when he
writes, Orthodox theologians have heaped perfection after perfection upon Adam before
the Fall, making him equal with the picture of Christ. This procedure is not only absurd;
it makes the Fall completely unintelligibleThe symbol Adam before the Fall must be
understood as the dreaming innocence of undecided potentialities.47 Essential nature is
characterized by freedom and nondeterministic possibility in contrast to the existential
nature which precipitates anxiety and limited options. The fallen state of humanity and all
of nature is actualized in creation but never completely overtakes that which can be.
Finite existence has limitations. Here Tillich shares with Masani that biological
existence necessitates a fall, but it is not a functional or actualized characteristic; it
reaches deep into the core of ontology. Tillich comments, The transition from essence to
existence is a universal quality of finite being. It is not an event of the past; for it
ontologically precedes everything that happens in time and spaceAll have recognized
that existence cannot be derived from within existence, that it cannot be derived from an
individual event in time and spaceexistence has a universal dimension.48 All of
creation shares in this bondage, but only humans have become conscious of its pervading
stain.
45

Paul Tillich, Nature, Also, Mourns for a Lost Good, in The Shaking of the Foundations (New York:
Charles Scribners Sons, 1948), 81.
46
Tillich. Systematic Theology, 31, 33.
47
Ibid., 34.
48
Ibid., 36-37.

Bradnick 18

There are various dimensions that constitute the metaphor of Original Sin and the
Fall, and Tillich has exposed the ontological foundation that sin from human
consciousness and amoral evils cannot be separated from one another. They are
thoroughly intertwined, arising out of creation and existence. In light of Tillichs view the
Fall cannot be dichotomized or reduced to anthropocentric explanations, but it must also
reach back to the very foundations of the world. Original sin, necessitated by the fall,
stands as a metaphor for this transition from essential to existential nature, or a move
from unlimited potential to bridled limitations.
IV. A Pneumatological Approach to Emergence and Entropy
Entropy supplies the universe with an arrow of time, providing parameters in
which processes typically operate.49 This deterministic feature of finite existence limits
the overall number of potentialities within the cosmos. Essentially creation is free to
develop as quantum indeterminacy allows for infinite possibilities, but existentially
creation is in bondage to the parameters of entropy on the macrolevel. As a result, life
deteriorates, systems move towards disorganization, and nature decays. Despite this
tendency, pockets of complexity have managed to arise. The history of the cosmos
reveals a progression of emergence that began millions of years ago when atoms, the first
building blocks of materialism, were constructed. Eventually, celestial objects, planets,
were molded, single-celled organisms appeared on earth, and complex life forms began to
take shape. The arrival of consciousness within human beings marks the most intricate
product of cosmic and biological evolution. Emanating against all odds, complexity
refused to heed to entropic limitations, generating a series of irregularities. What was the
49

Andersen, 63.

Bradnick 19

source of these probabilistic anomalies? Mere chance? Perhaps, but Christian theology
preserves the notion that divine processes operate, not only to initiate creation but also to
sustain creation. More specifically, this paper ventures to propose that the Spirit of God
functions to bring order out of chaos. In the midst of a universe bound by entropic
parameters the Spirit energizes creation, giving shape to new physical structures and
dynamic forms of life.
A pneumatological perspective seems to be in order and requires a fundamentally
different approach to naturalistic reductionism.50 A resurgence of pneumatological
thought in the later portion of the twentieth century has precipitated numerous theologies
of nature, whereby the Spirit acts in all natural processes, directing them towards new
potentialities and fullness of life. Denis Edwards in his book Breath of Life provides a
concise example when he writes:
The history of the Spiritis coextensive with the total life of the universe. Gods Spirit
has been breathing life into the processes of the evolving universe from the very first. The
laws of nature and the initial conditions of the early universe exist only because of the
empowering presence and action of the Creator SpiritIt is this Breath of God who
breathes fire into the equations and continues to breathe life into the exuberant, diverse,
interrelated community of living things.51

For Edwards, and so many others, the Spirit is that which imbues creation with life,
animating existence and budding new activity. God is not a distance entity that initiated
the creative process, standing back to watch creation unfold; rather the immanent Spirit is
continuously at work to reinvigorate, enliven, and vitalize creation. The Spirit God

50

Philip Clayton has written extensively on this subject, drawing attention to the emergence of various
ontological levels, and as a result the physical realm cannot be reduced to the laws of physics. See Philip
Clayton, Mind and Emergence: From Quantum to Consciousness (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006).
51
Denis Edwards, Breath of Life: A Theology of the Creator Spirit (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2006),
33. Moltmann offers a similar thought when he writes, The Spirit is the principle of creativity on all levels
of matter and life. He creates new possibilities, and in these anticipates the new designs and blueprints for
material and living organisms. In this sense the Spirit is the principle of evolutionAll created things are
individuations of the community of creation and manifestations of the divine Spirit. in God in Creation: A
New Theology of Creation and the Spirit of God (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993), 100-101.

Bradnick 20

breathes new impulses into creation in spite of the entropic principles that threaten its
demise.
Scientists are quick to point out that the appearance of decreased entropy is an
illusion, and the overall state of the universe maintains its thrust towards disorder and
decay. For example, plants may grow and produce fruit which gives the impression of
negentropy, but plants must receive energy from the sun in order to generate this product;
therefore, the energy of the sun is consumed and disseminated, contributing to an overall
increase of entropy within the universe. Fundamentally, though, entropy is a statistical
probabilistic law, and in some natural processes there may be an increase in order with a
decrease in entropy. The probability may be extremely low, but it cannot be disregarded
as a possibility.52 This leaves room for the Spirit to work within the laws of physics or to
work in accordance with these laws, developing new and dynamic systems. Moltmann
appropriately draws attention to the Spirits action when he writes, If the cosmic Spirit is
the Spirit of God, the universe cannot be viewed as a closed system. It has to be
understood as a system that is open-open for God and for his future.53 The Spirit directs
entropic fluctuations within and across system boundaries to open up new potentialities
within the cosmos, thus freeing pockets of creation from the bonds of deterministic
destiny.
As mentioned above these pneumatological events can also be viewed as
eschatological moments, whereby that which is not yet breaks into the present. Amos
Yong, writing on Special Divine Action (SDA) from a pneumatological perspective,
sheds light on this notion when he writes, Divine action works unlike material or
52

Brian Greene, The Fabric of the Cosmos: Space, Time, and the Texture of Reality (New York: A.A.
Knopf, 2004), 156.
53
Moltmann., 103.

Bradnick 21

efficient causes proceeding from the past toward the present, but proleptically or
teleologically (to use Aristotelian terms) from the future.54 He adds, The
pneumatological logic I am advocating, however, would recognize SDA as charismatic
actions of the Spirit that are proleptic anticipations of the world to come. Each case of
SDA, more or less miraculous, would be signs of the new age that will be freed from the
bondage of suffering, and decay characteristic of a world under the effects of sin.55 The
future spoken of here, though, is not a temporal value relegated to a distant or unknown
date. It is not a sign of a future pristine state or utopian paradise reminiscent of the
Garden; rather the eschatological incursion is a qualitative change in the present moment.
The Spirit operates within the world to generate pockets of organization out of disorder,
not only begetting initial creation, but the Spirit also continues to act within the cosmos,
sustaining the natural order, and giving rise to innovative and dynamical formation.
Symbolically the eschaton, in mirroring the Fall, becomes a transhistorical event that has
no temporal value and is not limited by location. The Spirit infiltrates creation to
overcome the entropic constraints and to establish the Gods kingdom in the present. The
world which groans for and anticipates transformation experiences local decreases in
entropy as proleptic events of Gods in-breaking reign, thus providing an eschatological
response to the worlds decay.

54

Amos Yong, The Spirit at Work in the World: The Divine Action Project in Pentecostal-Charismatic
Perspective (Paper presented at the Science and Spirit Research Colloquim, Virginia Beach, VA, June 11,
2007): 14. George Murphy makes a similar claim, although he does not approach the issue from a
pneumatological perspective. See Murphy, George L., Time, Thermodynamics, and Theology Zygon 26,
no. 2 (1991): 359-372.
55
Yong, 22.