The theatre of the absurd is no longer the fashion it was once, but it is still around:
Reading Schaeffer: The God Who Is There. (Crossway Complete Works)
lists the brokenness of man as: man separated [himself] from God, man
separated from himself [no longer an integrated being], man separated
from himself [no longer in integrated community], and “Fourthly, man was
separated from nature”.
I came to a halt with the fourth
separation. The word ‘nature’ suggests an independent ‘natural’ reality.
But, not so. The non-human world is not ‘nature’, with its hint of
autonomy from the creative acts of God, but The Creation, fallen as it
is, due to the first separation. This makes the pain of our position
even more sharp: we separated ourselves from God and as a result...we
are separated from his creation which we were to be stewards of and live
in in enjoyment and God’s company.
But FS goes on to some great analysis.
beginning is simply that God exists and that He is the
personal-infinite God. Our generation longs for the reality of
personality, but cannot find it. But Christianity says personality is
valid because personality has not just appeared in the universe, but
rather is rooted in the personal God who has always been.”
heart of the rebellion of Satan and man was the desire to be
autonomous; and accepting the Christian faith robs us not of our
existence, not of our worth (it gives us our worth), but it robs us
completely of being autonomous. We did not make ourselves, we are not a
product of chance.”
The final sentence caps it all very well.
alternative to being made and that through the purposeful love of the
infinite-personal God is the ironic ‘autonomy’ of chance where purpose
is absent, and we live a perceived absurdity of being people full or
purpose and intent, and indeed, love, but in a universe, a reality, we
imagine has none of this as basic. This man looks back to his roots in
meaningless (purposeless) chance and sees a black absence of
personality, love and purpose.
To joint the two, as both implied and express theistic
evolution does, for example, compounds the absurdity and evacuates the
gospel of credibility. It would tell us that God 'used'
purposelessness/chance on purpose, to produce a world of purposeful
beings (in his image) that gave no evidence of his purpose! More than
absurd because it destroys the fellowship of beings founded in the
creation as described in Genesis 1 where God's acts and our being share
contiguous objective space-time causality as persons in communion.