Category: Creation

  • William P. Tuck: Let's Come Alive to Life!

    William P. Tuck: Let's Come Alive to Life!


    by Dr. William Powell Tuckfriarsfragment.com, retired pastor, professor and author of  soon-to-be-released The Forgotten Beatitude: Worshiping Through StewardshipA Positive Word for Christian Lamenting: Funeral HomiliesThe Church Under the Cross, and more!
    virginia-2012Suddenly it dawned on me I was dying. I was beginning to allow routineness, habits, a style of living, patterns of observation, daily practices, customary ways or methods, and orderly procedure to groove for me a rut for life which leads only to death. I was startled with the realization that if I were to live, I must come alive to life.

    Alan Torey caught this thought when he observed that everyone must learn to understand the “Ah!” of things. Instead of AH, our age is more accurately characterized by BLAH. As we have grown older, we have lost our sense of wonder, excitement, awe, and the very thrill of living itself. The world has grown black and gray before our eyes, and the breathtaking color of life eludes us as a cloud covers our eyes like cataracts. We go through life partially or totally blind to its marvels and wonders.

    The other day I was carried back to the land of nostalgia as I listened to an old song over the car radio about a little boy playing in his tree house with a wooden toy horse and a purple bear named Biff. What adventures he engaged in! He fought off Indians, outlaws, and pirates along the flowerbeds, which became a pirate’s cove; the top of a lawn chair represented a mountaintop, and the flowers became a thick forest.

    I remember well those years. We have grown older, you say, and we have put away such childish things. What a shame to lose our child-likeness as we outgrow things!

    Is it not really to be dead already when you have lost your ability to be moved with awe by a sunset, stirred within by the beauty of the fall colors, a good book, play, movie or song, astonished continuously by the wonders of God’s creation and the inventiveness of humanity, awed with a sense of incredulity at the marvels of your own hand, your heart, a bee, an ant, a monkey, a skunk, a flower, or a newborn baby? You are no longer thrilled by your steamy breath on a glass door in freezing weather, the softness and whiteness of newly fallen snow, the unsure first few steps of a young child, or the breakthrough into the world of reading for a first grade child.

    Oh, the wonder of it all! Life is so wonderful and awesome, why is it that most of the time we remain dead to it? We are surrounded by mystery and wonder, but most of us simply take them for granted.

    Faith Begins in Wonder

    Do you not suppose that this is at least part of what Jesus meant when He said that no one could enter His kingdom until he became as a little child (Matthew 18:1-3)? Genuine faith begins in a rebirth of the sense of wonder and awe. Jesus knew us well, didn’t He? He knew there had to be something radical in our lives – a turning around, a reorientation, a new direction, a, new beginning, a new start. Why remain in death when we can come alive to life?


    tulip-single-in-washingtonScientists tell us that there are at least three characteristics of all living things. Living things take in food or some kind of nourishment. The big fish feeds on the smaller fish. The smaller fish feeds off insects and other smaller creatures in the water. The owl and fox hunt for mice. Flowers draw nourishment from the sun and the soil. Some animals or insects pursue their prey, while others simply wait for it to come to them, and they catch it as it passes by or bumps into them. A rock does not eat; it is not alive. Taking in food is a distinguishing trait of living things.

    Growth or the repair of one’s organism is also essential for life. When a branch is broken off a live bush or tree, it will repair itself and grow a new stem with more leaves. New life will go on. That is true with some insects, animals, or fish. If a portion of their anatomy is broken off, the body will repair itself. Rejuvenation takes place and a new part is grown. By contrast, a smaller rock does not grow into a larger rock. If my leather shoe sole gets a hole in it, it does not repair itself. It is not alive. I have to get it repaired. Growth for human beings takes us through stages – from a baby, to a child, to an adolescent, and finally to adulthood. Growth is a part of being alive.

    Anything that is alive also reproduces itself. Life continues through seeds, eggs, the birth of live babies to human beings and lesser animals. Reproduction is an essential quality of living things. Automobiles do not give birth to smaller cars. They are not alive; they are made.

    Bring these characteristics of aliveness over into the spiritual realm, and you will note that all three are essential if you are to be alive spiritually. A person who is alive feeds upon spiritual food as well as physical food. We cannot be nourished and sustained without it.

    When you and I were infants, we ate anything that we could get into our mouths. In fact, that is one of the things you have to do to protect a small child. You have to keep them from eating any and everything around them. When I was very small, one of my delightful delicacies was the black dirt underneath the front porch of my grandmother’s house. I enjoyed crawling under there and tasting that dirt. My parents had to keep me away from it. Children will sometimes eat paint off furniture, consume hair, swallow pennies, or all kinds of other things. We have to protect them from those harmful things, because we know that this kind of diet is not good for them.

    Some of us wonder why we have such a hard time growing spiritually. Look at what many of us feed on spiritually. We consume only those things which entertain or delight us. We spend little time in nourishing the spiritual side of life.

    Our desire for food arises out of a sense of need. We know that if we do not have food we cannot survive. This is also true with our spiritual life. Our spiritual appetite arises out of the need we have to be fed spiritually. This fall and into the season of Thanksgiving, I want to remain open to the wonders of the world around me and within me and be grateful!

    [slideshow_deploy id=’2745′]

  • David Moffett-Moore: God of All Creation

    by Dr. David Moffett-Moore, pastor and author of The Jesus Manifesto: A Participatory Study Guide to the Sermon on the MountPathways to PrayerWind and Whirlwind: Being a Pastor in a Storm of Change, and more!
     
    9781631990106mThe Psalmist writes, “O God, our God, how majestic is your name over all creation!” as book-ends for a psalm that beholds the wonders of the universe, the stars above and the flocks beneath, and in wonder and delight is moved to glorify God.
    My father was walking home from a Boy Scout meeting late one evening and, beholding the canopy of creation over his head, the heavens in all their glory, felt that oceanic oneness and described this experience as his call to professional ministry. Growing up in a Christian Scientist household, he had little experience of clergy yet this mystic encounter convinced him to become one.
    Why not a scientist?” I asked him. “Why not an astronomer or astrophysicist and study those stars in the midnight sky?” But it was not that kind of reasonable, rational experience; it was more experiential than intellectual. He felt called, compelled to a spiritual pursuit based upon this physical, tangible experience.
    I think modern science is, or at least can be, a divine revelation and an opportunity to experience the divine in contemporary ways. God may be encountered in telescope or microscope, in petri dish or specimen slide as readily as in any sacred text, any holy canon.
    One of the biblical images of God and nature is that all the universe is but the garb that God wears, worn not to conceal but to reveal God’s divine presence in, with and through all of God’s creation. In my studies of Celtic spirituality I am reminded that the Christian Celts regarded the created order as God’s first revelation and any text on a page or written manuscript as a secondary revelation. Even according to those written words, God’s first spoken words were “Let there be!” and there was, as God in Genesis speaks creation into being.
    In my book Creation in Contemporary Experience I include introductory chapters on scripture and doctrine, but the meat of the book is in modern science as contemporary revelations and experiences of the divine. Evolutionary biology and morphic field theory, the big bang as God’s “Let there be,” quantum mechanics as the dance of the cosmos, chaos theory as allowing free will, Christ as an event of spiritual singularity.
    I believe that the God who loves us, forms us, frees us and fills us, desires to be known and experienced by us, wants to be at one with us in our atonement, and therefore continues to reveal God’s presence, purpose and promise to us through our study of all creation, from quarks to quasars, from electron probability fields to black holes. I believe that scientists of all stripes can join with mystics and theologians, declaring “O God, our God, how majestic is your name in all creation!”
     
    [slideshow_deploy id=’2755′]

  • Does Biological Evolution Explain our World? —YES!

    [EDITOR’S NOTE: This post is part of our series on controversial questions. A NO post will normally follow a YES post. Join in by posting your comments.]

    Evolution and the Character of God
    by Allan R. Bevere

    Bevere picDoes biological evolution explain our world? I’m not sure how that question in and of itself is significant. I answer “yes” to that question, but it seems to me the importance of the question can only be found in the inquiry that must lay behind it– “Is biological evolution consistent with the character of God who created the world and the universe?” Without that prior concern, the main question for discussion here is of little significance, at least for those who believe in God. So, in answering the question given to me, I will make in initial case that evolution is consistent with the character of the God, who created all things including life on Earth.
    Prior to the main subject of this post, a few caveats are in order:
    First, I don’t think we can separate the biological evolutionary questions from the evolutionary nature of the universe itself. If the universe has evolved and is evolving than it reasonable to assume that biological evolution on Earth makes sense. When we isolate how human life came to be from the rest of the cosmos, I think we confuse one issue making it two. Why would God create the universe in one fashion while bringing human life in another? Thus, I must deal with the question of evolution in general, which includes the cosmos and life on Earth.
    Second, since I accept evolutionary theory, that means I do not believe that Genesis 1 and 2 should be interpreted, as they say, “literally” (an oft abused term). There’s a mythology in many fundamentalist and evangelical circles that the church unanimously interpreted the creation narratives literally until Charles Darwin came along in the nineteenth century. In fact, the church has debated for almost two thousand years how to read the creation material as Daniel Harrell points out quite well.1 The reason I mention this is that often creationists will do a bait and switch arguing that only those who hold to a literal reading of the creation narratives believes in the authority of Scripture. But what is authoritative is Scripture, not a particular hermeneutic. One can hardly accuse St. Augustine, for example, of denying the authority of the Bible. So, let’s take that criticism off the table and stick to the actual substance of the debate.
    Third, that means those who take issue with my position on evolution must do so based on the science alone, not on guilding the data to fit a particular interpretation of Genesis. For me, Genesis is one thing, and science another. Genesis 1 and 2 answer the why of creation. Science answers the how. My use of Scripture in this post will highlight the character of God and why I think his character is consistent with evolutionary creation. My concerns with Scripture are theological, not scientific.
    Now, on to the main argument.
    First, God is truth and does not create deception. The Bible is clear on this:
    God is not a human being, that he should lie,
    or a mortal, that he should change his mind.
    Has he promised, and will he not do it?
    Has he spoken, and will he not fulfil it?
    (Numbers 23:19; see also Titus 1:2)
    1 John 1:21 states, 21I write to you, not because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and you know that no lie comes from the truth.
    The point for our purposes in this post is that since God is truth God cannot create in a deceptive way. Creation itself and its coming into existence with reflect that character. If the age of the universe is not 14.6 billion years and if the age of the Earth is not 4.5 billion years, and the appearance of homo sapiens on our planet was not approximately 200,000 years ago, why is that not obvious? It would seem that God in creating rocks that appear old God himself has created a deception. And those who believe that the universe and the Earth are not obviously old are clearly guilding the evidence. We can accurately measure light from distant stars that tell us their distance. The farthest stars known to us are anywhere from 750,000 to 900,000 light years away, and those stars are not close to the center of our galaxy or for that matter the center of the universe. Contrary to what some will argue, scientific dating is an accurate way to assess the age of rocks and bones and other earthly things as well. The oldest rocks discovered on our planet are anywhere from 3 to 4.4 billion years old.2 Again, we must wonder why God would deceive us in creating a universe and our Earth that only appear old? This is not in character with the God of the Bible.
    Moreover, why would God work in a microevolutionary way, something that even creationists acknowledge, but fail to do so in a macroevolutionary manner since microevolution happens by the exact same mechanisms as macroevolution?3Is this not inconsistent? Why allow evolution to occur within a species (microevolution), but not between species (macroevolution)? Is God’s character inconsistent and doesn’t this make God even more deceptive, to create one way on a large scale and a different way on a small scale?
    Second, evolution is about a relational universe and world, and God is inherently relational. One does not need to know the Bible forward and backward to know that God is relational and desires to be in relationship with human beings and all of creation. Theoretical physicist and Anglican priest, John Polkinghorne has argued cogently that the universe is inherently relational4 and we should expect it to be no different in character from its Creator.
    In Romans 8:19 St. Paul writes,
    For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the children of God; for the creation was subjected to futility, not of its own will but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and will obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God.
    Salvation in the New Testament is cosmic in scope. The cross and resurrection of Jesus is not about individual human salvation alone, but about the redemption of creation. Just as God desires to be in relationship with men and women, so God desires relationship with the cosmos he created. Just as our relationship with God grows as we evolve (mature) as disciples, so creation itself evolves as God enjoys seeing the cosmos develop and mature. Indeed, even creation itself is inherently relational with itself. John Polkinghorne writes,
    Einstein went on to develop the theory of general relativity, showing that space, time and matter are closely interconnected in a kind of integrated package, in which matter curves spacetime and spacetime curves the paths of matter. The cosmic ‘container’ and its contents are not separable, but intimately linked with each other.5
    The interrelatedness between matter and spacetime is only one of many examples. This inherent relationality not only reflects the character of a Trinitarian God, which St. Augustine referred to as a fellowship of love, but it also strongly suggests that this cosmic relationality is revealed in the evolutionary process. One cannot have microevolution, which we know takes place, without a macroevolutionary process that is intimately related to it.
    Third, creation is dynamic just as God is dynamic, not static, as creationist accounts suggest. In creationist accounts of the universe the world was created in six twenty-four hour days and when it was completed, it was done. The problem with this notion of creation being completely finished is that we know it is simply not true. The universe even now is expanding. New galaxies and stars and worlds are being created. The cosmos is not statically finished, but it is still being created. Alister McGrath notes,
    The twentieth century saw dramatic changes in our understanding of the origins and development of the universe. The first two decades were dominated by the assumption that the universe was static…. The solution of his [Einstein’s] equations indicated that the universe was not static, but expanding.6
    McGrath goes on to argue that such a dynamic universe that is evolving does not reflect the static deistic God of the Enlightenment, but better reflects the dynamic Trinitarian God of Christianity.7 It seems to me quite problematic for creationists to reconcile the dynamic, relational God of Scripture with their static understanding of how God created.
    Fourth, and finally, through the evolution of creation, God allows the universe freely to make itself. In a sense, God has built freedom into the universe. If God is inherently relational and wants to be in relationship with his creation, he must allow the freedom of creation. This does not deny God’s providence, but “a balance is struck between the actions of God and the actions of creatures.”8As human beings are free to choose their own way, so the evolution of creation is consistent with the character of God that allows creation itself to go its own way. Once again, I quote John Polkinghorne:
    A creation allowed to make itself can be held to be a great good, but it has a necessary cost not only in the blind alleys and extinctions that are the inescapable dark side of the evolutionary process, but also in the very character of the processes of a world in which evolution takes place. The engine driving biological evolution is genetic mutation and it is inevitable in a universe that is reliable and not capriciously magical, that the same biochemical processes which enable germ cells to produce new forms of life will also allow somatic cells to mutate and become malignant That there is cancer in creation is not something that a more competent and compassionate Creator could easily have eliminated, but is the necessary cost of a creation allowed to make itself.
    God acts within the open grain of nature and not against it. God interacts with creatures but does not overrule them, for they are allowed to be themselves and to make themselves. It follows from this that not everything that happens will be in accordance with God’s direct will. The divine sharing of the causality of the world with creatures will permit the act of a murderer or the incidence of cancer, though both events run counter to God’s desires9
    Such freedom is seen countless times throughout the Bible in reference to human beings who also unfortunately all too often choose to go their own way. Why would it be any different with the entire creation? And it is in such freedom and in God’s desire to be in relationship to his creation, that God takes the risk of becoming human in Jesus Christ; and in the cross and resurrection, displays his willingness to allow human beings in their freedom to reject him on Calvary, and in his providence to insist otherwise in the empty tomb.
    Does evolution explain our world? Indeed it does. It explains the very character of the universe because all of creation reflects the character of God.


    NOTES

    1. Daniel Harrell, “How was the Genesis account of creation interpreted before Darwin? http://biologos.org/common-questions/biblical-interpretation/early-interpretations-of-genesis
    2. Becky Oskin, “Confirmed: Oldest Fragment of Early Earth is 4.4 Billion Years Old,” http://m.livescience.com/43584-earth-oldest-rock-jack-hills-zircon.html
    3. Evolution at different scales: micro to macro http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/evoscales_01
    4. See John Polkinghorne, Science and the Trinity: The Christian Encounter with Reality. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004, pp. 60-87.
    5. Polkinghorne, Science and the Trinity, p. 73.
    6. Alister McGrath, A Fine-Tuned Universe: The Quest for God in Science and Theology. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 2009, p. 112-113.
    7. McGrath, A Fine-Tuned Universe, p. 118.
    8. Polkinghorne, Science and the Trinity, p. 99.
    9. Polkinghorne, Science and the Trinity, p. 72.
    Allan’s books can be viewed and ordered here: https://energiondirect.info/authors/authors-a-c/allan-r-bevere
  • Which creation is the greater witness?

    by Herold Weiss

    Cover1Which is more important, the creation of Adam and Eve or the creation of the Risen Christ, the Last Adam? The story of the creation of Adam and Eve, the second of the stories in Genesis, is in part the story of the loss of life when access to the tree of life is blocked. As such, the story is theological, not about biology. Disobedient Adam and Eve did not lose biological life when they sinned. They lost access to the source of their life. That source transcends the biological realm, and without access to that source human life found itself floundering. The story of Adam and Eve, which much to one’s wondering is never alluded to in the rest of the Old Testament (with one exception, Job 31: 33), is the story of how  life East of Eden became a struggle, and death at the hands of others entered the created world.
    The story of the Last Adam, on the other hand, is the story of how biological death is not really the last thing to be said about human life because of what God has done for the benefit of humanity. All the disciples of Jesus who saw his crucifixion went home thinking that what they had hoped for had been brutally negated by the power of the State that judged Jesus to be a seditious man. They were ready to go back to Galilee and try to pick up the life they had left behind when they had decided to follow Jesus. Their enthusiasm for Jesus and what he promised had been crushed by his crucifixion. That is the biological side of this story.
    According to the apostle Paul, however, what God did on Sunday was not just the resuscitation of a dead body. It was a new creation. The revelation of the Risen Christ gave the crucifixion a totally new meaning. It saw God in the picture and understood that his crucifixion put an end to the overwhelming power of sin in the lives of all humans. The Risen Christ is the Last Adam. The descendants of the first Adam come to life in bodies like that of their progenitor, bodies of flesh. Those who are united with Christ by baptism into the death that he died for all, come to life in the realm of the Spirit that raised Christ from the dead. Eventually, they will also receive spirit bodies and enjoy the life God had intended for humans to start with.
    The Risen Christ is the Adam of the new creation. This creation took place two thousand years ago and it is more real than the creation of Adam in as much as it is the creation of imperishable life, totally different from any biological life or death. Christians who are eager to affirm that God is the creator, to which creation should they give ultimate significance? Which creation should be the one that merits consistent efforts to affirm on the part of Christians?
    Neither the creation of Adam in the garden nor the creation of the Last Adam in the Spirit is subject to historical or scientific testing. All biblical authors affirm that God was directly involved as Creator. In both creations the Spirit was the active agent, but in the Bible, descriptions of the universe created by God, if given at all, do not provide a consistent picture, even as they affirm that God is the Creator. That God is the Creator is affirmed by faith. Of the two creations affirmed by the Bible, the creation of life in the Spirit is what Christianity is all about. That is the creation in which Christians live now and will live in eternity. Should not the reality of the creation of life in the realm of the Spirit, rather than the creation of life out of dust of the ground, be what Christians are constantly witnessing to before the world?


     

Energion Direct
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.