Science in Christian Perspective
Creation: Pattern, God and Man
DANIEL A. TAPPEINER
Melodyland School of Theology
Anaheim, California 92806
From: JASA 29 (June 1977): 58-64.
"By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, and all their host by the
breath of his mouth." Ps. 33:6
"For from him and through him end to him are all things, to him be glory
for ever. Amen." Rom. 11:36
INTRODUCTION
The task of theology is "to think God's thoughts after
Him." To do this
requires humble submission to the leading of the Spirit of Truth and
careful study
of God's authoritative revelation in Holy Scripture. Without the
Spirit the Word
becomes mere words to us. Without the Word the Spirit becomes human fantasy and
imagination. This combination of Word and Spirit, so necessary to the
theological
task is, as we shall see, no accident. It is based upon the
fundamental biblical
pattern in creation itself-the pattern of Ruach-Dahar, of Pneuma-Logos, of Spirit
and Word.
There are many ways in which a theologian might look at creation.
Typically there
is an analytic approach in which logic, reasoning and implication are
used. This
is the method of the scientist and the scholastic theologian. There
is, however,
another method-that of poet and seer, mystic and dreamer. Here the first task
is to "see", in an holistic way, in a state of passive
perception, the
reality to be described and discussed. It is an effort, in and through careful
analysis of Logos structure, however it may present itself, to penetrate to the
reality symbolically represented to us in words and categories. It is usually
the purpose of the poet and mystic to speak in ways which
will evoke an awareness of the "reality" itself. It is the purpose of
scientists and theologians to construct an adequate representation of
that reality
in terms which can be weighed and tested in the community of
committed, concerned
and capable persons who occupy themselves with such matters.
Both approaches seem necessary. High vision and careful exposition are needed
if the living word of God is to exercise its proper authority over
our lives and
thought. Prior to the writing of this paper there has been some
attempt to "see"
the majestic mystery of creation originally perceived by Scripture writers. The
paper itself will reflect this by its method. Under three basic
rubrics, "Creation
and Pattern", "Creation and God", "Creation and Man",
a series of propositions will he given which are crystallizations of
perceptions
of the reality of creation. The purpose is not to prove but to expound a vision
of creation which, it is hoped, is both biblically adequate and theologically
illuminating.
Before proceeding, the following definition of creation is provided
as containing
the basic elements which must he treated in a discussion of creation which is
biblically, theologically and philosophically complete:
Creation is
-an act of God alone by which he
-of his own free will
-in a
progressive sequence
of actions fanned all things, visible and invisible
-ex nihilo
-from the depths
of his being as pneuma
-by the Word of God
-through the agency of the
Spirit
-for
the manifestation of his glory (doxophany),
-the benefit of man,
-and all very good.
CREATION AND PATTERN
THESIS I. The basic biblical pattern in creation is the majestic and mysterious
co-ordination of Ruach and Dabar, Pneuma and Logos, Spirit and Ward.
In the biblical
materials the emphasis falls on Dabar-Hochma, Logos-Suphia (Word and Wisdom) as
providing order, coherence, structure and teleology in creation.
Anyone acquainted with the biblical materials becomes aware that such
a co-ordination
of Ruach and Dabar exists. The opening chapter of Genesis clearly
indicates this.
Creation, which proceeds through a series of majestic and almighty
"fiats"
is preceded by a mysterious and deeply significant reference to the
Ruach-Elohini
which "broods" over the face of the unformed void. No exposition of
this fact is given in the inspired record, but reference to the
Spirit here must
be taken into account. A two-fold significance suggests itself. First it points
to the depths of God's own being as the source of his creative
activity. The infinite
inwardness of God as roach is the source of this creative activity. Second, it
points to the agency of the Spirit of God in the execution of the divine fiat.
It is evident in Gen. 1.2 that Ruach-Elohisn is clearly
distinguishable from the
fiat. It is also evident that the "uttering" of the fiat is
not possible
without roach both as preceding and fulfilling the word "uttered". In
this way a basic pattern of mach-dabar-ruach emerges as the pattern of creative
activity.
It is very clear however, that in the biblical materials prominence is given to
dabar, rather than to roach. Speaking theologically it is evident that emphasis
is placed upon the eternal Logos as the agent of creation rather than on Pncuma
as source or agency in creation. (John 1:1-3; Heb, 1:2,3; Col. 1:16,17, I Cor.
8:6). Dabar is the outward manifestation of the inwardness of God. It
accurately
portrays that inwardness and expresses in the categories of finite,
created space-time,
the order and coherence, structure and purposefulness of that inwardness. Dean
Inge has expressed this point very perceptively in the following
words: "the
world is the poem of the Word to the glory of the Father: in it and by means of
it, He displays in time all the riches which God has eternally put
within him."1
THESIS II. In the order Ruach-Dahar emphasis must be placed upon the mystery of
creative activity as proceeding from the depths of God Who is not
only the "thinking
God" but is also the living God, the
God Who, in personal self-determination, acts spon-taneously for the fulfilment
of personal purposes.
Here it is necessary to see with the eye of the seer. Here it is necessary to
join the unending chorus of worship and praise to God-"worthy
art thou, our
Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for
This combination of Word and Spirit, so necessary to the theological task, is based upon the fundamental biblical pattern in creation itself.
thou didst create all things, and by thy will they existed and were
created."
(Rev. 4:11) Perhaps the deepest puzzlement of man as philosopher, is over the
fact that anything is. That there should be anything is a great mystery-matched
only by the greater mystery of the selfexistent, personal reality of God. It is
very necessary to recognize the utterly free and totally self-determined nature
of God's creative activity. Creation, in relation to the divine
freedom, as proceeding
from God as ruach, means that it is an act of volition on the part of God, not
a necessary (non-volitional) outworking of the divine essence
independent of the
divine personae of the Godhead. The ascity of God and the divine simplicity do
not allow the separation of essence and existence in God. Creation is
not simply
the overflow of the infinite richness of the divine inwardness but is
an absolutely
unique, free and profound activity.
Yet it is an expression of this infinite richness. When, with seer's
eye, we perceive
this incredible richness in God as expressed in creation, we can but
cry out with
St. Paul, "0, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge
of God"
(Rum. 11:33), A marvelous modern expression of this perception is found in C.
S. Lewis' "The Great Dance" described so eloquently and skillfully in
Perelandra:2
Never did He make two things the same; never did He utter one word
twice. After
earths, not hatter earths hot beasts; after beasts, not hatter beasts
but spirits.
After falling, not a recovery hot a new creation. Out of the new creation, not
a third but the mode of change itself is changed for ever. Blessed be He!
THESIS III. The fact that Ruach is part of the divine pattern of creation along
with Dabar means that there is an inexhaustible richness and elusive
mystery underlying
Logos-structure which snakes creation forever beyond the total
ordering of man's
finite application of Logos to the Logos-structure.
This is simply a call to humility to the busy reasonings of man, a call which
itself proceeds from a proper application of Logos to the
Logos-structure. Pascal
aptly and epigrammatically enunciated this insight in his famous
words "the
heart has its reasons which reason does not know."3
It is only in the deceitful grasp of "tinker toy reason",
that man struts
proudly about proclaiming a kind of omniscience and capability for
his own ability
to know. The deeper call of reason points beyond itself to a reality
fully coherent
yet ever beyond the limits of man's knowing.
Unfortunately such a midget attitude quite often prevails among us as
Evangelicals
who profess to be in true submission to the authority of the word and
yet presume
to confuse our own understanding with the word itself!
THESIS IV. The fact that Ruach is pan of the divine pattern of creation along
with Dabar also means that
all genuine activity of divine Ruach fulfills Logos
structure, rather than destroys it.
This is the other side of the previous thesis. Just as it is necessary to avoid
the danger of squeezing the "juice" out of the inexhaustible richness
and mystery of creation, so it is needful to avoid any separation of Ruach and
Dabar which would destroy our capability for the recognition of reality as it
is in itself. It is only demonic ruach which destroys
Logos-structure. Ruach divorced
from Dabar is at best man's subjective fantasy and at worst the
delusion of demonic
power. This means that though we recognize our limits and the depth of mystery
and power implied in Ruach, yet we always assert a fundamental orderliness and
coherence in created reality itself. There must be neither
metaphysical nor epistemological
dualism here.
All of this points to the necessity of keeping clearly
and definitely before us the distinction of Ruach and
Dahar and therefore the diversity of purpose between ruach-perception
and dabar-perception 4, as well as the indivisible coordination of the two elements in the
basic pattern
of creation which allows the fruitful interplay of Ruach and Dabar in man's own
limited, yet correct, perception of created reality.5
THESIS V. Man, who creates relatively, knows the experience of the emergence of
powerful insights into the structure of created reality through the
holistic mode
of perception (Ruachperception) which is associated with the depths
of man's being
(the unconscious dimension in psychology and "spirit" in
religious experience).
This experience of the dimension of depth, mystery, meaning and power, in short
the experience of Ruach, provides a model for our understanding of the divine
creative activity as it relates to the order of Ruach-Dabar in the pattern of
creative activity.
In this thesis the distinction, dialectic and unity of Ruach and Dabar in man's
experience is used to shed some light on the basic pattern in
creation. Man experiences
a two-foldness in his perception and in his creative efforts in
science and art.
There is a dialectic which takes place between Ruach-perception and
Debar-perception.
Man as Imago Dci seeks dominion over created reality in accord both
with his nature
and with the Divine mandate (Gen. 1:26,27). As he seeks, he uses Dabar-perception
to classify, analyze, organize and manipulate creaturely reality. This is the
raw material which must then be contemplated deeply and
passively-with Ruach-perception.
Then there emerges from the depths of man's being a new insight into the nature
of created reality, insight which cannot be derived from the mode of Dabar-perception,
but which must be subjected to that mode for clarification, testing, purifying,
and conceptualizing. The history of art and science is replete with
such dynamic
and often dramatic interplay of Ruach and Dabar in man. It is the Ruach which
provides the incredible richness, depth and perpetual value of creative art or
science. But it is Dabar which supplies articulation and adequate
expression for
the insight of Ruach. Ruach insight without Dabar is only a fleeting
thing unavailable
to the whole family of man for its continued benefit. Dabar without
Ruach is simply
a lifeless game of empty symbols-much like the formalisms of symbolic
logic. The
distinction and unity of Ruach and Dabar in man's experience is but a reflection of the pattern of Divine creation.
We must not suppose, however, that such a separation of Ruach and Dabar as we
experience in our relative creation, is to be found in God. There is
no unconscious
in God! God is, as the older theologians were wont to say, actus purrisimus, "absolute
actuality". As such there can be no distinction within the Godhead between God
as Ruach, (personal, self-determined infinitely rich life) and God as Dabar
(coherent, structured, ordered). The inner divine "activities" which
are forever beyond our capacity to grasp as they are in themselves, are opera
essentiaiia et personalia experienced and executed in the marvelous
unity of God
which is higher and more intensely one by virtue of the richness of oneness of
essence and threeness of person.
THESIS VI. The order Dabar-Ruach points to the fact
that in the execution of creation Ruach is in the service
of Dabar as agency to agent.
We are now on more familiar territory. Most of the biblical evidence emphasizes
the role of Dabar in the creation, with Ruach perceived as the instrumentality
of Debar. In the Genesis account, which is so profoundly explicated
in the Fourth
Gospel in terms of Logos-Christology, it is God's activity as
"speaking"
which is the dramatic focus. The repetition of "God said-and
there was"
portrays a "majestic instaney" of divine purpose and power
culminating
in the creation of man and the Divine sabbath. B. B. Warfield
expresses this significance
of the order Dabar-Ruach with his usual insight when he comments on the role of
the Spirit in Genesis 1 through 6:
To the voice of God in heaven saying, Let there he light! the energy
of the Spirit
of God brooding upon the face of the waters responded, and lo! there was light
. . . God's thought and will and word take effect in the world, because God is
not only over the world, thinking and willing and commanding, but also in the
world as the principle of all activity, executing...
It is important to note here that in the order Dabar-Ruach, Ruach is conceived in terms of the dyanmic
power of God immanent, in terms of the opera personalia of the Holy Spirit, rather than as the depths of richness and mystery in
divine freedom as it appears in the order Ruach-Dabar.
Creation is through Debar, by Ruach. The classical passage on Hochma (Prov. 8),
which has come to be identified with the person of Jesus Christ in
Christological
discussion, indicates the agency of Hochma in God's creative activity.7
The Fourth Gospel makes the identification between Debar-Logos and Jesus Christ
explicit. St. Paul and the writer to the Hebrews also make this quite clear. (I
Cor. 8:6; Col. 1:16, 17; Heb. 1:2, 3).
The significance of this is that strong emphasis is placed on
creation as a personal
effect, coherent, ordered and knowable. This has profound implications for man
as worshiper and scientist which will be touched upon more fully in
another thesis.
In this order of Dabar-Ruach the unity and fundamental harmony of
Debar and Ruach
is highlighted. This provides a sense of boundary and norm for all
authentic insights into the created order of Logos-structure.
CREATION AND GOD
Much has already been stated concerning the relation of creation and
God in treating
the basic biblical/theological speculative pattern of creation as
Ruach-Dahar-Ruach.
A few further points are important.
THESIS VII. Creation is a personal activity of God.
It has already been asserted that creation is personal rather than unconscious
or necessary (coerced). This is evident by the meanings of the words Ruach and
Dabar themselves: Ruach, as indicating self-conscious inwardness, and Dahar as
indicating knowledge, purpose and order. Only that which is personal
speaks. Creation
is not the overflow of the divine richness in an unconscious or unintentional
way. There can be no conflict in God between opera essentialia and
opera personalia.
All that God does is done according to his own self-determined
essence and through
the personal will of God.
At this point the Trinitarian formulae should be brought forth.
Creation is always
said (and this is agreeable to Scripture) to be from the Father,
through the Son
and by the Holy Spirit. Thus the theological axiom: Opera ad extra
sunt indivisa
sea omnibus personis communia.8 Yet creation is specially the work of
the Father
as fons Trinitatis even as redemption is uniquely of the Son and sanctification
is of the Holy Spirit. Yet nothing is done without the whole Godhead.
THESIS VIII. Creation is a powerful activity of God.
Two points of significance are noted here. First, creation was not deficiency
motivated. Having declared creation as a personal and free activity of God it
will not do to speak of it as an expression of God's need for a love-object. To
put it thus would be to make creation an action of weakness rather
than of power.
The inner Trinitarian relations within the Godhead preclude such a
dependent view
of God in creation. God is eternal agape as Father, Son and Holy
Spirit. The eternal
moving of self-giving love is found above all in the self-communication of the
Father to the Son and the relation of the eternal Son to the Father by the Holy
Spirit.
The second point concerns the absolute independence of God in relation to any
antecedent reality outside or independent of God who alone is
self-existent. Here
the expression creatio ex nihilo must be used. Negatively this means a denial
of emanation theories (Gnostic or pantheistic) or dualistic theories as in the
Greek doctrine of primordial hale which conditioned the divine
execution of perfection
in the creative activity of God. Positively it expresses the absolute
independence
of God in relation to the created order and the absolute dependence of creation
upon the will of God. The phrase does not mean that no cause is
posited for creation
or that "nothing" is the material out of which all else was
made. Rather,
it asserts the almightiness of God's power and that the setting of the divine
will in Logos-structure was in no way antecedently conditioned by
anything external
to God Himself.9 This fact has very great significance practically to
man as religious
and scientific. A point which will be taken up later.
Creation
"In the beginning", long before all worlds
Or flaming stars or whirling galaxies,
Before that first "big bang", if such it was,
Or earlier contraction; back and back
Beyond all time or co-related space
And all that is and all that ever was
And all that yet will be; Source of the whole,
"In the beginning was the Word" of God.
The Word of God; Reason, Design and Form,
Intelligence, Whose workshop spans the stars
Expressed within the Cosmos and alike
In what seems chaos; He Who works as much
In randomness as order, Who to make
Man in His image scorns not to create
By patient evolution on a scale
Of craft divine which dwarfs a million years.
Who is this God, that bows Himself to see
The puny wanders of this little speck
Of cosmic dust that we have named our Earth,
The toy volcanoes and the restless sea
That splashes from His bucket like a drop
And still a captive to the circling Moan
Flaws and recedes, purging polluted shares
Or sending tidal torrents up the Severn?
Who is this God, that circles either pole
With fluorescent light-an arctic dawn,
Whose rain makes little sparks and tiny cracks
That we call thunder storms, this Gad Whose plan
So shapes the atoms that they must combine
To give dust life and then to teed that dust
With inorganic substance to create
By DNA a pattern like its own?
Who is this God and can this God be known
Within the confines of a human skull,
A litre and a half of mortal brain
Whose interlinking neurones must depend
On chemistry and physics in the end
For all that Man can know or comprehend?
Can Man know God eternally enthroned
Throughout all space and in the great beyond?
The mystery of being, still unsolved
By all our science and philosophy,
Fills me with breathless wander, and the God
From Whom it all continually proceeds
Calls forth my worship and shall worship have.
But love in incarnation draws my soul
To humble adoration of a Babe;
"In this was manifest the love of God".
Still Jesus comes to those who seek for God
And still He answers as He did of old,
"I've been with you so long, how can you say
'I don't know Cad, oh show me God today'?
When you've met Me you've seen the eternal God
Met Him as Father too, as He Who cares
And loves and longs far men as 1 myself.
I am the Christian message. God has come."
ROBERT L. F. BOYD, C.B.E., F.I.E.E., F.R,S.
Reprinted from Faith and Thought, publication of the Victoria
Institute of Philosophical
Society of Great Britain, Vol. 102, 182 (1975).
THESIS IX. Creation is a purposeful activity of God.
Teleology is implied in the previous theses. Creation as personal activity and
as executed through almighty fiat ex nihilo clearly point to a
purpose in creation.
Scripture in many places indicates not only that creation is purposeful but also what the purpose
is.10
That purpose is clearly the revelation of the glory of God-doxophany.
There are,
of course, many less ultimate purposes which might be noted from Scripture but
doxophany sums up the final purpose of God in creation. It is only as we come
to understand the doctrine of creation in terms of the fundamental
biblical framework
of eschatology that the meaning of creation attains its widest scope
and richest
significance. The "final cause" of anything is the ultimate category
of interpretation, the point of reference for all else. Doxophany,
the full manifestation
of divine glory is the final cause for the unfolding drama of
creation, salvation
history and consummation. St. Paul's doxological outburst in Rom.
11:36 puts this
point in short form: "For from him and through him and to him
are all things.
To him be glory forever. Amen." The song of the twenty-four
elders worshiping
before God's throne expresses it eloquently: "Worthy art thou,
our Lord and
God, to receive glory and honor, and power, for thou didst creative all things,
and by thy will they existed and were created." (Rev. 4:11). The
final vision
of the New Jerusalem presents it this way: "the city has no need of sun or
moon to shine upon it, for the glory of God is its light and the lamp
is the Lamb."
(Rev. 21:23)
All of this is in fulfilment of the ancient promises of God "all the earth
shall be filled with the glory of the Lord" (No. 14:21), or more
fully "the
earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord as the waters
cover the sea" (Hah. 2:14. See also Isa. 11:9). Isaiah, the
prophet of glory,
speaks of the final purpose of God's gracious redeeming activity in these words
"that he might be glorified" (Isa. 61:3; 60:19).
Creation and Man
The significance of the doctrine of creation to man can hardly be overstated.
In particular it strikes fundamental chords in man as scientist and
man as worshiper.
THESIS X. The fact of divine creation implies that the created order hears the
marks of divine character (Logos-structure) and is therefore knowable
to man (Imago Dci); and forms an adequate ontological basis for genuine but
conditioned knowledge
both of created reality and of the transcendent reality of God who, in Himself,
is incomprehensible to man.
This is the epistemological significance of the doctrine of creation. A kind of
"critical realism" follows from the fact of creation, which
establishes
the reality of the created order in relation to God, the ultimate Reality. This
is philosophical realism. As an "artifact" of God, creation is in the
pattern of Dabar-Ruach and thus has a structure independent of man's
consciousness.
Order is not imposed upon sense data (as the positivists would have it) but is
rather to be discerned by man the observer. Man as Imago Dei
participates in Logos-structure
as personal, knowing substance and therefore is equipped to discuss, according
to the limits of his finite structure, the corresponding
Logos-structure in created
reality. In this way skepticism is avoided in view of the ontological basis for
genuine knowledge, and healthy humility is inculcated in view of the distinction between subject and object and the clear recognition of the
dependence of perception upon the created categories of Logos-structure in man
as imago Dei.
THESIS XI. Logos-structure in created reality is the foundation for
man's mandate
to have dominion over the earth (Gen. 1:26, 27) and for the
scientific and technological
activity of man (even as fallen) in fulfilling that mandate.
The fact of creation provides the basis not only for
the possibility of scientific activity but also the Magna
Charta for men's duty and right to scientific activity, especially in view of
man as Imago Dei. Man has the capacity, and is in relation to God as vicegerent
on earth, to exercise Dabar-perception with its attendant technological results.
Religious man must not limit the natural quest for scientific understanding of,
and thus dominion over, creation. Religious authority must not be
applied to man's
scientific activity in a way which will stop it from fulfilling its
proper method
and function. Mao, however, is fallen and therefore does require, as scientist,
light from divine revelation to protect him from misuse of his God-like ability
for such dominion. The "Book of Creation" must be linked to
the "Book
of Special Revelation" in a fundamental complementary harmony.
THESIS XII. The biblical view of creation, belonging as it does to the sphere
of the transcendent and revelation, logically supercedes the legitimate sphere
of scientific methodology which can never penetrate the mystery of the origin
of the causal sequences which constitute the sub/eat matter of its
investigations
and theorizing. All statements about first or final causes cease to
be scientific
thereby and are immediately in the realm of metaphysics and
philosophical presupposition.
Theology was once recognized as the "Queen of the Sciences". Some of
us still recognize it to be so. It is necessary to keep before us the
limits and
nature of the diverse methodologies of science and theology. The proper sphere
of theology encompasses all of reality and therefore all science is
to he regarded
as a "subset" of theology. This does not mean, however, that theology
dictates method and result to science. It simply means that science,
in its proper
form, is not large enough to interpret the ultimate meaning of its
results. This
task requires that the scientific endeavor be implicated in a larger,
non-scientific
(philosophical), pattern.
It is necessary to recognize that scientific description and analysis is within
the system of the causal nexus itself and therefore by its very nature cannot
speak directly to the meaning of creation or to its metaphysical
nature. Any attempt
to do so by a scientist immediately removes him from his role as scientist into
the role of philosopher-at which exchange the scientist loses the
positive results
of science as uniquely his own and joins in the competitive task of
interpreting
science in a larger framework along with all other philosophers and
theologians.
On the other hand, the scientist, as scientist, must not be censured
for his inability
to discern the ultimate causality of God in the causal nexus! There
is quite properly
a hiddenness of God in relation to creaturely causality. God is not simply another cause in the chain of natural
causes, but, as the doctrine of creation ex nihilo implies, is a
"cause"
of a wholly transcendent order. Therefore it is not obvious that God
created the
universe unless the observer steps back from the limited perspective offered by
scientific methodology to the larger perspectives of philosophy and theology.
This is further complicated by man's fallenness so that there are
inner spiritual
and moral conditions upon the interpreter of creation before he can, with the
Psalmist, affirm "The heavens are telling the glory of God and
the firmament
proclaims his handiwork." (Ps. 19.1).
THESIS XIII. The mystery of creation, as proceeding
from the depths of God as Ruach, is in the transcendence of God as not part of the created order; therefore his
activity in creation
is forever beyond man and can be spoken about only in metaphor, myth
and analogy.
Here we touch upon an epistemological issue more general than the
previous points
concerned with scientific method. The issue now concerns human
limitation to space-time
categories in describing any perception of transcendent reality (the
Kantian noumenal). Ruachperception, which penetrates to the noumenal realm, is dependent
upon dabar-expression
in articulating its perceptions. At this point we agree with Bultmann
and Tillich
in noting the essentially symbolic or "mythical" nature of
all description
of transcendent, spiritual realities. This does not, however, imply
that the Genesis
revelation, for example, is simply a human description in space-time categories
of transcendent realities. "Symbolic" and
"historic" are not
necessarily antithetical. The "facticity" of the Genesis
narrative can
(I think must) he maintained even though its symbolic quality can at the same
time (I think must) be acknowledged.
It is correct, with theologians who discuss religious assertions from the point
of view of linguistic analysis, to examine the nature, form and
functions of religious
and theological language and to point to the oddity (as Ian T. Ramsey does) of
such language in relation to ordinary discourse. But it must also be recognized
that all who have been committed to genuine biblical views, speak as
"critical
realists" when speaking religiously or theologically. No biblicist merely
intends to speak of his own existential situation or his own values. There is
always the intention to assert something which has objective significance, to
describe "the way it really is" even if, in principle, such
assertions
are beyond the methods of science to verify or to falsify.
THESIS XIV. The significance of creation to man as
worshiper is that it establishes the total propriety of man's creaturely sense
of absolute dependence upon God.
The doctrine of creation ex nihilo clearly establishes the reality of our sense
of absolute dependence upon God. As St. Paul put it in quoting the Greek poets
"In Him we live and move and have our being" (Acts 17:28).
It is certain
that apart from God's continued willing of our existence we would
fall instantly
into "non-being". An awareness of this
God is not simply another cause in the chain of natural causes, but, as the doctrine of creation ex nihilo implies, is a "cause" of a wholly transcendent order.
dependence Schleiermaeher correctly identified as the universal which is uniquely
characteristic of man as creature and so as worshiper. To this general positive
essence of religious experience the biblical record of salvation history adds
the specific essence of all genuine Christian faith and experience which is an
absolute dependence upon God as revealed in Jesus Christ - a
dependence not simply
of nature, of creaturehood, but of grace.
THESIS XV. The final significance of creation to man
as worshiper is that it provides the ultimate meaning to his
existence as creature:
to answer with doxology to the doxophany of God's self-revelation in
creation.
This is the other side of the fact that God is purposeful in creation. St. Paul
gave us the maxim which sums it up: "So, whether you eat or
drink, or whatever
you do, do all to the glory of God" (I Cor. 10:31). The
Westminster Shorter
Catechism tells us that man's chief end is "to glorify God and
to enjoy Him
forever." The deepest heart cry of all creation and especially
redeemed creation
is Soli Deo gloria! To God alone be the glory! "Not unto us, 0 Lord, not
unto us, but to thy name give glory!" (Ps. 115:1). The meaning
of creaturehood
for man is both doxophany and doxology. First doxophany as
manifesting the infinite
richness of the glory of the Godhead. Then doxology as calling forth
the response
of prostration and praise to God's glory revealed in creation and supremely in
the person and work of Jesus Christ.
The eschaton most clearly points to this dual theme of doxophany and doxology.
All of reality will be filled with the Spirit of glory. The end of all things
is a Spirit-filled creation transposed from the present categories of history
and space-time into a mode of existence flooded by the glory of God. (Hab. 2:14;
Nu. 14:21). And the only proper response of man here and now as well as in the
esehaton is the response of doxology-prostration before Him "who alone has
immortality and dwells in unapproachable light" (I Tim. 6:16),
praise, worship,
adoration, a joyous acknowledgment of God as the source of all that is good and
beautiful and true; as the ground for purpose and plan in life, as the good of
all things. Stauffer so eloquently summarized this point in these glowing and
insightful words;13 "The antiphony of universal history leads into a
symphonic doxology. At last God has attained the telos of his ways:
the revelation
of the gloria Dei achieves its end in the hallowing of his name."
Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts; the whole earth is foil of his
glory. (isa.
6:3), Who shall'not fear and glorify thy name, 0 Lord, for thon alone art holy.
(Rev. 15:4) Amen!
REFERENCES
1W, R. Inge, "Christian Mysticism", in Classics of Protestantism, ed. by Vergihos
Ferm, Philosophical Library, New
York, 1959., p. 466. Given the meaning of the Creek word poiema, Dean
Inge'a use
of the word poem is
especially apt. In the interests of greater precision from a Trinitarian point
of view the last phrase might better he written "in it and by means of it,
He displays all the riches which God the Father has eternally communicated to
Him in the mysterious eternal generation of the son."
2C. S. Lewis, Perelondra, The MacMillan Co., New York, 1972, p. 214.
This exquisite
expression of the mystic vision of the nature, meaning and movement of creation
is worthy of careful study and exposition in its own right. It is theological
poetry.
3Blaise Pascal, Pensees, No. 277
4"Ruoch-perception" and "Dobor-perception" simply refer to
the distinction of method and approach already referred to in the Introduction
to this paper.
5This is analogically related to the mystery of our Lord's person as expressed
in Chalcedonian Christology "without confusion, without change,
without division,
without separation."
6B. B. Warfield, "The Spirit of God in the Old Testament" in
Biblical
and Theological Studies, p. 134. It is important to note here that in the order
Dabar-Ruach, Ruach is conceived in terms of the dynamic power of God immanent,
in terms of the opera personalia of the Holy Spirit, rather than as the depths
of richness and mystery in divine freedom as it appears in the order
Ruacch-Dober.
7It is curious that Irenaeus identifies Hochmo in Proverbs 8 with the
Holy Spirit
rather than with Christ. ". . . the Son was always with the
Father. And God
tells us, through the mouth of Solomon, that wisdom, that is the
Spirit, was with
him before the whole creation (Prov. 3:19; 8:22ft)" Ad Haer, iv. xx. 3. quoted
in The Early Christian Fathers, pp. 116, 117.
8"All the works external (to God) are indivisible (among the three persons
of the Godhead) because they are common to the three persons". See Heppe,
p. 134.
9Ian T. Ramsey has a very useful and illuminating discussion of the linguistic
oddity and the real theological significance of this phrase in his
excellent book,
Religious Language: An Empirical Placing of Theological Phrases,
pp. 80-85. The biblical basis for such a phrase is found in the
"fiats"
of Gen. 1; in Ps. 33:9, "He spoke and it came to be; he commanded, and it
stood forth"; and in Rom, 4:17 "God .,, who calls into existence the
things that do not exist."
10Two classic works dealing with this matter of the final telos
of creation are Dissertation on the End for Which God
Created the World by Jonathan Edwards and B. F. Westcott's essay "The Gospel of Creation" in
The
Epistles of St. John, MacMillan and Co., London, 1886, pp. 285-330. , pp. 285-330. Ethelbert
Stauffer provides a stirring review of this theme in his New
Testament Theology,
chapter 19, "The Final Glory of God", though it is marred
by an unbiblical
conclusion of apokatostasis.