My responses and interpretations
after reading books on the subject of “Befriending Creation” have a lot to do
with my understanding on creations in my past and presence. Therefore, part of my writing
includes background information about my upbringing, education, and work
experience, which are to be integrated with my readings, in order to express my
thoughts, meditations, prayers and feelings regarding the subject.
1 Cherishing the Story of Creation
When I was a child, I received the story of creation without any
doubts. To me, the story was to be cherished, not to be analyzed and not to be
challenged, only then one could totally enjoy the spirit of the story. At
school, although the government’s academic curriculum, in the area where I spent
my childhood years, had included science as one of the optional subjects for
school children from age six to eight, the school that I was attending chose to
start teaching the subject of science when the students reached nine years of
age. During junior high years, I also recalled my school particular skipped the
chapter on “The Darwinian Revolution” from the textbook. Out of curiosity, I
read the chapter by myself, with the images of a single cell being developed
into a human through the phases of a monkey and an ape. After looking at the
picture of the Darwinian revolution, I sensed that some people were quite
imaginative, as if I was viewing an abstract painting from an artist. My school
(1970’s to early 1980’s) skipped the controversial subject to protect Christianity
belief. Though I never found it controversial, only thinking that some people
being very creative in art. In contrast, the creation story as described in the
book of Genesis never appeared in my mind as being imaginative, perhaps it had
something to do with the term “God said” was appearing many times in the book.
I guess our intellectual understanding is built on top of our faith, not the
other way around.
I entered the science stream when I reached senior high, and majored
in Chemistry when I was in university, then I studied Computer Information
Systems at a technical institute. In the past twenty years, I have worked in
the field of Chemistry as an environmental chemist, as well as in the Software
Engineering area for a few companies. The former one belonged to natural
science, and the latter one was more of applied science and technology. When I
was studying physical chemistry, there were many calculation exercises on the
subject of thermodynamics. I saw them as a series of proof steps and
mathematical equations. Not until now that I have read “The Luminous Web” by
Barbara Brown Taylor, it illuminates me that the law of entropy is connected
with creation, in which “unless something is done to prevent it [chaos], all
systems tend toward increasing disorder over time”. This is much more exciting than diligently working on the
equations of physical chemistry, of which I have already forgotten all the
steps to prove the theory by now, because I can see God’s presence in science. Scientific
theory leads us to cherish God’s creation, provided that our understanding is
based on faith in Him.
In my past years as a science student, as an environmental chemist,
and as a software engineering staff, I encountered many environmental or/and
ethical issues on living in the world as a Christian, but the subject on
Biblical creation was never one of the issues I had. On one hand, creation
sounds logical to me, and by imagining an ape turning into a human is
problematic to me; on the other hand, I can become quite a poetic person when
reading the six days of creation. My belief in God does not only rely on the
doctrine of creation, but also His presence in this world, in which His
presence links us back to the doctrine of creation, and moves us forward onto
the doctrine of consummation, through the doctrine of redemption and salvation.
When I was reading books that deviated from the Biblical creation
and heading towards Pantheism, they do not sway my belief on Biblical creation.
I still have dialogues with those readings, but in a Christian perspective.
Followings are some dialogues I have had noted down when reading “The Creation:
An Appeal to Save Life on Earth” by Edward O. Wilson:
·
Edward O. Wilson: “MOST POWERFUL FORCES OF SOCIETY. TOGETHER THEY
CAN SAVE THE CREATION.” (Kindle location: 1944)
o
My
response: I think only God can restore the creation, not from the most powerful
forces of society, nor our efforts. However, science and technology, along with
people of stewardship mindset can help to preserve and to manage the ecosystem
until the return of Christ.
·
Edward O. Wilson: “self-assembled by random mutation and natural
selection of the codifying molecules” (Kindle location: 1962)
o
My
response: Irrational to me, chaos without wisdom and intelligence cannot give
birth to a self-sustaining ecosystem.
·
Edward O. Wilson: “evolution occurs but argues that it is guided by a supernatural
intelligence” (Kindle location: 1966)
o
My
response: Ever wonder this supernatural intelligence's name is God. Quite rude
and irrespective to give a person a label arbitrarily out of one's desire when
the person has already introduced his/her name to you.
·
Edward O. Wilson: “therefore a
higher intelligence must have guided the evolution… no positive evidence exists for Intelligent Design. None has been
proposed to test it” (Kindle location: 1969)
o
My
response: Wrong approach to begin with, it is not a concept can be tested on,
but so high of His intelligence that He can only reveal Himself.
·
Edward O. Wilson: “that the theory of Intelligent Design does not
qualify as science” (Kindle location: 1971)
o
My
response: True that the theory of intelligence design does not qualify as
science, because it cannot be qualified as science, as the designer is beyond
the study of science, and He is the creator of science (not only the creator of
science but also creator of the rest).
To my awareness, I have never attempt “trimming theology to fit the
science consensus (Henry Nelson Wieman)”[2], or vice versa. Basically, science is one form of the languages to
describe the law of nature; likewise, the Bible uses human language in various
forms, such as poetry, sayings, pronouncement statements, narratives, myths, and
miracles to describe God’s way. Science is describing our observations about
God’s creation (nature and its law), and theology is telling us the purpose
behind all these observations, that is His original design.
2 Putting back the Creation Piece into the Pie
Without any doubts about creation as described in the book Genesis,
after reading books under the subject of “Befriending Creation”, I gradually
figured out that some of my issues on living in the world as a Christian are
related to what Jonathan Wilson said in his audio recording that “the past 300
years of neglecting theology of creation disabled the church and academy”, and it extends to many of our living styles, which are contradicting
to the holistic teaching from the Bible. Certainly, we need to include the
theology of creation to allow our understanding about God to be more complete
in order to spread the holistic version of the Gospel, rather than making the
theology of creation, or any particular doctrine, overly outstanding above
other doctrines, with the peril of leading us back to square one again of being
biased on a particular doctrine, but only of a different one. As Jonathan Wilson said in his speech about
covering all aspects of doctrines – creation, redemption, salvation, and restoration,
the “dialectic of redemption and creation” is important, through linking all doctrines up with the doctrine of
creation. On one hand, we need to “be
aware not to separate matter (evil) and spirit (good) like Gnosticism,
disintegrate the matter of creation, and exhorted the spirit, or to avoid the
neglect of the material world”[5]. On the other hand, if one
overly emphasizes the material world, then whatever we overly emphasized and
fall in love with could become our mammon (“anti-God that distorted our body
image seduces us with counterfeit power promises life then crushes us in death”). A balanced balance
emphasis on all theological doctrines is mandatory.
We always need to find a balance and to define a boundary within the
subject that we are studying and practicing, regardless whether the subject of
study is art, humanities, science, or technology. When I am reading about the
subject of biology, I need to discern whether the author had overstated the
definition of biology by making it sounds like a silver bullet. For example, “biology
is the logical bridge between the three great branches of learning: the natural
sciences, the social sciences, and the humanities”; my opinion as a Christian I think the subject of Spirituality is
the bridge for inter-discipline studies, rather than the subject of biology
being the logical bridge. When I was practicing environmental chemistry, I
reflected on whether chemically extracting soil for toxicity analysis will do
more harm to the environment than having the polluted soil itself sitting on
the ground. When I was designing and developing software, I always questioned
that whether I was saving more trees by lessening our use of paper for printing,
or creating more electronics wastes. When I am spreading Gospel to people,
hopefully with the help of the Holy Spirit, I can present the holistic Gospel
covering the doctrines of creation, redemption, salvation and restoration, and
God’s relationship with individuals, plus our relationship among people.
3 From Individual’s Being to Collective & Cooperative Doings
Putting back the creation piece into the pie requires a team effort
of the world. The team includes every individual living on earth, like the
theory proposed by Arne Naess in 1973 proposed that “humans are an integral
part of their environment, and emphasized the interconnectedness of all aspects
of our world and universe”, and as Jonathan Wilson said, “We do not have an environment; we
are part of the environment.”.
If it is a team work, then individual needs to participate. Can we
really propose a single blueprint on a green lifestyle to suit everyone, such
as whether we take Sallie McFague’s advice of “traveled by plane perhaps once a
year”, or we agree with Richard
Chartres’ comment on “flying on holiday is 'a symptom
of sin'”, then enforcing each person to follow regardless of their cultures
and situations? No, because our behaviours/doings are the results of our being
(hearts); and legislation cannot change people’s hearts. Only by knowing God
(the holistic gospel), one’s heart can be transformed – from a resource
profligate individual to a contented person that can distinguish needs and
wants, to discern the balance out of love towards God’s creation. To
illustrate by an example, buying a digital camera or reading electronic books
can help lessening toxicity and saving trees for making papers; however,
possessing five digital cameras and four kindle devices at one time could be an
indication that the person needs to reflect on a quote by Mother Teresa that
“Live simply so others may simply live”, because the level of generating
industrial wastes may overrule the original environmental friendly purpose of
lessening toxicity. As a Christian, “being contented” starts by having Christ
to fill one’s emptiness; true fulfillment can only be found in Christ alone. If
one recognizes God is the creator and provider and repents (“a change of [heart],
mind and life”), one can become less greedy, such healing is mystical, like “Jesus
transformed despair into hope, and sadness into joy… did not do this by
intellectual debate… but by physically rising from the dead”.
Committing to environmental practices for overly pragmatic or for
self-gratification reasons could be problematic, as it deviates from cherishing
God’s creation, because the practice would cease if one no longer see the
immediate benefit from it. We are to collectively and cooperatively commit to
good environment practice out of our love toward God and to cherish His
creation.
4 From This Sandbox to The New World
Our collective and cooperative efforts cannot totally restore God’s
creation. This world is a sandbox for us to prepare our hearts and to practice
responsible and good stewardship of caring for our environment; that is in a world
that has already corrupted and polluted because of sins. It is important to
recognize that “we can’t achieve and accomplish God’s Kingdom, but it is God’s
act”, and for us “to bear witness and to participate by caring for all
creations (persons and world)”[15]. Only upon the second coming of Christ that God’s creation will be
consummated, according to Revelation 21:1-5.
With environmental caring practice, we can slow down environmental
pollution, but we are never able to rewind to the time prior “The Fall of Man”
by human efforts. Our practice is to reform our hearts to cherish God’s
creation, and to learn to be good stewardship as what we were created for, as
stated in Genesis
1:26 as our vocation. The
only way towards full restoration is the hope of the new world, total
restoration by God upon second coming of Jesus. Only when consummation is
reached, our holistic formation of good stewardship can be fully exercised to
glorify God. For the time being, we are transforming and reforming our hearts to
be closer to God’s heart; therefore, we are in tune to God’s original design,
in preparation for the consummation.
Dear Lord, please transform our hearts through the work of the Holy
Spirit in order for us to pray and play well in today’s sandbox, so that we learn
to cherish and to adore your creation, holding hope towards your New World upon
the second coming of Christ. I pray in Jesus’ name. Amen.
