Wednesday, October 10, 2007

Where did we come from?: origins, faith, and our place in the universe

It stands out vividly in my mind. We were traveling home from my grandparents, and I poked my head forward and asked the “big question.” It was not the first time I had inquired, but it stands out more than the others. “Mom, dad–where do babies come from?” Of course a good portion of this type of questioning is related to sheer curiosity and, perhaps, a sense of adventure as we seek to discover some truth that is hidden somewhere away from the minds of children.

Yet, as we get older, the subject of origins doesn’t go away. It’s not so much the biology of it all that intrigues us but the larger issue of who or what caused us to be in the first place. Are we the result of chance mutations in an otherwise meaningless universe? Or, are we the product of some special creation?

The opinions on this subject range from the narrowminded assertions of purely naturalistic evolutionists to the dogmatic claims of those who are so convinced about the precise mechanism of creation that it seems they must have been with God when he created. Between these, a host of other options are available. Some separate science and religion entirely, feeling that neither has the right to encroach upon the territory of the other. Others, theistic evolutionists, seek the blend the two, accepting evolution but attributing it to a deity who got the whole thing started. Still others advance various types of progressive creationism in which God creates life and then “steps in” at various times to introduce new features to the creation.

Though much ink has been spilt over the precise answer to such questions, most of what I will do here concerns broader issues of origins. Without denying the need for ongoing discussion of these matters, my intent is more modest but also, I hope, more profound and far-reaching. Where do we come from, and what does this tell us about our place in the cosmos? To this end, I offer these brief excursions.

The subject of origins is integrally tied to our sense of purpose in the universe.

While the precise mechanism that yielded our existence may be a hot topic, the real issue is whether we can honestly conclude that we have a raison d’etre, a reason for being. Where we came from is inextricably tied to our sense of purpose. If, as many naturalistic suggest, we are merely the result of blind chance plus time, if we originated in purposelessness, it is likely that our existence lacks meaning. As Scripture says in one place, “Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die.” While we can lose ourselves in a lifetime of supposedly relevant activities, it is difficult to imagine how these activities amount to anything more than wishful thinking.

Then again, if we are the result from some creative purpose, if we owe our existence to a master Creator, our origin might be meaningful. Indeed, if the Maker is personal and benevolent, our whole existence takes on a more pleasant hue. One might even argue that this involves nobility.

The thing to understand is that there is a correlation between the debate on origins and the issues of identity and purpose. Indeed, at some point when contemplating these matters, we have to face up to the ultimate question: Is there a God?

While it can be relevant to discuss such matters as the age of the universe, these must be viewed as ancillary (and not central) when it comes to thinking about origins.

A good portion of the debate about origins has focused on the age of the universe. Evolutionists place the age of the universe in the a billions of years, while young earth creationists place it in the order of thousands (or tens-of-thousands) of years. Then, there are old earth creationists, who believe that the universe is old but that an old universe can be reconciled with Genesis 1 and other passages from the Bible.

Too often, however, we have allowed our disagreements to degenerate to such a point that they become useless. The real issue is not how old the universe is but whether or not the universe was created with intent. Both old earth and young earth creationists, along with theistic evolutionists, agree that there is a God. If that is the case, can we not at least allow this to be a starting point for discussions? And can we not also agree that it is possible to have a relationship with a living God even if disagree over the manner in which he placed us here?

Please understand, I am not underestimating the implications of the various views. For instance, many young earth creationists believe we are compromising the biblical text if we allow for any other possibility. Likewise, many old earth creationists feel that we are abandoning common sense and the findings of science if we deny that the universe is ancient. But the reality is that fidelity to the biblical text and properly and honestly interpreting the created order are both necessary. When the Bible is set aside in a cavalier fashion, we lose our greatest spiritual resource. On the other hand, when we too easily dismiss the discoveries of science, we run the risk of neglecting our God-given instincts, our ability to interpret whatever it is that God has placed before our eyes. This is why, according to Christian theology, we must respect both special revelation–God’s special interventions in the historical process along with the writings provided for our edification and spiritual health–and natural revelation–our sense that his “fingerprints” are everywhere in creation. More importantly, we need to rely on him if we are to be able to make any sense of the world at all. The point, again, is not to ignore debates about some of these topics but simply to recognize that these should “take a back seat” in the overall discussion of origins.

The primary purpose of Genesis concerns the prerogatives and majesty of the Creator and our relationship to him.

Christians (rightly, I think) have a high regard for Genesis One, for there we discover the Jewish-Christian perspective on beginnings. Still, so much debate has surrounded matters of detail (e.g., the meaning of the Hebrew term “Yom,” i.e., day, the order of creation, the age of the earth) that we sometimes neglect the larger picture. When Genesis One was written, when the Psalmist spoke of the creation (Psalm 8), when Jesus referred to the beginning (Matthew 19:4, 8; Mark 10:6)–the major points of emphasis were highlighted. What are these?

First, the true God is the Maker of all things; he, not impersonal forces or other gods, is the Creator. Second, creation is separate and distinct from the Creator, being designed and fashioned by him. Third, the living God is a magnificent and all powerful being, worthy of our honor. Fourth, human beings are the crown of God’s creative activity, occupying a special place among his creatures. Fifth, we were made for God. We are both subject to divine authority and find our greatest meaning through him. Though other topics are relevant, it is important to accentuate those truths that are central to the writers of Scripture, drawing forth from the relevant texts that which God intends for us. Whatever else is true, the heavens declare the glory of their architect. However much we don’t know, we can know him and marvel at the intricacies and spectacular displays of his wisdom and power. The Word informs us of creation’s Originator, as the world shows us the marvels of the Originator’s handiwork. Through it all, we encounter beauty and mystery, along with the imperfections of a marred and scarred world. Likewise, we are drawn to the true source and goal of creation, the One whose imprint is there for all who are willing to see.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Wow.

Now that is some pretty deep thinking there!

Is your Creator your Revealer, or is making stuff way easier than telling us about it?

Dr. Carmen C. DiCello said...

Is your Creator your Revealer, or is making stuff way easier than telling us about it?

Hmm, that’s an interesting question, though I’m not entirely clear what you’re getting at.

Knowing that the world is in some sense created is debated, of course, but if it is (as I maintain) then knowing that it bears the marks of the Creator is easier to recognize than is knowing, say, the intricacies of that creation.

The creation itself is a revelation. My sons can know that I’m their dad because it’s fairly evident in a number of ways. But knowing whether they’ve gotten aspects of their personality from me or from their mother is, in some cases, a matter of debate. The data are all there, but interpretation is not always easy (though sometimes it is).

The Creator is a Revealer, and one of the ways he reveals is via his creation.

Making stuff and telling us about it are both easy for God. However, our built in limitations (as mere creatures and as fallen creatures, at that) sometimes make it difficult for us to comprehend both what is (i.e., facts about the creation) and what it means (i.e., natural revelation). Though God’s speaking is clear enough for us to be held accountable for it, it is not completely clear, at least not yet. :-)

Carmen

Anonymous said...

Well, if what you just told me is true, then you would be wise to be a little less insufferable.

You sit there and claim that God created and that God revealed, and you admit that you cannot understand it. You must be so proud.

Did you become a Heebroo skoller at CES?