Creation and Doxology: The Beginning and End of God's Good World (Center for Pastor Theologians Series)

This is written extremely well. It is researched in an excellent manner and it presents its thesis very effectively throughout the entirety of the book

“Creation And Doxology” is an interesting collection of essays by many authors on the book’s title. Some of the interesting titles include:- Things that evangelicals can mainly agree on about creation.- Defending creationism.- Ways atheists and Christians may be frustrated over the creation account.- How medicine and technology tie into the Christian life.- God’s mission in creation.The title appeals to anyone wanting to learn more and think more deeply about creation and the reading level is suitable for the “intellectual and those who may be less intellectual” in their approach. This is an academic book and is suitable for either a college course or personal reading.I was given a review copy by IVP Academic and appreciate the opportunity to review.

How should Christians think about creation? Not only the creation account in Genesis, but the created order around them at present? Gerald L. Hiestand, interim senior pastor at Calvary Memorial Church in Oak Park, Illinois, cofounder and director of the Center for Pastor Theologians; and Todd Wilson president and cofounder of the Center for Pastor Theologians and former senior pastor of Calvary Memorial Church in Oak Park, Illinois, have compiled a series of articles from numerous authors on this very subject. The 230-page softback “Creation and Doxology: The Beginning and End of God’s Good World” includes the manuscripts from the 2017 annual theology conference of the Center for Pastor Theologians. It is a collection of essays that “is an effort to “return love” to the Maker of the world, to acknowledge his ultimate transcendence in all things and before all things, to give him thanks, and to affirm that praise to the Creator is the ultimate telos of creation” (3). This bundle of grandiose aims weaves in and out of the articles, sometimes thinner and sometimes thicker.After the introduction written by the editors, the book pans out in three broad categories: the doctrine of creation expressed, the doctrine of creation explored, and the doctrine of creation practiced. Several papers are more gratifying and edifying than others. Unfortunately, it appears that the book has an over-representation of authors with BioLogos connections or sympathies.The book opens with four chapters tackling the Genesis creation account. Michael LeFebvre theorizes that instead of Genesis 1-2 retelling a creation account as a creation account, it is a festival calendar, specifically focusing on the Sabbath, and therefore the “text’s function as a calendar calls us to re-center our interest in the text on its practical calling of God’s people to a weekly vocation and communion” (21). As an astrophysicist and the president of BioLogos, Deborah Haarsma explains why she sees that “God is still making new stars! The universe is continuing to develop, growing in complexity. God’s creative work isn’t once and done; its an ongoing process” (28). Which feeds her unconcerned acceptance of evolution. Next Todd Wilson lists ten propositions that the majority of Evangelical Christians can mostly agree upon, whether they accept evolution or not. Thankfully, though Wilson acknowledges evolution, he lists many of the consequences to the Christian faith if we come to deny “Adam and Eve as real persons in a real past” (51). Lastly, Hans Madueme defends what he calls “dogmatic creationism,” in which Christians can still rationally hold onto God specifically making all things of nothing, and without evolution, “in spite of what seems to be overwhelming evidence against” that position (62). He posits the resurrection of Christ as the prime support for his claim:“Let Christology be our guide. The cornerstone of Christian faith is the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus…However, every school child knows that resurrection is scientifically impossible…. Every known science points unequivocally against bodily resurrection. But if it is paramount for Christians to dissolve any conflicts between science and theology, then why don’t they abandon belief in the resurrection? Why indeed” (67)?After three chapters with a steady drumbeat of “Why we have to accept evolution as Bible-believing Christians....and how insignificant it really is....and how we have misread the Bible for, oh, so long....and really, it won't hurt us any” reading Madueme’s chapter was like someone opening the door, letting the breeze come in and blow the smoke and dust out of the house!!!!!The second part of “Creation and Doxology” deals with the goodness of creation. “Is the world sacramental?” is the question Jeremy Mann takes up and skillfully answers, concluding that “I believe reserving sacramental as a term related to the two sacraments is a helpful way of signaling linguistically the like-nothing-else quality of salvation.” Yet we must still “open our eyes to the glory of the world, testify to its power, draw others to see it, and then preach of the God who made it, a God whose glory is without peer” (98). In a bold move, Gerald Hiestand teams up with Irenaeus to tackle the devil and his relationship to creation in which Hiestand shows how Irenaeus saw Satan’s ultimate conflict as not really a tussle between the adversary and God, but with humanity over creation. In the end, the “basic contours of Irenaeus’s devil narrative do not encourage us to view the material world as a throwaway husk, a ladder to be climbed and then kicked away once we’ve reached the angelic top…It reminds us that Christ has come not only to save our souls but also to save our home – indeed, to save his home insofar as he too is now forever the embodied Son of Man” (117).This, too, was my conclusion which I mapped out in my book “Gnostic Trends in the Local Church.” Next on stage is Stephen Witmer and his take on Wendell Berry’s recognition of the valuableness of the materiality of creation. Finally, John Walton, attempts to make the case that the storyline of the Hebrew Scriptures is not about redemption, but about creation as a place of fellowship with his people (137). To do this he dismissively throws out Genesis 3.15 as messianic, pushes to the side any notion of Eden being restored in the eschaton, and even makes this cheeky assertion about the fall in Genesis three: “the Old Testament never looks back to revisit that moment to explore its significance or probe its implications” (138). These claims, and more, are part of his support for his mantra that the “Bible is much more interested in creation as establishing God’s presence than in the mechanisms used by the Creator. Science studies mechanisms; the Bible is more interested in agency – God as Creator embarking on his mission to create people among whom he will dwell and who will be in relationship with him forever” (144).The remaining chapters speak to some of the ways Christians can engage creation. Andy Crouch momentarily glances back at 1917, passes over 2017 and gazes into 2117 as he ponders our views of Creation, science, and the future of Christianity. Another discussion was facilitated by Paige Comstock Cunningham where she examines the place of medicine, technology and how we should view life. The author made several sound observations that were helpful, as she deciphered how consumption “of technology in pursuit of a well-curated life can lead to counting on technology to alleviate all pain and suffering. Rather than the unrealistic pursuit of lives that are pain free, and comfortable, and under our control, might we consider instead a well-lived life” (173)? In a different direction, Kristen Deede Johnson scrutinizes the calls and clamorings for justice, critiques the root of much social justice advocacy and leaves the reader with sage advice:“When it comes to talk of justice, it is easy to move right to discussions of what we ought to do to seek justice in this world. And it is easy to let notions of justice be shaped more by the latest political and cultural ideas than by what God has shown us to be just and right…Christians…want to root our call to justice in Christ and Scripture…When we allow Christ to frame our understandings of creation, we see that our calling to seek justice flows from the invitation we have received in Christ to participate in the communion that Jesus the Son has always shared with the Father by the Spirit. With this framework in place, the invitation to seek first God’s kingdom, justice, and righteousness is good news indeed” (199-200).The book wraps up with a final chapter by Gregory Waybright telling stories of how various members of his congregation, Lake Avenue Church of Pasadena California, have dealt with science and Scripture.In some ways “Creation and Doxology” became cramped and claustrophobic. The dominating presence of those who embrace evolution was disappointing. Especially the way most of them dismissed any substantial consequences to the Christian faith if the Church accepted, carte blanche, modern scientific theories of origins. There were bright spots here and there, but over all I found the book’s value to be mainly these two: (1) it gives the reader a clearer picture of how messy the Evangelical Church is; and (2) it presents the voices of one particular side in evangelicalism that is more cooperative with, and uncritical of, the reigning scientific theory. I recommend it if you are wanting to know how one specific faction of evangelicalism views evolution and the creation account in Genesis.My thanks to IVP Academic for sending the book upon my request. I used that book for this review, scribbled notes in many margins, marked it up and made it truly my own. The only thing IVP asked of me is to give my honest review, and I have done so here within.

Doctrines of creation often come into play on the defensive end of apologetics. Thus, Christians defend the Bible by showing it is compatible with evolution, evolution is not up to snuff, or some conglomeration. While this approach is good and proper, creation should also be in the side of offense for the apologist. Creation does not merely need to be defended, it is a witness in itself. As Gerald Hiestand and Todd Wilson say, "In a day when (too) much Christian theological reflection on the doctrine of creation has been preoccupied with apologetic discussions and in-house debates regarding how to read Genesis, there is a need for theologians--both pastoral and academic--to be remind that creation is first and foremost an occasion for praise and thanksgiving. To miss this aspect of the doctrine of creation is to miss its central node." [1]This view is central in our own lives. A painted sunset, glorious mountains, beautiful flowers, and so much more cause us to give thanks and praise to the God who created it all. These beliefs and attitudes well up irresistibly in us. It is a common phenomenon that apologists should pay more attention to. As Hiestand and Wilson write, "To thankfully acknowledge creation as a beautiful gift is to acknowledge that there is necessarily a Beautiful Giver." [2] This avenue is taken up in Creation and Doxology. Spawned from the 2017 Center for Pastor Theologians conference, this multi-author book explores the doctrine of creation biblically, theologically, and practically. Here we will simply focus on Stephen Witmer's essay on Wendell Berry and the materiality of creation.Wendell Berry's WitnessWendell Berry is a novelist, poet, and essayist focused on agrarian themes. A recipient of the National Humanities medal, Berry often writes about Christian themes in a way that pushes back against the church. This pushback is healthy and good though for he is helping bear witness to Scripture's witness. The materiality of creation is near the center of Berry's resistance. Too often, the church has spiritualized doctrine and downplayed the goodness of the material world. Berry calls for a renewal of Christian thinking and practice on this front.BodiesBerry emphasizes that we are alive in bodies. His novels highlight theses themes in his description of characters. While bodies change and break down, we experience God's good world through the material body. "No one relates to the world as mere mind or spirit." [3] Our bodies thus "both shape, and are shaped by, the creation." [4] The union of body and soul raise theological questions. How, then, are Christians to think of the body?HandsBerry often explores these themes through hands. Our hands connect us in the present time and to past history. Think of how we often use our hands to comfort those that are hurting, welcome those that are new, and communicate our intentions. Hands likewise connect us to God's good creation. It is through our hands that we dig a hole with a shovel, build a house with a hammer, and so on. Our hands help tell us about the person that we meet. These hard, calloused hands witness to a person who is active in physical labor.When Andy Catlett loses his right hand in a farming accident, "he lost his hold. It was as though his hand still clutched all that was dear to him--and was gone." [5] It is likewise through hands that Andy is reconnected to the world and his community. He remembers the physical touch of members. He is thus both reintegrated but now changed. As Witmer writes, "He is limited by belonging to this larger reality, because he recognizes he is himself, not any person he might imagine himself to be. He is complicated by belong, because he's forced to deal with his limitations rather than escaping them. He is singled out in his own flesh: he belongs in his body, and his body belongs in his world." [6]SexSex is also part of our embodied being. We have sexual desires because our bodies are part of nature. Because sexual desire participates in creation, our desires are wild and primal. They are therefore also sometimes wild and untamed. This is seen in the various broken and sinful ways our good sexual desires are expressed. Sexual desire, however, is not bad or something we must escape. Sexual desire is an intimate connection to one another and creation. As Berry writes, "Sexual love is the force that in our bodily life connects us most intimately to the Creation, to the fertility of the world, to farming and the care of animals. It brings us into the dance that holds the community together and joins it to its place." [7]Healthy marriages preserve, rather than suppress, these good desires. Marriage both guards and sustains the wildness of sexual desire. Marriage preserves sexual fidelity, which sustains the community. Marriage is therefore a covenant with a member of the opposite sex. "The forsaking of all others is a keeping of faith, not just with the chosen one, but with the ones forsaken." [8] The breakdown of marriage is not simply the dissolution of one couple, but the fracturing of society. In being faithful to our covenant partner, we are being faithful to the community at large. Sexual love, therefore, is at "the heart of community life." [9]MysteryMaterial creation is not only beautiful and broken, sinful and splendid, it is also mysterious. The materiality of creation does not mean it is predictable or fully knowable. Any philosophy that sees every mystery as a problem, every problem as something that can be solved fails to grapple with creation. As Berry notes, when a mystery only exists because of human ignorance, "[t]he appropriate response is not deference or respect, let alone reverence, but pursuit of 'the answer.'" [10] To claim that everything unknown is simply not yet known is a philosophical claim. At the heart of the error is "what we take nature to be is what nature is, or that nature is that to which it can be reduced." [11] Instead, our epistemology of creation must be based on our embodied existence. We as creatures live within and as part of creation. We are each unique and can be partially known only as individuals within our places. Our life is connected to place. The resulting epistemology is therefore very different, "This wholeness of creatures and places together is never going to be apparent to an intelligence coldly determined to be empirical or objective. It shows itself to affection and familiarity." [12] Our bodies are shaped by our life histories and therefore remain mysterious. We must receive this mystery with awe and affection. After all, "[t]hings cannot survive as categories but only as individual creatures living uniquely where they live." [13] As Witmer observes, all of this has theological import, "Recognizing the materiality of creation, and therefore the unique mystery of every life in every place, increases our desire to observe and therefore our capacity to praise." [14]ConclusionAs noted above, this is only one chapter in a great volume. Stephen Witmer draws on the thought of Wendell Berry to highlight the conceptual resources Christians have in thinking about creation. We are embodied beings: God made us from the dust. Our embodiedness matters. We relate through our bodies and hands. Moreover, sex helps keep the community together. Christians can witness to the goodness of sex by emphasizing the communal and covenantal aspects. Only within a monogamous, covenantal union between man and woman can the wildness of sexual desire be preserved. This one flesh union is a way of keeping faith with the ones we forsake in choosing only one spouse. Finally, our embodiedness means life is a mystery. We are people of a place. Adam and Eve were placed in the garden. Cain is to serve the ground (Gen. 4:12). All of this redounds to the praise of the Creator. The Christian, therefore, should see creation as a doctrine that can help bear witness to the Creator.I received a complimentary copy from IVP Academic. The opinions I have expressed are my own, and I was not required to write a positive review.Notes[1] Creation and Doxology, 3.[2] Ibid.; emphasis original.[3] Ibid., 122.[4] Ibid., 123.[5] Cited in ibid., 124.[6] Ibid.[7] Cited in ibid., 125.[8] Cited in ibid., 126.[9] Cited in ibid.[10] Cited in ibid., 128.[11] Cited in ibid.[12] Cited in ibid., 129.[13] Cited in ibid., 130.[14] Ibid., 131.