Creation is perhaps one of the most misunderstood doctrines of Judeo Christianity. In the eyes of moderners it is almost always used to refer to the initial act of creation by God. With this, it is usually reduced to a debate of false alternatives between faith or reason, religion or science, seven days of creation or billions of years of evolution. And it is in this reductive dichotomy of false alternatives whereby creation itself becomes a bastardized concept used by those of oppositional faiths to hurl stones at their opposition.
Yet creation is really a multifaceted concept, so much more than the modern debate which caricatures it. To be sure, it is the first act in the Christian drama that precedes all others. “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” Yet it also extends beyond this declaration in that creation is an ongoing process. That is to say that, within the sweep of the biblical narrative, our God is a God who continues to both create and sustain the created order. Simply put, creation is not merely something God has done in the past but is a way of constantly being. We worship a God who creates.
What then does this say about us? As humans we are made in the image of this creator (creating) God who thereby invites us into his creative act. We are thus given to persistent creation. As such we are never settled, and are always looking to create anew. We long for artistic growth, which causes us to continually, push our creative endeavors to the next level. Furthermore, we do so because in creating we are both sustaining and contributing to life’s abundance as co-creators. In short, as creatures and co-creators we create to live because creation is also our way of being.
5 comments:
Yes, even in Genesis 1, God says not only "Let there be light", but "Let the earth bring forth...". The latter is a mediated creation in which the creator summons the creation to share in his creative act. As long as we are clear that we are participating in God's work, the instruments of his creating, rather than going off on our own, then I think this is a very helpful insight.
You might be making that a little to clear for me. Yes I agree we are ultimately participating in God's creative endeavor, but with given responsibility and, even ownership. (How can you be responsible for something you cannot own) Stating that we are instruments of Gods creating (like a utilitarian object such as a paint brush) seems to demean humanity and to debase human creativity as well as responsibility . (perhaps it sounds a little to deterministic to me) Your pushing me though. I knew i could count on you for that. Thanks
You're right, not a passive instrument in which God pulls the strings. Yet it is indeed responsibility without ownership. How is this possible? Through the concept of stewardship, or perhaps through that of being an heir (not that we are waiting for God to die!).
The point I was trying to make is that in the divine conversation, we do not have the first (or the last) word. We are God's co-workers (2 Corinthians 3) and no longer merely slaves, but friends (John 15), but we are still dependent recipients of the very possibility and invitation (summons!) to join in God's work.
NB And this work of creativity is not limited to what are usually called the 'arts' either. The shaping and sharing of our common life together is also creative, and our personal obedience to the divine call to holiness is also a summons to creative freedom (Gal 5.1). Creativity happens off the canvas as well as on it.
First, I think our discussion here is over different nuances of the subject of creativity and perhaps warrants future posts on these issues. I have been thinking a great deal about your responses, particularly about issues of ownership and responsibility which I have the most tension with, and will most likely continue to do so. I hope to address these in future posts as my mind needs more time to process these things. Secondly, to address the last portion of your last response on creativity which extends beyond the canvas, yes I absolutely agree and I think my post has been more general than specific involving the issue of what creativity is or exactly how it is expressed. In that sense it certainly seems to encompass the larger umbrella of creativity which you are referring to (at least I hope so). Finally, your responses to the post have me thinking about my initial reason for writing the post, which was to explore the theological reasons why myself and others, as artists, have the urge not merely to create but to create persistently, continually and progressively? Why, I asked myself as an artist, do I continue to create and seek to push the limits of my creativity? Why is there no final expression which says all there is to say? In asking this question it lead me to more general theological concept of bearing the image of God, particularly as creatures of a creator who continues to create. And if I read you right, I think you agree with the post itself. The disputes with it actually lie beyond its immediate content but not its trajectory. Thanks for thinking more comprehensively.
Post a Comment