I’m trying to wrap up my much-prolonged reading of Harold Best’s Unceasing Worship, however I seem to keep getting distracted by other projects and books. That said, a passage in his chapter, “What creative people can learn from God’s creation”, struck me yesterday.
Best is discussing the contrast between our rational need for order, symmetry, harmony and balance and the seemingly overwhelming chaos of creation:
But walk into a meadow and see if you can locate a straight line of buttercups all exactly the same height, each with exactly replicated petals. Or try to find a strictly triangular stand of perfectly symmetrical trees foregrounding a mountain range the left side of which is a mirror image of the right side. There is no landscape in which we can find any semblance of order, no storm at sea in which the waves are the same shape, height, creaminess or momentum. [...] Nothing repeats and nothing is predictable. (Unceasing Worship, p.135)
Best goes on to discuss the paradox between the randomness of what we see and the reality of underlying laws that do not randomly fluctuate. Commonly known as chaos theory, the effect is that immutable laws are seemingly worked out with randomness, asymmetry, unpredictability and endless variety, all the while germinating from a fixed set of initial conditions.
Parallel to my reading, I was reminded in a conversation on the new Theologer forums (one of those “distractions”…) of a different “working out”:
So you too, my friends, must be obedient, as always; even more, now that I am absent, than when I was with you. You must work out your own salvation in fear and trembling; for it is God who works in you, inspiring both the will and the deed, for his own chosen purpose. (Philippians 2:12-13, REB)
Once saved, we are called into a life of service, not as best friends forever with God, but as fearful and trembling slaves, wholly dependent on him for our redemption and freedom from sin. The terms of his gift of salvation are well defined:
If the confession “Jesus is Lord” is on your lips, and the faith that God raised him from the dead is in your heart, you will find salvation. (Romans 10:9, REB)
And yet our lives are filled with decisions and deeds that often appear to make no sense, are not straight and orderly, twist wildly in the winds of our days, and we tremble before the throne.
If we apply the notion of chaos theory to salvation, that is 100% correct. Once we have heard the message of the gospel and the Spirit moves our heart to accept it, and we confess that “Jesus is Lord”, then God resets our “initial conditions” and our eternal lives become based on his immutable plan of salvation, rather than our natural condition of sinful inclination (Genesis 8:21).
Then, just as an immense fractal starts with the smallest mathematical expression, once through the narrow gate of Jesus Christ, we are free to fill the infinite expanse of the kingdom with the trembling twists and turns of our lives. Like the buttercups in the meadow, the trees and mountains, the landscapes and the stormy waves, our salvation lives are worked out in chaos, with infinite variety and all for God’s chosen purpose.
Leviathan was conquered. Long live Leviathan!
10 Comments
Thanks for this interesting post. A few questions, however: Was the creation always in chaos? Isn’t the creation headed for a renewal?
But I do find the imagery as applied to our diversity in God’s creation quite compelling.
That “fear and trembling” before a Holy God I see as utter awe because of who he is.
Was the creation always in chaos?
Yes - at least the working out of creation. The act of creation was decidedly non-chaotic; the laws or principles that creation is based on are fixed and immutable.
Note that “in chaos” doesn’t necessarily mean cursed. I’m still thinking about that implication. The question in my head is whether sin is like a virus that permanently changed the makeup of creation or like a costume that hides our original image.
Isn’t the creation headed for a renewal?
Yep. A physical “reset” akin to what we get spiritually when we are saved. And of course, we get a physical “reset” too…
That “fear and trembling” before a Holy God I see as utter awe because of who he is.
Yes. And I think that our modern culture has gone a bit too far in personifying God and/or Jesus as “our best friend” or “lover” rather than our sovereign Lord and ruler. Jesus is not my buddy - he’s my king.
Yes - at least the working out of creation. The act of creation was decidedly non-chaotic; the laws or principles that creation is based on are fixed and immutable.
Are you saying that there wasn’t perfect symmetry to begin with? Do you subscribe to theistic evolution? That’s the only how I can see that?
Note that “in chaos” doesn’t necessarily mean cursed. I’m still thinking about that implication. The question in my head is whether sin is like a virus that permanently changed the makeup of creation or like a costume that hides our original image.
All of creation was subject to futility because of sin (Rom 8:20, 21). Because of sin creation is “wearing out like a garment” (Heb 1:11, 12).
Yep. A physical “reset” akin to what we get spiritually when we are saved. And of course, we get a physical “reset” too…
Per Paul and Peter I see the same way.
Yes. And I think that our modern culture has gone a bit too far in personifying God and/or Jesus as “our best friend” or “lover” rather than our sovereign Lord and ruler. Jesus is not my buddy - he’s my king.
Yes, it’s all an outworking of the seeker-sensitive, postmodern world of the church that we’re witnessing.
Are you saying that there wasn’t perfect symmetry to begin with? Do you subscribe to theistic evolution? That’s the only how I can see that?
Within the chaos theory model idea, I’m suggesting that underlying natural laws created by the “Let there be…” statements are perfect and immutable, but that the physical progress of creation is chaotic.
I accept Old Earth theories, including evolution. I’m not sure about theistic evolution, since I don’t know enough to form an opinion on God’s continued involvement in the day-to-day (millenia-to-millenia?) operations of the universe. I cannot deny the possibility of Young Earth, but it’s not my first choice in resolving our scientific and theological records.
Within the chaos theory model idea, I’m suggesting that underlying natural laws created by the “Let there be…” statements are perfect and immutable, but that the physical progress of creation is chaotic.
Now I can concede this explanation. I totally agree.
I accept Old Earth theories, including evolution. I’m not sure about theistic evolution, since I don’t know enough to form an opinion on God’s continued involvement in the day-to-day (millenia-to-millenia?) operations of the universe. I cannot deny the possibility of Young Earth, but it’s not my first choice in resolving our scientific and theological records.
Don’t you think giving into either theistic evolution or evolution robbing God of his glory in creation?
Don’t you think [that] giving into either theistic evolution or evolution [is] robbing God of his glory in creation?
Why would it? Whether God created a platypus by [1] placing a fully formed creature on Earth or [2] guiding or allowing evolution to result in that creature doesn’t take away the fact that God created. The beauty of chaos theory is that what seems completely random on the surface, e.g. evolution, is based on definable laws that don’t change. We delight in the variety (chaos) that God’s creation appears in as well as the structure (laws) that underpin it.
I don’t agree with those supporters of evolution who say that evolution proves there is no God because everything can be seen naturally. They might have the “what” and “how” (arguable), but they miss the “why”. And ultimately, the “why” is what prompts us to give God his glory. Even for the platypus…
Why would it? Whether God created a platypus by [1] placing a fully formed creature on Earth or [2] guiding or allowing evolution to result in that creature doesn’t take away the fact that God created. The beauty of chaos theory is that what seems completely random on the surface, e.g. evolution, is based on definable laws that don’t change. We delight in the variety (chaos) that God’s creation appears in as well as the structure (laws) that underpin it.
Have you ever read Dr. Hugh Ross,an astronomer and astrophysicist? He champions the same. I’ve listened to him on the matter before. He makes a compelling argument for the same, but of course it’s more scientific than biblical.
The Bible as you know wasn’t written as a science book.
I don’t agree with those supporters of evolution who say that evolution proves there is no God because everything can be seen naturally. They might have the “what” and “how” (arguable), but they miss the “why”. And ultimately, the “why” is what prompts us to give God his glory. Even for the platypus…
Well, BB Warfield, that great Princeton theologian, was a theistic evolutionist. I guess there’s room in the marketplace of ideas for such discussion without denying the existence of God.
I’ve not read Dr. Ross - I’ll have to look him up. Thanks for the recommendation.
I need to spend more time with theistic evolution - it seems to span the gap between atheistic evolution and Young Earth creationism. Just a matter of having time…
I accept Old Earth theories, including evolution. I’m not sure about theistic evolution, since I don’t know enough to form an opinion on God’s continued involvement in the day-to-day (millenia-to-millenia?) operations of the universe.
You accept the theory of evolution and you’re a theist. In my book, that makes you a theistic evolutionist. (I prefer the term “evolutionary creationist” myself.) Simply put, a TE is one who accepts both the scientific theory of cosmological and/or biological evolution as well as the belief that God is the origin of the cosmos and continuously upholds all things by His power. So, I’m somewhat confused by your reluctance to adopt that label.
No reluctance, Mike. I just didn’t know if there was anything more to it. So yes, all things considered, I am a theistic evolutionist or an “evolutionary creationist” (I like that better too).