creation and reality

i just finished a book for my philosophy course titled creation and reality by a german scholar named Michael Welker. the book included many themes that i have been wrestling with for the past 4-5 years. ironically (or not so), i am assigned to teach this tuesday on this material. i needed a place to record some raw post-reflections from the reading so i decided to use this place. feel free to read or run away as you see fit...

the overall question of the philosophy course Paradigms and Progress is what is "good" theology and if the notion of "good" theology exists, then do theologians (all of us are theologians whether we say so or not) have the ablility to rank theologies.

michael welker presents a theology of creation and reality in his book that is titled the same. this theology is necessitated by the fact that there is a collapse in the prevalent view of theism, mostly in western europe, some in north america. he attributes this collapse to over-simplified, reductionist, and vague views on important theological issues. he uses the term 'false abstraction' to describe these views. overall, his goal is to expose how most people do not challenge these false abstractions and the result is a dulling of biblical traditions' concepts and sets of concepts. the dulling is a result of over-simplifying complex issues by limiting the input into the debate on one hand while on the other hand the dulling also is a result of including multiple accomodations to prevailing habits of thought and specific conceptions of rationality. welker describes the latter use of biblical theology as a cipher. the outcome of this dulling is that biblical knowledge loses its orienting power in our non-oriented world. in light of this challenge, welker takes on issues of (1) the creation of heaven and earth, (2) angels and God's presence in creation, (3) creation, the image of God and the mandate of dominion, and (4) creation and sin.

before i jump into (3) and (4), i want to point out some themes that i have considerd in the past 4-5 years that re-surfaced in these readings. one theme is my observation that most people do not think. that sounds arrogant but i am not referring to people's ability to think or, better expressed, their thinking "ceiling". everyone has different ceilings of thought and it doesn't make anyone better or worse for appearing or potentially even being more 'brilliant' than others. remember, i was the one who didn't make the 'gifted class' in elementary school and i still mock that whole idea. with that said, i move on to a person's willingness to think. our increasingly internet-driven, attention-deficit world shapes us into people who are forced to filter all information and make decisions on the value of that information immediately. search engine results, stock tickers, espn bottom lines, physical mailings (credit card applications!), electronic mail inboxes, are all examples. the list goes on and on. each of us owns a specific information assessment profile that is shaped by our interests, experiences, and critical thought processes. we quickly jettison any information or entry point into information that we judge (immediately) to be of little to no value. welker indirectly keys in on this reality by stating that people have rejected over-simplified, vague, and reductionist views of very important theological issues. in other words, people are immediately deleting these views from their mental (over-burdened) inboxes...

the role of "good" theology is to provide valuable (as perceived by the receiver) insights and views of very important theological issues that are Biblically-based, inter-disciplinary in nature. and allow for tensions among competing beliefs (pluralistic) so that these renewed solutions provide an orienting influence in our non-oriented world.

let's jump into (3). welker tackles the issue of the relationship, in creation, between the image of God and the mandate of dominion. he applies the critique to numerous prevailing views. he raises the observation of how humans have always viewed themselves as the central figure in creation. two results of this human-centered view are the ecological crisis and the systematic underpriviledging of women (at points, oppression). Christians have been tagged with being anti-environment and anti-women due to the use of Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. on the other hand, Christians have pointed out the pro-environment and female equality aspects of Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. welker rejects the over-simplified reasons given by both and moves toward a renewed critical view of the creation texts that accounts for the complexity of the relationship between humans created in the image of God, the mandate to have dominion, and the relation of man and woman.

he questions the over-simplified explanations given by people who use Gen 1 and Gen 2 to explain these issues. most people, use Gen 1 and/or Gen 2 to attack or defend their views. Gen 1 includes the reference for humans to trample under and subjugate the earth but it also includes the equality of man and woman. Gen 2 includes the reference for humans to till and keep the earth but it also includes the hierarchy of man ruling over woman. there is not an option to pick and choose based on historical lines because there is not a clear timeline to these events. in other words, we cannot 'correct' Gen 1's view of subjugating the earth with Gen 2's reference to care for the earth. we are left with choosing one or the other.

there are three ways to view the image of God as described in Gen 1.
does the image of God refer to the relation of created humankind as male and female?
does the image of God refer to the so-called mandate of domination?
does the image of God refer to the connection of both aspects, the connection of the relation of man and woman with the mandate of dominion?

these are classic questions... questions that will be dealt with in future entries. i am going to stop now because this is turning into a book summary instead of any original thinking...