Naming Creation
July 25, 2021
Shakespeare famously claimed that a name is essentially empty. A name is something external to the object, so “a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” We could also say, “sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.”
But that’s not entirely true, because words shape our perception. There’s a world of difference between calling the world “nature” and calling it “creation.” “Nature” smacks of natural, which is to say, to some extent, accidental. There’s no rhyme or reason for it, it just is. This informs how we relate to the world. Nature is a machine that will function perfectly well if we’ll just leave it well enough alone. We can carve out a bit of it for our own needs, cultivate it and tame it, manipulate it to serve our own ends. It’s there to serve us and be used by us.
Or we can call the world “creation.” “Creation” smacks of purpose, intentionality. God made it, formed it, planned it, preserved it, and continues to sustain it, care for it, delight in it (if we take Psalm 104 and Job 38-41 seriously). Creation is a gift from God. He hasn’t given it to us to do with as we will, as if God put us here and then stepped back and washed his hands of the whole thing. God put us here so that we would know God as Creator and creation as creation.
It is this intentionality which invites us to see meaning in the minutia of life. We can see God in creation because that which is created always reflects its creator. And our actions in creation can be a more or less accurate representation of God. Or another way of putting it—our actions may or may not glorify God. When they align with who God is, they glorify God. When they don’t align with who God is, they dishonor God.
This world is not, strictly speaking, “natural.” It didn’t have to come into being. It doesn’t have to be here. In that sense, only God is natural, and therefore only actions that are in accordance with God’s nature are natural.
In regards to this particular conversation, the aspect of God’s nature that is relevant is his care for creation. Sure, we’re of more worth than a sparrow, but God still cares for the sparrow. God still clothes the lily, he still numbers the stars in the sky, he still numbers the hairs on your head. We, people who recognize creation as “creation,” ought to follow God’s lead. Caring for creation is a way of glorifying God. Ignoring creation dishonors God—it says that God’s work is not worthy of our attention or concern.
This purposefulness of God’s creative work invites us to live purposefully within creation. The more we explore and understand, the more we know about God’s work. It also invites us to think theologically about all of life. All of life has meaning, because it is all the result of God’s intentional creation.
—John Coffey
