Jurgen Moltmann’s theology of creation

Jurgen Moltmann is a theologian I've taken some interest in primarily due to his formulation of the Trinity on the grounds that God passes through a process, similar to Karl Rahner whose work on the trinity I have evaluated here: https://theologyphilosophyscience.blogspot.com/2019/01/an-evaluation-of-karl-rahners-trinity.html Naturally after having engaged with Moltmann's key theological ideas I took a look into his view of creation, down to my love for natural theology. Moltmann has an interesting approach which fits with his theology of hope, with a focus on eschatology. I personally find this to be very welcome, what's with this rarely being dealt with in relation to creation.  

Moltmann is someone who has written a lot on creation

Moltmann sees creation in three distinct stages- Original Creation, Continuous Creation and New Creation. Moltmann identifies the Original Creation with God's creative acts as identified in the six days of the Genesis creation account, the Continuous Creation with God's preservation and innovation of the Original Creation, until a consummation of a perfect New Creation. Creation therefore does not end with the account in Genesis on the seventh day, rather there is continuous creative activity by God which anticipates the New Creation where there will be a making new of the old.

Moltmann claims that God's Continuous Creation allows Christians to accept evolution and interpret scripture on its basis. Seeing the earth as a creative space for new life via continuous creation can be seen in the Bible's identification of earth sea and air in Genesis 1:24-25, as spaces for the living things that are to be bought into being in them. Similarly, in in Genesis 1:11 "let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit" and Genesis 1:24 ""let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds" can be seen as a causal space for the development of life. Furthermore these "kinds" are evolutionary leaps to new forms of life, rather than ready-made clicking of the fingers from the creator.

This reminds me of the idealist notion of design, which argues there is an overall pattern of creation, rather than adaptation of individual species to their environment. Take for example the fossil record- the idealist would see a progressive unfolding of a structured plan of creation. This was seen by pre-Darwinian nineteenth century biologist Lois Agassiz who argued the history of vertebrate life contains a pattern of development which led to the human form. Furthermore, Agassiz held to recapitulation theory, which claimed that embryological development and the progression of life have the same plan. I mention these things as Moltmann's discussion of creation for the most part rarely actually deals with the sciences, more of a theology first approach- starting with God and going to creation rather than going from creation to God.

This of course differs from the Paleyean notion of creation, where certain aspects of creation are taken to demonstrate the need for a designer which can be used to extrapolate to the existence of a creator God. This is not a small disagreement as which view one holds leads to a different view of man. Moltmann sees humans as belonging to the same family of living creatures, interpreting be "fruitful and multiply, bring forth abundantly on the earth and multiple in it" in Genesis 9:7 as a commandment to all life rather than just humanity alone. He further links this with the covenant God made with Noah, with creations new start after the flood where God makes covenant "with you and your descendants after you, and with every living creature" in Genesis 9:9-10. This is probably the most contentious point in Moltmann's theology of creation and brings up arguments of the past to when Darwin's Origin of Species was published. Samuel Wilberforce was an English bishop in the Church of England in the nineteenth Century, saw seeing man as in the same family as the animals around his as incompatible with the Bibles view of man’s moral and spiritual condition. Man’s ruling of the earth, man’s power of speech, reason, free-will and responsibility, man’s fall and redemption, the incarnation, the indwelling spirit are all incompatible with man not being distinct from the animals, being an animal himself.  Furthermore, Wilberforce took Darwin’s ideas in the origin to be incompatible with Gods providence to intervene in nature, for Wilberforce creation is a result of the mind of God, a view which evolution dishonours. 

My own view is that one can supplement Moltmann's view, with the Biblical view of man as tripartite.  Humans are body soul and spirit. The body is physical, the soul is made up of the mind emotion and will, and the spirit is the conscience and means by which one worships, contacts and joins with God. The soul and body are shared with animals; however, the spirit is unique to man and allows man to be in communion with God and a part of his great plan. The body and soul are therefore evolved just like animals; however, the human spirit is the divine part within man without an evolutionary origin. Moltmann does not discuss the matter, accepting evolution on the basis that it is good and secure science which can enrich a theology of creation. 

This theology of creation draws on Moltmann's eschatology, continuous creation preparing the way for new creation where the Earth is bought into new condition. In the Ethics of Hope Moltmann outlines the Biblical basis for his conception of creation in the following ways: Original creation-  The creating at the beginning: ‘In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth’ in Genesis 1:1, Continuous Creation- the continuing creation of the new: ‘Remember not the former things, nor consider the things of old. Behold I am doing a new thing; now it springs forth, do you not perceive it? in Isaiah 43:18–19 and the New Creation- the completion of God’s creating activity: ‘Behold, I make all things new’ in Revelation 21:5. 

Moltmann has been critical of theologies overemphasis on Original Creation, God's creative activity throughout history being neglected as a result. This creative activity is in-between initial creation and new creation, the activity itself giving hope for the New Creation as God's preservation creates anticipation for it. I'm not entirely sure this is accurate- the doctrine of a God who preserves creation through sustaining it has been present for a long time, and the Original Creation seems to produce challenges for a purely natural account of the world which theology can account for. This is linked with contemporary Christian apologist John Lennox who has claimed there are three times where God has created, sustaining in the intervening periods: at the Big Bang, at the Origin of life and at the Origin of man. Lennox claims these are 'singularities' which a purely materialistic science cannot and will not explain as they are supernatural creative acts of God. Such a view can be seen more attractive as although Moltmann sees emphasis on continuous and new creation as a way of overcoming atheist tendencies upon the acceptance of evolution, it’s difficult to see why it is needed for the atheist. Evolution via natural selection can be seen as a blind process which means that it is unguided, with no foresight or goal. This entails that one can hold there is no need for God in evolution via natural selection, as it is a wholly natural process no mind or purpose behind it. Furthermore, there are a variety of approaches to Christian eschatology among different Christians, so basing a view of creation upon it will dissatisfy those who do not hold to Moltmann's eschatology. 

Moltmann's view of creation is strongly influenced by his eschatology

I find Moltmann's theology of creation to be fresh and interesting, drawing on eschatology and evolution in a way that I'm impressed by. There are however many approaches in the Christian camp and I personally see Moltmann as contributing to a doctrine of creation rather than having one that fully encompasses God's wonderous creation and ability.