Why Did God Make (Insert Species Here)?

We need to understand the reasons for creation if we are to get to grips with our responsibility for it.

In the mid-seventies I studied chemistry, physics and biology for A’ Levels and then went on to take a four year degree in Applied Biology before doing a three year research assistantship in plant physiology. At the same time, I was getting to grips with how to live out my Christian faith in the real world. One thing that had a significant impact on me was that this was the high-point of the creation versus evolution debate in British evangelicalism.

I read all of the books and became a committed creationist. In my last year at school, I spoke at the debating society on the issue. I realised that the deck was stacked against me when the title of the debate was announced as “This House Believes that Eddie Arthur Arose from the Swamp”. I don’t remember any details of the debate apart from the fact that I was roundly trounced.

However, despite my early zeal, I started to have some serious questions about the creationist literature that I was consuming. Authors would confidently make statements that I - as a first-year undergrad - knew to be untrue. Not only that, but they seemed determined to answer questions that no evolutionist was asking. I tried to talk to my pastor about this, but he basically shushed me and said that a little knowledge was a dangerous thing. I learned a lesson that day - though it probably wasn’t the one the pastor intended.

As time went on and my understanding of biology grew, I ditched the scientific-creationist bandwagon. This wasn’t because I rejected a literal six-day creation, but rather I thought we had chosen to fight the battle on the opposition’s ground. If there were Scriptural and philosophical reasons for defending six-day creation, then the issue should be addressed on Scriptural and philosophical grounds. I’ll undoubtedly return to this in more detail, but it isn’t actually my subject today.

One thing that really bothered me most about scientific-creationism and the whole evangelical response to creation was that people seemed to be fixated on the origin of species, but totally unconcerned by the fact that we were living through the beginning of a huge mass extinction. I read reams of secular books about the loss of biodiversity, but at that point, there was very little, if anything, in the popular Christian press. Not only that, but I encountered a fair number of Christian leaders who were actively hostile to any idea of nature conservation. The only important thing was to preach the gospel and get souls into heaven.

Bad theology inevitably leads to bad praxis. If God is going to destroy the earth in the fires of judgement, what does it matter if some butterfly, or even elephants and whales become extinct? It is just speeding up the inevitable. Except, of course the Bible doesn’t talk about the earth being destroyed in this way. It is groaning, waiting for its deliverance; God is going to usher in a new heaven and (crucially) a new earth. I sincerely hope that there is going to be plant and animal life on this new earth; frankly, if it’s just going to be a ball of bare rock, I’m not much interested in spending eternity there.

However, if we are to get to grips with how we should relate to creation, we need to step back into the book of Genesis and read something of the story of how it all came about. Whether you read Genesis literally or as an illustration of the nature of God and creation, the argument I’m about to make stands.

Let’s look at one section from the creation narrative in Genesis 1

And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky.” So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.

This is day five; in verses 20-23, but the pattern we see here is repeated (more or less) for each of the other six days of creation.

The general view of species diversity is that small genetic changes have allowed plants and animals to specialise so that they can fit into particular niches and out-compete other species. However, this process of evolution and adaption has taken place in a huge concert of different species all adapting together. Trees have developed woody structures so that they could grow tall and harvest more sunlight, but this could not have happened without the co-evolution of fungi which break down the woody structures. If we had trees but no fungi, the world would be a sterile desert of fallen tree trunks. And so the whole of the biosphere works together; each organism from the smallest unicellular creature to the biggest trees has a place and fills a role in the huge symphony of nature.

While secular scientists are reluctant to imply that there is a purpose or direction to evolution, there is an acknowledgment that we are living in an interdependent system. Christians are more likely to see purpose in the world around us. Why did God create fungi? Because nothing else can break down cellulose so efficiently. Creation is seen as functional; each organism has its purpose and (presumably) the whole lot hangs together in order to sustain human life. Thinking in these terms, it is important to preserve species because they have a role (even if we don’t know what it is) in keeping the web of nature together so that we can survive. An obvious example is the fact that if bees become extinct, many of the food crops that we rely on will no longer get pollinated, causing massive problems for our food supply.

This functional view of creation and conservation makes sense and has (or at least, should have) huge motivational impact. However, for the Christian, it is not the full story.

Look back at the passage from Genesis. God doesn’t say that the fish, birds and other winged creatures work, that they fulfil a purpose. He says that they are good. His reaction to his creation is a moral one, not a functional one. He takes it further and then blesses the creatures. God thinks birds and fish are good. If you read down to verse 31, God looks at the whole of creation and declares it very good.

We continue to get indications of God’s delight in his creation throughout Scripture, perhaps most notably in the latter chapters of Job.

God looked at his creation and said that it was very good. Why did he create the various organisms we see around us? He did so because they are good; because he likes them. Yes, creation has an interlinked purpose. Fungi are needed to break down tree trunks, but most importantly fungi (and trees) are good and God wanted to make them. (I’m going to leave the question of “the fall” and why some organisms are so darn unpleasant for another post.)

I wrote in my last post about how the incarnation of Jesus should alter how we view history. It is also true that the fact that he took on the stuff of creation should make us think about creation differently.

We are living at an unprecedented time in history; with a huge number of animals and plants that God called good becoming extinct. This is without even addressing the question of climate change (for a later post) which is speeding things up enormously. If we call ourselves Christians and if we claim to love the things that God holds dear, then we will be concerned for the loss of each species. Of course this doesn’t mean we should neglect evangelism, disciple making and all of that stuff. But part of being a disciple means loving the things that God loves.

One bright morning at the dawn of the world, God created a beetle. He looked at it and called it good. Somewhere, this week, the last example of that beetle species will die because we destroyed its habitat. It deserved better.