Having started down the creation-as-speech-act train of thought I (re)discovered that Lawrence Osborn makes a similar connection in his book Guardians of Creation. Here are a few quotes
At eight points in Genesis 1 God speaks creatively: ‘And God said, “Let…”‘… This use of speech as a metaphor for the divine activity of creation suggests something voluntary, effortless and rational.
It follows that creaturely existence is to be understood as the appropriate response to the divine word. But what sort of speech-act and response are envisaged here?
…
the divine creative commands need to be contrasted with what we usually understand as commands. There is an element of openness which distinguishes them from the notion of specific obligation normally implies by the word ‘command’. True, the creative commands set limit upon creaturely existence — the impose order upon the formlessness and void. But, at the same time, they hold out the possibility of tremendous variety in the unfolding of creation within those limits.
…
Thus, while recognising the command and execution structure of Genesis 1, we must not allow this to mislead us into thinking that God’s creative activity is narrowly deterministic. On the contrary, in uttering those commands, ‘God give permission for creation to be. The appearance of creation is a glad act of embrace of this permit.’ [quote from Walter Breuggemann] More positively, the creative words may be regarded as holding out a promise to creation, as offering created being the gift of a future with God.
I hope that my suggestion that creation is called somehow catches the combination of constraint and freedom that Osborn expresses here. The calling requires something of the created order — hence it sets ‘limits on creaturely existence’ — and yet there is freedom in the response — ‘tremendous variety in the unfolding of creation within those limits.’
No Comments