Is the Bible eco-friendly or eco-abusing?

The basic biblical principles are:

1. The world is a creation of God. God created it ex nihilo (out of nothing).

2. The world is the possession of God e.g. Psalm 24:1 “The earth is the Lord’s and everything in it.”, Job 41 “Everything under the heavens belongs to me.”

3. The world therefore reflects God. At creation, God saw that the world was good and reflected his goodness . It should therefore be respected.

4. Stewardship and dominion are given to humans. They are to look after the earth for God –

“Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue [kabash] it and have dominion [radah] over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”  Genesis 1:22, 28

The meaning of the Hebrew text is clear: to subdue – kabash – this means to tread down, to bring into bondage and suggests power and control. Radah means to rule or to prevail over.

But some disagree:
“It does not mean exploitation; for food or any other purpose; rather it is a consequence of the gift to mankind of the image of God. Mankind is, as it were, a manager or supervisor of the world of living creatures.” Oxford Bible Commentary 2001

According to Norman Geisler four principles can be drawn from Genesis 1:

1. Ecology means good stewardship. Humans must not turn God’s garden into a desert.

2. The principle of Sabbath rest: rest is necessary if life and the land are to be productive. This is also clear in the jubilee law, that every 50 years the land must be returned to its original owner (Leviticus 25:28)

3. Man should not be greedy over the land – it is God’s not ours.

4. Man is made in the image of God and is therefore above nature and is not part of it.

? Is the contemporary trend for “stewardship” eisegesis (reading in) or exegesis (reading out)?

Eschatology

An important idea, lurking in Paul’s letter to the Romans is that the restoration of the world after the Fall of Humans and the coming of the Kingdom of God will occur once the humans have repaired the damage they have done to it:

“For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us. 19For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God. 20For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope 21that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. 22For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now. 23And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the first fruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies.” Romans 8:18-23

? Does this contradict the anthropocentric nature of Genesis? Is it eco-holistic?

Problems

Lynn White’s article “The Historical Roots of our Ecological Crisis ” (see article at the end of this handout) argues that the current disaster facing the environment is due to the Christian command to have ‘dominion’ over the earth. People have moved from nature-centred religions to a religion where god demands dominion over nature. Only when the Christian view is rejected form can the ecological crisis be solved.

White does acknowledge the ‘whisper’ of some enlightened individuals, such as Francis of Assisi who treated all nature equally worthy of Gods faith, hope and love. But his voice is not enough:

“The greatest spiritual revolutionary in western history, St Francis, proposed what he thought was an alternative Christian view of nature and man’s relation to it; he tried to substitute the idea of the equality of all creature, including man, for the ideas of man’s limitless rule of creation. He failed.”

? Is White’s analysis fair?