If the mission of the church is to get people to heaven when they die, then the church has no reason to care for the Creation or human flourishing or abundant living (John 10:10) in general.
The scriptures don’t emphasize environmental concerns as much as you might expect, but then humans had much less ability to injure the environment in biblical times than they have now. It’s now very much within our power to completely destroy the planet, should we be so foolish. That wasn’t true 2,000 years ago.
But the doctrine of Creation Care is plainly revealed nonetheless.
Gen 1:26-28
(Gen. 1:26-28 ESV) 26 Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. 28 And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”
Christopher Wright comments,
The first mention of human beings in the Bible states two fundamental things about us, two things that are put so closely together that they are clearly connected: (1) God made us in his image (both male and female), and (2) God intended us to exercise dominion within creation. It is not that having dominion is what constitutes the image of God, but rather that exercising dominion is what being made in God’s image enables and entitles us to do. We humans have a mission on earth because God had a purpose in putting us on it.
So God instructs the human species not only to fill the earth (an instruction given to the other creatures in their habitats), but also to subdue the earth and to rule over the rest of the creatures. The words kabaš (“subdue”) and radah (“rule”) are strong words, with a sense of imposing of will upon another. However, they are not terms that necessarily imply violence or abuse (though some critics of Christianity lay the blame for ecological disaster at the door of these two words and the freedom they allegedly give to us to rape the environment—a charge that has been well refuted).
Christopher J. H. Wright, The Mission of God’s People: A Biblical Theology of the Church’s Mission, Biblical Theology for Life, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010), 50.
Gen 2:15
(Gen. 2:15 ESV) 15 The LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it.
Wright says,
The verb ʿabad means “to serve”, with the connotation of doing hard work in the process of serving. So although most translations render it in this verse with meanings like “to work it”, “to till it”, or “to cultivate it”, the essential core of the word still has the sense of serving. Humans are servants of creation, and that is the way they are to exercise their kingship over it.
The verb šamar means “to keep something safe”, with protection, care, and watchfulness. It means to treat something (or someone) seriously as worthy of devoted attention (thus, for example, in a moral sense it can mean to keep the way of the Lord, or to keep God’s law—i.e., by studying, understanding and obeying it).
Christopher J. H. Wright, The Mission of God’s People: A Biblical Theology of the Church’s Mission, Biblical Theology for Life, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010), 51.
A little philosophy
There are those who see the Creation as God — Gaia worshipers and Pantheists. They see all creation as equally valuable, and many would just as soon that humans be removed from the planet so they would no longer use its resources.
Others see humanity and God as so far removed from Creation that the Creation is only a temporary holding area pending the real creation that comes when Jesus returns and takes us all away from here. Therefore, “it’s all going to burn,” and we have no reason to concern ourselves with this third rock from the sun.
The truth is that God created the heavens and the earth and declared his Creation good. It’s not corrupt and evil, as the Gnostics taught. It’s not disposable as so many Christians teach. Rather, when we’re saved we become “new creations” (2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). Our redemption is a renewal of what God did in the beginning.
“New” translates kainos rather than neos, and the sense of being restored or refreshed or renewed — not made all over again from nothing. Our own salvation points back to the original Creation, restoring us to what we were always meant to be — in charge of the Creation for the sake of God, not as destroyers and pillagers but as caretakers and protectors — who also are given the Creation for our own flourishing.
Psalm 148
(Ps. 148:1-14 ESV) Praise the LORD! Praise the LORD from the heavens; praise him in the heights!
2 Praise him, all his angels; praise him, all his hosts!
3 Praise him, sun and moon, praise him, all you shining stars!
4 Praise him, you highest heavens, and you waters above the heavens!
5 Let them praise the name of the LORD! For he commanded and they were created.
6 And he established them forever and ever; he gave a decree, and it shall not pass away.
7 Praise the LORD from the earth, you great sea creatures and all deeps,
8 fire and hail, snow and mist, stormy wind fulfilling his word!
9 Mountains and all hills, fruit trees and all cedars!
10 Beasts and all livestock, creeping things and flying birds!
11 Kings of the earth and all peoples, princes and all rulers of the earth!
12 Young men and maidens together, old men and children!
13 Let them praise the name of the LORD, for his name alone is exalted; his majesty is above earth and heaven.
14 He has raised up a horn for his people, praise for all his saints, for the people of Israel who are near to him.
Praise the LORD!
The psalmist sees the Creation — even the inanimate portions such as the moon, sun, starts, and mountains — as singing together a chorus of praise to God! Why? Because God is going to throw it all away in some heavenly trash heap? Or because God made it good and has promised to redeem it — just as he’ll redeem us humans?
Indeed, at present the world is in mourning for our sins —
(Hos. 4:1-3 ESV) Hear the word of the LORD, O children of Israel,
for the LORD has a controversy with the inhabitants of the land.
There is no faithfulness or steadfast love, and no knowledge of God in the land;
2 there is swearing, lying, murder, stealing, and committing adultery;
they break all bounds, and bloodshed follows bloodshed.
3 Therefore the land mourns, and all who dwell in it languish, and also the beasts of the field and the birds of the heavens, and even the fish of the sea are taken away.
But the Creation anticipates the redemption from God —
(Ps. 96:10-97:1 ESV) 10 Say among the nations, “The LORD reigns!
Yes, the world is established; it shall never be moved;
he will judge the peoples with equity.”
11 Let the heavens be glad, and let the earth rejoice;
let the sea roar, and all that fills it;
12 let the field exult, and everything in it!
Then shall all the trees of the forest sing for joy 13 before the LORD,
for he comes, for he comes to judge the earth.
He will judge the world in righteousness,
and the peoples in his faithfulness.
The Creation rejoices in anticipation of the reign of God — the kingdom of heaven!
“The truth is that God created the heavens and the earth and declared his Creation good”
Jay, just because something is described as “good” does not mean it is eternal. It can be “good”
for the purpose , for which it was created. Maybe this universe is like a spaceship designed to travel to the moon and back, it is not eternal, but it filled it’s purpose quite well.
I don’t have a clue as to what God has planned for “man” , but I am sure he does.
I believe the bible describes a baptized Christian as a “new creation” created from the old man.
Maybe the old earth was re-created at the same time as man was re-created.
“If the mission of the church is to get people to heaven when they die, then the church has no reason to care for the Creation or human flourishing or abundant living (John 10:10) in general.”
While I’m not tied to the idea of “heaven is somewhere else,” I’ve always found these assertions to be troubling. And very wrong.
If creation care is right and taught in Scripture, then those who believe they will one day be judged by God according to what they have done have EVERY reason to care for creation. Those who want to please God will do what he wants because it’s right, not because it’s somehow tied to their final dwelling place.
You could also say that those who think God will one day renew the earth have no reason to care for it now… because God’s going to renew it later! I know that statement is silly, but no less silly than the one that opens this article.
Some will base the concept of being good stewards of God’s creation on their belief in a renewed earth. Some will base it on other beliefs. Some who believe in a renewed earth won’t be concerned about caring for creation. The ideas are not inseparably linked.
Will we be judged by how we treat creation (the earth, plants, animals, etc) and/or will we be judged by how we treat our brother (who was created in the image of God)?
I have my concerns about the first one, but no doubts about the second one.
We have no example of Jesus being involved or promoting earth-care-taking.
Now should we be good stewards of the resources that God has blessed us with, yes, and we should have some sense of compassion about the things that God has created, but this was never a point of justification or command or even put forth as a Godly example.
Jesus didn’t die that the earth might be healthy, but that we might be saved and reconciled to God who is spirit and who is in heaven.
Dwight wrote,
Seriously? I have to pick? Why can’t it be both? I mean, God made both. Maybe he cares about both.
PS — NT scriptures on the subject will be in the next post of the series. But you seem to ignore the explicit OT commands —
Jesus died, in part, so that we’d be restored to our original, Edenic purpose. Study the “image” and “likeness” passages, as well as the passages that speak of our dominion or reign to come — which is a return to Gen 1’s reign.
How can we be in the image of God and not be faithful in the exercise of the dominion given us in Gen 1 and 2?
Tim,
You’re reading NT Wright into my argument. Take the argument for I actually said.
For the entire history of the Churches of Christ, we’ve argued that the only point of salvation is to go to heaven when we die. Therefore, we spend our lives as saved people seeking a salvation we already have. Our “mission” is to do Five Acts and organize correctly and to restore the First Century church, because if we don’t, we’re damned. And it’s all about chasing heaven until we die.
In such a world, we become hyper-focused on obedience as the path to salvation. We even insist on “precision obedience.” And we care nothing for the mission of the church — except that we want to do evangelism since that scores points with God — and nothing matters but getting saved and getting other people saved.
Evangelism is preached as obedience that is essential to salvation. Preachers look for new and better ways to declare damned those who don’t do their part. And so the church is purely about our going to heaven even when we’re saving others.
Benevolence is an afterthought. We care for the poor because it’s commanded and a church without a benevolence program may not have all the right marks. But the point is to score heaven-going points through benevolence. Not to do benevolence for the sake of those in need. I should do benevolence out of fear for my own soul — and so I help others to help myself. Our legalism creates fake love for the lost and fake love for the poor. And as a result, we aren’t very good at any of it.
Count the Church of Christ hospitals in the US. The only hospitals we found are in foreign lands as mission points — because benevolence is targeted to the damned. In a Christian nation, we’re happy to let the Catholics and Baptists found hospitals. Because it’s not about helping the sick. It’s about earning salvation points for ourselves, which is accomplished through evangelism.
Just so, we found orphanages, but it’s for the sake of saving the lost souls of orphans. It’s not out of concern for the orphans themselves as people in need — as shown by the extreme low participation of Church of Christ members in foster care. (I have stories.)
We don’t do affordable housing — not in Christian lands. Every other denomination our size has an affordable housing parachurch organization. We don’t. No salvation points in the US. But we might do it in a nation where we can be confident of high baptism counts as a result of our generosity.
We are hyper-focused on evangelism and it distorts EVERYTHING. We aren’t good at it (the numbers are dismal, of course) but it’s still how we think.
There are, of course, exceptions. But the overall trends in the 20th Century are plain — and we’re just now starting to change. (Notice how many articles in the Gospel Advocate or Spiritual Sword talk about caring for the marginalized in society.)
But if we see mission not as a path to heaven (or the new heavens and new earth) but a consequence of becoming like God, if we think in terms of theosis — being perfect as God is perfect — a God who is seeking the good of those he loves solely because they are his people and he loves them, everything changes. We’re freed to act out of our love for others, even when there are no salvation points in it for us. Love becomes its own reward. Joy is found in service, not in point scoring. Right relationship and shalom compel us to take action. We get to be peacemakers.
Viewed in such a way, what is God’s attitude toward the creation that he made? And whatever that attitude is, it should be ours as well, to the extent our mortality doesn’t get in the way.
I should also look at the orphan, the poor, the widow, etc. not as a means to earn my way to heaven — or a task I must achieve on penalty of losing heaven — but as part of God’s good creation, broken and flawed by sin and in need of redemption. Does that include evangelism? Absolutely. But not for my sake. For the sake of God’s good creation — which includes people most especially, but not just people.
The NT is quite clear that it’s not just humans that will be redeemed by God. And if I am a new creation, re-created in the image of Jesus (who is LORD = YHWH), then maybe redemption becomes the mission.
The challenge in grasping a truly biblical concept of mission is to get out of the “going to heaven when I die” mindset, not because heaven is the wrong place. It’s the wrong motivation even if you substitute “new heavens and new earth” for heaven. Far bigger than the problem with where we wind up is our legalism. But it’s not just legalism. Even the Baptists and most other evangelicals are so caught up in evangelism as the be all and end all of Christianity that Christianity becomes defined as evangelism. Which distorts everything.
Most evangelicals cannot define “mission” in terms other than evangelism. We give lip service to “love your neighbor” because it’s one of the two greatest commands — so it’s about obedience, not a way of being. Which is messed up. Again: earning salvation even if you’re much more grace oriented that we in the CoC. It’s still obedience to please an angry Deity. And the only atonement theory we respond to is penal substitutionary atonement — so that unless God is angry and Jesus saves us from damnation it’s not the right story — and that makes escape from damnation the driving motivation for very nearly everything — even for those who are not caught up in CoC legalism. We are still caught up in a story that builds everything on fleeing hell and gives no motivation outside that story. The story ends with forgiveness but offer no answer for: forgiven to become what? So we figure the only possible answer is to save people from damnation — which is not bad or wrong (of course) but not the entirety of scripture and our relationship with God. We erase roughly 97% of the Bible when we evangelize solely to create more evangelists.
I mean, go to the local Bible bookstore. How many books on church growth? Lots and lots. How many on personal evangelism? Quite a few. How many books on running a foster care program? Doing affordable housing? Providing medical care to those who fall through the cracks? Caring for the mentally ill? Dealing with poverty in a way that restores the poor to dignity and self-sufficiency? You’ll find far more on that subject in the secular social sciences section than the Christian section of Barnes & Noble.
It’s not just creation care where we just don’t get it. It’s everything.
And I’m probably just making it less clear. It’s been a long day and I’m too tired to lay this out clearly as I would like. But I’ll give being clearer a shot at some point, Lord willing.
If Jay’s reading of Thompson’s thesis on the mission of the church is correct, though, the two should never have been severed. Churches whose mission is transformation will engage in evangelism and social justice along the way.
Part of the issue that Thompson has pointed out is that we have pushed personal evangelism so much more than the NT does, that a mindset was created that first said personal evangelism is the most important thing a Christian can do. Over time, it went from “most important” to “the only important thing.” Then those who weren’t and aren’t gifted as evangelists come to believe that, since personal evangelism is the only thing that matters, all that they’re good for is their money.
So they come to church, they put their check in the plate, and they’re confused when leadership asks for more than that.
Tim,
I missed you at Nashville. I was so excited when I recognized a name whom I might meet in person. I believe that your assessment is very correct. Just read the actions of Jesus and it will become very apparent that he did relieve hunger but we should also notice that it was only after his delivery of a message, and even then it created the wrong reason for them to follow him. They soon forgot the message looking only to the physical.
Jay,
“Rather, when we’re saved we become “new creations” (2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15). Our redemption is a renewal of what God did in the beginning.”
If he has already made us a “new creation” just as he did in the beginning, why would he need to do that again?
Jay, I don’t really see those scriptures you gave as commands, which incur blessings or wrath, but rather general common sense realities for mankind that he had to do to survive. If “be fruitful and multiply” is a command, then was Paul telling people to sin in not marrying and to be single.
When we read the Law we don’t find laws on treat your animals with dignity or don’t burn your waste near the river or don’t over farm an area, etc. And while he might have been put in the garden to take care of it, he also was kicked out of the garden, with no general rules to do the same.
Now having said that I believe we should, because we are dealing with God’s creation, deal with it with a sense of wonder and respect, but not to the point where the creation becomes secondary to the creator who made it.
But I do believe we in our quest for bringing people to God, often we don’t behave Godly in that we don’t seek the best interest of another person in all ways…this would be called love. Jesus fed those around Him not because that was His mission, but because he saw a need among the people and out of compassion and love fulfilled it. He healed and fed thousands, even when one act would have showed his Godly power, but it was His actions of love that showed his Godly character. Jesus often gave, such as healing the 10 lepers, without verbally spreading the message of the Gospel and getting much back, but through His actions he showed the gospel.
dwight wrote,
Actually, we do.
The Torah requires the land to be left fallow every 7th year.
(Exod. 22:30 ESV) 30 You shall do the same with your oxen and with your sheep: seven days it shall be with its mother; on the eighth day you shall give it to me.
(Deut. 25:4 ESV) 4 “You shall not muzzle an ox when it is treading out the grain.
(Deut. 5:13-14 ESV) 13 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 14 but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter or your male servant or your female servant, or your ox or your donkey or any of your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates, that your male servant and your female servant may rest as well as you.
Christopher J. H. Wright, Deuteronomy, eds. W. Ward Gasque, Robert L. Hubbard Jr., and Robert K. Johnston, Understanding the Bible Commentary Series, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2012), 75–76.
That’s not an exhaustive list of verses, but the Torah does indeed concern itself with sanitation, overfarming, and the treatment of animals with dignity. There’s even this —
God even issues commands to protect the needless destruction of trees, even in time of war.
Now, in terms of commandments, I would urge you to think less legalistically. As I said in the post,
So the question isn’t: Is there a BCV making me care for animals and streams and the rest of Creation? Rather, it’s: Does God care for animals, streams, and the rest of Creation? If so, if I’m going to be “perfect as the Heavenly Father is perfect,” I should aspire to care about what God cares about.
The SOTM is quite clear, if we must find a command. But the concept of becoming like GOd (theosis) is bigger. It’s found in the unity passages in John 17. It’s found in Phil 2 when we’re called to be like the self-emptying Jesus. Jesus emptied himself to redeem people but also to reconcile and redeem to the Creation (Rom 8, Col 1).
To follow Jesus to the cross is not just to suffer and die. It’s to suffer and die for the right purpose.
God, through Jesus, will redeem ALL THINGS in earth and in heaven. The ENTIRE CREATION. And Paul surely thought of the Creation primarily in Gen 1 terms: animals, fish, birds, sea, land, man and woman — not just humans.
How can Jesus present me holy and blameless if I deny that the gospel should be “proclaimed in all creation under heaven.” Or maybe Christopher Wright misreads this text. Let’s see what the other commentators say,
Douglas J. Moo, The Letters to the Colossians and to Philemon, The Pillar New Testament Commentary, (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 2008), 124.
Tom Wright, Paul for Everyone: The Prison Letters: Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon, (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 2004), 150–152.
THe Creation exists and was made for Jesus and even by Jesus. Jesus is Lord over the Creation — and he holds it all together (present tense). How can he not care about its care and upkeep? Just because humans sinned and so are no longer in Eden, well, we’re being restored to the image and likeness of God though Jesus (several verses you already be familiar with by now). If I’m going to become like Jesus as the very image of God, then the fall of man in Gen 3 is no excuse to avoid caring for the Creation. Rather, it’s a restoration to what we were always meant to be. True humanity. Ideal humanity — like God, exercising dominion over his creation, sitting on the throne of heaven with Jesus (Eph 2:7-9).
Means what it says, says what it means.
As I was writing this I noticed that you promised that another post would deal with NT accounts, but can you fill in some of the gaps that I am seeing?
Could you show us some of the things Jesus did in the way of caring for the creation as you are suggesting was in the Torah? Studying the life of Jesus on earth, I have not found where he taught men about saving the environment. As a carpenter, have we any messages as to the need to plant more trees to replace what was being used. What about his knowledge of alternate substances for structures, did he revel anything? He had the ability to totally revise the way men used their resources, do we find any instructions? I don’t remember him referencing any of the information which you have cited from the Torah to correct any of the abuses which were commonly used by cities and governments. I do remember garbage dumps (odor, disease), destruction of waste by burning. Do we assume that a city the size of Jerusalem would have had such a good sewage system in place that even Jesus did not see a need to have taught them how to bring it into a more earth friendly use? I noticed the communication about the trowel and planting the excrement. In a city like Jerusalem how many holes would be dug in one day? How long would it take to fill the whole city and country side within a distance that a human could travel to a place to deposit his excrement? I feel very confident that Jesus could have taught mankind living in the day while he was on earth valuable lessons about sanitation and disease control. Were there no better methods to control leprosy that Jesus could have taught in A.D. 30 than those which were legislated in the Law?
Were the Jews in the time of Christ obeying the law about the Seventh year Jesus would have lived through at least two possibly three of these seven year commands to leave the land fallow? Does his silence indicate that they were in obedience? There could have been a fiftieth year within his life on earth, even if there was not he would have known if they had been obeying it also, but all his communications regarding the Law were in the context of men dealing with each other, never about laws of creation abuse.
Jay,
You commented, “God, through Jesus, will redeem ALL THINGS in earth and in heaven.” I cannot find that concept in scripture. You made this comment following this, “19 For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.” Some how (reconcile to himself) was paraphrased into (God, through Jesus, will redeem ALL THINGS). This does not appear to me to be a parallel. Even if it was, the position in time and the action is out of place. Redeem and reconcile by Webster are different concepts. Then I see a problem with the time, “Will redeem” is future tense and “reconcile to himself” was done at the cross, (making peace by the blood of his cross). There surely must be a more correct text to portray this concept if it is true.
Jay, You got me…somewhat. There were laws on over farming (at least stopping every seven years), but many today just rotate crops and it seems to have more of a religious concept imbedded within it. In regards to waste, it wasn’t for the environments sake, but for God’s sake of not seeing it and waste in general was burned outside of the city walls…burning causes air pollution. Now animals were still killed for sacrifice, per God.
But my over all point was that there is no overt message that the people were supposed to care for the land on the same level as caring for the people and this concept of care for the earth isn’t remotely carried forth in any sense in the NT.
Now, I am in most things a naturalist and a preservationist and love nature. I go camping and try to teach my kids to respect what God has given us and we should take care for future generations, but this is not something that I can with any real certainty teach from the scriptures and if so in any sense it is not pronounced and largely on God’s radar. Israel spent 40 years in the wilderness and I bet they left a mark, unless God had a “pack in, pack out” law.
Even if we did mess up the earth pretty bad, if there is going to be a new creation, then it will be better by God’s will than the old creation and it is not up to us to preserve something God will replace.
Dwight wrote,
Like our bodies?
Just because they’re temples for the Spirit?
But then, the heavens and earth of Gen 1 are God’s temple. John Walton has written extensively on the subject and I’ve frequently posted based on his writings and YouTube videos.
You’ve ignored a number of my arguments. Let’s return to —
The Psalm is clearly built on Gen 1:26-28 but is also clearly written post-Fall of Man.
Robert L. Jr. Hubbard and Robert K. Johnston, Psalms, 2012, 72.
Willem A. VanGemeren, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, 1991, 5, 114.
Seems like a very straightforward argument to me.
BUT it doesn’t mean I have to agree with the Sierra Club on the Keystone Pipeline or nuclear power. It does mean that God expects me to exercise authority over the Creation responsibly – just as I’m to take care of my body. God has chosen to dwell there, and we’re his vassals, priests, servants to maintain his his dwelling places.
Jay, I eat lot’s of preservatives, but they (sadly) will not help in prolonging my life (or my looks) and may actually contribute to the downfall of my health. While I might take care of my body, I am under no compunction to do this in order to please God. And on the other hand disfiguring or abusing my body will not please God, either.
I haven’t tried to ignore them i.e. Psalms 8:3-9, but I fail to seen a direct command in this passage, as if Psalms was used as a command. I see a fact, but not a command and it is overtly poetic. And the fact is that man has dominion over everything on this earth, meaning that he has control or is at least higher in order.
But it doesn’t mean we, in our dominion, are given the job of pampering the earth so it can be the best it can be, any more we are given the job of pampering our body so it can be the best it can be, at least to the point of then “worshipping the creation and not the creator.”
Jesus didn’t go from town to town healing the sick and planting plants.
And He didn’t teach them to be earth bound, but heaven/Kingdom bound.
Now I do agree that we should “exercise authority over the creation responsibly”, but I’m just not sure there is a command to do it, but rather it is a matter of respect for the blessing of God. We should treat our bodies well, but the scriptures never advocate a routine of exercise to strengthen it, but do advocate spiritual exercise to strengthen the soul by praying, reading, helping others, etc.