Creation, Ecology and Human Responsibility

A Seminar Paper on “Use and Interpretation of Bible in the context of Eco-Crisis”

Submitted to: Rev. Sunny P Submitted by: Shiju M Samuel
February 2010 B.D III
Introduction
The ecological crisis is created by modern industrial and technological growth and modern life-
style. The varying views regarding the role of biblical religion in the whole crisis can be broadly be
summarized in to three basic positions; that biblical religion is primarily responsible for ecological crisis,
that biblical tradition has no role in the abuse of nature, and that biblical faith encouraged the crisis with
its ambiguous views regarding the divine-human relationship towards nature. This seminar paper mainly
deals about biblical responsibility for ecological crisis, denial of biblical role in the ecological crisis,
biblical ambiguity and the ecological crisis and Christian stewardship.
1. Biblical Responsibility for the Ecological Crisis
Religions and cultures in general have not been ecologically sensitive in their relationship towards
nature. Yet, Biblical religion is held exclusively responsible for the ecological crisis since “Christianity has
done too little to discourage and too much to encourage the exploitation of nature,” as Nash has
observed. Biblical responsibility for the ecological crisis is based on the interpretation of the Christian
traditions that contributed towards the development of an unfriendly attitude to nature with its stress
on human history, human dominion over nature, and other worldly spirituality. 1
1.1 The stress of Human History
Christianity has influenced our view of the material world through the interpretation of its
sacred text, the Bible. A reading of the biblical text, guided by an anthropocentric worldview, has
contributed towards the separation of humanity from the natural world. This bias towards historicism
with the emphasis on human history as against the history of nature in biblical interpretation, according
to G. Mcafee, is responsible for the lack of interest, till recently, the study of nature in biblical
scholarship. While ascribing to Bible complete understanding of all things pertaining to life and the
world, such an interpretation rejected as having any bearing on natural science.
L White, Jr., J Passmore and W Coleman are representatives of those who have held biblical faith
as being responsible for the current ecological crisis. They hold the monotheistic concept of God stressed
by the Genesis account as being responsible for the separation of the creation from the creator.
According to Passmore, Christianity encourages man to think of himself as metaphysically unique, as
supernaturally above, rather than naturally iummersed in the ebb and flow of processes. What is
ecologically dangerous in Christianity, indeed is not that it denies the sacredness of nature but that it
encourages men to believe that they are Sons of God and therefore secure, their continued existence on
earth guaranteed by God.2
1.2 The concept of Dominion
The separation of humanity from the rest of creation placed the creation under human control.
Being the image bearers of God they stood in special relationship to him as vice regents on behalf of
God. They, thus presided over the destiny of the rest of creation. According to Hallman, This theological
concept of dominion has been one of the primary factors leading to the distinction that we make
between ourselves and the rest of creation. The distinction that emphasizes our differences from nature
and interprets that difference as superiority.
The Genesis creation text has been much of controversy in the history of biblical
interpretation. Differing interpretations have emerged out of the biblical command in the priestly version
of Genesis 1: 28ff. the two important words are: to “subdue” and to have “dominion”. The

2
commandment to “subdue” the earth has been taken as the permission of human activities of building,
mining and agriculture whereas dominion as one of control and domination. 3
1.3 The Notion of Spirituality
A spirituality that grew out of the anthropocentric interpretation of the Bible emphasized the
transitory nature of this world as it was a temporary home for God’s elect what one does with the world
was inconsequential so long as it helps advance human dominion over nature. Here on earth the people
of God were to keep themselves from being contaminated by this corrupt world. This gave birth to
another-worldly and ascetic spirituality which on the one hand stressed the need to live in harmony with
nature. While on the other, albeit unintentionally, gave rise to the concept of withdrawal from this world
which is impure and satanic. The inability to discern the operation of divine mystery in the process of
nature resulted in disregard and denial of meaning and purpose in nature.
The historical interpretation of the Bible centered human, stressed the metaphor of ascent and
the spiritual motif and the religious metaphor of “ascetic ascent” encouraged a negative attitude to this
world and a longing for the heavenly realm. The interpretation of the sacred text based on the
enlightenment mentality with its emphasis on science and reason and the separation of mind from
matter, body, from body, from soul, and humankind from the rest of creation, legitimized human
domination and exploitation of the created order. Nature was for the development of human reason
which takes place only in the context of human history. 4
2. Denial of Biblical role in the Ecological Crisis
While there are scholars and historians who hold Christian faith as being responsible for the
ecological crisis of today, others with equal fervor strongly deny any such charges against Christianity.
They point out that the biblical religion has so much to contribute towads a strong appreciation of the
created world that it is incorrect to hold the Biblical faith as being responsible for the crisis. Zebre
considers the entire Bible as an “ecological stimulate” when he says, “From the beginning to end, from
the first part to the last part, the Bible is an ecological book.” While Zerbe may have overstated his case,
there cannot be any denial of the biblical sensitivity towards ecological integrity. This may be noted in
three areas in the biblical narratives, namely, appreciation of creation, placing of human person in
relation to the creation and the association of nature with the human culture. 5
2.1 Appreciation of Creation
Most part of the biblical stories are found in the setting of the ordinary, everyday life of an
agricultural people. Biblical people to the most part lived in constant struggles with the forces of nature
in their efforts to satisfy their basic needs. Israel’s awareness of nature is evident in their stories of
creation, perception of creation as revelation of God and in the recognition of the intrinsic worth of
creation.
The Biblical stories in the book of Genesis begin with an account of the creation narratives. God
created the entire universe with all creatures within it and found them all to be good (Gen 1: 31). Among
the creatures there was a recognition and acceptance of each other. Each had its own spheres of
existence and was never a threat to the other. Nature in the Old Testament serves as the medium of
God’s revelation. God has revealed himself through nature and the events in nature (Ps 19: 1 cf Rom 1:
19). God has appeared to the people through the medium of nature such as, fire (Ex 3: 106) and
whirlwind (Ex 19: 16; Job 38: 1). The theophany of Yahweh through the storm is used in several passages
(Ps 18; 2 Sam 22: 8-16; Is 63: 19f). Diseases, locusts, plagues, famine, lack of rain and earthquakes (1 King
8: 2; 17: 1; Joel 1: 4) were events God used to express his displeasure and judgment over the people. The
New Testament, too, portrays nature as a medium of the revelation of God when Paul affirms: Ever since

5
the creation of the world his eternal power and divine nature, invisible though they are, have been
understood and seen through the things he has made. (Rom 1: 20). 6
2.2 Humans and Creation in Relation
The biblical narrative invariably present human stories in relation to the rest of God’s creation.
The life of the people of Israel was intrinsically bound up with the events and activity of nature as their
stories attest. There is recognition of an integral connection between human history and the history of
nature. It is in the context of nature that human history evolved and narrativized. All narratives speak of
this human-nature connection which is evident in their common origin, common living and common
destiny.
Biblical writers were people who lived “intimately in their ecologies.” Living in a rural setup in
ancient Palestine, they might have been better in contact with nature than the modern urban dwellers.
Their attachment to the productive soil gave them an understanding of inter relatedness of the humans
and earth. With its focus on human history, “The biblical view of man’s relation to nature is …definitely
anthropocentric”, yet as Derr points out, it was “devoid of false confidence in the results of man’s
mastery.7

2.3 Nature and Human Culture

Most part of the Old Testament deal with the stories of the ordinary, everyday life of the Jewish
people. The first mention of human culture described in Genesis 1: 26-28 is in the context of human
dominion over nature. This involves the cultivation and care of the earth (Gen 2: 15). Cultivation which
included serving and tending the garden is the work that involved the human culture. The human work
entails a constant relationship between humanity and the plant and the soul in which it grows. It is in the
balance of such a relationship between nature and culture that human labor becomes fruitful. The close
connection between nature and culture is evident in many of the biblical imageries being taken from the
context of nature. Hebrew architecture and art forms did not permit the use of human and animal
representations but used plants which were frequently symbolic.
3. Biblical Ambiguity and the Ecological Crisis
According to this view, biblical tradition is not forthright with regard to its views on nature. If
anything, the biblical position moves between two opposing poles. On the one hand, it seems to affirm
the goodness of nature and the responsibility of humankind to cherish and care for God’s creation, on
the other hand, there is a negative emphasis that stands out. This world is passing through and
something enduring is yet to be revealed in the future. The stress, then, is on divergent biblical
perspectives that grew out of differing biblical positions as the Bible does not present a “unified, codifies
perspective.” The biblical position as well as that of the Christian theology were considered equivocal
with regard to their position on the ecological crisis.
3.1 Divergent Biblical Positions
The divergent in the attitude towards nature as the biblical texts developed in the context of their
respective writers has given rise to differing interpretations. At certain places, the writer seems to be
favourably disposed towards nature, while at other times the emphasis is on human history. P Santmire
through a study of the history of theological interpretations delineates two over- riding motifs that
guided the interpretation: “the spiritual motif” with its stress on the metaphor of ascent and the
“ecological motif” stressing the metaphors of fecundity and migration to a good land. The variation in
emphasis on these dominant motifs at different parts of the Bible as in the history of Christian theology,
according to Santmire is the ambiguity in the ecological promise of Christian theology. 8
6

8
3.2 Differing Christian Interpretations
G S Hendry’s survey of the role the nature has played in the religious thought of the West since the
rise of modern science, to an extant, substantiates the above position. Hendry identifies four distinct
phases in the perception of the role of nature. They are: the fall and its effect on the world of nature and
humanity which turned nature in to a “realm of darkness as well as malice”, nature as a second source of
revelation as well as scripture, the preference of nature over Scripture as the revelation of God, and the
total emancipation of nature from religion and its secularization.
H Oliver, in a recent assessment of the Protestant Thought of the twentieth-century views that
the reformed traditions emphasis on grace as against nature accompanied by its overvaluation of history
and doctrine of God as being responsible for the neglect of nature. 9

2 4. Christian stewardship
Why is it that Christianity does not have this earth-healing effect everywhere it reaches? There are two
reasons:
The first challenge is to our almost unqualified embrace of the current economics of growth and
consumerism. Traditional capitalism’s emphasis on work and the rewards of honest labor, restrained by
Christianity and the Bible’s many admonishments against greed and covetousness, produced great
benefits for the good of society. Today, with Christianity relegated to the margins of society, the
economics of growth and consumerism are spiralling upward unchecked, driven by relentless advertising
and promulgating a worldview based upon dissatisfaction and craving. We are daily bombarded with
appeals that we will be happier if we buy more things that we don’t really need, that soon wear out, that
bring only fleeting pleasure, and ultimately leave us in greater debt. This drive to earn more so we can
get more has resulted in a booming economy, but at a disastrous cost to the human spirit and world
ecology.
The second challenge is to our assumption that this world does not matter in the eternal scheme of
things. It is interesting to note that the bestselling Christian fiction series of all time is the Left Behind
series by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins, which is about the last days. The minds and hearts of Christians
are focused less on this life and more on the life to come, and rightly so. Biblical prophecy predicts the
destruction of this world and the creation by God of a new heavens and a new earth. If this world and
everything in it is headed for destruction, then why should we worry about some ecological degradation
along the way?
The answer to these challenges is found in a right understanding of Christian stewardship. Christian
stewardship is based on the concept that everything we have was given to us—our health, our emotions,
our intellect, our talents, the social and economic benefits into which we have been born, and all we do
or earn or make with what God has given us—all ultimately are gifts from God for which we cannot take
credit. In fact, because God created everything, He owns everything and they are only on loan to us. We
are not owners but caretakers. And as the Biblical parable of the Talents tells us, we will be held
accountable to God for what we do with the resources He has entrusted to us.
Frederick and Julia Billings, and their granddaughter Mary French Rockefeller, were professing believers
in Jesus Christ and understood the concept of Christian stewardship. It was their implementation of the
principles of George Perkins Marsh at Marsh’s boyhood home that led to its becoming a national
historical park dedicated to conservation stewardship. It was their spirit and example that surely
contributed to Woodstock being recognized as the prettiest small town in America. They demonstrated
through a century of careful management their belief that stewardship of God’s creation does matter! If

9
we treat this world shabbily to meet our greed, our pleasure, our convenience, or our supposed
materialistic, consumptive and consumer-driven needs, we are not glorifying God as the Maker of
Heaven and earth.

More than all these arguments, the Yahwist tradition of creation story shows that the changes of
the earth that God entrusted to humankind id one of responsible stewardship or trusteeship. Humans
are told to “till the earth” and “care” or “keep” it, (Gen 2: 15) with the responsibility of a gardener, who
need to show great sensitivity to the resources available and the bounty. Thus a closer look at the
priestly narrative and the Yahwist narrative, shows that the function of the two narrative is to exhort the
human being to exercise trusteeship in relation to nature and to society. He has to “till” and develop the
world and at the same time watch over it, “keep” and preserve it from exploitation. Moving on to the
New Testament perspective we find that the stewardship is taken from Jesus’ parable of the injust
steward, (Lk 16: 1-8). The parable of the talents (Mt 25: 14-21) or the pounds (Lk 19: 11-28) make it clear
that the owner of the land puts severe demands on those to whom he entrusted his goods. 10

Conclusion

The ecological crisis that we experience at present, then, is caused by a combination if =factors,
including the ruthless exploitation of nature and her resources and a crisis of traditional cultural values
with its emphasis on caring and sharing. This in turn affects the quality of life of both the humans and
the non-human species as a result of displacement from natural habits. Experience of poverty and
malnutrition arising from the scarcity of resources due to growing instances of ill health. Biblical religion
has often been held responsible for promoting a worldview that supported the abuse of nature and her
resources, leading to such a plight of the poor. The divergent views on biblical position on human-nature
relationship seem to move from an appreciation of nature, on the one hand, to a devaluation of it as a
mere resources on the other.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Thomas, Srampickal, Ethics of Ecology, Jeevadhara Vol 21/126 (November 1991), 465-483.
K C Abraham, A Theological Response to Ecological Crisis, Bangalore Theological Forum Vol 25/1 (March,
1993): 3-14.
V J John, The Ecological Vision of Jesus (Thiruvalla: CSS-BTTBPSA, 2002), 51-67.
R L Sarkar, The Bible, Ecology and Environment (Delhi: ISPCK, 2000),

10