Genesis 1:28, 2:15-20 God’s gift of dominion
Genesis 1:28 God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground."
Increase, subdue, rule. I don't think there is any way an environmentalist can deny the force of these terms. We are not to live as one with nature, we are to live as caretakers of nature. We do not commune in nature, we are to shepherd it. We do enjoy the benefit of nature, and we will pay the price if we abuse nature. I don't think there is any doubt, though, that humanity was created as the crowning achievement of God's activity. As the pride and joy of creation, part of our God-given duty is to manage it, for our benefit and the benefit of the rest of creation.
Most people probably use creation of the benefit of themselves. This is not fulfilling God's initial command to us. To "subdue" means to bring under control. IN this case, submission has a positive implication, if the ruler is benevolent. A benevolent and perfect Adam, established by God, can take a peaceful and orderly creation, which submits to his hand, and then subdue it and rule over it as a divinely-appointed manager. Doesn't sound like a bad set up to me.
Let me ask this questions: Is there anyway to rule nature? In the debate of global warming, it is becoming more apparent that, while our actions can have some impact on our environment, we truly don't have much control over some of the factors that dominate our world (i.e. the sun, atmosphere, El Nino, etc). So, how can we rule, or have dominion, over something that is beyond our control? Is this an issue that reflects the relative peace and tranquility of creation before the fall? If so, how does that peaceful image of creation compare to most evolutionary descriptions of a chaotic earth that arrives at some measure of stability?
What about this: This command was given before the Fall. Does this mean that child-bearing and farming occurred before the Fall? Does this mean that Adam and Eve had a family (or potentially had a family) in the Garden of Eden? Were they working already?
Increase, subdue, rule. I don't think there is any way an environmentalist can deny the force of these terms. We are not to live as one with nature, we are to live as caretakers of nature. We do not commune in nature, we are to shepherd it. We do enjoy the benefit of nature, and we will pay the price if we abuse nature. I don't think there is any doubt, though, that humanity was created as the crowning achievement of God's activity. As the pride and joy of creation, part of our God-given duty is to manage it, for our benefit and the benefit of the rest of creation.
Most people probably use creation of the benefit of themselves. This is not fulfilling God's initial command to us. To "subdue" means to bring under control. IN this case, submission has a positive implication, if the ruler is benevolent. A benevolent and perfect Adam, established by God, can take a peaceful and orderly creation, which submits to his hand, and then subdue it and rule over it as a divinely-appointed manager. Doesn't sound like a bad set up to me.
Let me ask this questions: Is there anyway to rule nature? In the debate of global warming, it is becoming more apparent that, while our actions can have some impact on our environment, we truly don't have much control over some of the factors that dominate our world (i.e. the sun, atmosphere, El Nino, etc). So, how can we rule, or have dominion, over something that is beyond our control? Is this an issue that reflects the relative peace and tranquility of creation before the fall? If so, how does that peaceful image of creation compare to most evolutionary descriptions of a chaotic earth that arrives at some measure of stability?
What about this: This command was given before the Fall. Does this mean that child-bearing and farming occurred before the Fall? Does this mean that Adam and Eve had a family (or potentially had a family) in the Garden of Eden? Were they working already?
Labels: creation, environmentalism, Genesis
posted by Randy Rogers at
1:11 PM
4 Comments:
Looking in
'Gen1:26...let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.'
and
'Gem3:15. And the Lord God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.'
Both indicate that man had a purpose and responsibility. Dominion as opposed to domination; and caretaking, respectively.
Have I heard that there seems to be a difference, perhaps syntactical, in the first and second chapters so that there is indication they may be two different versions, by way of the teller, of the same story, the second chapter having a very strong likelihood that Moses authored it, while in the first chapter perhaps Moses only recorded from a verbal tradition that had been handed down?
suppersdone more later perhaps
RobertRe
robfre,
I don't know if the Hebrew grammar offers any clues as to the origin of Gen. 1 and 2. I am sure a more knowledgable Hebrew scholar can speak to this. What I am seeing in G. Wehnam's Genesis commentary from the Word Biblical Commentary series is this: that Gen. 1 has similar language to that of the Psalms, and may in fact be the latter of the two accounts. This would match your description of Gen. 2 being written earlier (perhaps by Moses), and then Gen. 1 being written later to introduce the whole account.
Robert writes
Randy,
I was just thinking after reading your latest post covering a similar topic, that Elohim would seem to fit a time, perhaps later than the creation and garden era, when men would have encountered other entities such as those of Pharoah's priests whose shafts turned to snakes (just not big enough nor hungry enough to deal with Moses shaft) when thrown on the floor; in other words a contextual reeference indicating that Yahweh eth Elohim(or vice versa).
Robert
It looks like childbearing was to be a part of that environment(be fruitful and multiply) and at least pruning and gathering but not irrigating and seeding and cultivating. As to animal husbandry I cannot tell. It is almost as if the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil(why capitalized?) was a 'Pandora's Box' what with sweat and toil and pain and maybe even weeds and vermin coming after the fruit was eaten!
The animal husbandry thing might be a whole other topic to discuss in terms of our responsibility in dominion, Noah's gained permission to eat the flesh of animals and things like swine apartment houses and cattle feedyards and mega dairies and even chinchilla farms.
RFR
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home