Comments on: An open response regarding Christian environmentalism

By: tc robinson

tc robinson — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 19:12:49 +0000

Are Premillennialists bad for the Environment?

By: Dave

Dave — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 18:22:01 +0000

I think that I would agree wiht aspects of both EE and TC’s viewpoints. I believe that most of the modern day push for (what I consider to be ) hyper-environmentalism is from those who are opposed, and often times actively combating, the Christian faith. Therefore I think caution needs to be exercised when considering environmental issues, because there is often a more fundamental difference in worldviews behind it. I also think that the Genesis dominion mandate is explicit in stating that the world is made for our dominion, and we are to subdue it to benefit us. That comes with a caveat, however, in that we are also to care for it, which would preclude reckless abuse. Utilizing it for our own good and comfort is a healthy God mandated thing. Abusing it is the result of a (I think) sinful desire for power or destruction. As in all things there is a balance. The focus must remain on the creator and not the created. I think that this would be true for any Christian, regardless of their eschatological viewpoints.

Dave

By: tc robinson

tc robinson — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:55:35 +0000

Can you share more on what “Christian Ethics” means to a premil on the topic of environmentalism? I’m trying to understand how you resolve your stated love of creation with an apparent fatalism toward that same creation.

El, I’m not speaking for all premils here, but let me start with quoting Peter:

Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to live holy and godly lives as you look forward to the day of God and speed its coming (2 Pet 3:11-12, TNIV).

Peter says that Eschatology should lead to Christian ethics, which include “to live hold and godly lives.”

In reference to the creation, Peter says “everything will be destroyed,” and then we’re looking forward to a new creation.

At this point I agree with NT Wright on his concept of discontinuity and continuity.

In the meantime we need to care for our environment but we know where it’s headed: “Like a garment it is wearing out” (Heb 1:11). What does it mean that it’s “wearing out”?

It’s experiencing the groans of childbirth (Rom 8:22). What does that mean?

By: ElShaddai Edwards

ElShaddai Edwards — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:42:06 +0000

TC – in a comment to your post “Is the Church too lax on eschatology?” you say that “eschatology in Scripture is meant to spur us onto Christian Ethics”.

By: tc robinson

tc robinson — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:22:13 +0000

El, I’m premil, but that doesn’t mean I think we should not be good stewards of our environment. The overly zealous rhetoric with no regard for Scripture is what I have a problem with.

Even though NT Wright is clearly Amil, we both agree about what this creation is going to look like in the end.

I love the flourishing trees and so on, but I know that where this creation is headed.

I believe we can agree to disagree in the spirit of Christ on these matters.

By: ElShaddai Edwards

ElShaddai Edwards — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 13:24:53 +0000

@Damian: I am not the one to assume any mantle of wisdom and my intent is not to open a debate on the specifics of premillennialism. I wished only to point out the mindset that seems prevalent by many who hold that position and disagree with it.

By: ElShaddai Edwards

ElShaddai Edwards — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 13:12:05 +0000

I believe I’ve been misunderstood.

Seriously?

By: tc robinson

tc robinson — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 08:18:05 +0000

I believe I’ve been misunderstood. I’m sorry I didn’t make myself clearer on the matter.

By: Damian

Damian — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 07:41:02 +0000

E.S.,

I’m decided not to post a comment in T.C.’s thread, as we’d already had a disagreement about his rapture eschatology on the basis of what this ‘misuse of eschatology’. But I’m glad I’m not the only one who finds this attitude a little appalling, and further glad that those wiser than I (such as you) can find stronger reasons that that repulsion to argue against it.

I’ll look back again now, to see other’s replies.

Thanks!