Showing posts with label categories. Show all posts
Showing posts with label categories. Show all posts

Thursday, February 5, 2009

Pro-Environment But Pro-Choice: Contradiction and Categories

This entry in Oikonomia features a link to the CedarEthics podcast in which Dr. Dennis Sullivan, Director of the Center for Bioethics at Cedarville University invited me to discuss a rather puzzling pattern in our culture. First, let me frame the issue using many of Dr. Sullivan’s opening remarks. Then you can go to the podcast link below and listen.

Dr. Sullivan notes that former President George Bush was notably pro-life in his outlook. This means that he was opposed to abortion, embryo-destructive research, and euthanasia, among other things. In contrast, Mr. Bush was not recognized for a strong stand on environmental protection. He opposed U.S. ratification of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change, and he favored opening up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for oil drilling, positions that angered environmental activists.

However, the inauguration of Barack Obama as our new president has led to sweeping political changes, and his views on certain key ethical concerns are dramatically different than his predecessor. For example, he has stated that he would sign the Freedom of Choice Act, which would eliminate many legal limitations on abortions, including parental notification laws and waiting periods, and would even overturn our present ban on partial birth abortion. By the time you read this, the president may already have signed an executive order to permit government funding of embryonic stem cell research, something the Bush Administration would not permit. One the other hand, Dr. Sullivan points out that our new president is considered by many to be a friend to the environment and in favor of more controls on pollution and greater protection for natural resources. The two presidents appear to be quite representative of the views of their respective supporters.

So, it seems that being pro-life means also being anti-environment, if our national discourse is any indication. My discussion with Dr. Sullivan on the CedarEthics Podcast addressed the question, “Why do both of these ethical concerns live at opposite sides of the political spectrum?” Please click on the link below, listen, reflect on the points being made, and reply if you would like to comment or raise a question.

CedarEthics Podcast - Pro-Life or Pro-Environment: Poles Apart? (16)

Thursday, November 27, 2008

Not Dominion But Rebellion -– and Restoration

I introduced Oikonomia to the blogsphere to promote reflection upon the nature of human responsibility to exercise dominion over the Earth and to exercise stewardship of the material resources, time, and talents we have received from our Creator.

We began by exalting YAHWEH as the “Greatest Subject” (August 1, 2008) for He is the King of all creation. Yet, surprisingly, the “Greatest Subject” chose to “subject” all of creation to the dominion of humankind as noted in our August 11 entry. God invited mankind to exercise dominion and thus be living examples of how God would rule over creation. We quoted Psalm 8 in this blog entry which calls us to contemplate the wondrous fact that the God of heaven would elevate humankind to the position of exercising dominion over His glorious creation:

What is man that You take thought of him,
And the son of man that You care for him?
Yet You have made him a little lower than God,
And You crown him with glory and majesty!
You make him to rule over the works of Your hands;
You have put all things under his feet Psalm 8:4-6

In the August 29 and September 19 entries, we considered the importance of recognizing categories as one of the basic principles of biblical dominion – i.e. “Dominion 101.” Sadly, humankind failed the course when Adam and Eve failed to follow God’s command not to take and eat from one category among the trees of the Garden of Eden – the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil (Genesis 3). Suddenly aware of their nakedness and seeking to hide from the One with Whom they had walked and talked in the Garden, they sought to hide by camouflaging themselves with coverings of plant leaves.

Since mankind’s original “fall” in the Garden, there has been the “confusion of categories.” When we are out of fellowship with God, our view of God is diminished as stated in Romans 1:21 – they did not honor Him as God or give thanks. And often, our view of ourselves may be exalted in pride – professing to be wise they became fools (Rom 1:22) . Together, these sins tend to blur the distinctions between God and mankind; and between mankind and the other creatures. This is the “confusion of categories” that is actually promoted by pantheism (see entries for Aug. 29 and Sept. 19). In the Sept. 19 entry, we noted that proper exercise of dominion “requires that humans be humans, taking responsibility for dominion as God intended it– being image-bearers of the Almighty God and Glorious King of all creation.” We asked how this can be accomplished. The answer in part is that we must begin in humility and confession of sin. Then seek God’s wisdom and provision to be the servant kings He wants us to be:

Prayer: Lord, I can relate to Adam and Eve’s alienation from You through my own sin. Immediately, I see myself as defiled and degraded and not as one crowned with glory and majesty who can rule over the works of Your hands. Forgive me for rationalizing my own sin, sometimes blaming You, my Creator; sometimes blaming others, or looking for reasons to accuse them or find fault in them. Instead, help me own up to my own sin, for I have sinned against You. Purify me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; Wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow (Psalm 51:7). Then, You will delight in righteous sacrifices (v. 19a) on this glorious Thanksgiving Day.

Friday, September 19, 2008

Dominion 101 – A Course to Be Banned?

There I stood at the Columbus Zoo, looking through the glass at a bonobo, or pigmy chimpanzee. Her eyes and facial expression conveyed a welcome as the bonobo stood up in a human-like posture as if to greet me. Another one appeared, possibly her mate. I watched their behavior, at times entertaining, at other times showing respect for one another–touching, cuddling, nurturing.

As I observed their form and behavior, I reflected on the claim by many in our culture that Homo sapiens are simply one of several species of upright primates. What’s more, thanks to gene mapping, we now know that bonobos and humans have more than 98% of their DNA in common. Like humans, these chimps are capable of making and using tools, and both species live in families and form social bonds involving sexual behavior.

Although human rational ability surpasses that of the bonobo, the striking genetic, morphological, and social resemblances have led many to believe that humans are simply the most advanced product of a long evolutionary process. If this is true, how is it that humans should claim superiority or moral authority over other animal species?

In the August 29 entry, we emphasized that at the heart of our hypothetical course “Dominion 101" is the belief that God occupies a distinctly different “category of being” from His creation. If God’s distinctness from His creation as taught in Scripture is denied, there is no basis for His ownership of and dominion over creation.

Another foundational teaching of Dominion 101 is that God gave humans the right to exercise dominion over the other creatures. The psalmist, David, wrote:

When I consider Your heavens, the work of Your fingers,
The moon and the stars, which You have ordained;
What is man that You take thought of him,
And the son of man that You care for him?
Yet You have made him a little lower than God,
And You crown him with glory and majesty!
You make him to rule over the works of Your hands;
You have put all things under his feet... Psalm 8: 3-6.

According to this and other Scriptures (e.g. Genesis 1:26-28), humans clearly have a unique place in God’s rule over creation. But humans have not generally exercised benevolent rule over the rest of the creation as befitting one who has been crowned with “glory and majesty.” Indeed, many environmentalists, in effect, call for a ban on the course, Dominion 101 because they reject the Judeo-Christian concept of “dominion.” Instead, they call for humans to learn to live in unity and harmony among the other species so that no one species can take advantage of other species.

Pantheistic teaching fits the bill for many environmentalists who see “categories” and “dominion” as the cause of the environmental crisis. Pantheism is often accepted as he solution for the “environmental crisis” because it denies categories and teaches peace and harmony between humans and nature which are both seen as part of a divine unity.

Albert Schweitzer was highly respected by those who sought this pantheistic unity and equality among the plants and animals. However, as Francis Schaeffer, in Pollution and the Death of Man: The Christian View of Ecology (Tyndale House), pointed out, “a pantheistic stand always brings man to an impersonal and low place rather than elevating him. At the end of his life, Schweitzer’s pantheism, instead of going toward a higher view of those among whom he worked, went toward a lower view.” If this assertion is true, humans cannot truly value and care for nonhuman species by abrogating our position of dominion and returning to the forest or meadow on an equal level with the other species such as the bonobo. Instead, “true environmentalism” requires that humans be humans, taking responsibility for dominion as God intended it– being image-bearers of the Almighty God and Glorious King of all creation. But how can we accomplish this?

Friday, August 29, 2008

Dominion 101 – Categories Are Essential

Beginning at a very early age, learning depends upon our ability to distinguish categories of things. As babies, it was essential that we learned to distinguish Mommy from Daddy. In baby foods, we could distinguish pureed carrots from peaches. Doggies and kitties are different “species” of animals; both are different from trees, and so on. Yet, while a recent ABC poll reported that 95 percent of responders claimed to believe in God, there is a diversity of opinions as to the nature of God.

Pantheism teaches that God and the natural world are one. Creation is simply an extension of God’s essence. In his book, Pollution and the Death of Man: The Christian View of Ecology (Tyndale House), Francis Schaeffer notes that, without categories, “in pantheistic thinking...one simply does not have a creation, but only an extension of God’s essence, in which any such term as “God’s creation”...has no place (p. 26).”

However, those who accept the authority of biblical revelation, believe that God and His creation (or, “the world of nature”) belong in separate categories. They are separate entities, ontologically speaking. Genesis 1:1 states that “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth.” Thus, God is ontologically distinct from His creation from a historical standpoint. That is, He existed before the heavens and the earth; and then, He created them out of nothing (ex nihilo).

God is also distinct from creation today as He has always been. In the New Testament book of Colossians 1:17, we read, “in Him all things hold together.” God is not only the Creator of the physical realm, but also the Sustainer Who holds it together in ways that are only partly evident through what we can discover as laws of physics and chemistry. This God, Whom we have called “the Greatest Subject,” chose to “subject” His creation to mankind so we would exercise dominion over creation.

But we rejected God’s plan and therefore, failed the course, “Dominion 101.” A major reason for this failure was the failure to recognize God’s holiness and uniqueness. Genesis 1-2 makes it very clear that there are categories of being, and God is supreme and in a category unique from all others.
For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks,
but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Professing to be wise, they became fools, – Romans 1: 21-22

In the next entry, we consider how failure to acknowledge categories of being was responsible for the beginning of humankind’s poor record of stewardship of the earth.