Ecological "blind spots" in the structure and content of recent evangelical systematic theologies

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Jun 2000 by Davis, John Jefferson

In the chapter on the atonement,80 Grudem does discuss the issue of the extent of the atonement, but this focuses on the impact of the cross on humanity only, not the creation. "Reconciliation" is likewise understood to involve only human beings (2 Cor 5:18), and Col 1:20 is not examined.

III. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

This examination of twenty representative systematic theology texts published since 1970 has shown that evangelical theologians tend to devote a disproportionate amount of space in their treatments of the doctrine of creation to matters related to evolution, the age of the earth, and the days of Genesis one. The percentages here ranged from a low of 0% to 81.8%, with the median being close to 31%. The amount of space in these same chapters devoted to developing the implications of the Biblical doctrine of creation for environmental stewardship ranged from a low of 0% to a high of 12.5%, with the median figure being about 1%. Nine of the authors (Lightner, Garrett, Moody, Williams, Finger, Johnson and Webber, Ryrie, Grenz, and Bloesch) were in the 0% category on explicit environmental application of the doctrine of creation. Three authors-McClendon, Grider, and Boice-were at the top of this category, devoting 9.3%, 9.7%, and 12.5% respectively of their treatments to such concerns. These results indicate not only the pervasive influence of the scientific enterprise in modern culture, but also the impact of the creationevolution controversies on the shaping-or misshaping-of the evangelical theological agenda.

It is likewise apparent that evangelical theologians generally do not see any connections between the atoning work of Christ and the future of the earth and Christian responsibility for its proper stewardship. Of the twenty texts examined in this study only one, that of Lewis and Demarest, specifically comments on Col 1:19-20 and the environmental impact of the cross of Christ. Lewis and Demarest do make this connection, noting that "Christ's sacrifice provides for future cosmic peace." When Christ returns, nature itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay, and believers will enjoy fellowship with God and one another in a new heaven and earth.81 This perspective is consistent with the authors' earlier concern that believers are to responsibly conserve the earth's limited resources.82

This paper concludes with a call for evangelical theologians to engage in further development of the doctrines of creation and the atonement with a view toward unfolding in a more systematic and integrated way the contemporary implications of these Biblical truths for Christian stewardship of the environment. The history of Christian thought shows that the church's understanding of its own theological heritage has often been deepened in response to critics outside the church and to heretics within. The early church's understanding of Christology and the Trinity was clarified through its struggles with Arius, Apollinarius, Nestorius, Eutyches, and other heterodox teachers.83 The early church asserted the goodness of the material world (Genesis 1) against the gnostics, and developed the understanding of creation ex nihilo in the face of Greek notions of the eternity of matter.84