Does God Love Forests More Than Cities?

Does God Love Forests More Than Cities? is a great piece by Richard Mouw. I really love it because I love cities too.

From a biblical perspective, there are real problems with the back-to-nature scenario. As many commentators have pointed out, the Bible begins with God creating a beautiful garden. But at the end of the Bible, we are told that a splendid City—golden streets and all—will descend from the heavens.

The God who designs gardens is also an urban planner. And while the Creator does want us to care deeply about fields and forests and ice caps and woodpeckers, he also urges us to promote signs of beauty and well-being in humanity's crowded places.

…..

But I also think a lot about God's love of cities. And I will be thinking about that—along with my concern for polar bears and baby seals and bird sanctuaries—on this Earth Day. "The earth is the Lord's, and the fullness thereof," the Psalmist says (Ps. 24:1). But he quickly adds, "the world, and they that dwell therein"—including, I am sure he had in mind, the people who live in cities.

(Hat Tip to Presbyweb)


Comments

4 responses to “Does God Love Forests More Than Cities?”

  1. Ed Darrell Avatar
    Ed Darrell

    God commands us to stewardship of the Earth. Good cities requires large amounts of natural space, to keep the air and water clean, for example. Cities without water die, as history shows us (see Babylon, for example).
    God does not pit one part of the Earth against another — that’s a conceit of humans. We are charged to take care of all of it, to use what we use wisely, to conserve, preserve, and increase the value of what we have been given.
    But given a choice between God-created forests and human-created cities, one might be excused for choosing that from which God’s fingerprints have not been expunged.

  2. Thanks for the observations Ed. The biblical narrative begins in a garden (Eden) and ends in a city (New Jerusalem) where God makes his dwelling with humanity. It does not not teach the restoration of a garden. What can we say about what God prefers?

  3. Ed Darrell Avatar
    Ed Darrell

    It’s also true that God destroys cities, but preserves gardens. We can say that a city designed by God is preferable to a city designed by humans, and that God tends to favor natural over man-made.
    We can definitely say that God charged Adam and Noah with being stewards of the Earth, and we know for certain that unless we preserve vast wild stretches, people die early of nasty diseases.
    Perhaps New Jerusalem has its own water supply. But until that time, God has charged us with taking care of the Earth we have — all of it. Then, as if to emphasize the point, God has given us cholera, typhoid, lead, mercury, acid rain, and assorted other biological and chemical plagues to wipe out the cities we build, if we don’t preserve the wild areas well enough.
    Until New Jerusalem comes, we oughtt do God’s bidding, I think.

  4. On Feburary 24 I did a post that I think has application here:
    BEGIN
    I mentioned earlier that there was as a city in Canaan called Shalem. It is time to say more about this city. The earliest reference to the city was 1850 B.C.E. in Egyptian texts. Baal was the god of all nations in the Near East, except for Egypt, and each locality had its own version of Baal. Shalem was the Baal for its region. It was in the same family of Gods as Ashtar and Molech. Cities of the Near East like Shalem weren’t just economic centers. They were religious centers. They were the very incarnation of the deity worshiped. These religious cities were the highest expression of defiance against God. Babel, or Babylon, was the archetypical city in defiance of God and Shalem was just another manifestation of Babel.
    Shalem symbolized Venus, the evening star. It conveyed the idea of completeness and fulfillment, the culmination of the day. Shalem is in the Bible. We first encounter Shalem in Genesis 14:18 where the priest-king Melchizedek comes out to bless Abraham. (The anglicized version of the name is spelled “Salem.”) The ancient texts that referred to the city often referred to it as Urushalim meaning “foundation of Shalem.” David annexed the area of Urushalim to Israel after Israel had conquered Canaan. He altered the name of the city and made it his capital. He took the first syllable for God’s name, “Yah” from Yahweh, and added to the front of the name: Yahurushalim. The anglicized name for God is Jehovah and the first syllable is “Je.” Therefore, anglicized name of the city becomes “Jerusalem.” The very word I wrote about earlier, shalom, appears to have evolved from the Canaanite word “shalem.” (1)
    The theological imagery here is powerful. “Shalem” originally meant completion and fulfillment through human idolatry. God enters the picture and infuses a new vision of what completion and fulfillment really is. God adds his name to that which was humanity’s highest expression of defiance toward him (Urushalim) and transforms it to God’s foundation of completion and fulfillment (Jerusalem). What is the euphemism for the newly restored order at the end of the biblical narrative given in Revelation? The New Jerusalem!
    Urusalem > Jerusalem > New Jerusalem
    This is the mission of God in the world. To transform Shalem to Shalom and Urusalem to the New Jerusalem. God will not abide the vain illusions created by his rebel eikons. God will disillusion the world that all may see God for who God is. God will renew shalom.
    (1) Much of the preceding comes from, Robert C. Linthicum, City of God. City of Satan: A Biblical Theology of the Urban Chruch, Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1991, p. 24-26.
    END
    We haven’t had conversation before so I don’t know where you might be coming from. Would you agree that the mission of the Kingdom is to be giving evidence in the present of the world that is to come? Would that not include living in arrangements that foreshadow the New Jerusalem?
    I fully agree that the wanton destruction of the natural world is sinful. God created the world and called it good. Therefore, it is of high value. However, he did not call it best!
    God created humanity in his image. What do we distinctively share with God if not reason and creativity? He placed humanity in the garden “to work it” and care for it. We were told to “fill the earth,” which is more than just a numbers game. It is his desire to see his character evidenced throughout the earth by having beings who share his creative nature fill the earth. We were not put here to keep the earth as a museum piece but to use our creative nature to bring creation to fulfillment in God. There is very clearly implication of moving from something raw to something more refined.
    Yes, cities can be awful places that enhance rebellion against God but they can also be places that enhance human welfare including learning, prosperity, health and host of other benefits. Until Jesus returns cities will always be a mixture of Babylon and the New Jerusalem.
    What concerns me about the perspective you are describing is that it seems to place creation above those whom the creator created in His image. It negates the very traits that, though corrupted, give far more evidence of God’s glory than what we call nature. It sounds to me like you view human existence like the machines in the Matrix; as some sort of parasite. (I don’t intend to put words in your mouth. That is just how it hits me.)
    The natural world is good and needs to be dealt with responsibly and with conservation in mind. But it is not God’s highest agenda.
    I hope I am not sounding belligerent here. My passion can come across as anger in this electronic medium and that is not the case. Hopefully this comes across like two guys having a calm but engaged discussion over a cup of coffee.
    I really appreciate you weighing in.
    Peace!

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Kruse Kronicle

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading