Eco-Theology in the Old Testament

Sometimes, within or outside Christian circles, the opinion is voiced that the Bible is indifferent toward the environment or that environmental ethics are largely absent from the Bible, especially in the Old Testament. These positions were not shared by the participants of this research. The study showed that Ukrainian and Russian Orthodox and Evangelical Christians believed that many Old Testament passages were not indifferent toward the environment and helped to avoid anthropocentrism in the ecological debate.

Speaking about animals and nature in the Bible, the interviewees in this study made references to various Old Testament books (by 28% of Evangelicals and 32% of Orthodox). A number of biblical passages were cited only once either by Evangelical or Orthodox respondents. For example, they mentioned the sun standing still in the book of Joshua (Joshua 10), clothes and diet of the prophet Elijah (2 Kings 1:8), Jonah's being in the belly of a great fish (Jonah 1-2), and the prophet Daniel's sojourn at the bottom of the den of lions (Daniel 6).

Several Old Testament narratives were mentioned by the respondents from both faith traditions. Three Evangelical and three Orthodox interviewees mentioned the Old Testament story of Noah (Genesis 6-9), especially the building of the ark and the Great Flood. For example, an Orthodox interviewee said:

"*I will refer to the story of Noah. The Bible demonstrates that when it comes to salvation, this also implies care for various animals, their salvation, because they live in the same world with humans. This means that the well-being and life of humans is impossible without the lives of other living creatures. We share the same creation and, in a sense, have the same future* ... *. The question of the salvation of people touches the issues of how we can preserve and continue the happy and safe existence of other creatures*".

Another Orthodox respondent stated, "*God loves not only humans but also everything that he created. And Noah built that ship not only for himself as a selfish man, but also for animals that were saved there with him*".

In total, seven Evangelical and four Orthodox respondents mentioned Old Testament laws and regulations related to nature and animals. One Evangelical interviewee paraphrased Deuteronomy 20:19-20 as, "*When you wage war, don't destroy trees*". As another example, an Orthodox priest alluded to Leviticus 25 and said, "*The earth is God's property and, according to the Bible, nobody can own it permanently. One can use and cultivate it for a limited period of time. Every seven years people should give the earth rest to be restored*".

Eight Evangelical and nine Orthodox referred to Psalms and Proverbs that contained ideas related to nature, animals, and creation care. For example, an Evangelical respondent paraphrased the text from Proverbs 12:10: "*The righteous person cares even about cattle*".

Several Orthodox interviewees argued that liturgical practice has helped them remember certain passages of Scriptures associated with nature and the animal world. One such example was, "*Every evening service in the Orthodox liturgy begins with the reading of Psalm 104 in which David, as a prophet, was very excited and talked about the creation of the world*".

#### Eco-Theology in Jesus and the Gospels

It is noteworthy that not many interviewees in this study linked the themes of nature, creation, and creation care with the person of Jesus Christ and/or referred to the Gospels to express this connection. Only three Evangelicals and nine Orthodox stated this emphasis. All references to Jesus could be divided into two categories: (1) Jesus' interaction with nature; and (2) nature in Jesus's teaching. The following response of an Orthodox interviewee served as an example of this first category: "*In the Gospels, we see how many times the Lord calmed the storm before his disciples*". An Evangelical interviewee response illustrated the second category: "*Christ gave many examples derived from his observations of Israel's agrarian life* ... *. Apparently, God gave the earth to us as an example and object for our observations. Looking at plants and animals, we, among other things, explore the Creator's character".*

Only one interviewee (from 151 participants in this study)—an Orthodox priest—made a theological connection between creation and the death/resurrection of Jesus: "*Everything had to be restored by man, which is why Christ is the new Adam who came to set us free from sin, curse, and death. And he did it. The Lord himself said it in his sermons*". Perhaps the fact that only one interviewee mentioned Jesus as savior of the universe suggests that Evangelical and Orthodox Christians in Ukraine and Russia rarely view ecological problems in light of Jesus' redemptive ministry of salvation; i.e., his plan to heal, bring peace, rescue, reconcile, and restore creation. This means that in the eco-theological consciences of Orthodox and Evangelicals in Russia and Ukraine, there predominates a so-called anthropocentric bias; i.e., a bias that presupposes that humans are the most important part of God's creation. This bias devaluates the other-than-human creation in God's redemption through Jesus Christ.

#### Eco-Eschatology

Modern biblical scholars argued that Christian eschatology was essential to creation care (Kelly 2015; Moo 2006; Williams 2018), but certain eschatological beliefs, such as premillennial dispensationalism, could discourage Christians from caring for creation (Snyder 2011, p. 55). Basically, Christian eschatology refers to the Second Coming of Christ (Parousia), Final Judgement, resurrection, and the restoration of creation (Noble 2015; Thiselton 2015, p. 382).

Most Orthodox Christians in this study did not think about creation care, environmental issues, nature, and animals in terms of anticipation of an eschatological wholeness to a broken creation. Eschatological texts were mentioned only by 17 interviewees total. Among Orthodox interviewees, one priest from Ukraine mentioned the book of Revelation. He said, "*Revelation teaches that everything will be renewed* ... *. Salvation lies not only in the salvation of individual humans (or humanity at all), but in the whole creation, including nature".* The other 16 references to various eschatological biblical texts were made by Evangelicals: Isaiah 11:6 (mentioned 4 times); Romans 8:22 (8 times); 2 Peter 3:10 (5 times); and Revelation (8 times).

Evangelical participants revealed different eschatological positions. Some held a premillennial view. For example, two evangelical interviewees connected Romans 8:22 with the concept of the Millennial kingdom. One stated:

"*I know that the whole creation groans and waits for the revelation of the sons of God*

... *. The redemption of the whole creation will take place when humanity is redeemed*

... *. Most likely, it is about the Millennial kingdom because the earth and all works will be burned up by that time*".

Another evangelical pastor interpreted 2 Peter 3:10 literally and said, "*The earth and all works will be burned up, and this is fact. But this does not free us from the responsibility for implementation of the first and second commandments*". Premillennial eschatology is quite common among Evangelicals in Russia and Ukraine. Mokienko (2018) argued that this helped explain a weak environmental concern among Pentecostals in Ukraine (p. 265).

Of course, some Evangelicals admitted that they did not agree with a literal interpretation of 2 Peter 3:10, but believed that in the future the earth will be renewed through God's redemptive work, and that those who did not care for creation will be punished by God. Here are several examples of this viewpoint:

"*As for the texts that say that all works on earth will be burned up, I think that they are imagery and not suggesting that the earth will be destroyed by fire at the end of times. The passages that talk about the new heavens and the new earth do not imply that everything will be brand new. What we have now will be renewed in the future, which is why we should care for it with the understanding that it will be renewed*".

"*I admit that God's wrath will be on those who are careless about nature and destroy it*".

"*The making of the new heaven and new earth will be completed with the transformation of the old creation into new. Ecology and other things will work as they should on the new earth. And we should do everything we can to accelerate the fulfilling of this prophecy*".

Bible, Tradition, and Eco-Hermeneutics

Participants in this study had distinct hermeneutical and theological frameworks related to their understanding of authoritative foundations for their faith and practice (Antonenko 2004; Breck 2001; Dobykin 2016; Florovsky 1972; Likhosherstov 2013; Negrov 2002, 2006, 2008; Puzynin 2012; Stylianopoulos 1997). In this research, it was noted that in expressing personal theological perspectives on ecology and ecological responsibility, Evangelical interviewees mainly concentrated on the biblical texts and used literal understanding of the Bible, while Orthodox respondents made references to the writings of the Church Fathers and used allegorical (figurative) understanding of biblical passages that they cited. The following three paragraphs highlight the Orthodox viewpoints.

Church Tradition is essential to Eastern Orthodoxy, and therefore the respondents of this tradition illustrated their eco-theological perspectives by mentioning the writings of Church Fathers and/or experience/example of the Orthodox monastics and the just. Several respondents mentioned Seraphim of Sarov, Sergius of Radonezh, Gerasimus of the Jordan, Mary of Egypt, Silouan the Athonite, and Isaac of Nineveh. It was quite interesting that the Orthodox interviewees did not mention Maximus the Confessor, whose theological perspectives on creation are suggested to be relevant for the present ecological crisis (Bordeianu 2009; Jenkins 2008). Among the modern Orthodox spiritual leaders, four interviewees cited the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, Bartholomew I, known for his proenvironmental position (Bartholomew 2015; Chryssavgis 2003), and who is often called the Green Patriarch (Theokritoff 2017).

One of the interviewees, an Orthodox priest from Ukraine, connected the example of the saints with the idea of creation's interconnectedness. He noted, "*Seraphim of Sarov was in harmony and communication with God, which is why he always maintained harmony with God's creation, nature. Therefore, everything is connected and by no means can be divided*".

Five Orthodox interviewees (10% of all Orthodox participants) articulated their ecotheological ideas with the help of figurative interpretations of several biblical texts. For example, one Orthodox priest recounted the story of a Canaanite woman in the Gospel of Matthew 15:21-28. He interpreted the words of this woman—*"Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master's table"* (v. 27 NIV) as follows, "*In this passage Jesus compares dogs with the non-Jewish nations that are no less valuable than the Jewish people. Thus, for Jesus, the animals are also valuable".* Another Orthodox interviewee indicated that God's creation should be harmonious. This he concluded from the fact that Jesus cursed the fig tree (Mark 11:12-14, 20-25). He stated that the "*poor harvest of the fig tree is a sign of the broken ecological harmony, which leads to and results from the curse. The initial plan of God for the whole creation was to be harmonious and fruitful*". Yet another Orthodox priest from Ukraine made this statement, "*Nature is also involved in salvation of humans because Jesus died on the cross made of wood".* We are not suggesting that these remarks of Orthodox respondents misinterpret biblical text. The point we want to make is that the Evangelical interviewees expressed their eco-theological perspectives by mentioning biblical texts without proposing various deeper levels of meanings to those texts.

#### **5. Conclusions**

This research has shown that Evangelical and Orthodox Christians in Russia and Ukraine were able to express basic eco-theological Christian ideas, but their eco-theological framework was not yet fully developed. While most Evangelical and Orthodox participants recognized that the ecological situation in the world and their countries was unpleasant, less than 35% of all respondents actively practiced environmental leadership.

There are various trajectories in how Evangelical and Orthodox Christians understand the connection between religion and ecology. On the one hand, their religious beliefs provide the framework for their perception of theory and practice of Christian environmental leadership. Most respondents demonstrated the knowledge of how the Bible corresponds with the ecological crisis and other environmental issues. They shared the belief that the natural world is good since it was created by God, who commanded humans care for a balanced biodiversity and ecosystems.

On the other hand, there are a few factors that impede the development of environmental leadership among Evangelicals and Orthodox in Russia and Ukraine. First, many Christians believe that the value of nature and animals lies in satisfying the physical needs of men and women. This utilitarian and anthropocentric view has little to do with the Bible and/or Christian tradition and rather is rooted in the modernistic worldview. It also

rotted in the anthropocentric view of the salvific work of Christ and in the anthropocentric eschatological perspectives. Second, although most Evangelical and Orthodox Christians believed that the idea of creation care was rooted in the Bible and/or Holy Tradition, only a small number of them agreed that Christians were responsible for practicing and developing environmental leadership. It was especially seen in the responses of Evangelical Christians, who often insisted on the idea that Christians should preach the Gospel and save souls instead of caring for creation. Third, several Evangelical and Orthodox Christians in Russia and Ukraine were skeptical of claims and actions that came from environmentalists, climate activists, and politicians, and thus associated creation care with secular political agendas.

This study revealed that the Evangelical and Orthodox perspectives on eco-theology and environmental leadership can enrich interfaith dialogues and boost meaningful projects related to creation care. Needless to say, environmental issues cannot be addressed by individuals and/or fragmented communities. Of course, it is difficult to foresee that the high-ranking Church leaders, especially in Russia, would urge cooperation between the Evangelicals and Orthodox in fostering eco-theological discussions that will advance effective environmental leadership. Yet, in Ukraine, there are several academic communities that exemplify the willingness for meaningful dialogues and connections between the Evangelical and Orthodox theologians and practitioners (especially, the Department of Theology and Religious Studies of the MP Dragomanov National Pedagogical University, the Open Orthodox University of St. Sophia the Wisdom, and the Eastern European Institute of Theology).

This article's aims were to compare the perspectives of the Orthodox and Evangelical Christians in Russia and Ukraine related to eco-theology and environmental leadership. The article fills the existing gap on the topic and lays the foundation for further inquiry. It is obvious that other studies should pay attention to several urgent and important questions:


**Author Contributions:** Both authors contributed to all sections of the article. Both authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This research received no external funding.

**Institutional Review Board Statement:** Not applicable.

**Informed Consent Statement:** Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

**Data Availability Statement:** Due to the nature of this research, participants of this study did not agree for their data to be shared publicly, so supporting data is not available.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.

### **Note**

<sup>1</sup> In this article, we use the term "Orthodox Christians" to refer to the religious adherants of the existing independent Orthodox Churches in Ukraine and Russia. The term "Evangelicals" is used to denote those who belong to various Russian and Ukrainian Baptist, Pentecostal, and charismatic congregations.

### **References**


Ayres, Jennifer R. 2017. Cultivating the "unquiet heart": Ecology, education, and Christian faith. *Theology Today* 74: 57–65. [CrossRef]


Bebbington, David W. 1989. *Evangelicalism in Modern Britain: A History from the 1730s to the 1980s*. London: Unwin Hyman.

Becker, William H. 1992. Ecological Sin. *Theology Today* 49: 152–64. [CrossRef]


Moo, Douglas, and Jonathan Moo. 2018. *Creation Care: A Biblical Theology of the Natural World*. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.

Mumrikov, Oleg. 2013. Христиaнство и Экологический Кризис: ΠрaвослaвныйBзгляд нa Πроблему[Christianity and the Ecological Crisis: An Orthodox View of the Problem]. Московские Еп*a*рхи*a*льные*B*едомости*[Moskovskie Eparkhialinye Vedomosti]*. Available online: http://www.mepar.ru/library/vedomosti/65/1351/ (accessed on 7 January 2021).

Negrov, Alexander. 2002. Fr. Sergius Bulgakov (1871–1944): A study in the Eastern Orthodox Hermeneutical Perspective. *HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies* 58: 250–63. [CrossRef]

Negrov, Alexander. 2006. Three Hermeneutical Horizons of Slavic Evangelicals. *International Congregational Journal* 6: 83–104.

Negrov, Alexander. 2008. *Biblical Interpretation in the Russian Orthodox Church*. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.


O'Brien, Kevin J. 2010. *An Ethics of Biodiversity: Christianity, Ecology, and the Variety of Life*. Washington: Georgetown University Press.

Oxford Declaration on Global Warming. 2002. *JRI*. Available online: https://www.jri.org.uk/events-2/forum-2002-statement/ (accessed on 4 January 2021).

Papkova, Irina. 2011. *The Orthodox Church and Russian Politics*. New York: Oxford University Press.

Patton, Michael. 2009. *Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods*, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

Pospielovsky, Dimitry. 1998. *The Orthodox Church in the History of Russia*. Cresswood, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press.


Schaefer, Jame. 2011. *Confronting the Climate Crisis: Catholic Theological Perspectives*. Milwaukee: Marquette University Press.


Snyder, Howard A. 2011. *Salvation Means Creation Healed: The Ecology of Sin and Grace*. Eugene: Cascade Books.

SPPCR. 2014. *C*оци*a*льн*a*я Πозиция Πротест*a*нтских Церквей России [*Social Position of the Protestant Churches in Russia*]. Available online: https://www.xmkk.org/2014/02/479 (accessed on 8 January 2021).


Thiselton, Anthony C. 2015. *Systematic Theology*. Grand Rapids: Wm.

Tracy, Sarah. 2020. *Qualitative Research Methods: Collecting Evidence, Crafting Analysis, Communicating Impact*. Hoboken: Wiley Blackwell. Ubeivolc, Vladimir. 2016. *Rethinking Missio Dei Among Evangelical Churches in an Eastern European Orthodox Context*. Carlisle: Langham Creative Projects.


White, Lynn, Jr. 1967. The Historical Roots of Our Ecologic Crisis. *Science* 155: 1203–7. [CrossRef]

