WHY CARE FOR THE EARTH IF IT IS ALL GOING TO BURN?

ESCHATOLOGY AND ECOLOGY

by

A. Rahel Wells
Associate Professor of Hebrew Bible
Department of Religion and Biblical Languages
Andrews University

Rome 4th IBC 2018

Abstract
Seventh-day Adventist understanding of end-time events involves the reality that the earth will
burn at the end of time. Unfortunately, this often translates into reneging on environmental
care, since the earth will be renewed by God anyway. This inaccurate understanding overlooks
the clear descriptions of God’s care for the earth, and human ecological responsibility in the
original creation, the new earth, and all laws for the present. Eschatological passages include a
picture of earth restored and rejuvenated, rather than annihilated and totally recreated from
nothing. Even the images of fire burning at the end of time, do not imply that the earth will be
totally consumed. Eschatology actually presupposes and necessitates ecological care in the
present, rather than opposing it.

Seventh-day Adventist understanding of end-time events involves the reality that the

earth will burn at the end of time. Unfortunately, this often translates into viewing the many

biblical injunctions to take care of the earth as no longer relevant, since it will be re-made by

God anyway. This inaccurate understanding of the relationship between ecology and eschatology

has led many non-Christians who care about the earth to label the Bible and Christians as the

source of a multitude of ecological disasters.1

In this paper, I unpack how caring for the earth is actually central to a Seventh-day

Adventist understanding of eschatology. While fully understanding each of these elements is

1
For example, Lynn White, Jr., “The Historic Roots of Our Ecological Crisis,” Science
155 (1967): 1203-1207.
 Wells 2018

only possible with a much longer exposition than this paper can provide, I will give an overview

of the following points: humanity’s ecological responsibility given at creation; humanity’s

ecological responsibility given after sin; and a consideration of humanity’s ecological

responsibility on the earth made-new.

Original Creation and Human Responsibility

God’s command to care for the earth began in the Garden of Eden, before sin, and deeply

impacts our theology and anthropology. If we understand ourselves to be made in God’s image,

and ruling the earth as God would if he were here, then caring for the earth becomes a necessity

to supporting God’s ultimate reign on earth.

Humans are to be caretakers of the earth. We are made in God’s image, but our purpose

is not to exalt ourselves or exploit the environmental resources under our dominion. Instead,

humans are to act as God’s representatives on the earth, ruling it as he would if in our place. The

Hebrew verbs in Genesis 1:26-28 do not give license to abuse, but demand a just and wise rule

over God’s creation, acting as his viceregents. 2 Genesis 2:15 reiterates this principle of

environmental stewardship by using Hebrew verbs for humanity’s care of the garden that are

normally associated with the priestly care of the temple (e.g., Num 3:7,8).

The earth and everything on it actually belongs to God. Leviticus 25:23 gives further

insight into humanity’s rulership over the earth in Gen 1. We do not actually own the earth, but

2
H. Spanner, “Tyrants, Stewards—or Just Kings?” in Animals on the Agenda: Questions
About Animals for Theology and Ethics (ed. A. Linzey and D. Yamamoto; Urbana, Ill.:
University of Illinois Press, 1998), 216–24; Daniel I. Block, “All Creatures Great and Small:
Recovering a Deuteronomic Theology of Animals,” in The Old Testament in the Life of God’s
People: Essays in Honor of Elmer A. Martens (ed. Jon Isaak; Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns,
2009), 283–305; Richard Bauckham, The Bible and Ecology: Rediscovering the Community of
Creation (Waco, Tex.: Baylor University Press, 2010).

1
 Wells 2018

are its caretakers (cf. Gen 2:15; Ps 24:1-2; 1 Chron 29:14). In addition, God’s ownership of the

earth is reiterated in Exod 20:8-11, where the reason given for Sabbath observance is a memorial

to God’s creation of the earth. We are never to forget the real owner of this earth, and that we are

responsible for its care. Thus, in recognizing and celebrating the biblical account of creation and

Sabbath, Seventh-day Adventists stand on a firm foundation in their biblical theology of

conservation.

The Sabbath also implies a reduction in consumerism and materialism, as we have the

privilege of resting and not working one day each week. Stewardship does not only concern

money, but also references the environment, possessions, time, and opportunities, all related to

the most crucial principle of God’s ownership of the world and everything in it. Most

importantly of all, God delights in his creation. He calls everything he makes “very good” (Gen

1:31). Thus, from the beginning, humans were to treat all of the earth as created and loved by

God and belonging ultimately to him as its Maker.

Human Responsibility to Care for the Earth After Sin

The care for animals and all of God’s creation in Gen 1-3 is a theme that can be traced through

the rest of the Bible. The creation narratives set the foundational mandate for creation care, and

many Old Testament texts imply or allude to this care, while others clearly depict God’s love and

concern for his creation and Israel’s responsibilities to care for the earth and all its creatures.

After sin, human responsibility is even greater in some ways, as sin leads to deterioration of the

earth, and humans bring more destruction than restoration. In light of this, God makes even

more clear His ownership and delight in the earth, as well as continued human responsibility.

God still owns the earth, stating clearly that “the land is mine” (Lev 25:23), including the

2
 Wells 2018

heavens, the earth, and everything in it (Deut 10:14). Moses describes the land of Canaan as “a

land which the Lord your God cares for” (Deut 11:12), implying love and delight in his creation,

even though tainted by sin. God cares for the earth even where there are no human settlements,

bringing rain on land where no people live (Job 38:26).

Because of God’s love for the earth, and the potential of humans bringing destruction to

the earth, the commands to care for the earth are intensified after sin. Although not mentioned in

every passage regarding the Sabbath, the clearest commands involve animals in Sabbath rest and

the sabbatical year. These hints of the high priority of animal life in the Bible seem to command

a caring responsibility from humans towards animals, and certainly imply humane treatment on

every day of the week. All types of animals are cared for by the Pentateuchal laws concerning

Sabbath rest.3

In addition to the Sabbath and sabbatical year commands, restitution is extra if animals

are stolen (Exod 21:33; see also Lev 24:18); animals are responsible for actions—killing,

bestiality, etc. (Exod 21:28; 22:18; see also Lev 18:23; 20:15); baby animals are to remain with

their mother for a time (Exod 22:30); kindness to neighbors involves kindness to their animals

(Exod 23:4); burdens of animals should be reasonable (Exod 23:5), etc.

Additionally, in passages like Jonah 4:11 and the flood story (Genesis 6–9), it is obvious

that humans are not the only creatures for whom Yahweh shows compassion. No other flood

3
J. B. McDaniel, “A God Who Loves Animals and a Church That Does the Same,” in
Good News for Animals? Christian Approaches to Animal Well-Being (ed. C. Pinches and J. B.
McDaniel; Ecology and Justice Series; Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1993), 77. Recent work
confirms this picture of animal care seen in Pentateuchal law concerning the Sabbath: Israel was
to care for the earth as a good king, representing how God would care for it. See H. Spanner,
“Tyrants, Stewards—or Just Kings?,” 216–24; J. A. Loader, “Image and Order: Old Testament
Perspectives on the Ecological Crisis” in Are We Killing God’s Earth? Ecology and Theology
(ed. W. S. Vorster; Proceedings of the Eleventh Symposium of the Institute for Theological
Research [UNISA]; Pretoria: University of South Africa, 1987), 6–28.

3
 Wells 2018

stories in the ancient Near East depict humans or gods caring about and saving the animal

world.4 Interestingly, certain passages treat/consider animals in ways equal to humans. For

instance, in Exod 19:13 (and Exod 34:3), the animals were also not to touch Mt. Sinai or they

would be killed. In Num 8:17, Yahweh seems to consider animals as part of the children of Israel.

Psalm 36:7 states that Yahweh saves both humans and animals. In Jonah 3:7–8, animals are to

fast along with humans and cry out to God for salvation from the destruction of Nineveh. Job

12:7–10 implies that animals know that God is in charge and directing events of the world, even

the lives of every living thing. 5

When animals are in need, Jesus instructs humans to care for them, even when doing so

on the Sabbath requires what would normally be considered work. In Luke 13:15, Jesus mentions

the well-being of oxen on the Sabbath who need water to drink, and therefore promotes the

healing of humans on the Sabbath as well. By mentioning the loosing of oxen from their stalls in

order to give them a drink, this passage seems to assume that the oxen were not working on the

Sabbath, but remained in their stalls resting from their labors.6 Humans are held responsible for

the state of the earth and all the creatures that live on it (Rom 8:19-22; Rev 11:18).

Along with these passages, the Sabbath commandment in Deut 5:11-14 reminds us that

the other main reason for Sabbath keeping is in response to God’s gracious redemption of his

4
A. Hüttermann, The Ecological Message of the Torah: Knowledge, Concepts, and
Laws Which Made Survival in a Land of “Milk and Honey” Possible (Atlanta: Scholars Press,
1999), 12–58.
5
For further discussion, see Terence Fretheim, God and World in the Old Testament: A
Relational Theology of Creation (Nashville: Abingdon, 2005), 249–68; Bauckham, Bible and
Ecology.
6
See J. Nolland, Luke 9:21–18:34 (WBC 35B; Dallas: Word Books, 1993), 724–5, 745–
7. In addition, animals are often mentioned in Jesus’ parables, and some of the first creatures to
view the Messiah were animals in the stable. For other references to animals by Jesus, see G. L.
Comstock, “Pigs and Piety: A Theocentric Perspective on Food Animals,” in Good News for
Animals? Christian Approaches to Animal Well-Being (ed. C. Pinches and J. B. McDaniel;
Ecology and Justice Series; Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1993), 105–27.

4
 Wells 2018

people (cf. Lev 25:17, 38). When humans bless creation by conserving the earth, we are also

responding in gratitude to God for his redemption of us.7 Indeed, the reason for this time of rest

for the land is that the poor and the wild animals may eat. In the purpose clause used here to

describe the reason for the Sabbath (“in order that your ox and your donkey may rest”), the focus

is shifted from the human head of the household to those who would likely be oppressed. The

apparent prioritization of animals reflects the focus on care for the downtrodden in Exodus 20-33.

God also shows immense love and care and concern for the land, especially as the people

abuse it and do not follow the laws that He set forth in regards to it. For instance, even during

war, the people were to leave at least some trees, especially fruit trees, rather than cutting them

all down to use in the war effort (Deut 20:19-20). When the land needed a rest, God sent Israel

into exile in order to give it rest (2 Chron 36:21). Even when people do not care for the earth,

God does and brings restoration to it.

The sabbatical and jubilee years are good examples of God’s care, as well as of human

responsibility, for both land and animals. Leviticus 25 and Exod 23 contain foundational

principles of conservation based on Gen 1-3, and applicable to all those concerned with the

environment. The passages give special reasons for earth care and conservation that other

Christians may find harder to substantiate when the reasons given for seventh-day Sabbath

7
As illustrated in the Sabbath commandments, humans are to imitate God in his care for
animals. In Prov 12:10, the one who is righteous is the one who cares for the soul (‫ )נפשׁ‬of
domestic animals. The noun ‫ נפשׁ‬is used broadly to describe everything from personhood to
specific individual desires (E. Brotzman, “Man and the Meaning of ‫נפשׁ‬,” Bibliotheca sacra 145
[1988]: 400-409). More than just making sure the animals live, a righteous man knows the
“soul” (as it were) of his animal: the desires, appetites, inner living being, even emotions,
passions and personality (cf. Ex 23:9; 31:17). Since Israel had been delivered and were to imitate
God, all the surrounding laws in the Covenant Code were to protect those most likely to be
victims in society. See B. Rosenstock, “Inner-Biblical Exegesis in the Book of the Covenant:
The Case of the Sabbath Commandment,” Conservative Judaism 44 (1992): 37–49.

5
 Wells 2018

observance are regarded as no longer valid.8

The year of Jubilee was a special type of sabbatical year, when slaves were freed and

land was returned to its original owner. Even more than during the typical sabbatical year,

however, anyone who lived off the land would likely be worried about how they were to survive

this lengthy period with no agricultural activity (Lev 25:20). Thus, God reminds the Israelites

that he has promised blessing and provision to those who are faithful to follow his law and let the

land rest (Lev 25:21). Just as on the Sabbath, trusting God involves relinquishing even one’s

time and opportunities for advancement in order to care for the earth (necessitated by the three

year break from agriculture, along with return of any acquired land).9

Exodus 23:10-12 and Lev 25:2-7 reiterate this principle, as phrases and wording

correspond to the fourth commandment of the Decalogue, and parallels are drawn between the

resting of the land itself on the seventh year and the command to rest on the seventh day. Upon

examining Lev 25:2-7 more closely, the chiastic structure found there highlights the care for the

earth and its non-human inhabitants by placing them in the center of the passage in v. 4a.10

8
Although Leviticus does not reiterate the Sabbath commandment in the same manner as
the Decalogue, observance of the Sabbath is assumed in several instances, and is mentioned
more specifically in regard to the festivals and the Day of Atonement (Lev 16:31; 19:3, 30; 23:3,
8, 11, 15–16, 32, 38; 24:8; 26:2). For further discussion, see J. Milgrom, Leviticus 23–27: A New
Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 3B; New York: Doubleday, 2001); F. R.
Kinsler, “Leviticus 25,” Interpretation 53 [1999]: 395–9). Newer research on the ecology of
Israel states that without this rest for the land every seven years, all the topsoil would be depleted
quickly and the arability of the land would be lost (Hüttermann, The Ecological Message of the
Torah).
9
In the New Testament, the church realized the value of these jubilee principles, and
attempted to make them applicable at all times, as they shared everything in common, helped the
needy, and supported freedom from slavery (Acts 2:42-46; 4:34-35; 5:14-16; Gal 3:28; Col 3:11;
Philemon 15-17).
10
For more discussion, see A. Rahel Schafer, “Rest for the Animals? Non-human
Sabbath Repose in Pentateuchal Law,” Bulletin for Biblical Research 23 (2013): 15-34.
Although this passage does not refer directly to the weekly Sabbath, the parallels with Exod
20:8–11 and Deut 5:12–15 correlate strongly with the concepts, vocabulary, and even specific

6
 Wells 2018

What is striking about this passage is the inclusion of the wild animals, and this care for animals

further removed from contact with humans, makes it clear how much God cares for all of His

creatures.11 As the focus of this passage is the special Sabbath rest for the land, the Sabbath (and

sabbatical year) rest and care for creation extends to all that God has made, not just people and

animals. The use of land here implies the whole ecosystem, not just the soil. 12 Indeed, in 2

Chron 36:21, the land was finally able to enjoy the Sabbaths that had been denied it by

disobedient Israel.13

Leviticus 26:31–44 also includes the concept of sabbath rest for the land, but animals are

not specifically mentioned in relation to the Sabbath in this passage. It is important to note that

the Hebrew verb in Lev 26:34, 43 is ‫“( רצה‬to restore/make amends”), not ‫נוח‬, ‫נפשׁ‬, or ‫( עשׂה‬the

verbs used for human, animal and divine Sabbath rest in Exod 20 and Deut 5). This implies that

the land is not actively participating in repose and rejuvenation, but is being restored from human

abuse and overuse. In light of this, it seems significant that Lev 25 also has different

terminology for the land’s rest (‫)שׁבת שׁבתון‬, and describes the sabbatical year as benefiting

humans and animals, not so much the land itself (the verb ‫ שׁבת‬is used for the land in Lev 26:35,

phrases that are used in relation to the weekly Sabbath. For further discussion, see E. Haag,
“‫שׁבת‬,” Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 14:383; Milgrom, Leviticus 23–27, 2154–7.
11
J. E. Hartley, Leviticus (WBC 4; Dallas: Word Books, 1992), 434.
12
This intensifying sabbath terminology is rare in the Pentateuch and occurs only five
other times (Exod 31:15; 35:2; Lev 16:31; 23:3, 32), two in relation to the weekly sabbath and
two regarding the Day of Atonement. E. Haag refers to this phrase as “in superlative construction”
(“‫שׁבת‬,” Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 14:389).
13
Hüttermann connects the sabbatical year with the protection of soil fertility and water
availability, stating that the Israelites lived in a land that was not well-suited to agriculture but
needed special care, as the milk and honey “translated into modern plant sociology and
knowledge of succession” refer to “ a macchia, a region of Mediterranean hard scrub” (The
Ecological Message of the Torah, 149). He considers the Torah to contain the keys to biological
as well as spiritual life. See also M. S. Northcott, The Environment and Christian Ethics
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996).

7
 Wells 2018

but in a more passive sense). Thus, it seems that God cares for all of his creation, but that living

creatures take priority over plants and land masses.

Seventh-day Adventists have a headstart in conservation by strongly encouraging a

vegetarian diet. A plant-based diet is one of the very best things humans can do for animals—one

vegan saves the lives of at least 95 animals per year.14 In addition, such a diet is also one of the

best things humans can do for the environment as a whole—recent research shows that meat and

dairy production is a major contributor to global warming, worldwide famine, deforestation, and

habitat loss.15

Concern for the earth and all animals is a clearly identifiable theme after sin. We cannot

dismiss care for creation on biblical grounds by reasoning that the earth will eventually burn

anyway. Other living creatures are co-inhabitants of the world, and as they also depend heavily

on its ecosystems for survival, the Bible holds all humankind responsible for the preservation of

the earth and the care of all living creatures.16 Seventh-day Adventists believe that humans are to

help others who are oppressed, even though it seems that we may lack as a result. As any

advantages in this world are only temporary, conservation in the light of the Sabbath and creation

14
No Voice Unheard, Ninety-five: Meeting America’s Farmed Animals in Stories and
Photographs (Santa Cruz, Calif.: No Voice Unheard, 2010). See also Matthew Scully,
Dominion: The Power of Man, the Suffering of Animals, and the Call to Mercy (New York: St.
Martin’s Press, 2002).
15
Livestock’s Long Shadow: Environmental Issues and Options, Rome: Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2006; Livestock Revolution: Implications for
Rural Poverty, the Environment, and Global Food Security, World Bank Report 23241,
November 2001.
16
Much has been written about what individuals can do to help the suffering of animals.
For some examples, see G. L. Francione, Animals, Property, and the Law (Philadelphia: Temple
University Press, 1995); McDaniel, Of God and Pelicans; A. Linzey, Animal Gospel (Louisville:
Westminster John Knox, 1998); P. Waldau and K. Patton, eds., A Communion of Subjects:
Animals in Religion, Science, and Ethics (New York: Columbia University Press, 2006).

8
 Wells 2018

teaches us to trust in our heavenly riches and practice conservation with an eye towards

eschatology (Lev 25:20-21).

Eschatological Renewal and Restoration

Eschatological passages in the Old Testament include a picture of the earth restored and

rejuvenated, not necessarily recreated from nothing (e.g. Isa 65; Zech 14; Ezek 40-48). In

Revelation, John still sees the lake of fire and all those who have died (21:7-8), implying the

cleansing of this earth, not the presence of a different earth.

Romans 8:19-23 lays a foundation for understanding the continuity of creation in the

earth made new, in that God is going to restore and redeem the present earth. This passage

highlights God’s response to the creation itself crying out for deliverance from suffering.17 Paul

discusses creation in only one other place in Romans, indicting all humanity based on what they

should have known from the creation of the world (1:18-23). Several crucial terminological

connections establish the interrelationship between Romans 1:18–23 and Romans 8:19–23.18 The

word κτίσις is one of the major keys to understanding both passages (separately as well as linked

together), connecting creation past with the eschatological picture of creation.19

17
For further analysis and sources referring to this passage, see John Bolt, “The Relation
between Creation and Redemption in Romans 8:18–27,” CTJ 30 (1995): 34–51; Harry Hahne,
The Corruption and Redemption of Creation: Nature in Romans 8.19–22 and Jewish Apocalyptic
Literature (London: T&T Clark, 2006); Cherryl Hunt, David G. Horrell, and Christopher
Southgate, “An Environmental Mantra? Ecological Interest in Romans 8:19–23 and a Modest
Proposal for Its Narrative Interpretation,” JTS 59 (2008): 546–79.
18
Especially crucial are the words that only occur in these two passages in Romans:
κτίσις, αφθαρτος/φθαρτος/φθορα, µαταιότης / µαταιοω. Others also note links between Romans
1 and 8 (Steve Kraftchick, “Paul’s Use of Creation Themes: A Test of Romans 1–8,” ExAud 3
[1987]: 72–87; Hunt, et al., “An Envirnonmental Mantra?”).
19
Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996),
25. For further exposition of this passage, see A. Rahel Schafer, “‘You, YHWH, Save Humans

9
 Wells 2018

Humans have “exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshipped and served the

creature rather than the Creator” (Rom 1:25), and this condemnation extends to creation as well

(Rom 8:20, 21).20 The words used for the suffering that creation is experiencing suggest intense

suffering that is experienced across the board; none is exempt from the anguish caused by human

sin.21 The word συστενάζω (8:22) carries the notion of severe discomfort from pain, and is often

used for the labor of birth pangs. Although involving some of the most intense physical hurt

experienced on earth, the birthing process also connotes hope for a new life.22 This term seems to

allude to the hope of Rom 8:20, where the creation was subjected in hope, implying that

something good could arise from the bad, not that it would be obliterated.23 The futility was not

for eternity, but only for a time, until all could understand the horrible consequences of sin.24 The

central point in this passage is hope for all creation in redemption from the bondage of corruption.

The cause of creation’s groaning is primarily the actions of humanity, and creation will also be

liberated by the redemption of humanity, rather than being destroyed.

and Animals’: God’s Response to the Vocalized Needs of Non-Human Animals” (PhD diss.,
Wheaton College, 2016).
20
In Rom 1:21 humanity became futile in their thoughts because they did not honor God,
a direct result of their refusal to acknowledge the clear revelation of God through his created
works. In chapter 8, the futility to which creation is subjected is not self-imposed or even self-
generated, but affects creation as the side effect of humanity’s sin. Paul reminds his fellow
humans that all of nature is in travail because of their transgressions. Sin is no respecter of
species. James A. Rimbach also connects this verse with Adam’s fall into sin (“‘All Creation
Groans:’ Theology/Ecology in St. Paul,” AJT 1 [1987]: 382). See also C. Clifton Black,
“Pauline Perspectives on Death in Romans 5–8,” JBL 103 (1984): 428.
21
BDAG, 942. These connect with Joel 1, Jonah 3, and Exod 2 in the LXX.
22
The LXX uses the same word for “groaning” in Gen 3:16, with the labor and birth
pangs resulting from sin. For further discussion, see Laurie J. Braaten, “All Creation Groans:
Romans 8:22 in Light of the Biblical Sources,” HBT 28 (2006): 131–59.
23
For further debate on the identification of the one who subjected the creation, see
Brendan Byrne, Romans, Sacra Pagina (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1996), 258.
24
The types of suffering mentioned for creation may be compared and contrasted with
that of humankind. In v. 22, the word συστενάζω gives the idea of groaning together, while v. 23
uses στενάζω, which implies more of an internal groaning. This distinction does not seem
important to Paul’s arguments, although some see both as a co-groaning of all creatures (e.g.,
Hunt, et al., “An Environmental Mantra?,” 546–79).

10
 Wells 2018

The central message of this passage is hope in deliverance both for humans and all of

creation.25 The same keywords are used for creation and humanity, paralleled in waiting for

redemption, groaning, and hope in the future. Although Paul does not speak directly about

ecological concerns, Rom 8:21 shows his underlying assumptions about God’s care for the

creation he has made. All the works of his hands will be restored from the ravages of sin, not

eradicated and annihilated to begin again. F. F. Bruce concurs that the present creation will not

be destroyed but undergo a “transformation . . . so that it will fulfill the purpose for which God

created it.”26 This interpretation implies a need for action on the part of humankind. If God

thinks so highly of the animals and plants in this world that he would rescue them from the curse

of sin, how much more is humanity obligated to act as faithful stewards of the ecosystems

entrusted to them by God.

God promises to restore all and bring his creatures into the full liberty when the earth is

made new.27 The definite article before the adverb (τοῦ νῦν) reinforces the end-time sense

involved, literally translated as “the now.”28 This verse escalates the tension between the present

groaning and the eagerly anticipated redemption, since Paul seems assured of the closeness of

25
Dunn notes that Rom 8:18–30 serves as the climax of chapter 8, the climax of chapters
6–8, and the preparation for chapters 9–11. See his Romans 1–8, 466–467, for lists of keywords
found in all of these passages.
26
F. F. Bruce, “The Bible and the Environment,” in The Living and Active Word of God:
Studies in Honor of Samuel J. Schultz, ed. Morris Inch and Ronald Youngblood (Winona Lake,
IN: Eisenbrauns, 1983), 29. After an in-depth study of κτίσις, Joseph Lee Nelson, Jr. finds that
creation is never an “object of wrath” or a “symbol of guilt” (“The Groaning of Creation: An
Exegetical Study of Romans 8:18–27” [Th.D. diss., Union Theological Seminary, 1969], 154.
27
Dunn notes that in this context, νῦν takes on a whole new meaning beyond the present
time—namely, the “eschatological salvation in which the process of salvation is being worked
out” (Romans 1–8, 473).
28
Sigve Tonstad notes that an “apocalyptic, ultimate hope, is in view” (“Creation
Groaning in Labor Pains,” in Exploring Ecological Hermeneutics, ed. N. C. Habel and P.
Trudinger, SBLSym 46 [Leiden: Brill, 2008], 145).

11
 Wells 2018

fulfilled hope despite the current struggles.29 The verb used for the liberation of creation

(ἐλευθερω) implies that unlike the subjection to futility, where the consequences to creation were

a secondary result of humanity’s fallen condition, the release into freedom involves anticipation

on the part of creation.30

The earth and all God’s creatures are not just freed from bondage, but actually enter into

the glorious freedom that otherwise only belongs to the children of God. In this verse, creation

again seems to be put in a similar category with humanity as God’s creatures.31 The anticipation

(ἀπεκδεχόµενοι) of the creation involves watching “eagerly with outstretched head, like geese

flying toward a warmer climate.”32 The same root (ἀποκαραδοκία ) is used in v. 19 for the eager

anticipation of the creation for the revealing of the sons of God, confirming that creation is also

waiting for redemption and will be delivered along with humanity. Creation and humanity share

their eager expectations, hope in the future liberation, and groanings for deliverance. Creation is

not going to be annihilated, in order for God to start over with a different earth. Creatures and all

of creation are also awaiting Jesus’ second coming, when they will also have no more pain and

suffering, but will live on the earth made new and restored.

Passages Related to Fire

Despite the clear injunctions above to care for the earth (past/present/future), one of the main

29
Andrzej Gieniusz, Romans 8:18–30: “Suffering Does Not Thwart the Future Glory”
(Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1999), 162.
30
See also Sheila McGinn, who notes that “creation is eager for freedom” (“Feminists
and Paul in Romans 8:18–23,” in Gender, Tradition, and Romans: Shared Ground, Uncertain
Borders, ed. Christina Grenholm and Daniel Patte [New York: T&T Clark, 2005], 25).
31
See further in Hahne, Corrupton and Redemption, 215. McGinn agrees that humans are
not superior to the rest of creation in this passage (“Feminists and Paul,” 26).
32
Dale Moody, “Romans,” in Acts–1 Corinthians, Broadman Bible Commentary 10
(Nashville: 1970), 218. Groaning usually connotes complaints about pain or sadness. But here,
Paul describes groaning more positively, as a straining for an immanent better future.

12
 Wells 2018

reasons given for not doing so is the notion that it will all burn up, so it does not matter what we

do. However, even the biblical images of fire burning at the end of time, do not imply that the

earth will be totally consumed, or that we should not care for it in the meantime. Fire is cleansing

for the righteous (e.g., Zech 13:9; Mal 3:2); and does not burn them when God is with them (cf.

Isa 43:2). Fire can also be used for purification (e.g., Num 31:23; 2 Chron 7:1), as well as for

light/protection (pillar in wilderness; Ps 105:39; Zech 2:5). God Himself is a consuming fire (cf.

Gen 15:17-18; Deut 4:24; Ezek 1:27-29; Dan 7:9-10; Rev 1:12-16), and yet is also represented as

the source of the fire of the love between husband and wife (Song 8:6). Fire is in God’s house

before sin (Ezek 28:14), and it only consumes Lucifer after his sin (Ezek 28:18). The latter

scenario is the main time when fire is all-consuming: when it is destroying the wicked (e.g. Gen

19). But the earth and all other creatures are not wicked, just humans, so sin and sinners are what

will be consumed at the end of time, not the earth.

Many of those who argue that the earth will be completely annihilated by fire reference 2

Pet 3:7-12, so it bears a few comments here. There are several interpretations of each of the

words involved, and most English translations do not always capture all the nuances. When Peter

says that the “heavens will pass by with a roar” this could just as easily refer to loud noise or fire

moving past in the sky (perhaps when God is coming in judgment?). The word “pass away”

(παρερχοµαι) in Scripture usually refers to events that have passed, not total and complete

eradication.33 God plans to redeem the world, not utterly destroy it and start over again. The idea

of annihilation is not biblical, but actually originates with Gnostic eschatology, which states that

33
For further exposition, see Matthew Emerson, “Does God Own a Death Star?: The
Destruction of the Cosmos in 2 Peter 3:1-3,” Southwestern Journal of Theology 57 (2015): 281-
93.

13
 Wells 2018

the spiritual is good, and the physical will be burned up to make way for that.34 This is directly

opposed to a Seventh-day Adventist understanding of the world as good and created by God to

be redeemed and restored.

Peter is also using language of the day of the Lord, which is highly symbolic of the

destruction of the wicked and everything related to sin.35 The word “elements” (στοιχεια) does

not refer to elements on the periodic table, but usually to heavenly bodies, in that the coming day

of the Lord’s judgment will pass to the earth from heaven, through the heavenly bodies. The verb

referring to the elements being “burned up” (καυσοω) is juxtaposed with the word best translated

as “loosened/released” (λυω), which together seem to refer to the result of the fire of cleansing

judgment. This fire lets nature return back to God’s ideal for it, rather than continue to be

burdened by the current presence of sin. The earth and the works done in it are able to be

“exposed/found/made clear” (ευρισκω) and this is best understood as to be refined, where the

wicked is done away with to reveal the refined result in 2 Peter 3:13.36

Peter then quotes Isa 65:17; 66:22, where it is clear that this is a renewed earth, not a new

earth after it was burned totally up (Isa 24 describes the earth before the fire of judgment). Isaiah

66:24 confirms this, by describing the earth after the cleansing fire is done (cf. Isa 66:15-16),

34
See more in Craig A. Blaising, “The Day of the Lord Will Come: An Exposition of 2
Peter 3:1-18,” Bibliotheca Sacra 169 (2012): 387-401. Instead, God’s refining power is moving
from the heavens, through the heavenly bodies, to the earth. All the universe will have to be
cleansed by the refining fire of God. Sin will be no more through the universe, which fits with an
SDA understanding as well. Sin is not just here, there are sinful angels and results of sin through
the universe.
35
Gale Heide, “What Is New About the New Heaven and the New Earth? A Theology of
Creation from Revelation 21 and 2 Peter 3,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40
(1997): 37-56. Clifford Winters argues that the fire burning is a metaphor for burning up of the
false beliefs and theology of which Peter has been adressing (“A Strange Death: Cosmic
Conflagration as Conceptual Metaphor in 2 Peter 3:6-13,” Conversations with the Biblical World
33 [2013]: 147-61).
36
Blaising, “The Day of the Lord Will Come,” 387-401.

14
 Wells 2018

indicating that the evil to be burned up is sin and sinners. The people are the ones that die, while

the earth is still there (cf. Mal 4:1; Ps 11:5-7). Similarly, Rev 20-21 describes a lake of fire, not

an earth full of fire. This is hinted at in 2 Pet 3:7 as well, in that the fire is reserved for the

judgment of ungodly humans.

In 2 Pet 3:5-6, Peter also makes the comparison between the judgment by fire at the

Second Coming and the worldwide flood in Gen 6-9. Some have used this as an additional

argument that all will be destroyed to start over. But the flood did not utterly destroy the earth,

only cleansed it of sin. In fact, the fish all lived through the flood, as did plants and seeds,

evidenced by the raven returning a green leaf to Noah. So this was a refining destruction, just as

it seems clear that the final one will be also. The point was to remove sin and sinners, so that

righteousness can dwell (2 Pet 3:13). In addition, on the renewed earth, humans will still have

the responsibility of caring for the earth and animals. Isaiah 65:17-25 details actions in the new

earth that include planting vineyards, and a total lack of pain or destruction.

Rather than indicating that we should not take care of the earth, because it will all burn up,

2 Pet 3:7-12 urges us to take better care of the earth than we are doing now! “What manner of

persons ought you to be, in holy conduct and godliness?” (2 Pet 3:11). The earth belongs to God,

God cares for the earth, God will redeem the earth, and God is expecting us to care for it too until

he returns. Eschatology does not negate earth-care, but instead presupposes and urges it.

Conclusions

Creation, Sabbath laws, the pictures of the new earth, and many other biblical passages examined

briefly above, provide key rationales for the continued necessity of earth care. In our theology of

conservation, we cannot dismiss caring for the earth by reasoning that the earth will eventually

15
 Wells 2018

burn anyway. The Bible holds all humankind responsible for the preservation of the earth and the

care of all living creatures, continuing our responsibility from before sin into the renewed earth.

Thus, eschatology provides a definitive motivation for ecology. Humans are to care for

the earth now, especially in light of the biblical account of God’s creation of the world, and the

future continuity with the earth made new. Although many care for the earth even though they

are not Sabbath-keepers or Christians, Adventists have a special duty to be involved with

conservation efforts because of the links between original creation and re-creation in the New

Earth. In light of these connections, Seventh-day Adventists believe that conservation is not only

necessary, but also a God-given responsibility for humankind. Earth care was humanity’s

responsibility before sin, after sin, and will continue to be on the earth made new. We are to care

for those less fortunate than we are, including animals and all life on earth, not as a chore, but as

an offering of thankfulness for our redemption by God, looking forward to the redemption of the

whole world.

The earth continues to be our home through eternity, and the Seventh-day Adventist

understanding of the new earth is that we will not be floating on clouds as spirits. The physical

world is good, very good, and what God intended from the beginning. Our physical bodies will

be present on the physical earth after sin is destroyed. Heaven and the New Earth are not places

for spirits, but are physical places for us to live.

Our care for the earth will also continue on the New Earth, which is simply the renewed

earth. God will bring his home to become our home once again. Indeed, God will destroy those

who destroy the earth (Rev 11:18), indicating that care for the earth is intimately tied to being a

follower of God. Thus, I argue that an accurate eschatology actually presupposes and

necessitates care for the earth now, rather than opposing it.

16
 Wells 2018

17