A Critique of Dominionism

Mankind has been given dominion over the earth. This is a gift given to the sons of men, not the state, nor the church, but you and me. It is a beautiful thing. We are lords of the earth (Psalm 8), stewards of Paradise (Genesis 2), and are to use, fulfill, and subdue the earth (Genesis 1). Work is elevated, for those who roll up their sleeves and use the elements of earth for the good of man are doing so under the benediction of God. Yet there can be a subtle shift in thinking that can cause erroneous ways of living further downstream; it has to do with how the question of why we take dominion is answered. The difference is between subject and object. If dominion is a subject to aid man then complete freedom to do all in that line is given. If dominion is seen in and of itself as the object, then man becomes a slave to the gift given for his good. The goal in dominion is not to use up every square-inch of earth, sea, and sky; it’s not its aim to raise another tower of Babel, but rather to fulfill the needs and reasonable wants of mankind. Cut deeply into the bosom of the earth to grow your harvests, chop down the tallest trees to provide shade for human beings, but take not one tree extra. Mankind has been given a dual charge; one, to steward the earth, this means to take care of it, and last I checked, polluting the land does not do this. The second, and I would argue, the most important charge, is to take the earth and use it for the needs of yourself and your family. Beyond this we have no business going. Where the line is at, is of course, obscure, but the fact is, not all subduing of the earth actually benefits man, at least not in the long run. Using roundup may produce more food in the short term, and yet in time does far more damage to the earth that we are to safeguard and the people we are to feed, than any good having a bigger crop one year may bring. I heard a lecture recently where a man claimed that because of the dominion mandate we ought to search out the deepest ocean or colonize the moon. This is rubbish, it will not promote the good of mankind nor will it aid in caring for nature. Now, I’m not against ocean travel for study per se, or even moon travel, but dominion was given so we can eat and live reasonably comfortable while doing so at the same time as protecting the natural world given mankind to steward, and not for the goal of using up as much of earth as possible before Christ returns. Stewards care for and nurture, and I believe western culture would be a healthier place for seeking to live in closer harmony with nature. Not as earth worshiping liberal greenies of course, but as families who understand the cycles of seasons and production, who take from nature what they need, and conserve the rest as good stewards. What is good for the planet is always good for you and me, since we all live here after all. 


One thought on “A Critique of Dominionism

  1. Exploration is easily defended by our nature as beings created in God’s image. God visits every part of His creation. And so it is in our nature to do the same

    Psalm 139:7 “Where can I go from Your Spirit?
    Or where can I flee from Your presence?
    If I ascend to heaven, You are there;
    If I make my bed in [f]Sheol, behold, You are there.
    If I take up the wings of the dawn,
    If I dwell in the remotest part of the sea,
    Even there Your hand will lead me,
    And Your right hand will take hold of me.”

    Doubly so for those of us who are called to be like Christ. He is the Word by whom all were made.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a comment