Douglas J. Moo

Summary: An survey of the relevant scriptures concerning how we might think biblically and theologically about the creation and our role in it, and the relevance of this teaching to current environmental concerns.

Many discussions about the environment get caught up in arguments about scientific findings and public policies. Often Christians end up fighting each other about these matters as well. What the father and son team of Douglas and Jonathan Moo offer is a study that takes us back to show more first principles. As Christians, our actions in the world ought not be informed fundamentally by talk radio, political party positions, or scientific papers, but rather biblical teaching, and the wisdom principles that arise from that teaching that we seek to humbly and prayerfully apply to all the activities of our lives.

This work serves as a kind of sourcebook for thinking about caring for creation. The authors begin by asking what we mean by the care of creation and contend that this ought matter to us because it matters to the God we love. They then explore how do we develop a theology of creation, and how we understand the evidence of scripture in light of theology, culture, and science. They suggest a "roundabout" model where understanding of text and these influences feed into each other.

The next seven chapters, the majority of the work, develop the teaching of scripture. They begin with the beautiful world God has created, that it is his and our beginning posture is one of joining all his creatures in worshiping his goodness. They turn to our place as members, rulers, and keepers of creation. In discussing dominion and the idea of subduing the earth, they suggest particularly the idea of "bringing the earth under the appropriate rule of those who bear God's image," a task that becomes even more urgent in a post-Genesis 3 world. This involves abad and shamar, working and caring for God's garden. They explore Israel's relationship to the land, their homeland, and yet owned by God and thus a gift and not a possession. Their use is shaped by sabbath and jubilee, as they trust God to sustain them in the land.

At the same time, they discuss the impact of the fall on a creation "subject to frustration." All creation suffers because of our rebellion against God, yet the context of Paul's reference is that God has acted to redeem and reconcile both us, and the creation. The incarnation reveals God's care for the material creation. God in human flesh in the person of Christ reveals what it means to properly rule in God's world as his image bearers, and died and rose to inaugurate the renewal of God's loving rule through his reconciled creatures. They are part of the new creation accomplished through the resurrection of Christ that not only means new life for those who believe but a new heaven and a new earth. They deal with 2 Peter 3, often understood as "it will all burn," and used to denigrate our care for what will be destroyed, and contend that this passage is best understood as speaking of refining and not destroying fire, consuming all that is dross and evil, preparatory to the new creation.

The last part of the book is a reflection on the relevance of this biblical material in our present time. They propose that caring for creation is an integral part of our gospel. They affirm our role as stewards accountable for good care of the creation, that is also shaped by the realization that our care for creation also is an act of caring for people, and their flourishing. Understanding the biblical teaching leads us into wisdom, which involves knowing and doing, using all of our knowledge of the world, much coming from science, to care for the world in ways that acknowledge God's ownership, the earth's goodness, is just toward all God's creatures, in dependence upon God.

The authors include a chapter briefly summarizing current environmental challenges that require our caring attention: the loss of biodiversity, deforestation, the plight of the world's oceans (depletion of fisheries, destruction of coral reefs, etc.), soil loss and developing sustainable agriculture, and our changing climate. They are measured in their treatment, providing peer-reviewed data. They conclude with the importance of putting creation into our teaching of new creation and putting ourselves into the creation. They commend five ways in which we might be AWAKE to caring for creation:

Attentiveness to the creation and its suffering.
Walking and de-emphasizing mechanized transportation.
Activism, often beginning in our own churches and communities.
Konsumerism: learning to step back from excess to enough.
Eating, through choosing food grown sustainably.
While others have covered this ground, Douglas and Jonathan Moo bring strong evangelical credentials and careful treatment of biblical texts to this task with a strong commitment to biblical authority. Because of this most of the work is formulation of the Bible's teaching. It might be faulted on being short on practical recommendations, yet what this allows is for the reader to reflect on the theology of creation care and determine their own response, perhaps side-stepping politicized discussions.

I would love to commend this work for adult education in churches. The difficulty is that this is a more academic work than I sense many adults in the church willing to engage in an adult education program. The issue is less comprehensibility than comprehensiveness. The treatment of the biblical material is thorough and lengthy, more appropriate for a college or seminary level course. It also would be a good resource for a creation care task force in a church or Christians concerned about the environment who want to think Christianly about their activism. The authors do help us see what is distinctive about a Christian concern for creation and balance proper dominion with care and serving of the creation. They help us understand both how fallen human beings are the problem, and offer hope that as redeemed and reconciled new creations, we can care for God's good world in anticipation of the new heaven and the new earth.

____________________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary review copy of this book from the publisher in exchange for an honest review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. show less

Biblical scholars make a name for themselves by writing a commentary on Romans. The ability to survey the vast amount of secondary literature, follow the arguments in the text, and chart your own course are daunting. When I took a class on Romans in Seminary, I was assigned two commentaries: James D. G. Dunn (Word Biblical Commentary) and Douglas J. Moo (New International Commentary on the New Testament). While I lean more towards Dunn's interpretation or Romans, I was struck by the depth show more and readability of Moo's work.

Imagine my surprise when I discovered that the Romans scholar also wrote a commentary on James! Those two books seem to go together like oil and water! Moo highlights the difficulty (140):

- Jas. 2:24: A person is justified by works and not by faith alone
- Rom. 3:28: A person is justified by faith and not by works of the law

I had to know how a Pauline scholar came to grips with the message of James.

James is famous for being a disjointed tract. While Moo acknowledges its frequent shift in foci, he does an excellent job at drawing the isolated pericopae together across the chapters and explaining how they aid in the interpretation of each other. A good example of this is how he relates the patience that James requires of his audience despite their trials (James 5:7) with the introductory comments on joy in trials (James 1:2-4).

As for the central conundrum between Paul and James—justification by works or by faith—Moo makes three points:

Paul's "works of the law" is different from James' "works". James is speaking of any good deed, while Paul has something specific in mind. (If Moo were a New Perspective on Paul theologian, this point would be easier to make!)
Paul speaks of "faith" where James speaks of "faith alone". James is criticizing the sort of "faith alone" (without works) that Paul would equally criticize.
Paul uses "justify" to refer to "the initial declaration of a sinner's innocence before God" (141), where James has God's eschatological verdict in mind.
Moo does a fine job at acknowledging the difficulty while charting a reasonable way forward.

The Letter of James is a readable commentary for the thoughtful layperson with more than enough depth to keep the pastor engaged. I'm richer for having read it. show less

To start, this is one of the most difficult books I have ever read. I believe a Divinity, Theology, Law, or Linguistics student would be better prepared. Many words which may have a controversial or alternate take are thoroughly examined. I never realized words like "FOR" could be taken in so many possible ways. I thought I was well-read, but this is the first book in years which introduced words and parts of speech I never knew existed. Moo is not being pedantic: this is a technical book show more and he uses jargon applicable to the task.

Don't be intimidated by the page count. Maybe 1/3 of the actual space is taken up by footnotes, most of which can be ignored by a lay reader not conducting research.

Unlike other commentaries, this is not a "jump to it" commentary. I was lost many times and had to restart a section. Like the letter, later sections are built on former.
The book IS rewarding
After chewing this for a while, the unbiased reader will come away with the conclusion that the straightforward meaning really is the most likely take on most verses and, yep, you aren't the only one who sees double predestination in Rom 9.
I had the pleasure of learning and sharing that Peter and probably other apostles traveled on missions with their wives. (1Cor9:5). Read it a hundred times and never caught that.
My biggest problem is that I always read Romans out of context. I was told early on "the whole gospel theology in 1 book" and that's how I read it. Paul wrote letters for specific reasons. This one had several, but the main one was unity between Jewish and Gentile Christians. Instead of just saying "love one another" he threw in a whole theology on the underlying issues: why they should get along, and proactive responses to possible misunderstandings, Judaizers, and so on. The best part of giving it context is that the whole letter flows much easier. It also gives a life and personality to Romans that I hadn't read before.

I think for a lay Christian, his NIV Application Commentary may be a better start. show less

This a a conservative Christian commentary on the book of Romans in the Bible. It is in what I now consider my favorite series of commentaries-abbreviated NICNT/NICOT-New International Commentary on the Old or New Testament. It is non-partisan. It explains what the text says and does not really try to make the text justify any particular denominational opinion which I really like. Some commentaries are devotional-with a focus on what does the text say to ME or how can this be applied today. show more This series is not like that-it is more about what does the text mean (and sometimes what text is best or preferred). Highly recommend for anyone wanting a text in that format. For those wanting a devotional commentary then James Montgomery Boice is a good option. show less