¹ Naess, Arne, ‘The Shallow and The Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movements: A Summary’, Inquiry 16 Oslo, 1973, pp. 96–100.Google Scholar

² Devall, B. and Sessions, G., Deep Ecology, Utah, 1985 (p. 65).Google Scholar

³ Devall, B. and Sessions, G., Deep Ecology, Utah, 1985, (p. 65).Google Scholar

⁴ Devall, B. and Sessions, G., Deep Ecology, Utah, 1985, (p. 74).Google Scholar

⁵ Since Naess, Devall and Sessions there has been some debate as to whether ‘deep ecology’ needs to involve any ethical principles. Fox, W., Transpersonal Ecology, Boston and London, 1990Google Scholar, has persuaded Devall and Sessions that their attempt to make distinctions between the self and nature in ethical terms was in fact symbolic of the need to break down distinctions between the self and what has traditionally been thought to lie outside it. We should, they say, accept identification with nature to recognize that this is the true self rather than the selves that we formerly thought we were, and that this is where self-realization lies. Psychological transformation is what is needed, not axiology or ethics. Sylvan, R., ‘A Critique of Deep Ecology’, Radical Philosophy 40, pp. 2–12 (part 1)Google Scholar; 41 pp. 10–22 (part 2), is still convinced that if they are going to have anything interesting to say about practice, the Deep Ecologists should adhere to some position about value and ethics. This position is now known as ‘deeper’ ecophilosophy in the light of this debate. I am therefore adopting the original Deep Ecology perspective as opposed to later modifications. I am grateful to Robin Attfield for alerting me to these developments.

⁶ Derail, B. and Sessions, G., Deep Ecology, Utah, 1985, (p. 90).Google Scholar

⁷ White, Lynn Jr., ‘The Historical Roots of our Ecological Crisis’, Science 155 (March 10, 1967), pp. 1203–1207CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Reprinted in The Environmental Handbook, ed G. De Bell, New York, 1970, pp. 12–26.

⁸ See the chapter on ‘St Francis and Ecology’ by Hooper, Father P. with Palmer, M. in Christianity and Ecology, eds Breuilly, E. and Palmer, M.. London and New York, 1992.Google Scholar

⁹ Derail, B. and Sessions, G., Deep Ecology, Utah, 1985, (p. 91).Google Scholar

¹⁰ Devall, B. and Sessions, G., Deep Ecology, Utah, 1985, (p. 91).Google Scholar

¹¹ Devall and Sessions in their 1985 Deep Ecology left open the possibility of a Christian statement of Deep Ecology. They have now moved away from the position which opened up this possibility. However there is no reason why such a statement should never be attempted, difficult as it is to reconcile with Deep Ecology as it has now developed.

¹² This qualification is made by deeper ecophilosophers such as R. Sylvan. However I wish to adopt a moderate holistic position which sees the strong distinctions between humanity and nature to have been overdone. This I see as a feasible interpretation of Devall and Sessions in relation to their 1985 position. It may fall between the ‘deep’ and ‘deeper’ ecologies.

¹³ Scholarly debate has for some time considered the position of the doctrine of creation in Israelite thought. Is there an interrelationship between all areas of creation theology, starting with the J document of the Pentateuch and culminating in the words of Deutero-Isaiah including early psalmic praise and later wisdom literature or can we find a separate creation tradition in the wisdom tradition which has very little to do with the saving history approach of other Israelite literature? D. Hubbard, The Wisdom Movement and Israel's Covenant Faith’, Tyndale Bulletin 17 (1966), argues that ‘Theologically wisdom has as one of its functions an explication of Genesis 1–2’ (p. 22). G. von Rad found in certain psalms and in wisdom hymns to creation such as Job 38f. evidence for a doctrine of creation which existed independently from an early stage but which was never allowed to attain a separate existence apart from soteriology (‘The theological problem the Old Testament doctrine of creation’, ZAW66 (1936) reprinted and translated in The Problem of the Hexateuch and other essays, London 1966).

¹⁴ White, Lynn Jr., ‘The Historical Roots of our Ecological Crisis’, Science 155 (March 10, 1967), pp. 1203–1207 (Quotation of the article title, p. 1203).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁵ Barr, J., ‘Man and Nature: The Ecological Controversy and the Old Testament’, Bulletin of the john Rylands Library 55 (1972) pp. 9–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed Reprinted in Ecology and Religion in History, eds D. & E. Spring, New York, 1974, pp. 59–75.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Barr, J., ‘Man and Nature: The Ecological Controversy and the Old Testament’ (p. 73).Google Scholar

¹⁷ Barr, J., ‘Man and Nature: The Ecological Controversy and the Old Testament’ (p. 73).Google Scholar

¹⁸ White, Lynn Jr., ‘The Historical Roots of our Ecological Crisis’, Science 155 (March 10, 1967), pp. 1203–1207 (p. 1205).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁹ Black, J., Man's Dominion, Edinburgh, 1970, (p. 48).Google Scholar

²⁰ Attfield, R., The Ethics of Environmental Concern, Oxford and New York, 1983 (pp. 27–28).Google Scholar

²¹ Macquarrie, J., ‘Creation and Environment’, Expository Times 83/1 (1972), pp. 4–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²² Barr, J., ‘Man and Nature: The Ecological Controversy and the Old Testament’ (p. 74).Google Scholar

²³ Barr, J., ‘Man and Nature: The Ecological Controversy and the Old Testament’ (p. 74).Google Scholar

²⁴ Macquarrie, J., ‘Creation and Environment’, Expository Times 83/1 (1972), pp. 4–9 (p. 5).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁵ Macquarrie, J., ‘Creation and Environment’, Expository Times 83/1 (1972), pp. 4–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁶ Attfield, R., The Ethics of Environmental Concern, Oxford and New York, 1983.Google Scholar

²⁷ J. Barr, ‘Man and Nature: The Ecological Controversy and the Old Testament’

²⁸ J. Barr, ‘Man and Nature: The Ecological Controversy and the Old Testament’.

²⁹ Baker, J. A., ‘Biblical Views of Nature’, Liberating Life, eds Birch, C., Eahin, W., Daniel, J. B. Mc, New York, 1990, chapter 1, pp. 9–26.Google Scholar

³⁰ Barr, J., ‘Man and Nature: The Ecological Controversy and the Old Testament’ (p. 68).Google Scholar

³¹ Johnston, R. K., ‘Wisdom Literature and Its Contribution to a Biblical Environmental Ethic’, in Granberg-Michaelson, W, Tending the Earth, Michigan, 1987.Google Scholar

³² Dell, K. J., The Book of Job as Sceptical Literature, BZAW 197, Berlin & New York, 1991CrossRefGoogle Scholar, chapter 2. R. Johnston in ‘Wisdom Literature and Its Contribution to a Biblical Environmental Ethic’ sees ‘openness to change’ as a characteristic of wisdom so allowing for diverse opinion such as is evidenced in the post-exilic wisdom books. He writes, of the wisdom material, ‘A… consequence of wisdom's rootage in experience is an openness, a certain liberality in viewpoint. There is in all of wisdom's admonitions an element of dialectic. Because the teaching of wisdom is not authoritative command but advice, it is discussable’ (pp. 76–7).

³³ The assumption that a theology of creation is inferior to a theology of salvation is probably a legacy of the struggle with Nazi ideology which also the reason why von Rad's positive evaluation of creation, which now seems obvious, was so bold in Germany in the 1950s to 1960s.

³⁴ Zimmerli, W., ‘The Place and Limit of the Wisdom in the Framework of the Old Testament Theology’, Scottish Journal of Theology 17 (1964), pp. 146–158 (p. 148).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁵ Hermisson, H.-J., ‘Observations on the Creation Theology in Wisdom’, Israelite Wisdom: Theological and Literary Essays in Honour of Samuel Terrien, ed. Gammie, J. G., Brueggemann, W. A., Humphreys, W. L.., Ward, J. M., pp. 43–57, Missoula, Montana, 1978, pp. 43–57 (p. 44).Google Scholar

³⁶ Perdue, L., Wisdom in Revolt, Sheffield, 1991, (pp. 12–13).Google Scholar

³⁷ Rad, G. von, Old Testament Theology, volume 1, (p. 426).Google Scholar We might note the important qualification made by Rogerson, J., ‘The Old Testament View of Nature: Some Preliminary Question’, Instruction and Interpretation, Leiden, 1977.Google Scholar He writes, ‘The principle that if we apply to our reading of the Old Testament a concept of which Israel was unaware then we falsify the Old Testament, is an important principle. It is a principle that can also be reversed: if we refuse to read the Old Testament in the light of a given concept because we mistakenly suppose it to have been foreign to Israel, then our reading equally runs the danger of being false’ (pp. 67–8). He goes on to argue that ‘in the matter of the experience of the natural world, the difference between the Old Testament experience and modern experience has been exaggerated’, (p. 68).

³⁸ Hermisson, like von Rad, perceives that our modern distinction between ‘nature’ and ‘history’ does not exist in ancient Israel. He argues that wisdom is characterized by a world that is ‘unitary’. He writes, ‘ancient wisdom starts from the conviction that the regularities within the human and the historical-social realm are not in principle different from the ones within the realm of nonhuman phenomena. Therefore “nature wisdom” and “culture wisdom” are not as far apart as it may seem at first. Knowledge of the world and the education of man belong together.’ (‘Observations on the Creation Theology in Wisdom’, p. 44.)

³⁹ Meye, R., ‘Invitation to Wonder: Toward a Theology of Nature’, in Granberg-Michaelson, W., Tending the Earth, Michigan, 1987 (p. 33).Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Anderson, B. W., ‘Human Dominion over Nature’, In Biblical Studies in Contemporary Thought, ed. Ward, M., Somerville Mass 1975, pp. 27–45 (p. 31).Google Scholar

⁴¹ Anderson, B. W., ‘Human Dominion over Nature’, in Biblical Studies in Contemporary Thought, ed, Ward, M., Somerville Mass., 1975, pp. 27–45 (p. 32).Google Scholar

⁴² Anderson, B. W., ‘Human Dominion over Nature’ (p. 33).Google Scholar

⁴³ Rad, G. von, Old Testament Theology, Vol 1, p. 451f.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Rad, G. von, ‘Job XXXVIII and ancient Egyptian Wisdom’, in The Problem of the Hexateuch and Other Essays, London, 1965, (p. 287).Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Perdue, L., Wisdom in Revolt, Sheffield, 1991.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Crenshaw, J. L., ‘Popular Questioning of the Justice of God in Ancient Israel’, Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 82 (1970), pp. 380–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴⁷ Perdue, L., Wisdom in Revolt, Sheffield, 1991.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Zimmerli, W., ‘The Place and Limit of the Wisdom in the Framework of the Old Testament Theology’, Scottish Journal of Theology 17 (1964), pp. 146–158 (p. 155).CrossRefGoogle Scholar To put his phrase in context, I quote Zimmerli's full sentence: ‘It is an unfailing evidence of the anthropological starting-point of Wisdom that it is precisely in its field that the question of theodicy (in which God is challenged by man) arises more emphatically than anywhere else in the Old Testament’ (p. 155).

⁴⁹ H.-J. Hermisson, ‘Observations on the Creation Theology in Wisdom’, Israelite Wisdom.

⁵⁰ Perdue, L., Wisdom in Revolt, Sheffield, 1991.Google Scholar

⁵¹ Rad, G. von, Old Testament Theology, volume 1, Edinburgh and New York 1965, pp. 44–53.Google Scholar

⁵² Perdue, L., Wisdom in Revolt, Sheffield, 1991.Google Scholar

⁵³ Johnston, R. K., Wisdom Literature and Its Contribution to a Biblical Environmental Ethic', in Granberg-Michaelson, W., Tending the Earth, Michigan, 1987.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Johnston, R. K., ‘Wisdom Literature and Its Contribution to a Biblical Environmental Ethic’, in Granberg-Michaelson, W., Tending the Earth, Michigan, 1987.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ G. von Rad, Old Testament Theology, volume 1.

⁵⁶ Rad, G. von, Old Testament Theology, volume 1 (p. 428).Google Scholar

⁵⁷ One can compare itwith metaphors which use the image of the tree of life found in Proverbs 15:4, ‘A gentle tongue is a tree of life, but perverseness in it breaks the spirit’, or with 3:18, which talks of the figure of wisdom: ‘She is a tree oflife to those who lay hold of her; those who hold her fast are called happy.’

⁵⁸ It is noteworthy that chapters 25–27 show a particular interest in nature. This is part of the collection of ‘Proverbs of Solomon’ by the men of Hezekiah. Perhaps we could tentatively suggest that these Proverbs of Solomon attempt to reflect what is usually seen as Solomon's kind of wisdom as mentioned in Kings and thus represent a more primitive part of the wisdom exercise. Interestingly references to God are lacking in this section.

⁵⁹ In 25:26 water is used of purity in a simile: ‘Like a muddied spring or a polluted fountain is a righteous man who gives way before the wicked.’

⁶⁰ Rad, G. von, Wisdom in Israel, London, 1972, p. 77f.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Johnston, R. K., ‘Wisdom Literature and Its Contribution to a Biblical Environmental Ethic’, in Granberg-Michaelson, W., Tending the Earth, Michigan, 1987.Google Scholar

⁶² R. K. Johnston, Ibid.

⁶³ Johnston, R. K., ‘Wisdom Literature and Its Contribution to a Biblical Environmental Ethic’, in Granberg-Michaelson, W., Tending the Earth, Michigan, 1987, (p. 76).Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Ibid.

⁶⁵ Ibid.

⁶⁶ Rad, G. von, Old Testament Theology, Volume 1, (p. 425).Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Murphy, R., ‘Wisdom — Theses and Hypotheses’, in Israelite Wisdom: Theological and Literary Essays in Honour of Samuel Terrien (p. 35).Google Scholar

⁶⁸ Dyrness, W., ‘Stewardship of the Earth in the Old Testament’ (p. 63).Google Scholar Cf. Baker, J. A., The Foolishness of God, London, 1970, pp. 52–53.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ Rad, G. von, Old Testament Theology, volume 1, (p. 425).Google Scholar

⁷¹ Rad, G. von, Old Testament Theology, volume 1 (p. 426).Google Scholar

⁷² Rad, G. von, Old Testament Theology, volume 1 (pp. 426–427)Google Scholar, cf. his article ‘Some Aspects of the Old Testament World-View’, Evangelische Theologie II (1964), reprinted and translated in The Problem of the Hexateuch and other essays, London, 1966.

⁷³ Rad, G. von, ‘Some Aspects of the Old Testament World View’ (p. 160).Google Scholar

⁷⁴ Zimmerli, W., ‘The Place and Limit of the Wisdom in the framework of Old Testament Theology’, Scottish Journal of Theology 17 (1964), pp. 146–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁷⁵ However Zimmerli tries to link the two by arguing that: ‘The sapiential theology of creation can gain full life only when it dares to believe that the creator is the God who in free goodness promised Himself to His people. Israel became acquainted with this God, who is faithful to His people through judgement and wrath, when it encountered God in history. In the framework of an Old Testament theology, the sapiential theology of creation will be recalled to the God who joined Himself to His people by His encounter with them in history’ (p. 158).

⁷⁶ Zimmerli, W., ‘The Place and Limit of the Wisdom in the framework of Old Testament Theology’, Scottish Journal of Theology 17 (1964), pp. 146–158 (p. 155).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁷⁷ Rad, G. von, ‘Some Aspects of the Old Testament World View’ (p. 161).Google Scholar

⁷⁸ Rad, G. von, ‘Some Aspects of the Old Testament World View’ (p. 161).Google Scholar

⁷⁹ Johnston, R. K., ‘Wisdom Literature and Its Contribution to a Biblical Environmental Ethic’, in Granberg-Michaelson, W., Tending the Earth, Michigan, 1987.Google Scholar

⁸⁰ Rad, G. von, Old Testament Theology, volume 1, (p. 450).Google Scholar

⁸¹ The wisdom literature and deep ecology (1980s style) can each be seen as antidotes to exaggerated distinctions between God, humanity and nature, both stressing interrelatedness instead.

⁸² This tendency may have sprung from a deep-seated exclusivism within Judaism and Christianity.