Thursday: The Duty of Humanity
As soon as God created the first man, He offered him three gifts: the Garden of Eden (Genesis 2:8), food (Genesis 2:16), and the woman (Genesis 2:22).
Read Genesis 2:15-17. What is man’s duty toward creation and toward God? How do these two duties relate to each other?
The first duty of man concerns the natural environment in which God has put him: “to tend and keep it” (Genesis 2:15, NKJV). The verb ‘avad, “tend,” refers to work. It is not enough to receive a gift. We have to work on it and to make it fruitful — a lesson that Jesus will repeat in His parable of the talents (Matthew 25:14-30). The verb shamar, “keep,” implies the responsibility to preserve what has been received.
Image © Educational Concepts Collection at Goodsalt.com
The second duty concerns his food. We have to remember that God gave it to humans (see Genesis 1:29). God also said to Adam that “you may freely eat” (Genesis 2:16, NKJV). Humans didn’t create the trees, nor the food on them. They were a gift, a gift of grace.
But there is a commandment here, as well: they were to receive and enjoy God’s generous gift “of every tree” (NKJV). As a part of this grace, though, God adds a restriction. They should not eat from one particular tree. Enjoying without any restriction will lead to death. This principle was right in the Garden of Eden and, in many ways, that same principle exists today.
The third duty of man concerns the woman, God’s third gift: “man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife” (Genesis 2:24, NKJV). This extraordinary statement is a powerful expression that highlights human responsibility toward the conjugal covenant and the purpose of being “one flesh” (NKJV), meaning one person (compare with Matthew 19:7-9).
The reason it is the man (and not the woman) who should leave his parents may have to do with the biblical generic use of the masculine; hence, perhaps, the commandment applies to the woman too. Either way, the bond of marriage, though a gift from God, entails human responsibility once the gift has been received, a responsibility that rests upon both the man and the woman to fulfill faithfully.
| Think about all that you have been given by God. What are your responsibilities with what you have been given? |
(28)
It looks like I jumped the gun yesterday with my comment and should have waited until today. That's the problem when you get busy and fail to read the whole lesson at the beginning of the week. You end up commenting without the big picture in mind. Still, the issues are large enough for a second comment, and it provides a point of discussion that I think is important.
If there is one lesson that is clear from this part of the creation story, it is that God has given us a duty of care for the environment. That is something that I am quite passionate about. That is in the back of my mind when I am sharing my concerns about the birdlife of our local area.
As most readers are aware, I spend a lot of time photographing birds. That interest has led me to meet a lot of people with the same passion. Fellow bird photographers, wildlife rescue people, rehabilitation groups, raptor carers, environmental scientists, and so on. Most of them are atheists, but we all in our own way care deeply for the environment. If I was to start arguing with them about origins, the conversations between us would cease. Instead, we share our "duty of care" for the environment we love deeply. There are some Seventh-day Adventists who try to put the hard word on me to "preach the full Gospel" to these folk, but I prefer to let my actions do the preaching. My interaction with these people is not like a soap opera. It is not all over in one 45 minute episode. And perhaps one of the most difficult ideas that I have to teach these folk is that Seventh-day Adventist Christians care about the environment.
God entrusted us with the care of his creation, and part of that care is to work with others who do not acknowledge God but have learned that environmental care is important. I mentioned earlier this week the importance of respect for others who disagree with us on origins. Working with one another is one way we can show respect.
And as a little gift to the Sabbath School Net readers, I am including a link to a slideshow of our local birdlife (note- I have no control over the advertisements.
Cooranbong Birds
Enjoy, share, and act.
Thank you, Mr. Photograph Man!
Maurice, thank you for the shared blessing of this outstanding slide show!
There is an ad blocker that works great on keeping unwanted ads off when viewing websites, such as YouTube, I found it on Google play called FAB adblocker browser. You use it like Chrome.
Thanks Maurice. I enjoyed the watching the slide show. I am sharing it with friends.
Thank you. Awesome pictures!
Thank you for the wonderful collection of bird photos. I have shared them with my many email friends and am already receiving positive feedback about them.
Thank you for sharing the slideshow ... we visit our daughter in Caves Beach (not far from Cooranbong) so found this very nostalgic ...
Thoughts ...
Everything God created, blessed another part of creation.
Example- an apple tree does not feed on its own fruit, it blesses others with its fruit.
It shows nothing that God created is for *self*, but is good for purpose !
Hebrews 1:19
And those who are for *self* have no purpose in creation.
Isaiah 14:13
While I agree wholeheartedly that we should not exploit our environment and we have a responsibility to care for it, I would add that God put the natural resources here for our benefit as long as we use them judiciously. God would certainly not support fawning after costly “renewable” energy pushing people into poverty at the expense of cheaper fossil fuels while they are still available. The world is in no danger from man. God is in control and it will not get any worse than He will allow it to.
I see the first ‘duty’ of humanity to be recognizing and accepting that God created the world and every living thing and that this Creator has sent His Son to give mankind guidelines that he/she should use throughout life.
These guidelines include everything - by the spirit revealed, accepted by the believer regarding how to interact with each other and life around them, use of resources, time, space; everything needs to matter equally when considering how to live in the Creator's world.
I think that only the true believer in the teachings of Christ Jesus has the ‘bandwidth’ by which to live this ‘everything’ approach rightly. Man should not establish a distinction of the ‘level of care’; the ‘environment’ can not be separated from those who live in or depend on it. One would think that shamans are a thing of the past, but their services are again in demand by those who worship Gaia, the Greek goddess of Earth.
I understand ‘to tend and keep’ comes from the disposition of the heart. Our Creator's spirit causes us to tend to the care of His creation, all of it - period! I include time in this tending and keeping as well. How much time is spent cleaning up after others and their discarded possessions? How much food is thrown away, or how much is discarded because we do not want to repurpose or finish using things we purchased before replacing it with something new?
Care of the environment becomes terribly askew without applying our Creator’s wisdom and understanding in ones attempts to keep life in its proper balance.
In Papua New Guinea culture (and sad to say its fading away because of modernism) young boys live with old men in 'haus boi' (boys house) and when they are old enough, they can decide to leave haus boi. Whilst in there they are taught by old wise men about ways of living, how to take care of family, how to make gardens, fishing and hunting, retelling histories and old stories, about their heritages and land and all sorts of things that make these boys ready to face future. Only then they can 'leave' the parents and 'cleave' to the wife. They wife is confident that she and the children will be taken care off.
God gave Adam and Eve the duty or responsibility, if you prefer, to be gardeners and horticulturist. Now Husbandman is a good coverall word. They were given dominion(control or sovereignty) of the entire earth. Genesis 1:26.
Likewise we have a spiritual responsibility too. Romans 12:2. Psalms 19:7-11.
John, was it the whole earth or only the Garden of Eden?
Gen 2:15 And the LORD God took the man and put him into the garden of Eden to work it and keep it.
Now Genesis 1:29. says dominion of all the earth.
The other question would be did God create fish, herbs and animals over the whole earth at the time of creation. The Bible seems to say that. I find it hard to believe that He created piece meal as needed.
Thanks Mr. Maurice for that wonderful bird slideshow, beautiful God's creation indeed! Reminds me of our visit to Sydney a few tears ago, waiting for a bus outside Sydney SDA hospital, this tree above us has birds of different colors ,we feel like we are at the bird park, same thing with those kangaroos, its awesome to see the blessings God created for us!
I would like to comment on the two inter-twined aspects of the concept of restriction mentioned by today's lesson: (1) that God added a restriction and (2) that enjoying without any restriction restriction will (inevitably) lead to death.
In Genesis 2:16, the Hebrew word referring to "every" is mikkal/mikkol. If I look into both the word itself and its other nearby usages within Genesis (eg Genesis 2:2,3; 3:1), it is apparent that every means without exemption. Further, in Genesis 2:17, begins with the Hebrew conjunctive waw - as does Genesis 2:15,16 and 18. Translators have varied which English conjunction (joining word) they have selected for their translation with some using "but", some "except" and some "and". The words but and except carry the same idea of restriction. In contrast, the word "and" conveys a different notion. While commentators tend to suggest that God gave a permission followed by a restriction (the idea conveyed by but and except), the use of "and" is more closely aligned with the idea of permission and cautioning in how one exercises their permission. Thus I find that "but" and "except" are at odds with the idea of mikkal - while "and" is perfectly in harmony.
I would therefore propose that God was not adding a restriction - because such would compromise God's commitment to absolute freedom of choice that each of His created beings is specifically given - even thought such comes at incredible risk and cost to God. Rather, I find converging evidence that God was both reinforcing His freedom-based permission while also cautioning and informing the way in which that freedom could be used that would be disastrous. This is consistent with what we find taking place in Deuteronomy 30:15-20 and is also consistent with the idea that God is not in any way arbitrary. By contrast, I find the notion of God as being restrictive is exactly what the "crafty" serpent was ever so subtly yet deliberately misportraying (Genesis 3:1-5).
With regard to the notion that enjoying without restriction inevitably leads to death as a pervasive principle, I would propose that this is not the case. But first we need to step back to consideration of the basis upon which life can be lived. Essentially, there appear to be only two bases: beneficent (living to give/benefit others) and non-beneficent (self-seeking). And only one of those bases is capable of viably supporting life. When living with commitment to beneficence, there is no need for restriction because every impulse and embraced activity is beneficial to others. Conversely, living with commitment to self-seeking is one-in-the-same as living without restriction - which will indeed lead to death. Thus, rather than enjoying without restriction being a pervasive principle that leads to death, it is only the case when operating on a base of self-seeking and is therefore not the case when operating on a base of other-focussed, self-giving.
Have I outlined the above just to be picky? Or have I outlined the above to illustrate and invite that we need to consider things a bit more deeply so that we 'understand' better how true/abundant (John 10:10) operates and therefore 'intelligently' live in harmony with the reality that is the Kingdom of God - the only viable reality?
Hi Phil,
It seems you are commenting on this:
May I suggest another interpretation? I don't think it's so different from yours, but uses different words.
A "restriction" is a boundary. In this case, Adam and Eve would be safe within the boundary of His Word - just like we later see the Psalmist writing finding liberty within the precepts of God's Law. (Ps 119:45)
God warned the pair that self-indulgence - attempting to live outside His word to them - would result in death. Is this principle not still effective today? There is no true life outside the "restriction"/boundary of God's Word/Law.
With our spiritual eye sight we can see that this is actually the path of freedom, not of bondage, as Satan would have us believe. (He is still peddling the same message he peddled to Eve at the tree. See my comment on Sabbath. )
Hi Inge
I understand what you are saying and I agree that there is no true life outside of the boundary of the Kingdom of God. However, I find no evidence that this boundary was considered a restriction by anyone prior to the suggestion of such by Satan. If anything, it is likely to have been seen as simply the reality that promoted joy and harmony rather than a restriction. Seeing something as a restriction only appears when there is dissatisfaction. I would propose that where there is perfect harmony - which there was prior to Lucifer's rebellion and The Serpent's subsequent appearance at the tree of the knowledge of good and evil - the notion of restriction doesn't exist.