Edward Pillar
The Roman Empire was not a distant and inconsequential authority on the horizon of the Thessalonians’ life. Having been founded in 316 BCE by the amalgamation of a number of small settlements, Thessalonica was defeated in battle by the Romans in 197 BCE and from then began its comprehensive imperialization. The Thessalonians drank freely of imperial ethos, philosophy, and culture, which together were a dominant influence on every aspect of their existence.
Thus, when Paul and his companions entered the city and began to proclaim the gospel concerning the Lord Jesus Christ, it is inevitable that the interpretative lens through which their message was heard and understood would have been one profoundly influenced by imperial ideas, ethos, and culture. It is this that we need to consider if we are to hear Paul as the Thessalonians heard him.
Moreover, we should allow the possibility that even if Paul did not directly intend to make references that might be understood as challenges to the imperial ethos and culture, the Thessalonians themselves, from where they stood in this extraordinary blend of Greek and Roman imperial culture, may well have drawn conclusions that engaged with their situation politically as well as spiritually.
At the heart of Paul’s gospel, accepted by the Thessalonians, was the announcement that God had raised Jesus from the dead. The implications of this suggestion, more than any other, must be taken seriously if we are to appreciate the significance of this letter—the earliest Christian writing that we have. Emphasis on the resurrection should not simply be seen by readers in the twenty-first century as a precursor to the Parousia—the anticipated reappearance of Jesus Christ, but rather as bearing profound implications for how the Thessalonians were to live in the present and how they were to view and relate to their rulers, the imperial authorities.
1 Thessalonians 1:1–10: The Gospel in Thessalonica
THE TEXT IN ITS ANCIENT CONTEXT
Paul begins the letter with a foundational statement of how he sees the Thessalonians. First, he refers to them as the church, the ekklēsia. However, rather than the Athenian model of ekklēsia as essentially a forum for democracy, Paul seems to see the Thessalonian ekklēsia as a gathering to share what was common among them, to support, challenge, and encourage one another in their newfound discipleship of Jesus Christ. Nonetheless, there remains a political nuance in the very act of adopting the name ekklēsia, for the Thessalonians are joined together in a new anti-imperial assembly. Conversion to God would have involved massive social, cultural, and political reorientation. A strong, supportive, and encouraging ekklēsia, or “church,” would have been vital for the survival of each convert. Paul makes clear that this new “church” is rooted in relationship to God the Father and to the Lord Jesus Christ. Paul’s reference to God as Father may highlight the fact that this ekklēsia is no longer dependent on the imperial father—the emperor—as Pater Patriae (“father of the country”). In addition, the reference to the Lord Jesus Christ may be Paul’s way of saying that the Lord of this ekklēsia is specifically not the emperor; the reference to Jesus as the Christ may hint at the fulfillment and priority of the narrative of Israel over against the imperial story.
Paul then reflects back to the Thessalonians three key elements essential to understanding the visit of Paul and Silas to Thessalonica. First, the gospel was announced in Thessalonica. Here, Paul adopts another imperial term—“gospel,” normally reserved for good news concerning the emperor or the imperial family—as an encompassing description of his message. Paul’s gospel comprised news of the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. The practical significance of the news of the resurrection for the Thessalonians is that the immense power of the empire—epitomized by crucifixion—has been usurped and upended by a greater power: that of the living and true God. Second, the gospel announcement included mention of the reappearance of Jesus (his Parousia, hinted at in 1:10 and made clear at 2:19; 3:13; 4:15; 5:23). Once again, Paul is taking up a term familiar in the imperial context, normally used, for example, at the appearance and entry of a king into a city. Third, Paul’s gospel makes clear that Jesus will rescue the Thessalonians from or defend them against wrath.
A second key element is that of the suffering of the Thessalonians as they receive the gospel. It is clear from 1:6 that the Thessalonians have endured persecution in the process of accepting the gospel (cf. 2:14 and 3:3). It is also likely that Paul speaks about wrath (1:10) precisely because there was a readily perceived and present awareness of suffering. Moreover, the Thessalonians’ own expectation of wrath, and thus of suffering, would be linked to the neglecting of the gods and idols inherent in their social, cultural, and political context. Thus, while the Thessalonians would interpret the wrath as having its origin in the anger of the pagan gods, its precise form may well encompass both official and informal harassment and persecution. While the Thessalonians anticipated that Jesus would rescue or defend them both in their present context of suffering but also as persecution continued, it is made clear that they suffered at the hands of their “own compatriots” (2:14). Paul later encourages the Thessalonians that they are not destined for wrath (5:9).
The response of the Thessalonians is highlighted by the welcome given to Paul and Silas (1:9) and their joyous reception of the gospel (1:6). Their confidence in the gospel is underscored by their willingness to reorient their lives away from idols and toward God while waiting for the appearance of Jesus, the resurrected Son. Paul’s use of an unusual term to describe this “waiting” is one used by the Jewish historian Josephus to portray waiting for the emperor (J.W. 7.68, 71).
THE TEXT IN THE INTERPRETIVE TRADITION
Scholars have seen 1:9–10 as an example of Paul’s mission preaching, perhaps adopted from other evangelists before him or employed by Jewish apologists in their contacts with gentiles (although Friedrich considered it to be part of a baptismal hymn: Friedrich, 502–16). Georg Strecker agrees and points out that it contains two of the affirmations fundamental to Christian faith: (a) worship of the true God and (b) the expectation of the return of Jesus the Son of God, who had been raised from the dead (Strecker, 65). However, it is unlikely that Paul would have been bound by a previous kerygma and more likely would have announced a gospel relevant to and contemporary in each context (Hooker, 435). The “wrath to come” has often been assumed to originate with God (e.g., Calvin 1960a, 339; Best, 85; Fee, 50)—although the text does not support this. Moreover, while the wrath is often taken to be eschatological, Martin Luther argued that the destruction of Jerusalem by Vespasian and Titus and the subsequent expulsion of the Jews is sufficient evidence for the “ruthless wrath of God” (Luther 1971, 138). Robert Jewett (37–41) suggests massacres, famine, or expulsion may have been in view here.
THE TEXT IN CONTEMPORARY DISCUSSION
The experience of the Thessalonians highlights the transformative challenges of the gospel for every cultural, social, and political context. The close relationship between church and state in contemporary democratic societies and the normalization of consumerism have often left the demands of the gospel as little more than the requirement of slight moral and ethical adjustment, while the changes required by the gospel in the Thessalonian context involved a radical social and political metamorphosis.
1 Thessalonians 2:1–12: Paul’s Defense of his Ministry
THE TEXT IN ITS ANCIENT CONTEXT
This section begins with the first in a series of reminders—“you know” (oidate)—perhaps alerting the Thessalonians to what Paul and Silas had taught them during their visit to the city. Paul wants to remind the Thessalonians of what he considers they know to be true. First, he takes up the theme of suffering and reminds them that he and Silas suffered for the gospel prior to arriving in Thessalonica. In this there is a clear attempt to identify himself with the Thessalonians’ own situation and to show empathy. So begins Paul’s defense. Why Paul feels he has to defend himself is not entirely clear, but most likely it relates to the struggle and suffering that the Thessalonians are presently experiencing, and may relate to the grief to which Paul later refers regarding the deaths among the group (4:13). Paul’s defense entails reference to their relation to God, an appeal to the evidence of their character, refuting rumors about their motives, and repeated references to the gospel. However, at the end of this section Paul returns to the theme inherent in his gospel, that of the subversion and arrogation of all other powers and authorities as he reminds the believers of the call on their lives.
First, Paul stresses that he and his companions consider themselves approved by God (2:4); their priority in speaking is to please God (2:4); and he maintains that God has been their witness (2:5). Second, Paul highlights the character that was evident while they were with the Thessalonians. They were gentle, “like a nurse” (2:7), which points also to the fatherly relationship they had with them (2:11). They sought to engage deeply with the Thessalonians, sharing “our own selves” (2:8), and moreover worked hard in order not to be a burden to them (2:9), insisting that they were never less than pure, upright, and blameless (2:10).
Third, he challenges accusations that appear to have arisen among some in the believing community. Paul’s insistence that they did not come to Thessalonica with deceit or impure motives (2:3), nor with words of flattery (2:5), nor with any pretext for greed (2:5) makes clear that suspicions and concerns had arisen with the believing community as to the authenticity of Paul’s mission among them.
Finally, he emphasizes his own sense of responsibility to present the gospel to them. He and Silas had shown great courage in declaring the gospel (2:2), believing that it had been entrusted to them (2:4). They shared (2:8) and proclaimed (2:9) the gospel, all the while urging, pleading, and encouraging the Thessalonians to live a life worthy of God (2:12).
THE TEXT IN THE INTERPRETIVE TRADITION
John Huss, who after being accused of heresy was persecuted and burned at the stake, emphasized Paul’s stress on integrity in the announcement of the gospel (Huss, 106), while Calvin considered that Paul reminds his readers of his integrity in order to stress the divine origin of their call to faith (1960a, 342).
THE TEXT IN CONTEMPORARY DISCUSSION
At the heart of contemporary discussion is the validity of the gospel and those who proclaim it for every culture and context. The gospel concerning the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead continues to challenge and subvert structures that lay claim to power and authority over those called into God’s kingdom. The gospel belongs to God and is founded on God’s action in Jesus Christ. Those who proclaim his gospel are called to do so in the same humble and self-effacing spirit that was evident in Jesus himself. Moreover, Paul’s own emphasis on how he and his companions lived their own lives as key aspects of the proclamation of the gospel is a timely call to authenticity and integrity for all to whom the gospel has been entrusted.
THE TEXT IN ITS ANCIENT CONTEXT
The theme of suffering persecution continues through this section. Paul and Silas give thanks to God for the way in which the Thessalonians received the word of God. First Thessalonians 2:13–14 echoes 1:6 in its reference to imitation. In 1:6, the Thessalonians are said to be imitators of Paul, Silas, and the Lord. The reference to “the Lord” is noteworthy and seems to suggest that the apostles and the Thessalonians share with the Lord the experience of receiving the word of God in the midst of suffering. In 2:13–14, they are described as receivers of the word of God in the midst of persecution, but on this occasion they are imitators of their Judean brothers and sisters.
The element of imitation Paul highlights is that of suffering at the hands of one’s compatriots. Just as the Judean believers suffered persecution at the hands of their compatriots, so too the Thessalonians are experiencing persecution by their own neighbors. Moreover, Paul appears to suggest that suffering incurred from compatriots is becoming typical for followers of the Lord Jesus, for not only are the Lord’s disciples being persecuted, but the Lord Jesus himself and the prophets before him also suffered in this way. In 2:15–16, Paul highlights how the Jews (hoi Ioudaioi) had apparently and unfortunately adopted this malevolent habit over many centuries (see below).
Paul then appears to suggest that the Jews were presently experiencing “wrath,” although he elaborates neither on the source nor on the nature of the wrath. However, as wrath in the ancient world was normally associated with the neglect of appropriate cultic activity, then we may tentatively consider that Paul views the Jews’ present experience of wrath to have its source in God, whom they neglect in their rejection of the Lord Jesus, the prophets, and the Christian disciples.
Although Paul had made clear that there would be persecution (3:3–4), the depth of Paul and Silas’s concern over the Thessalonians becomes apparent. There is the concern that the Thessalonians’ fledgling faith and the newly formed ekklēsia may have dissipated under the pressure of the suffering brought about by the persecutions.
The longing “with great eagerness” (2:17) that Paul expresses to travel again to Thessalonica and to strengthen and encourage the church arises out of this concern for the persecuted Thessalonians. Moreover, the profound personal investment that Paul and Silas have made in the Thessalonians is unmistakable in their description of the new church as “our glory and joy” (2:20) and additionally in their apprehension lest their labor had been in vain. Thus Timothy is sent to visit them. It is not made clear at this point why Timothy was able to make the journey while Paul was not, other than the enigmatic reference to Satan (2:18). Although some argue that Paul intends Satan and “the tempter” to be understood as one and the same (Fee, 120), Paul himself does not make the identity of “the tempter” clear, nor does he make the supposed link with Satan explicit.
Timothy’s task in journeying to Thessalonica is at least twofold. First, he is to strengthen and encourage them (3:2). Clearly some of them have been disturbed by the persecutions and may even have begun to doubt the veracity of Paul’s message to them. The extent of the persecutions may have led some to question Paul’s teaching that Jesus would rescue or defend them against wrath (1:10). Additionally, the impact of the persecutions on the young church and possibly even Paul’s awareness of it is made clear in two ways: First, in his expression of fear that the tempter had tempted them and all of Paul and Silas’s hard work in the city had come to nothing (3:5); and second, in his saying again that he longs to see them face-to-face and to restore or to mend what is lacking in their faith (3:10). Such a comment would be superfluous unless it was evident that the Thessalonians’ immature faith had in some measure been fragmented in the ongoing persecutions.
Timothy’s second task was to bring an account to Paul and Silas of the condition of the Thessalonian church (3:5). Timothy’s report involved good news. The Thessalonians still have kind memories of the apostles and also long to see them again (3:6). This positive report brings great encouragement to Paul and Silas, who respond with hopefulness. Paul’s affirmation, “For we now live” (3:8) is cautiously optimistic. As long as the Thessalonians “continue” to stand firm, then Paul and Silas can assess that their work is bearing fruit.
Paul concludes this section of his letter with a blessing for abundance in love and strength in their lives of holiness as they look to the appearance of the Lord Jesus.
THE TEXT IN THE INTERPRETIVE TRADITION
First Thessalonians 2:14–16 is among those passages “repeatedly used to demonize the Jewish people” (Hagner, 70). Thomas Aquinas clearly considered the Jews responsible for the killing of the Lord Jesus, and argues that they were also antagonistic, prohibiting and impeding the preaching to the gentiles, and that all this was by “divine permission … that they fill up the measure of their sins” (1969, 19). Luther was convinced that “this work of wrath is proof that the Jews, surely rejected by God, are no longer his people, and neither is he any longer their God” (1971, 139). Calvin comments here that God “strips the Jews of all honor, so as to leave them nothing but hatred and ill repute” (Calvin 1960a, 348).
THE TEXT IN CONTEMPORARY DISCUSSION
While Raymond E. Brown raises the possibility that the polemic against the Jews may be an interpolation, as it resembles pagan polemic and is “scarcely characteristic of Paul” (Brown, 463), Ernest Best is an example of those who argue that Paul held “an unacceptable anti-Semitic position” (Best, 122), and F. F. Bruce considered that just because Paul himself was a Jew did not rule out the possibility of anti-Jewishness here (Bruce, 51). However, Ben Witherington III considers that Paul has in view here a “temporal and temporary judgment which has already come in full” on those who opposed the gospel in Judea. At most, Paul may well have seen the wrath come upon the Jews as “poetic justice” in the light of the execution of Jesus and the persecution of Jesus’ earliest followers (Witherington, 87). Hatred and racism have no place in Paul or the contemporary church, but rather we can see this passage as deep encouragement for those suffering persecution.
1 Thessalonians 4:1–12: Sanctification as a Mark of Community
THE TEXT IN ITS ANCIENT CONTEXT
There is considerable evidence for the presence of voluntary associations in Thessalonica established on the basis of professional or religious affinities (Ascough, 316). Each of these associations would obligate its members to a common ethos, values, and rules. Both the regularity and the content of the gatherings would differ from group to group. It seems likely that the ekklēsia in Thessalonica would have been recognizable as a voluntary association with its own distinctive ethos. In this section, Paul follows his words of blessing (3:13), which seek to encourage holiness among the believers, by reminding them of the values and ethos that he and Silas had insisted should mark the ekklēsia (4:1–2). As far as Paul is concerned, the Thessalonians know very well what these values are. Paul then makes reference to two key elements of the distinctive ethos of the Thessalonian ekklēsia.
The initial concern is for their sanctification. Here Paul reminds the believers of three specific elements, each regarding sexual purity. The first aspect is that they should abstain from fornication. Second, that they should all learn to discipline their sexual desires, controlling themselves in a manner worthy of God and of course adopting the values they were instructed in and that should be espoused by the group of believers themselves. Moreover, they should not reflect the values of those outside the group or in other associations. Third, Paul reminds them that they should not use sexuality as a tool of power or exploitation.
It may be that the believers previously belonged to groups where there was a degree of sexual freedom or where, as a generalized aspect of Roman culture, power and status were expressed through sexual dominance. Indeed, Paul’s reminder may have been prompted by rumors of inappropriate activity, but that was not to be a mark of the Thessalonian Christian ekklēsia. Paul insists that rejecting the instruction to pure and holy behavior was a rejection of God’s authority, perhaps hinting that this would lead to exclusion from the Christian association.
Paul’s second reminder listed above seems to concern the impression made on outsiders by the loving nature of the group of believers. Having reiterated the primacy of love as the key aspect of their ethos, Paul then encourages them to ensure that the life they share together be marked by honesty and freedom from dependence on those who do not share their ethos and values. Rather than individualizing the instructions in 4:11–12, we should rather see them as admonishments intended to be understood corporately. In particular, Paul speaks of living together “quietly” (4:11). This is probably a reference to living without selfish ambition and without the striving for honors that may have prevailed in other associations that were profoundly influenced by values of the empire-inclined city. The group is to look after their own affairs and not be dependent on outsiders for their regulation and direction.
THE TEXT IN THE INTERPRETIVE TRADITION
Tertullian cited 1 Thess. 4:3–5 in arguing “in defense of modesty, of sanctity, of chastity: they all aim their missiles against the interests of luxury, and lasciviousness, and lust” (1870a, 101). Whereas Jerome references 1 Thess. 4:7 in his treatise questioning marriage, “for God called us not for uncleanness, but in sanctification” (1892, 1.16), Augustine spoke more positively of marriage for purposes of procreation, not “in the passion of lust like the Gentiles who do not know God” (1955, 13). Scholarly debate here has often centered on the meaning of skeuos (here translated “body”) in verse 4, while almost equal weight throughout history has been placed on the translation “wife” as on “body.” Both alternatives are theoretically possible, but the use of ktasthai (“control, acquire”) seems to point to “body” as the preferred option.
THE TEXT IN CONTEMPORARY DISCUSSION
In an era when the power of sexuality seems to prevail in public and private, religious and political arenas, this passage from Paul is a timely reminder of the robust challenge to followers of the Lord Jesus to live lives that are defined by the values of Christ and not to be enslaved by the dominant ethos of the day.
THE TEXT IN ITS ANCIENT CONTEXT
Paul elucidates the meaning of salvation in answer to profound concerns that have arisen among the Thessalonian believers. He then urges them to encourage one another (4:18; 5:11).
The first stimulus to mutual encouragement (4:18) is accompanied by a restatement of the gospel, “Jesus died and rose again” (4:14). However, while Paul’s previous reiteration of the gospel in 1:10 was set in the context of courage, confidence, and hopefulness, here there is ignorance, grief, and hopelessness (4:13). It is likely that “those who have died” were killed during the substantial and ongoing persecution suffered by the Thessalonians from their compatriots. The expectation of the Thessalonians was that they would be rescued or defended against such wrath (1:10), and thus it appears that these bereavements have led to a serious reassessment of the veracity of Paul’s teaching and perhaps even the gospel itself. Therefore, Paul has to reiterate the gospel on which their hope is based: “we believe that Jesus died and rose again” (4:14). Moreover, Paul then gives his confident assessment of what this gospel hope means for both the living and dead in Thessalonica and elsewhere. Because Jesus has been raised from the dead, he is Lord over against the claims of the emperor. Thus Paul anticipates that Jesus will appear as a conquering king in a manner reminiscent of the parousia of imperial victors. As with the familiar imperial custom, those who accept Jesus and accede to his lordship will go out to greet him—whether presently dead or alive. It is in no way necessary to insist that this was intended to be an exact prediction of the events that will accompany the appearance of Jesus, but Paul appears to blend imperial practice with war imagery from the Qumran community (1QM 1:4–17) and prophetic oracles from Zechariah 9 to paint a picture of a dramatic and decisive salvific event.
The second stimulus to mutual encouragement (5:11) again draws on the key aspects of the gospel: the death of Jesus leading to resurrection, “who died for us, so that … we may live with him” (5:10). However, 5:9 also appears to mirror 1:10. It goes perhaps to the heart of the motive for the letter, that of reassurance within a present experience of severe suffering under persecution and a restatement of the trustworthiness of the gospel and the deep hope that it provides, “For God has destined us not for wrath but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.”
Although Paul says, “you do not need to have anything written to you,” he nevertheless considers it necessary to restate his teaching about “the times and the seasons” (5:1). From the perspective of awareness of the chronology of the narrative of God’s people and the anticipation of the fulfillment of God’s purposes, Paul sets up a direct challenge to the assertion of Roman imperial ideology that the empire can guarantee “peace and security.” Rather, just as the Israelites were protected in Egypt against the angel of death, so the Thessalonians will be safe against the “sudden destruction,” while those outside the ekklēsia will discover that “there will be no escape” (5:3). Paul then juxtaposes the lifestyle of the believers over against that of those who continue to live under the values and ethos of the empire: the believers are children of light over against those of the darkness; of the day over against the night; awake rather than asleep; and sober instead of drunk (5:4–7). Moreover, Paul appears to highlight once again the church/imperial contrast by adopting two elements of the dress of the soldier, who was commissioned to keep a contrived “peace and security” under the imperial banner. The Christian will put on the breastplate of faith and love and the helmet as the hope of salvation. Paul’s final assertion here highlights his deep confidence that the destiny of the believer, whether presently alive or dead, is salvation through the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Throughout this letter Paul has had his eyes on the anticipated appearance of the Lord Jesus. One element of his concern for the Thessalonian believers is that holiness might be the distinctive feature of their group. Paul’s encouragement that this holiness should be maintained and strengthened in practical ways as the central ethos of the group is encapsulated in his final blessing (5:23). Previously he has spoken of sexual purity and mutual love as distinguishing marks (4:1–12). Now Paul highlights respectful internal relationships, thankful prayer, and openness to the Spirit. First, Paul emphasizes the need for a deep respect and profound love for those who have spiritual responsibility. Second, they are all to ensure peaceful relationships within the group. This peace has to extend to warning those who might be idle or cause trouble, strengthening those who are discouraged, and helping those who may be weak in the face of the persecutions. They are to be patient with one another. Third, thankfulness is to define their life together. Moreover, their continuous expression of prayer is to be distinguished by joy.
Finally, Paul expresses his desire that the Thessalonians should be open to the activity of the Holy Spirit among them and particularly that they cherish and appreciate prophetic words. It may be that hasty contempt has been shown when prophecies that might have strengthened or admonished the community have been shared. Rather, they are to test everything to make sure that nothing that might be profitable to their growth and strength is lost. Paul assures them all that God is faithful and will prepare them well for the appearance of Jesus.
THE TEXT IN THE INTERPRETIVE TRADITION
Discussions around eschatology have inevitably dominated consideration of this passage. The early church appeared to be particularly concerned with the individual context of eschatology, countering suggestions that it is only the soul that survives death. Tertullian, for example, tackled the thorny issue of the decomposition of the body in the interval before resurrection, arguing for “the integrity of the whole substance of man” at the resurrection (1922, 57). Origen stressed the transformation of the body at the resurrection into a state of incorruptibility (Against Celsus 5.19), while Augustine considered the possibility that those who are alive at the resurrection might pass through death into immortality as they were “carried aloft” to meet Christ in the air (1963, 20.20). Calvin speaks of the transformation into “an entirely new nature” while reminding us of the inevitable judgment that awaits (1960b, 2:17). In more recent times, the dispensationalist views popularized by J. N. Darby and published in the Scofield Bible have dominated in some quarters. The rapture, interpreted from 1 Thess. 4:17, whereby the faithful were snatched away from the earth upon the Parousia of Jesus, became a central tenet in this belief system. Each interpretive strategy ultimately concerns the meaning of salvation: will it take place in the present or the future; is it for the individual or for a corporate body; does it involve apocalyptic destruction of creation or its restoration?
THE TEXT IN CONTEMPORARY DISCUSSION
N. T. Wright is among those who have critiqued the escapist rapture theologies prevalent among the evangelical wing of the church, as popularized by Hal Lindsey in The Late Great Planet Earth and by Tim LaHaye and Jerry B. Jenkins’s Left Behind series. Wright has argued that such theologies’ acceptance of the subsequent cataclysmic destruction of the earth deny the need to put things right in this world as it will all be destroyed anyway (Wright, 119). Helmut Koester emphasizes the significance of the believing community in the context of the Parousia (Koester, 159) and concludes, “Paul envisions a role for the eschatological community that presents a utopian alternative to the prevailing eschatological ideology of Rome” (166). The transformation of all creation is predicated on the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. This in turn supports a robust understanding of the resurrection of all believers as life in community and cooperation with God putting things right on the earth as a more balanced and ecologically friendly view.