Australian Anglican Bishop Dr. Michael Rennie Stead (1969–) quotes that the true good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep (Luke 15:3-7; John 10:11), while adding that “the ‘good shepherd’ is the one who can maximise the return on investment from the flock, generating the highest yield of fleece or meat for the lowest price” (Stead 2019). So Jesus the good shepherd died for His sheep, while you, Michael Rennies Stead, want to use the sheep to the bone in order to maximize your own profit and to gratify your selfish, carnist lust? All this absurdity and hypocrisy stems from the bishop’s misconception of “dominion” in Genesis 1:26,28 as stewardship with certain God-given powers, though not necessarily tyranny.
On the one hand, Stead claims that “breeding an animal… in order to kill it for food” is alright, as long as the animal is treated humanely while he/she is alive, “as is hunting animals for food, and perhaps even culling feral rabbits or cats in order to protect crops or animals,” because “the Bible tells us that God has given us the animals for food [note 1] and their skins for clothing [note 2]” (Stead 2019). On the other hand, he states that “there is no biblical mandate for intentional and unnecessary cruelty to animals.” And he concedes that “to treat the creation with contempt” translates into “contempt for the Creator”, because all that God made was “very good”, as affirmed by Genesis 1:31 (Stead 2019).
It turns out that Michael Rennie Stead’s Pharisaic attitude towards animals is not an isolated phenomenon, but a trait shared by many “animal friendly” theologians before him, e.g., John Calvin (1509 –1564), John Wesley (1703-1791), John Styles (1782 –1849), C.S. Lewis (1898-1963) Karl Barth (1886-1968), Sir Matthew Hale (1609-1676), Stephen Webb (1961-2016), William Scully (1959).
The source of Stead and his predecessors’ hypocritical stance regarding animals comes from their misinterpretation of “dominion” in Genesis 1:26, 28 as stewardship with certain divinely ordained privileges, though not absolute ownership (Stead 2019).
In reality, “dominion” in Genesis 1:26, 28 means neither lordship nor despotism nor even stewardship, but servanthood bereft of power and authority. ירדו (yirdu), the ancient biblical Hebrew word in consonantal form for "dominion" in the verse concerned, refers to either רָדָה (radah) (to tread down, subjugate, rule) or יָרַד (yarad) (to lower oneself, to descend) (cf. Chaim and Laura 2015). IMO, “dominion” can only mean the latter, because, firstly, it is in the spirit of the Jesus who said that He has come to serve, NOT to be served (Mark 10:45); secondly, the instruction is immediately followed by a vegan diet prescribed by God to humans (Genesis 1:29); thirdly, in Genesis 2:15, humans are particularly assigned to be just a humble caretaker of the garden.
To "have dominion over animals" in Genesis 1 therefore signifies that God commands humanity to lower themselves and wait upon other animals as a powerless servant rather than a surrogate of God on earth (Chen 2024). The mistranslation/misinterpretation of one word in the Bible often has real grave consequences, as in the current case, leading to the tragic death of trillions of innocent creatures every year.
Notes
1. Soon after Noah emerged from the Ark, God said to him, "Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things" (Genesis 9:3 KJV). Many flesh-eaters seize upon this verse to claim that God thereby gave humans permission to kill and eat any animals they fancy. However, judging from its context, this verse is much more likely to be a descriptive preview of what atrocities humans were going to do to the animals on earth (cf. Barad 2012:17; Wescoe 2017), a visualization of what horror Noah and his offspring were going to inflict on the non-human inhabitants of the world, rather than an authorization to abuse animals. Also, in view of the scarcity of plant-food ensuing the Deluge, the compromise could well be an expedient measure, a provisional permission for Noah's people to eat the bodies of drowned animals (Wescoe 2017; Barad 2012).
In this connection, at least seven verses in Genesis should be examined. Firstly, the animals that God ordered Noah to take to the Ark were not for human consumption but for preserving their species (Genesis 7:1-3; 8:17). Secondly, God detested Noah's animal sacrifice (Genesis 8:20-21). Thirdly, God predicted all His creation will be terrorized by humanity (Genesis 9:2). Fourthly, God reiterated to Noah the vegan diet that had been prescribed to Adam (Genesis 1:29-30). Fifthly, God forbid Noah and his clan to eat flesh with life and blood, but for the early Hebrews, life was constituted by blood itself. Sixthly, God warned Noah, "for your lifeblood I will require a reckoning" (Genesis 9:5 ESV), after issuing the ban on lifeblood taking. Seventhly, God made a covenant with every animal (Genesis 9:9-10).
2. "The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them" (Genesis 3:21). This verse has been quoted by many a meat-eater to argue against Christian veganism. Did God actually hunt down in cold blood a couple of innocent animals, and skin them mercilessly, in order to make fur coats for Adam and Eve to wear? Sounds ridiculous, doesn't it? In reality, עור (`owr), the Hebrew original of "skin" in the verse, means human skin and/or the physical human body, in accordance with the Hebrew Lexicon. It is rarely used to refer to the skin of animals. In fact, in the context concerned, the death of an animal is in no way mentioned. So where did the Lord acquire the skin with which he provided clothes for Adam and his wife? The text doesn’t say. But it is likely that God just created it as either the human skin or the human body itself.
References
Barad, Judith (2012). "What about the Covenant with Noah?". In York, Tripp; Alexis-Baker, Andy (eds.). A Faith Embracing All Creatures. 13.
Chaim & Laura (2015). "Hebrew Word Study -- Dominion." Chaim Bentorah, Jun. 4. https://www.chaimbentorah.com/2015/06/hebrew-word-study-dominion/#:~:text=Seven%20hundred%20years%20after%20the,come%20down%20or%20lower%20oneself.
Stead, Michael R. (2019). "To ‘Rule Over’ and ‘Subdue’ the Creation." Anglican.org.au, Anglican Church of Australia, May. https://anglican.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/To-Rule-and-To-Subdue-in-Genesis-1-Michael-Stead.pdf
Wescoe (2017). "Permission and Going the Extra Mile." Swords to Plow Shares, 28 March. https://swords2plowshares.com/2017/03/28/permission-and-going-the-extra-mile/?fbclid=IwAR3vOmY1wIerXKrFOy7iwwNYZOU-CduKHHNW05MhckgnUIF0WbV1RXgM0Nk
Comments