Driving truly brings out the worst in some people. I am one of them. While I will not do anything to endanger myself or other drivers, I turn into my Mr. Hyde when aggravated by other people on the road. The blinker is seriously not that hard to use! Anyways, I was on my way home from work the other morning when I got behind a large, red pickup truck. Each time the driver used the gas, a large cloud of block smoke emitted. Admittedly, I assumed it was a white, Christian, and country male driving such a vehicle. Immediately, the words of Genesis 1:26 came to mind. Why is the relationship between Christianity and climate change so skewered?
For all I know, the driver of the truck does not match up to my stereotypical assumptions. But in the small Georgia town I live in, it is not uncommon for such vehicles to have stickers proclaiming Jesus while destroying the environment. As I’ve reflected on this the past few days, I’ve conducted some research on Christianity and environmentalism. Is it just American evangelicals that have no problem endangering nature? Why are evangelicals so opposed to having a cleaner earth? And is the contemporary evangelical interpretation of Genesis 1:26 correct?
Evangelical Christianity and Climate Change
Religion plays an enormous role in how humans act socially, culturally, and ecologically. The beliefs we assume regarding our basic needs, ontology, and identity engender our views on living, behavior, and responsibility.
The relationship between Christianity and climate change is complex and multifaceted, reflecting a diverse range of perspectives and beliefs across different faith traditions. Some religious communities emphasize the stewardship of the Earth, viewing environmental responsibility as a moral imperative rooted in their sacred texts. These groups often advocate for sustainable practices and environmental conservation as an expression of their spiritual values.
Conversely, there are individuals within certain religious traditions who may be skeptical of climate change or prioritize human dominion over the Earth, citing biblical interpretations that grant humans dominion over nature (i.e., Gen. 1:16).
The intersection of Christianity and climate change is continually evolving, with many religious leaders and communities increasingly recognizing the urgency of addressing environmental issues as a shared responsibility for the well-being of the planet and its inhabitants. Interfaith dialogue and collaboration have become essential in fostering a more comprehensive understanding of environmental challenges and promoting collective action across diverse religious communities.
Religion seems to outweigh ethnic and national identities in how individuals perceive environmental concerns. Many studies have revealed that American Christians are less likely to believe in contributing to environmentally conscious behaviors and actions. For example, the Pew Research Center revealed last year that American evangelical Protestants are the least likely religious group to say climate change is not a serious issue.1
But it is not just American evangelicals who think this way. A scholarly study in Australia reveals that Christian literalists (fundamentalists) are the least likely to be alarmed or concerned about global warming and most likely to doubt that it is a serious problem.2 A similar study in Indonesia shows Christian interpretation of the doctrine of imago Dei (man created in the image of God) correlates with more apathetic beliefs on ecological duties.3
Why are evangelicals opposed to bettering the climate?
Evangelicals tend to disregard the environment because of ontological beliefs. Generally, these beliefs are rooted in Genesis 1:26. This verse famously proclaims:
“Then God said, “Let us make humankind in our image (imago Dei), in the likeness of ourselves; and let them rule over the fish in the sea, the birds in the air, the animals, and over all the earth, and over every crawling creature that crawls on the earth.”
The interpretation of this verse can influence attitudes toward climate change. However, interpretations vary, and most American evangelicals misconstrue this dominion as an unchecked authority, leading to environmental exploitation. The doctrine of imago Dei has become dangerous because it leads to the mindset that humans are the “crown of creation.” This leads to the belief that other forms of life and nature are to be used solely for the growth and advancement of humanity.
The prevailing Christian interpretation of Genesis 1:26 holds that nature has no other purpose than to serve humankind. The church uses this verse to assert human dominance and exploitation of nature, which is why Christianity is responsible for industrialization. The proper reading of this verse highlights that humans are to be stewards of nature. Why? Because God is spiritually present within nature.4
Genesis 1:26 is not the only verse to assert humankind’s responsibility to tend to nature. In the following chapter, God places Adam in the Garden of Eden to “work it and take care of it.” Job 38:34-38 (famous for God saying to Job, “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?”) encourages humans to practice “cosmic humility” and safeguard the natural world.5 Furthermore, the Psalms acknowledge that the earth belongs to God. As stewards of the earth, should we be destroying it?
I am certainly no radical climate activist. For many years, I even believed the distorted interpretation of Genesis 1:26 as “the earth is ours, let’s do whatever we want to make us feel more powerful.” But as the climate worsens, all humans have a responsibility to practice stewardship of the earth. Not only should Christians be leading the fight, but they rank the lowest in understanding of ecological concerns!
Sure, we may have greater power over the earth, but that does not mean we should murder it. For those who believe God has given them dominion over the earth, think carefully about what that means. Remember that the same book you are using as an excuse to destroy earth also declares the earth to be property of the God who created you.
Conclusion
Genesis 1:26, with its directive for humans to have dominion over the Earth, should be seen as a powerful call for Christianity and climate change activism rather than an endorsement of unchecked exploitation. Recognizing the responsibility that comes with dominion, this biblical passage should inspire a sense of stewardship and care for the environment. Climate activism grounded in Genesis 1:26 involves advocating for sustainable practices, conservation, and policies that prioritize the well-being of the planet and its inhabitants.
By embracing the notion of responsible dominion, individuals and communities can harness their faith as a driving force for positive environmental change. This interpretation encourages a proactive and ethical approach to climate action, aligning with the broader global effort to address the urgent challenges posed by climate change. According to Genesis, humans were given dominion over the earth; this should not mean destroying it, but preserving it.
1. Becka A. Alper, Pew Research Center, November 2022, “How Religion Intersects With Americans’ Views on the Environment,” https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2022/11/17/religious-groups-views-on-climate-change/
2. Morrison, Mark, Roderick Duncan, and Kevin Parton. “Religion does Matter for Climate Change Attitudes and Behavior.” PloS One 10, no. 8 (2015): 7, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4527763/
3. Pasaribu, Andar G., Roy C. H. P. Sipahutar, and Eduward H. Hutabarat. “Imago Dei and Ecology: Rereading Genesis 1:26–28 from the Perspective of Toba Batak in the Ecological Struggle in Tapanuli, Indonesia.” Verbum Et Ecclesia 43, no. 1 (2022): 2, https://go.openathens.net/redirector/liberty.edu?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/imago-dei-ecology-rereading-genesis-1-26-28/docview/2715183412/se-2.
4. Ikeke, Mark Omorovie. “The Role Of Philosophy Of Ecology And Religion in the Face of the Environmental Crisis.” Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies 19, no. 57 (Winter, 2020): 87, https://go.openathens.net/redirector/liberty.edu?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/role-philosophy-ecology-religion-face/docview/2475948341/se-2
5. Jung, Ji Young. “Ecological Challenges and Injustice from a Missiological Perspective.” Transformation 38, no. 4 (October 2021): 287, https://doi.org/10.1177/02653788211038976.