What is a Biblical Response to Global Warming: Concluding Thoughts (Part Three)

Christians must be concerned about the environmental consequences of their actions, but environmental concerns are not primary. The primary concern for the Christian must be to love God and love others. A Christian response to environmental issues will never make the earth more important than God or man. A Christians response to climate change will guard against causing harm to others. The protection of species and environments must never be the end in itself but a means to the goal of loving God and others.

The protection of the environment is not trivial. God has given mankind dominion over the earth. That rule is to be exercised for the glory of God and the well-being of nature. In providing for the good of people and creatures, some change and loss of environment is unavoidable. Repeated walking along a path will destroy the vegetation on that path. The tilling of a field will kill plants native to that spot. These are unavoidable and generally acceptable damages. They are acceptable when they bring benefit to mankind, when their scope is limited, or when the damage is reversible.

Practices which do widespread or irreversible harm ought not be pursued. In the mid-twentieth century, DDT worked wonders as a pesticide. However, its use nearly wiped out the bald eagle population in America. The United States government rightly responded by banning the use of DDT. The damage caused by the use of DDT was widespread and almost irreversible. Because America responded in time, the bald eagle population has rebounded and is no longer an endangered species. Christians ought to be concerned to limit or reverse destruction caused by mankind. Christians ought to oppose products and practices which have widespread, irreversible, negative impacts on the environment.

This does mean all irreversible actions are negative. Humans have worked diligently to eradicate certain viruses. No one bemoans the near extinction of small pox or polio. No one opposes ongoing efforts to crush malaria, measles, or intestinal parasites. Though the eradication of deadly viruses necessarily involves the near extinction of certain species, few would seriously object we should protect harmful viruses like poliovirus. Environmental concerns usually involve issues which are less simple than the destruction of deadly viruses. The point here is that causing an unalterable change to the environment, including the extinction of a species, is not necessarily wrong just because it is irreversible. Before embarking on projects which would irrevocably alter the environment, great care must be take to discover and weigh as fully as possible the likely consequences of that action. Irreversible change must be justified by producing genuine and ongoing benefit to humanity which cannot be accomplished without that change.

Mankind is capable of causing severe harm to our world. However, man is incapable of rendering the earth uninhabitable. God promised in Genesis 8:22, “While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, winter and summer, and day and night shall not cease.” Man’s actions can make the world a more difficult place to live. Man’s actions can shorten the life spans of millions of people. Man cannot stop the seasons. The snowball earth and the hothouse earth are equally impossible. The earth will continue to spin on its axis and orbit the sun. The hydrologic cycle will continue. Men will plant crops and harvest the fruit. God has promised these things will not fail. Concern for the future well being of the earth is warranted. Panic is not.

Man is responsible to steward God’s creation. This stewardship is to be exercised by a careful use of the natural world. In using the resources of the world, men ought to seek to prevent significant or irreversible harm to the world. Humanity needs to work to reduce or repair the harm done without increasing harm to others. This care must seek the benefit of people and the flourishing of other creatures. This care must be practiced in submission to God. Humanity is the steward of the earth entrusted by God with the rule of the world He created.

What is a Biblical View of Climate Change: Non-negotiables (Part Two)

The problem of climate change is complex and difficult. No single solution supplies the full answer. Sound bites and headlines are unable to address the intricacies of this issue. A Christian response to global warming must begin with the Bible’s commands. Two commands stand above all the rest as most important for our response to climate change.

Jesus Himself declares which commands are supreme above all other considerations. He said in Matthew 22:37-39, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.” The Christian must respond to climate change by loving God supremely and loving others selflessly.

Love for God must trump all other loves. Caring for the earth is not most important because the earth is not most important. God is. All care for the earth must be subservient to and an expression of one’s love for God.

The earth is not divine. Though we may refer to her as Mother Earth, she is in fact not a goddess. Only one deity exists, the God of the Bible. Anything which elevates the earth, or any other created thing, to a god-like status is a failure to love God supremely. Worship of the earth loves the creature more than the creator.

Because God is the One who the Christian must love most, then no response to climate change should displeas Him by disobeying His commands. The Christian who speaks always of stopping climate change but never tells the gospel is disobeying God (Mark 16:15) and failing to love Him most. No one should blaspheme, steal, cheat, swindle, embezzle, lie, slander, or gossip in their efforts to slow global warming. The destruction of another person’s private property is never justified by the goal of reducing greenhouse gases. If we love God more than the planet, sinful means will never be employed in the fight against climate change.

Love for others is the inevitable result of a proper love for God. Every human is created in the image of God. Therefore, those who love God will love all those who bear His reflection. The love enjoined in the Bible is a selfless devotion to doing what is best for others. Selfless love will do nothing which brings harm to others. (Romans 13:10)

A refusal to harm others will have significant impact on the Christian’s response to this issue. Anything which directly or indirectly harms others must be rejected. Actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions must not increase suffering in any part of the world. A developing country must not be forced to stop using fossil fuels without also supplying the country adequate with power and resources to prevent its people from being unable to protect themselves from the elements, from acquiring proper clothing, and from having sufficient food. The acquisition of materials for use in clean energy must not exploit or harm people. The by-products from the extraction of fossil fuels must not be allowed to pollute local water supplies and poison people. Any solutions to climate change which would cause harm, directly or indirectly, to humans must be rejected.

Because the command to love others is most important, all environmental views which treat the earth or the creatures on it as more important than human beings must be rejected. Disregard of the well being of the planet is never Biblically justifiable. However, in situations where one must choose between the well being of a person and the well being of an animal or the preservation of nature, human life must be prioritized. The human cost of shutting down or relocating an industry to protect an endangered species must be weighed. If the protection of a species will result in the death of humans through malnutrition, inadequate access to medical assistance, or insufficient ability to access heat and shelter, then another means must be found to protect that species. Any solutions to environmental concerns which devalue a human being must be rejected.

The most extreme response to global warming offers a case study of the potential impact of proposed solutions on the well being of people. A sudden and complete cessation of all use of fossil fuels would move humanity into a pre-industrial condition. Such a state would inevitably result in much loss of life. For example, the ability of medicine to preserve human life has not advanced through the increase of knowledge alone. Medical advancement has gone hand in hand with technological advancement. Much of present medical technology (e.g., all the plastics in medical machinery) would become unavailable without access to fossil fuels. The large scale production and delivery of medical machinery would become prohibitively difficult without access to fossil fuels. Many antibiotics, pain relievers, and synthetic prescription drugs are made using petroleum. These life saving and life improving medications would no longer be available without access to fossil fuels. As an another example, improved technology in weather prediction and building materials, both heavily dependent on petroleum products, has contributed to a substantial reduction of death from natural disasters in the last one hundred years.

The undeniable fact is the technological development which is blamed for global warming has also protected human life, extended life spans, and improved the quality of life. The complete cessation of all fossil fuels would shorten life and make life much harder for billions of people. This is an extreme example, but it highlights the real scope of the discussion. If we love God and others, then efforts to slow global warming must weigh their impact on human beings.

Is God in Everything?

“God is in everything.” Those words sparked a lengthy conversation about the relationship of God to the physical universe. Christians who make that statement do not mean the same thing a Hindu or Buddhist might mean by a similar statement. The Christian might mean that since God is Creator of all things then all things contain an active part of God. Therefore, His being can legitimately be said to be in all of His creation. This asserts more than the existence of evidence of God’s creative work in the things He created, but that all things contain a part of God. This asserts that a piece of God is present in every created thing. Is this a Biblical assertion?

The Bible teaches that God is present everywhere. “Where can I go from Your Spirit? Or where can I flee from Your presence?” (Psalm 139:7) “Can anyone hide himself in secret places, so I shall not see him? says the LORD, Do I not fill heaven and earth?” (Jeremiah 23:24) God is present everywhere in His creation and His presence fills all His creation. God is truly present in all places simultaneously. The Biblical teaching of the unlimited presence of God is not the same as the teaching that God is present in everything

The Bible teaches God is present everywhere while also remaining completely distinct from His creation. God is everywhere, but God is not in everything. Declaring that God is in all things blurs the line between creature and Creator, a line which the Bible draws clearly. Aside from the incarnation of Jesus, the Divine and the created are never described in the Bible as co-mingled. God is greater than all the world and is higher than the heavens. He cannot be contained by the universe or even by Heaven. (1 Kings 8:27) Isaiah 40:22 says, “It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.” Isaiah shows God is separate from His creation. He sits above the earth. He spreads out the heavens. He is infinitely greater than all His creation.

Isaiah 40:25 asks, “To whom then will you liken Me, or to whom shall I be equal?” If God is in everything and everything contains the Divine, then what could be wrong with portraying God as a Sun, an elephant, a calf or some other created thing? Only because God is not in any of those things is it wrong to represent Him by an image of them. God is not in all creation, but “above all.” (Ephesians 4:6)

Understanding that God is always present with all His creation in all places and at all times while also always separate and distinct from His creation is not easy. The distinction is difficult but important. To mingle God’s being with His creation is to elevate the creation to the level of the Divine and to diminish the infinite, limitless God until He becomes equivalent to His creation. God is not equal with any or all of His creation. He is infinitely greater than all His works. None dare lessen His greatness. All must marvel at the infinity and intimacy of God who transcends all creation and remains present with each person.

Does the Bible say anything about Pangea?

Pangea is the name given to the super continent believed to be the single landmass from which the present day continents broke apart. Evolutionary science says Pangea existed two to three hundred million years ago. The continental plates slowly drifted apart and into their present positions. As they continue to move they will eventually bump into each other to form a new super continent.

The existence of Pangea seems plausible to those who look at the map and imagine the continents as pieces of a puzzle. The American continents appear like they would fit snugly into contours of the African and European continents. If the Bible is true one would expect to find in it some mention of a fact as significant as the existence of an original supercontinent. Does the Bible say anything about Pangea?

First, the Bible can be true and not mention the original shape of Earth’s landmasses. The Bible does not claim to speak about every subject known to man. Much that is of great importance to humans is not addressed in the Bible. Scripture does not teach basic mathematics. The Bible counts, but it says nothing about the relationship of Pi to the circumference of a circle or about the principles of Pythagoreans theorem. These are incredibly significant facts used in many professions and that affect the construction of many structures. Also, huge portions of natural history are ignored by the Bible. Though Scripture speaks of ants, locusts, goats and badgers, the Bible says nothing about kangaroos, armadillos, monkeys or dolphins. The list of important things the Bible does not talk about is much larger than the Bible itself. However, the Bible makes no claims to be the source of knowledge about every thing in this world. The Bible claims to tell everything people need to know about how to be right with God and how to live in the way God requires. The Bible can be true and also be silent on many things of importance to humans.

Second, the Bible does speak of an event which suggests how a super continent could have existed in the beginning and how the continents could have moved to their present location. Scripture does not say God created the world with one, massive super continent, but Genesis 6 through 9 describes a worldwide flood which could have broken that continent into several pieces.

The Bible says that during the flood the fountains of the great deeps were opened up. (Genesis 7:11) Some creation scientists speculate those fountains were underground reservoirs of water which pushed through the earth’s surface and began to push the continental plates apart. The movement of water from under the ground and the pressure of the water pushing through the cracks in the crust combined to speed up the movement of the continents. This drift would have continued during the flood and gradually slowed down after the flood waters were gone.

To be clear, the Bible does not describe Pangea or the spread of the continents. The Bible says the fountains of the great deep were opened up. From that statement some creation scientists have deduced a possible explanation for continental drift and the break up of the single super continent. Though the Bible does not answer all our geological questions, Scripture does tell us everything we need to know about salvation, eternal life and how to please God with your life. Everything the Bible tells us is important and trustworthy, even if it doesn’t tell us everything we want to know.

When did God Make Carnivorous Animals?

Genesis 1 describes God’s creation of all things, including the creation of every kind of animal. In Genesis 1:30 God says, “To every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food.” God then declared the entire creation to be “very good.” Initially all animals were plant eaters.

Genesis 3 records the rebellion of humanity against God and the subsequent curse that fell on all the world. Many conservative Bible teachers believe animals began to eat meat as a result of the curse. The Bible does not say when certain animals began to be carnivorous. Passages like Isaiah 11 which speak of carnivores being restored to their original herbivorous condition and Romans 5 which says death came because man sinned. These passages lead to the conclusion that no animal ate the flesh of another until after man sinned. After man’s sin some animals became carnivorous. Whether the transition to carnivory was gradual or instant is unknown.

Those who study zoology (the science of animals) know the digestive system of a meat eater is quite different from that of a plant eater. To survive on a meat based diet the creature has to be able to eat and digest the meat. This requires unique features in the teeth, jaws, stomachs or intestines of carnivores. When God cursed the world did He renovate the innards of certain animals so they could begin to eat meat? The Bible does not say.

Most carnivores are able to live on a plant based diet. Relatively few obligate carnivores (meat eaters which can only survive on a predominantly meat based diet) exist. Cats, snakes and lizards are a few kinds of obligate carnivores. The majority of meat eating animals also have a diet containing a large percentage of plant based foods. Bears, dogs and apes are carnivores which also eat varying amounts of plant matter. A slow transition to carnivory can be imagined for those animals which are not obligate carnivores. Conditions in the cursed world may have required them to begin eating meat and the process of adaptation allowed those better able to process meat to survive and pass on their unique genetic features. Knowing man was going to sin God could have built into the genetic structure of many creatures the ability to process meat.

God could also have redesigned many animals at the same time He redesigned certain plants to bear thorns and thistles. A Divine re-plumbing of certain creatures to enable them to survive on meat is not an unreasonable assumption. The curse of Satan included a radical redesign of snake structure. The serpent was created with legs, but was cursed to crawl on its belly. For this to be a sustainable transformation something greater than mere amputation had to happen. The structures supporting the leg bones, muscles and tendons had to be removed and new structures put in place (assuming they were not already present) that allowed the snake’s muscles to push its scales backward, thus propelling the animal forward. This design change also required a change of the animals DNA or only the first generation of cursed snakes would have been legless. If God had not changed the serpent’s DNA its offspring would have been legged because the genetic code would have included the originally created instructions to form the the embryo according to the originally created, legged design. God’s curse of the serpent shows that the effects of the curse were much greater than might be thought. Thus, speculating Diving intervention to massively redesign other animals is not unreasonable.

Nothing can be said with certainty about how and when animals began to eat other animals. The Bible does not tell those details. The Bible does tell of a time when that process will be reversed. Isaiah 11 describes the conditions of the world after the return of Jesus to establish His kingdom on this earth. During that kingdom, “The cow and the bear will graze” and “the lion shall eat straw like the ox.” (Isaiah 11:7) When Jesus rules on the earth He will renovate the world to remove much of the curse. He will radically alter the behavior and internal physical structures of animals so even obligate carnivores will eat hay. Who is to say He did not perform similar alterations when He cursed the world because of sin?

When Did Satan Sin?

The Biblical account of Adam and Eve’s sin describes a serpent tempting Eve to disobey God. This serpent is understood to be Satan. (Revelation 12:9; 20:2) Satan is the originator of sin, but he was not created sinful. (Ezekiel 28:15) Satan was created perfect by God, and sometime after his creation he sinned. When did this happen?

The Bible does not give a definitive answer to this question, but Scripture does give a few indicators that help identify the time period in which Satan sinned. Ezekiel 28 says that Satan was in the Garden of Eden, was beautiful, was one of the cherubim surrounding God’s throne and was perfect until the day he sinned. Isaiah says Satan’s first sin was an arrogant desire to become greater than God. (Isaiah 14:12-14)

Satan’s sin must have taken place sometime after the sixth day of creation. Satan could not have fallen before the events described in Genesis 1 because the Bible says that God created all things in six days. (Exodus 20:11) The angels were most likely created on the first day of creation when God created Heaven and Earth, since the angels watched the creation of the earth from the beginning. (Job 38:7) Satan is an angel and must have been created at the same time as the rest of the angelic creatures.

Satan must have sinned after the six days of creation because Genesis 1:31 says that at the end of the sixth day, “God saw everything that He had made and behold it was very good.” Nothing in the context of Genesis 1 limits Genesis 1:31 to only the things God had made on the earth, or only the things in the garden of Eden. Genesis 1 starts with, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth,” and continues with an unbroken sequence of Divine creative acts in which God made all things. Therefore, everything in heaven and earth must be included in the evaluation, “very good.” A sinful, rebellious angel would not be considered by the Holy God to be “very good.”

Satan sinned sometime after the creation week and before the sin of Adam and Eve. The Bible does not tell how much time elapsed between creation and the fall. Some scholars think Adam may not have sinned until nearly 100 years after creation, because he fathered Seth at the age of 130 years. Cain and Abel were born after Adam and Eve sinned and then grew to adulthood before Cain killed Abel. After Abel’s murder and Cain’s exile Eve gave birth to Seth. Therefore, Adam could have been as old as 100 when they were kicked out of the Garden of Eden. The Bible does not tell how much time elapsed between Satan’s fall and the temptation of Adam and Eve. Satan’s rebellion against God could have been as late as 100 years after creation.

The fact that Lucifer ministered around the throne of God suggests that some time elapsed after creation before Satan sinned. He probably did not rebel on the 8th day of the world’s existence. Satan sinned sometime after the creation was completed but before Adam and Eve sinned. Satan was not created sinful, but in his pride he rebelled against his Creator.