Abstract:  This article presents a biblical response to the fear-based claims of climate activists. Christians who understand that the earth requires the careful stewardship of human agents to act as priests to serve and watch over creation are best equipped to preserve our planet, promote human flourishing, and counteract the fear generated by those who promote radical policies that could impoverish and destroy millions of lives.

Key Words: climate crisis, cultural mandate, stewardship of creation, net-zero, fossil fuels, human flourishing

The Incessant Climate Change Message 

     Almost daily we are bombarded with a new thing to fear, from endless COVID-19 variants to the imminent threat of nuclear annihilation or economic collapse, every direction seems to yield another crisis or impending calamity. For over fifty years we have been warned by prominent scientists and activists of ecological and environmental climate catastrophes that emanate from humanity’s use of earth’s resources because they produce greenhouse gasses like carbon dioxide and methane gas. Scientists warn our failure to mitigate these emissions—sometimes mistakenly labeled as environmental toxins—will yield billions of deaths from starvation and disease.

     The irony and outright hypocrisy of the policymakers who arrived in Davos, Switzerland in private jets to attend the World Economic Forum (which promotes the doctrine of net-zero carbon emissions) has been noted by various media outlets. Meanwhile, ordinary citizens, not the policymakers, bear the brunt of the economic fallout from the proposed environmental policies developed in Davos.

     With the barrage of information about climate change, what should Christians think and do? Does the Bible provide us with a mandate to address the environmental issues? Where can Christians find a counternarrative to the pervasive story of pending environmental catastrophe that grips our young people and sends them spiraling into bouts of depression and anxiety? What are our responsibilities to God’s creation? Are there implications for how the earth is to be managed? This article contends that the creation account found in Genesis 1 and 2, along with other scriptural passages, reveals and defines clear instructions to counteract the confusion about climate change. Through careful reading of the biblical text, Christians will be able to discern how they ought to respond to environmental issues and take responsibility to serve, keep, and steward God’s creation.

God’s Cultural Mandate

     The seminal text is part of the creation account of Genesis 1 which deals with the creation of humanity. Most are very familiar with Gen. 1:27, which declares that humanity is created in/as the image of God. Much has been written on that front. The most important feature of the image-ness presented in this account is not ontological (i.e., the essence of being, including consciousness) but functional (i.e., the human job description). Whatever else the concept of image might mean, what is crucial to the biblical author here is that humanity functions—both male and female—as God’s vice-regents on earth. 

     This essay focuses on what is stated in Gen. 1:28. Some have referred to this text as the cultural mandate, that is, the command of God that his human creations should not only inhabit the earth but that they, in some sense, master it. Four Hebrew verbs describe the mastery human beings were designed to exercise over the creation as God’s representatives.

And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” 

     Consider the verb for the command to be fruitful pārāh – פרה coupled with the one that often accompanies it in Genesis, namely, to multiply rābāh – רבה. The imperative verbs echo the command God issued to the animals in Gen. 1:22. Clearly, God wanted His world to be filled; life in all its forms, including human life, was to fill the planet.

     Now consider how the human couple was commanded to relate to the created order of which they had been put in charge. The words used may sound off-putting to modern sensitivities, namely, subdue ĸābaš – כּבשׁ and rule or have dominion rādah  – רדה. It is this text that has aroused the ire of modern ecologists and environmentalists who accuse adherents of the Judeo-Christian tradition of using this verse as the impetus for pillaging earth’s resources and destroying both habitat and species across the world. But is this what this text advocates or implies? Is this a correct understanding or is it a misrepresentation of the meaning of these words in this context?

     The Hebrew word, ĸābaš – כּבשׁ means to subdue in the sense of a forceful conquest of an enemy.  

ĸābaš assumes that the party being subdued is hostile to the subduer, necessitating some sort of coercion if the subduing is to take place…Therefore “subdue” in Gen 1:28 implies that creation will not do man’s bidding gladly or easily and that man must now bring creation into submission by main strength. It is not to rule man.

Admittedly, here is ammunition for the opponents of the Bible. The word seems to invite domination and even destruction. Leaving that aside for the moment, consider the fourth verb.

     The word rādah – רדה is translated to rule or to govern. At first glance, our modern understanding conveys a heavy-handed domination over the created order. However, the concept of subjugation and rulership does not fit the tone or tenor conveyed in the very next chapter of Genesis. What is encountered in Gen. 2:15 modifies the notion and informs readers of the kind of subjugation and rulership originally intended by the Creator. 

Humanity’s Priestly Responsibility

The LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it.

     How does this verse mitigate the seemingly harsh overtones of the Gen. 1:28 text? The answer lies with two more verbs translated as work and keep. This explanation requires consideration of what God had established in the creation of the cosmos. 

     Eden, the idyllic setting into which the human couple was placed, is, in a real sense, a picture of Yahweh’s kingly rule over the cosmos presented in cosmic terms. The heavens and the earth, including Eden, are the temple of God over which the King has placed His representatives (the human pair) as priests who mediate the will of God to the creation. How is this known? To begin with, the common notion of ancient Near Eastern kingship consistently portrayed the gods of nations like Babylon or Canaan as living upon a mountain. Is there a mountain in Eden? Yes, there is. That can be observed implicitly from the previous verses in Gen. 2:10-14. Four rivers flow from Eden—the Pishon, Gihon, Tigris, and Euphrates. Keep in mind this is speaking in cosmic terms. Rivers can only flow downhill; hence Eden must be a mountain. Whose mountain? Well, Yahweh’s mountain, of course. And who has He placed into that landscape? His human agents, his representatives. What are they to do? Gen. 1:28 states that they are to subdue and rule. But now, in Gen. 2:15 we see the modifying corollaries to previous seemingly overly aggressive terms. The human couple is meant to work and keep the garden. Delving into the fuller meaning of these words and how they are used elsewhere in the Pentateuch will provide an even more nuanced understanding of what is being communicated.

     The word, ābad (עבד) is translated as work or serve. Both translations are important. In Gen. 2:15, cultivation is clearly in view since the verb’s object is the ground within Eden. But there is also a further meaning related to the concept of Eden as part of Yahweh’s cosmic temple. This is a place of priestly service to God and His creation. Moreover, the second word, šāmar (שׁמר) means to keep or keep watch. “The basic idea of the root is ‘to exercise great care over.’” In the context of Gen. 2:15, the idea of “‘take care of,’ ‘guard’” is present. Once again, interestingly, the term connotes an expanded meaning related to priestly duties. Why do we note the connection to a priestly role? Because precisely the same words (ābad and šāmar) are later juxtaposed when they describe the duties of the Levitical priesthood related to the Tabernacle. In some sense, the biblical author regarded the work of the original human couple to be priestly work. They were both cultivating/serving and keeping/guarding the garden in the same way that priests would later serve and guard the Tabernacle. 

     Why is this important? Chiefly because it counteracts the modern notion that originally, creation was a wild place devoid of the intrusion of human beings and that it should be left to run wild. On the contrary, the Bible depicts that human intervention was required from the beginning, prior to the entrance of sin and curse. Human cultivation, careful preservation, and use of resources were mandated by the Creator from the outset. Subduing and ruling were to be carried out with an attitude of service and watchful care, in the same way that priests would minister at the Tabernacle. Reckless exploitation was not part of the original plan. Rather, stewardship, planning, and order were the vocation mandated to humanity. 

Implications of Human (Mis)Management

     What does all this imply? What does this knowledge contribute to the cultural mandate given to the original human couple? How does that cultural mandate relate to the modern controversy surrounding climate change?

     The matter of “overpopulation,” so much in the news of late and repeated by the Davos-based World Economic Forum, must be addressed. Gen. 1:28 mandates that humanity be fruitful and multiply. The modern counterargument states that this has been achieved and surpassed. There is no more capacity for further growth, “experts” say. Our population has outstripped sustainability both in terms of food and energy production, certain scientists warn. But is this true? Much of the hype around overpopulation was generated by the 1968 book The Population Bomb by Stanford ecologist Paul Ehrlich. His thesis sent shock waves around the world because of its dire predictions of starvation and disease set to decimate the world population. Even though Ehrlich’s predictions have consistently been falsified and refuted, the 90-year-old Ehrlich continues to double down and maintains that populations need to be reduced by up to 6 billion people to reach optimally sustainable levels. This claim fails to consider the numerous human innovations and adaptations that have reduced poverty and malnutrition worldwide and have lifted much of the world’s poorest populations out of extreme poverty. Who’s to say that those not yet born are the very ones to discover solutions to our most pressing problems? Human potential is short-circuited by those we destroy or never allow to be born.

     As the biblical texts highlighted, humanity was commanded to rule and subdue the earth. How this dominion was to be mediated was through watchful and careful management. In other words, human beings were to take care of the earth and manage its resources to ensure human flourishing. This, of course, would also include taking care of both flora and fauna, which were put at humanity’s disposal and under its care. The pre-fall mandate carried forward into the post-flood world, as Gen. 9:1–3 indicates. The commandment to be fruitful and multiply is reiterated as the animals and plants of the earth are once again vouchsafed to the stewardship of human hands.

     Given that biblical mandate, how should people address the problem of greenhouse gas emissions like carbon dioxide and methane? Would the immediate suspended use of fossil fuels like oil and gas by keeping them in the ground as evangelical climate scientist Katharine Hayhoe advocates “save” the planet? Or is the current push for immediate transition to so-called net-zero policies and renewable energy sources even possible? Will enacting this policy plunge the world into economic and political chaos while forcing those already experiencing poverty into even further misery? 

A Christian Response

     What can we learn from the study of the biblical text? First, human input was not only commanded by God, in the world He created, it was necessary. Contrary to the suggestion and outright claim that humanity is a parasitic scourge and a “cancer” on the planet biblical texts claim that it is essential. Does this mean that all actions humans have undertaken are positive? Of course not! Much damage, both environmentally and societally, has been done and some in the name of religion—Christianity included. But far from being a scourge, human influence on the planet has been mostly positive, with technological innovations leading to increased food production. Moreover, adaptation to the changing environment has led to mitigating many climate and weather-induced calamities. In these ways, human endeavor has saved millions, if not billions, of lives over the centuries.

     Second, the biblical text calls for human beings to exercise dominion over the earth in a way tempered by an attitude of careful stewardship that utilizes and guards the earth’s resources. The same verses that picture Eden as the cosmic temple of the Creator also point out that the rivers that emanate from it flow through lands that contain gold and precious stones. By implication, these are to be mined and utilized by humanity. Indeed, Yahweh expected the children of Israel to mine and use the metals and minerals found in the land that he was giving them. This suggests that resources have been sovereignly placed, and deposited globally for humankind to discover to promote human flourishing. Could this conclusion also be extended to resources like fossil fuels as a means to support the eight billion people who currently populate the planet? Are they also part of God’s sovereign goodness toward humanity? Without these resources, the world’s population could not possibly have sustained itself to this point in terms of energy or innovation. It is, therefore, a blessing to be grateful for, while simultaneously acknowledging that the discovery and use of newer sources of energy that have fewer negative impacts on the environment are worthy enterprises to pursue. 

      Finally, is climate change real? Yes, it is real since the average temperature of the planet has risen since pre-industrial times. In the same way, sea levels have also risen. But how far back in time should scientists look when comparing these rates of temperature and sea level rise with the past? Should it be decades, centuries, or millennia? The answer to that makes a significant difference in the implementation of public policy. If it can be shown that temperatures have fluctuated substantially over, say, hundreds or even thousands of years, then less drastic solutions are advisable. If it is shown that sea level rise has advanced at a steady rate over hundreds or thousands of years, then public fears about impending doom can be calmed while new technologies, innovations, and adaptations are found. This leads back to the matter of the cultural mandate handed to humanity in Eden and thereafter in the post-deluge world. The priestly words of stewardship, namely, “serving” and “keeping,” retain their power and significance for humanity in the present as they did in the past. Our God-ordained mandate is to use, manage, and conserve the earth’s resources for human flourishing.

 

For Further Reading:

     Angela Symons, “Davos:1 in 10 Travelled by Private Jet to Meeting Designed to Tackle Climate Change,” euronews.green, January 13, 2023, https://www.euronews.com.

     Chad de Guzman, “China’s Population Is Shrinking—and Graying. Here’s What It Means for the Future,” Time, January 20, 2023, https://time.com/6248728/china-population-decline-aging/.

     Claire Parker, “Japan Records its Largest Natural Population Decline as Births Fall,” The Washington Post, June 3, 2022, https://www.washingtonpost.com.

     Lucy Tompkins, “Extreme Poverty Has Been Sharply Cut. What Has Changed?” The New York Times, updated January 20,  2022, https://www.nytimes.com.

     Sounak Mukhopadhyah, editor, “‘Distasteful Masterclass in Hypocrisy’: Greenpeace Slams WEF Davos Attendees Over Use of Private Jets,” Mint News, January 14, 2023, https://www.livemint.com.

     World Bank, “Poverty,” accessed October 15, 2023, https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/poverty.

     World Vision, “Global poverty: Facts, FAQs, and How to Help,” accessed October 15, 2023, https://www.worldvision.org.