What About Climate Change?
Question 12050
Climate change has become one of the most contentious issues of our time, generating passionate responses across the political spectrum. Christians find themselves caught between competing claims, uncertain how to think biblically about environmental concerns. What framework does Scripture provide for navigating this complex topic?
The Dominion Mandate
Our starting point must be Genesis, where God entrusted humanity with responsibility for creation. “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” (Genesis 1:28). This dominion mandate establishes human beings as stewards of creation under God’s ultimate authority.
Stewardship implies both use and care. Adam was placed in the Garden “to work it and keep it” (Genesis 2:15)—language suggesting cultivation and protection. We are neither to exploit creation recklessly nor to treat it as untouchable. The earth exists for human benefit, but humans exist for God’s glory, which includes honouring His creation.
This biblical framework differs sharply from two common errors. The first treats nature as divine or equally valuable to human life—a form of modern paganism that elevates creation above the Creator. The second treats nature as merely raw material for unlimited human exploitation—a form of practical atheism that ignores our accountability to God. Christianity charts a middle course: creation is good, given for our use, and entrusted to our care.
What Science Can and Cannot Tell Us
The scientific questions surrounding climate change—whether temperatures are rising, by how much, what causes changes, and what future impacts might occur—lie outside Scripture’s direct teaching. The Bible is not a science textbook, and we should not expect it to settle technical debates about atmospheric chemistry or climate modelling.
Christians can legitimately hold different views on the scientific questions whilst agreeing on the biblical principles. Some accept mainstream climate science largely as presented; others raise questions about data interpretation, model reliability, or the degree of human contribution. These are matters for scientific investigation and debate, not doctrinal pronouncement.
What we must avoid is allowing political allegiances to determine our conclusions. Climate change has become so politicised that many people’s views correlate more closely with their political party than with their assessment of evidence. Christians should seek truth rather than tribal loyalty, remaining open to evidence whilst maintaining appropriate scepticism about apocalyptic claims from any source.
Avoiding Two Extremes
One extreme treats climate change as the defining moral issue of our time, demanding radical and immediate action regardless of economic or human cost. This view often carries quasi-religious overtones, complete with prophets of doom, calls for repentance, and promises of salvation through proper behaviour. Some versions explicitly devalue human welfare in favour of planetary concerns.
Christians must resist this idolatry of creation. Human beings alone bear God’s image. Policies that would impoverish millions to achieve marginal environmental benefit invert biblical priorities. The earth will pass away (2 Peter 3:10-13); human souls are eternal.
The opposite extreme dismisses all environmental concern as liberal nonsense unworthy of Christian attention. This too fails the test of Scripture. If God has made us stewards of His creation, then we cannot be indifferent to its condition. Polluting rivers, poisoning air, and causing unnecessary species extinction dishonour the Creator whose handiwork we damage.
Practical Wisdom
Several principles should guide Christian thinking. First, we should care for creation without worshipping it. Reasonable measures to reduce pollution, conserve resources, and protect ecosystems align with our stewardship calling. We need not become environmental activists to be faithful stewards.
Second, we should prioritise human welfare, especially for the poor. Many proposed climate policies would increase energy costs, restrict development, and limit economic opportunity—impacts falling hardest on those least able to bear them. Cheap, reliable energy has lifted billions from poverty; making energy scarce and expensive would reverse that progress.
Third, we should maintain eschatological perspective. The earth’s ultimate fate rests not in human hands but in God’s sovereign plan. He has promised to preserve the earth until His purposes are complete (Genesis 8:22), then to create new heavens and a new earth (Revelation 21:1). This does not excuse environmental carelessness—we remain stewards until the Master returns—but it does relieve us of ultimate responsibility for planetary outcomes.
Fourth, we should resist fear. Climate activism often employs apocalyptic rhetoric designed to generate panic. Christians have no cause for such fear. Our hope rests not in stable climate but in the sovereign God who holds all things together (Colossians 1:17).
Conclusion
Climate change is ultimately a secondary issue for Christians—important but not defining. We approach it neither with the fervour of environmental religion nor with the dismissiveness of those who care nothing for creation. We are stewards, called to use creation wisely and care for it faithfully, whilst never forgetting that our ultimate hope lies not in this passing world but in the eternal Kingdom that Jesus will establish when He returns.
“While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night, shall not cease.” Genesis 8:22