What is a Christian view of nature? Does thinking correctly about creation assist us in answering the doomsday predictions of global warming alarmists?

Our study should not begin by gathering all the scientific articles, television reports, and current commentaries for and against global warming. Rather, we should pick up a dusty paperback copy of Francis Schaeffer’s Pollution and the Death of Man: The Christian View of Ecology.

There is a time and place for expositions regarding the current debate over global warming, but we may need to take one step back and review our actual theology of nature. Using Schaeffer’s thoughts, I’d like to look at concepts regarding global warming, the poorness of the world’s philosophy of nature, the answer that the church has (but perhaps has not been promoting), and, finally, the application of our theology of nature to the situation in which we find ourselves.

Global Warming

Non-Christians are keenly aware of the current state of the creation (or, as their own poets say, Mother Nature). Which groups are the first to voice complaints when there is needless destruction of nature in the name of industrial progress? Greenpeace. The Sierra Club. It is not the church. Why is that? Perhaps our view of nature is low, or perhaps we think it is not the church’s place to be guardian of creation.

Let’s look closer at the worldwide alarm being sounded about global warming. In the biopic that is An Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore implores us to see that global warming is a moral issue. That is an interesting assertion when you are speaking to Buddhist, Muslim, Christian, and atheist alike. As Schaeffer points out, this is the “moral dissolved into the pragmatic.”¹

Gore’s answer to the problem of global warming ends in a call to reduce, reuse and recycle all for our very survival. According to this philosophy, we must become pragmatists—that which works is true. That which preserves the ecological balance, no matter what the cost (human or otherwise), must be done.

But there is no reason, other than pragmatism (our survival), for respecting nature as something in itself. Schaeffer might well comment on Gore’s philosophy with, “The only reason we are called upon to treat nature well is because of its effects on man, and my children, and the generations to come.”² Schaeffer wrote this in 1970 in response to the grandfather of global warming: pollution. But it is an interesting and rewarding experiment to substitute “global warming” for “pollution” or “the ecological problem” when reading his book. When one does, the book is instantly transformed into the most cogent response to global warming philosophy available.

The Biblical Answer

Recently our family visited a natural history museum in Wyoming that was focused on the greater Yellowstone ecosystem. Gray wolves have been reintroduced to that area. Depending with whom you speak in this part of the country, the reintroduction of wolves into Yellowstone Park is either the best (conservationists) or the worst (cattle ranchers) thing to happen in the ecosystem in a long time. After giving museum visitors the opportunity to comment on this situation, the curators chose a variety of the comments to show on a bulletin board. The comments were as expected—both in praise of and in condemnation of the reintroduction. One comment that caught my attention placed the blame for the whole situation squarely on Christianity’s doctrine of man’s dominion over nature.

The same sentiment against Christianity was present in Schaeffer’s day, to the extent that it was published in the journal Science, and with which Schaeffer took a great deal of time interacting.³ To the world, we appear to have this doctrine that allows us to take from the creation whatever we desire. Because such charges will be lodged against us, we would do well to spend time not only thinking about dominion, but also thinking about a godly view of creation and its uses.

At the outset we must reject platonic Christianity, as Schaeffer correctly leads us. We cannot, if we are consistent, biblical Christians, only trouble ourselves with the heavenly—the “saving of the soul.”⁴ Christ came in the flesh, and He lived among the physical creation. Of course we are daily aware of our need for God’s salvation of our souls, but we must equally be aware of God’s dealings with creation itself.

And we cannot limit the creation’s value to mere apologetic. The heavens do declare the glory of God to the people of the earth, and that is a legitimate way to view nature. But there is more! Nature has value in and of itself, and God has dealings with non-human creation itself. It has this value because God created it. God made nature out of nothing, by the word of His power—and prior to the creation of man. As we look at nature, there is one sense in which mankind and all creation are equal—equal in origin.

Schaeffer puts it this way: “As a Christian I say, ‘Who am I?’ Am I only the hydrogen atom, the energy particle extended? No, I am made in the image of God. I know who I am. Yet, on the other hand, when I turn around and I face nature, I face something that is like myself. I, too, am created, just as the animal and the plant and the atom are created.”⁵

We have the understanding that man is in God’s image and the rest of creation is not; yet we also observe characteristics in nature that show we are related in our origin. Therefore there are grounds for a high level of respect for nature. But there is more. The Scriptures are quite clear that at various times, when God deals with His people, He does something that initially might seem bizarre—He covenants with creation. In God’s covenant with Noah, He says, “Behold I establish my covenant with you and your offspring after you, and with every living creature that is with you, the birds, the livestock, and every beast of the earth with you, as many as came out of the ark; it is for every beast of the earth.”⁶ God tells Noah in essence that His covenant is with Noah, his kids, and the parrot, the angus cows, and all the animals he has, everything that walks out of the ark. God then adds, as if to drive home the point, “every beast.” God repeats this promise to Noah and to the animals five times.⁷ We must then ask ourselves, How does the Father act toward creation?

As if that were not enough, we also have a peculiar passage to deal with in Romans 8, where we read, “For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God” and “the creation will be set free from its bondage to decay and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God.”⁸ It would be easy to overlook if it said it is as if creation itself is waiting and will eventually gain the freedom that we know. But it does not say that. God deals with creation on its own terms—related to us and our redemption, yes—but in a distinct relationship with God. Such passages, of which there are more,⁹ encourage us to look at creation with new eyes.

Since therefore creation is to be redeemed, Schaeffer, quoting Romans 6:8 and 11, pokes us one step further: “‘Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him….Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.’ So we look forward to this [redemption], and one day it will be perfect. But we should be looking now, on the basis of the work of Christ, for substantial healing in every place affected by the Fall.”¹⁰ That is, we act now in terms of what will be. We work now to put to death the flesh on the basis that, at the end of all things, it will be finally put to death.

The same is true of our treatment of nature. If it will be redeemed and given glory at the last day, then we must treat it now in terms of what it will be. Thus, there is a real, intrinsic value to nature beyond the apologetic.

This is where our answer to the alarmism of global warming must begin. The world has no foundation on which to argue for the value of nature; we have seen that their foundation is pragmatism. Our foundation for a respectful relationship to nature is grounded on the actions and words of God.

Practical Applications

Since our view of nature is towards a more respectful treatment, let us not forget that God has given man dominion. Nature can and must be used for our life. What should result from this is not the extreme protection of nature at the expense of humans, but our use of nature in such a way as to see nature “substantially healed”¹¹ in our dealings.

Schaeffer again puts before us very practical applications—the suppression of greed and haste in our relationship to the creation. As one who has been intimately acquainted with the environmental pollution of soils, I can testify that many of our current business and living practices are resulting in the degrading and poisoning of nature. This degradation is a result of greed and haste—greed in using the cheapest of procedures to perform tasks, often resulting in the pollution of the soil or water, and haste in leaving or disposing of the waste in inappropriate places. The church, since it understands God’s view of nature, must be the first to stand up and prohibit, on the basis of redemption, the wholesale destruction of ecosystems at the whim of saving time and money.

How does this relate to global warming? Let’s assume for a second that the globe is warming and that man is causing a majority of it. Currently the pagan is one step ahead of us in regards to thinking about the impact of (for instance) our industrial processes on the local and global ecosystem. But if our call is indeed to treat nature with due respect and practice correct dominion over it, it behooves us to be on the cutting edge of the natural sciences. The global warming issue is one of many topics in which we could reasonably be providing God-given wisdom. Nanotechnology, renewable energy, and ecological science are some others. There is a great deal of work to be done in simply thinking through “creation theology.”

Perhaps we should have seen the global warming issue coming. But as the church, we have the call and ability to reform our actions toward the creation—semper reformanda. We have ample reason for the church to begin thinking and acting towards the preserving, using, and substantial healing of creation.

Endnotes