Christianity and Environmentalism


I have tremendous respect for those who choose to go the extra mile when it comes to taking care of God’s creation. One of the first tasks God assigned to man was to care for the garden.

It behooves everyone on this earth to do the same. Little things make a huge difference. For example;

  • We had a compost heap when we had a garden
  • I’ve made dozens of trips to the county recycling center
  • We don’t throw trash out our car window
  • I change our AC filters frequently
  • We use CFL lightbulbs
  • When it’s brown we flush it down, when it’s yellow we let it mellow

That’s about it for my family and me. The point I’m getting at is that everyone should care for the environment according to their personal conviction and by using age old common sense.

Now for the part that may ruffle some feathers…

Assigning any form of spirituality with caring for our environment is dangerous, BIG TIME!
Those who do so are trodding the path of paganism. ie. earth worshipers. These are the people who sacrificed their children to the false god Molech for good luck. (And yes, I know that God’s chosen people (The Jews), mingled with these people and soon became involved in the same practice.


Oops. Didn’t mean to send that, I wasn’t finished.

My main point is that everyone’s calling on this earth is to glorify God, who created and sacrificed his son, so we may escape the punishment we deserve and be with him forever.

I invite any opposing thoughts or comments with great enthusiasm. Feel free to flame me even. I’m no snowflake.


You don’t mean that God created his Son, do you?


Good eye Ben. No, I meant who created us, and allowed his son to be sacrificed.

Sorry for the short spell of overzealousness.



We are to care for all of his creation that we have dominion over, but those made in God’s image, mankind, have infinite value and worth over any of God’s other creation. I do not know why people would want this any differently, anyway. I’m teaching on this issue this Sunday in Romans 1:24-32.


Thank you for putting better words to my thoughts, and for backing it up with a scripture reference.

Perplexing, is it not? Perhaps because it diminishes accountability, allowing for more enjoyment of fleshly things with less conviction.

Our enemy has a field day with this stuff, and many believe that a spiritual form of environmentalism will be the cornerstone for the coming one world religion. Hence, the reason for my passion in this matter.

Disclaimer: From within my heart, I’m as big a sinner as the next guy. Praise God that Jesus will be at my side saying “this one’s mine” when I give an account at the Judgement Seat of Christ.


As a Quaker, environmental stewardship is a cornerstone of our beliefs.

As one of God’s stewards of God’s creation, I do not feel I have the right to destroy that creation. In this way, I do not feel as if I am of greater worth than any of God’s other creations. That is to say, I do not personally feel comfortable destroying any of God’s creations as a financial or power benefit to myself.

I understand that God has given mankind dominion over all creation, however I would add the word responsible before the word dominion. Certainly, God has given us all free will which allows for terrible and negative human interaction with all of God’s creation. But I am not personally concerned with how poorly I can treat God’s creation, and am more concerned on how I can care for and respect all creation.

Mankind is free to do good and bad, but just because we have all been given the keys to the cookie jar, does not make it okay to hoard all the cookies for ourselves; sometimes we need to bake some cookies and fill the jar for others,

Just a Quaker perspective.



Thanks for the reply, Doc. I don’t know how dominion (which when used correctly implies responsibility) can be translated destroy. As for our value, Jesus says in Matthew 10:31: Fear not, therefore; you are of more value than many sparrows.

But in the same chapter and earlier in Matthew, Jesus talks about what great care God gives his creation like the birds and flowers of the field. If God cares for his creation and we are made in his image, we are to care for his creation, which is what a biblical definition of dominion means.


I was speaking in terms of the environment and how many people feel it is okay to continue to pollute and permanently damage the ecosystem.

To be clear here, I was in no way pointing fingers, instead I was referencing that some folks believe “dominion over” to mean “its yours to ruin”. I know you personally do not feel this way. That is why I include the word responsible before the word dominion as a reminder to folks who may not understand that responsibility is implied in the word dominion.



Just a couple of questions

  1. Is poor stewardship of the environment a salvation issue?
  2. What do you do with air conditioning?
  3. I’ve read the doctrine of the Quakers, and I’ve never been able to wrap my mind around what determines if you are saved or lost. Any perspective on this?
  4. Are you from PA? I am…what is your home town.



When I read the first post, I thought “oh this could get messy” and it appears that it could get that way very easily.

I think one of the problems with religion and environmentalism is that, even within one religion there are many interpretations, and everyone believes their interpretation is right. That’s why I don’t think there’s much value in trying to sway someone’s environmental opinion with scripture.

For me, environmentalism boils down to property rights. The EPA actually allows more pollution than if the government allowed citizens to seek damages to their property due to pollution. If your air, land, or water becomes polluted, your property rights should be all you need to make a claim against the polluter. If this were the case, every property owner would be stewards of the environment rather than just the EPA, and big polluters would have way more financial incentive to clean up their act than they do now.


That is not a question Quakers would ask as Quakerism is not built around the concept of “salvation”

Simplicity is a tenant of Quaker beliefs. Some Quakers do not use air-conditioning, some do. We purchase 100% wind generated power, so we do use air-conditioning.

That is a big question that cannot be easily answered in a paragraph or two. Quakerism is not the same as Christianity, so the concept of being saved or not is not a focus of our spirituality. Quakerism is built on the concept of the light of God in every person. As a Quaker, it is each person’s job to seek that light and a personal relationship with God. Since everyone is different, their road to the light within will differ.

I try not to post personal details online, but I will say that I live west of Philadelphia about 45 minutes outside the city.


Thanks Dr. I’m from between Scranton and BInghamton, NY.

I have many questions I’d like to ask, but it would probably all go straight into the weeds.

So instead, I’ll quote one of my favorite people C.S. Lewis:

"In the essentials, unity. In non essentials, liberty. In all things charity (love).

Once again, any comments, criticisms, flames are encouraged.


I’m a big fan of Clive myself, but that quote is actually from a guy named Marco Antonio de Dominis around about 1617.

“In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas.”

Throughout the years, many people have carried on the sentiment of that quote including the Moravians, Stone-Campbell Restoration Movement, Puritans, Evangelical Presbyterians, etc.


Cool…Thank you for correcting me.