The happy harmony of science and faith is too often and too glibly proclaimed. The real picture is far more interesting: culture wars, religious fears, evangelical atheism, good and bad science, good and bad theology, art, books, cartoons, dogs and cats, and the unpredictable, inexhaustible grab-bag of life itself. S Word scrapes skepticism against authority, freedom against constraint, desire against logic. It goes wherever it likes in that shifty country where the relationship between science and religion is strained, funny, disturbing, suggestive, or just plain weird. Mission: trespass.
Climate and Hubris
by Larry Gilman
Recently I heard the idea that religious conservatives resist the scientific view that human beings are changing the climate because they think it would be blasphemous, proud, or at least silly to think that we have to the power to alter something that God has made — namely, the climate.
But how many religious conservatives actually think this? A few . . . many . . . most? There is, as surveys have shown, a strong correlation between religious conservatism and denial of anthropogenic (human-caused) climate change, but why? Is theological reasoning involved? If so, is it the reasoning described above?
I don’t know the big Why, but I have taken a first crack at the Hubris Theory of Conservative Climate Resistance. My first step was to extensively Google various combinations of “global warming God” or “climate change God” with words like pride, hubris, presumption, and sin.
Surprisingly, at least to me, I didn’t find much. Most common, apparently, though still not very common, is the idea that God is not going to let us screw up the climate — as distinct from the idea that it is foolish pride to think we could screw it up. For example, in “Pride (in the Name of Climate Change)” (Pittsburgh Evangelical Examiner for Oct. 13, 2009), Douglas Comin argues that God has promised to keep climate change from being extreme:
“As long as the earth endures, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night will never cease” (Genesis 8:22). This divine promise was made to Noah just after the great flood. It was given in the context of God assuring Noah that He would never again destroy the earth with a worldwide catastrophe. It is not a promise that there will never be changes in the climate patterns on earth, nor a promise that there will never be local meteorological shifts that will result in, for example, previously temperate regions becoming colder or frigid climates becoming milder. It is a promise that the global patterns of seasonal weather will always remain intact, as long as the earth endures.Well, actually, no, it isn’t: because the mere existence of “seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night” is not synonymous with any given “global pattern of seasonal weather.” All those things—especially “day and night” — are slated to continue under any plausible degree of anthropogenic climate change. (Venusizing the planet doesn’t seem to be in the cards yet, nor stopping its rotation.) “Seedtime and harvest” might show an unpleasant tendency to shift from Ethiopia to Siberia, but they will continue in at least a few places. And the South Pole, at least, will continue to experience some nippy weather every June. So we don’t even have to argue about the “as long as the earth endures” thing. On the face of Scripture, even read literally, God has not promised to save us from anthropogenic climate change of the kind science is actually observing and forecasting.
The writer goes on to say: “Can man really overpower God’s resolve to maintain a stable climate on planet earth? To imagine this possible is an extreme expression of hubris.”
Note the precise argument: it is that God is resolved to keep the climate stable, not that the climate is going to remain stable just because God made it. God made the dodos, too, and we stomped or shot every last one of them: most fundamentalists are, I think, well aware that this sort of thing goes on, and so they do not claim that we are flat-out incapable of destroying or changing something just because God made it. They do, however, sometimes assert that God is actively going to prevent us from changing the climate — perhaps (I speculate) by miraculously tweaking the absorption spectrum of atmospheric CO2. If God is going to do that, then it would indeed be silly to think that our paltry tailpipes, powerplants, and belching beefaloes could prevail against the Almighty. But it’s a very big “if.”
I say “most” fundamentalists are aware that we obviously can and do change Creation all the time not because I have polled the fundamentalist world but because statements of the contrary view seem rare and because I know that fundamentalists are not dumb. However, former House Majority leader Dick Armey (R-TX) did his best to shake my reason with his testimony to a bicameral legislative hearing in July, 2009:
Let me say I take it as an article of faith if the lord God almighty made the heavens and the Earth, and he made them to his satisfaction and it is quite pretentious of we little weaklings here on earth to think that, that we are going to destroy God’s creation.Here Armey deploys the straw-man fallacy, one of the commonest and laziest. In rhetoric and argument, a straw man is any exaggerated, incomplete, or otherwise falsified version of an opponent’s view that one can easily mock or refute. In this case, Armey substitutes for the scientific mainstream understanding that climate change is real and human-caused the absurd notion that we are going to “destroy God’s creation.” In fact, we’re not talking about destroying the climate, much less the whole creation — we’re only talking about changing it a bunch, a much shorter order of business.
Here’s my own little theological squeak:
God manifestly doesn’t stop us from doing anything at all to anything or anybody. So the question of whether global warming is real, human-caused, and dangerous is simply a factual one, a scientific one, without a smidgen of religion in it.
And it is a question that has been answered. The answer is “yes.”
S Word :: Past Articles
"Tempting Science Fallacies 2: Winging It"
Larry Gilman on 01/18
"Tempting Science Fallacies 1: Seeing Is Believing"
Larry Gilman on 01/10
"What People Believe About What People Believe: The 2009 Harris Poll"
Larry Gilman on 01/01
"God, Unplugged"
Larry Gilman on 11/20
"Climate and Hubris"
Larry Gilman on 11/01
"Night of the Living Benthamites"
Larry Gilman on 10/24
"Does Science Cause Atheism?"
Larry Gilman on 09/28
"Genetically Engineering Jesus"
Larry Gilman on 09/11
"Original Child Bomb Day"
Larry Gilman on 08/08
"Obama Pick Sparks Kerfuffle"
Larry Gilman on 08/02
"Is Spaceflight a Religion?"
Larry Gilman on 07/01
". . . And a Side of Ribs"
Larry Gilman on 06/18
"The Lie Factory"
Larry Gilman on 06/07
"Is Science an Illusion?"
Larry Gilman on 05/20
"Magic, Science, Zeal"
Larry Gilman on 05/11
"Evangelical Resistance to Climate Science"
Larry Gilman on 05/04
"Christian Scorecard: Climate Change"
Larry Gilman on 04/27
"People of the iBook"
Larry Gilman on 04/20
"Jesus of Nazareth, King of the . . . Tyrant Lizards?"
Larry Gilman on 04/13
"Fillet of Soul"
Larry Gilman on 04/06
"Creationism: Christian Disease, Muslim Immunity?"
Larry Gilman on 03/30
"The Absence of God At Last"
Larry Gilman on 03/23
"The Thing Works Out (Until It Doesn’t): GKC and Evolution, Part II"
Larry Gilman on 03/16
"The Thing Works Out (Until It Doesn’t): GKC and Evolution, Part I"
Larry Gilman on 03/09
"Robot vs. Bird"
Larry Gilman on 03/02
"The Deity Made Me Do It"
Larry Gilman on 02/23
"The Forever Fantasy"
Larry Gilman on 02/16
"Are We Humble Yet?"
Larry Gilman on 02/09
"Last Night I Dreamed My Grandfather"
Larry Gilman on 02/03
"“The Evil Eye Controls Something Which Is Counted”"
Larry Gilman on 01/28














O God, Where Art Thou? A Review of A Serious Man
rwsmoore says ::
nice work John. Good thoughts on a good movie. One part I was intrigued by that you didn't touch upon was the link between the morality of our actions and the effect they have in the world. The closing scene of him changing the grade & getting t . . .READ MORE >
Friend of the Opposing Views
jfo1966 says ::
I'm trying to think well, and because of an atheist friend, I doubt more, and have deeper faith. So, my comment is pretty simple: I wonder if Ockam's razor is of help: if a business relationship cannot in any way touch the depth, breadth of a relat . . .READ MORE >
Young Life and the Gospel of All-Along Belonging
Alan K says ::
What can serve as an adequate reference for sin, evil and death? How is the world supposed to know that it is supposed to be different than it already is? Maybe earthquakes in Haiti and tsunamis in the Indian Ocean are just the way things are. May . . .READ MORE >
Young Life and the Gospel of All-Along Belonging
jking says ::
"whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son" how does the gospel of all-along belonging come from this?READ MORE >
Young Life and the Gospel of All-Along Belonging
jking says ::
i do think the incarnational model has been incorrect throughout the twentieth century. especially in ministry. we minister to Jesus, not as Jesus.READ MORE >
Young Life and the Gospel of All-Along Belonging
hesed says ::
It was that...and "go and sin no more" (Jn 8:11). Which is said immediately AFTER saying "Where are those that condemn you?...Neither do I." ABSOLUTELY, jking, absolutely. That is what is remarkable about the ministry of Jesus. He comes to sin . . .READ MORE >
Young Life and the Gospel of All-Along Belonging
jking says ::
"With 'sinners' and those outside of faith, his message was a banquet thrown for them, a father running to embrace, a shepherd looking for sheep." It was that...and "go and sin no more" (Jn 8:11).READ MORE >
Tempting Science Fallacies 1: Seeing Is Believing
jking says ::
did your article commit the "personal anecdote + mention of tree rings = article to shame naive creationists" fallacy?READ MORE >
Young Life and the Gospel of All-Along Belonging
jking says ::
could someone explain what "belonging" is and how it is a valid theological category? also, could someone remind me why our language of "incarnational ministry" makes sense for someone other than Jesus? by going to a high school and loving te . . .READ MORE >
Young Life and the Gospel of All-Along Belonging
jking says ::
being inclusive makes us feel oh so good, too. too bad our "Christian bros" just don't understand. (oh crap, have we become exclusive again?)READ MORE >
The Way Mulattas Make Me Feel: Michael Jackson's Domination of the Feminized Other
jking says ::
did you consider the context that generated this video? before using the occasion of your "cousin's" death as an opportunity for an article (in which you place the ills of the video solely on jackson's shoulders), it would have been helpful to l . . .READ MORE >
New TOJ Book - God Is Dead And I Don't Feel So Good Myself
gilman says ::
I bought the book. I haven't read it through, yet, but I've started it. It kicks ass and really is what it claims to be, a fresh, smart, compassionate, confessional new take on this tired old culture-war. I'm proud to be in such company, with m . . .READ MORE >
Friend of the Opposing Views
gilman says ::
Wow, great post. What a dose of honesty. This is the kind of stuff that makes TOJ great. I really will have to re-read to digest. When I got married 14 years ago, my wife was not a Christian. She was not an atheist either -- she was a Baha'i. . . .READ MORE >
Recycling
blaze says ::
Wow. Stunning and gripping story with great elements of faith and sexuality and life. All these things mixed in together and an author willing to admit the doubt in her own heart. Yet so modern too, talking about Java and Kayaking and traveling the w . . .READ MORE >
Young Life and the Gospel of All-Along Belonging
hesed says ::
jgriss, Yes sin needs to be talked about. We need, and have, a savior, again no argument there. I have read the gospels a bunch and have not been able to find the times where Jesus tells his listeners about sin, sends them home for 24 hours and th . . .READ MORE >