When Answers in Genesis (AIG), a Christian ministry in northern Kentucky announced that it was going to build a new theme park in 2014, onlookers were bewildered by it's elephantine scale. The 160-acre plans will cost $150 million to complete and centers on a 450-foot replica of Noah's Ark complete with live animals. But AIG's plans to seek eco-friendly LEED certification through local building supplies and alternative energy sources are perhaps even more confusing.
It's confusing because the AIG has made its money on scientific skepticism, particularly on the issue of evolution. Unfortunately, those who are reticent to believe most scientists' beliefs about the origins of life often (and unnecessarily, I might add) become skeptical of other scientific claims, including those of environmental degradation and climate change.
As author and Christianity Today editor Andy Crouch has written, "But perhaps no result of the creation-evolution stalemate is as potentially disastrous as the way it has stymied courageous action on climate change."
Such seems to be the case with AIG. Their web site calls Earth Day "a religious service for the New Age movement" that is "often based on evolutionary thinking."
Additionally, the ministry produced a 2008 DVD titled, "Global Warming: A Scientific and Biblical Expose of Climate Change," which calls the idea that the earth is warming "misinformation" and a "myth." As the promotional description for their global warming DVD promises, "Viewers will see why well-meaning Christians need to be extremely careful when advocating environmental policies."
But their environmental skepticism isn't only rooted in their beliefs about biology; it's also rooted in their theology. Like many conservative Christians, they build their theology of the environment on God's exhortation in Genesis 1:28 for humans to "subdue" the earth and "rule over" the animals. Of the Bible verses addressing humans' responsibility to nature, this one often gets much face time because without context it's empowering verbs can be effective in turning back environmentalists.
Growing up, I heard, "Well the Bible says we are to have dominion over the earth." They were right, and that idea springs from this verse. The phrase "rule over" is rendered "have dominion over" in the King James Version. But there are also other verses in the Bible which must be given consideration, such as Genesis 2:15 where God asks humans to care for the earth and Revelation 11:18, which tells us that God has set aside a time of judgment "for destroying those who destroy the earth."
As I've learned from growing up as a conservative Southern Baptist, when this one verse is overemphasized at the exclusion of the rest of the many other creation-affirming verses in scripture, it can lead one to a human-centered ethic and rigorous opposition of efforts to curb environmental destruction. But when one considers the whole Biblical witness, a vibrant ethic for responsibly developing, enjoying, and protecting the earth bubbles up.
But that leads us back to AIG and their LEED certified Noah's Ark exhibition. Why would an organization that is skeptical of environmental degradation and urges extreme caution when advocating for environmental policies go out of its way to seek LEED certification?
Perhaps they've realized that their evolutionary skepticism doesn't necessitate environmental skepticism or perhaps they're reconsidering all the creation care passages in scripture. Either way, it is a welcome shift of biblical proportions.
This article originally appeared in The Washington Post "On Faith" column.
-----
Order a copy of my new book, Green Like God: Unlocking the Divine Plan to Our Planet
Aaron Weaver said:
Enjoyed the article. AIG's decision to pursue LEED Certification is definitely inconsistent with their anti-environmentalism ideology.
But, LEED Certification probably makes economic sense for AIG. What theme park wouldn't want to be energy efficient? I suspect LEED Certification might provide tax incentives for such a huge project and made open the door for grant money, etc.
My wife works at the first green LEED certified Chamber of Commerce building in the country. It's a pretty awesome building - huge energy $$ savings too.
Posted: January 6, 2011
Dave said:
I'm being a little skeptical here and I admit up front I don't know that much about the organization. But I just read about the project in The Washington Post yesterday, so it's on my radar screen. So here's my skeptical viewpoint: Why would a conservative minisitry that seemingly believes environmentalism is a joke create fanfare around building LEEDS-certified structures in its humongous theme park? To suck in money from more liberal Christians that appreciate, from an environmental point of view, the fact that they are "respecting" the environment.
Aaron's probably half right...it started as a way to save operational costs (which is a smart thing to do) but I believe there is a second side, and that is to make more money from the side of the aisle that AIG is not in agreement with (environmentalist Christians). I hesitate to use the greed word here, but it's in the back of my mind. The love of money corrupts, and that can even spill over to large, successful Christian ministries. I suspect the decision is based on the desire to draw in as much money as possible (which I hope they use appropriately), so they want to be appealing to everyone. For those who think environmentalism is a farce, what do you think about LEEDS certification (which I understand is costly to implement when a structure is built)?
So in the end, I would have more respect for AIG if they didn't pump a lot of extra money into getting LEED certified and was consistent with their view that envionmentalism is a hoax (why should they support the notion, even if it saves operationg dollars?)...I would then see their consistency. On the other hand, as one that does believe in environmentalism and appreciates Jonathan's work in Green Like God, I am glad they are in fact pursuing LEED certification.
Posted: January 7, 2011
Mike said:
AIG's use of "local building supplies and alternative energy sources" prompts a back-handed, compliment, at best? I would have thought you'd be pleased. (As for the theme park, I tend to think it's a waste of time and money . . .)
Instead, you say AIG's actions are "confusing" because they (gasp!) oppose evolution and the idea of man-made global warming and go on about creation theology supposedly run amok. How dare they!
Do you think a person has to believe evolution and your view of global warming in order to support alternative energy, recycling, and basic conservationism? If so, I guess people should trade-in their hybrid cars for a Hummer if they dare to doubt Darwin. Or maybe I should dump my used car oil in the local lake because, after all, if I'm not going to support Cap and Trade, I might as well just go postal on the environment.
You don't have to be a full blown disciple to agree with some of a religion's tenets, but I think some environmental activists are more interested in theological purity than they are in trying to build reasonable consensus. It's like an enviro-litmus test.
I don't fault AIG for having a scriptually based position on the environment anymore than I fault you. I'm more interested in where the policy position ends up than I am in what motivated them.
Posted: January 7, 2011
Mike said:
To the first sentence of your second paragraph, I don't think one's views on the origins of life are necessarily linked to their stance on earth care. I do think that the Creationist crusaders can become so enveloped in anti-science thinking that they become skeptical of anything science reports on other issues. But I don't think it has to be this way. That's why I said, "evolutionary skepticism doesn't necessitate environmental skepticism..."
Posted: January 8, 2011