George Barna on Evangelicals and Environment
Friday, September 21st, 2007George Barna has just released the results of his research into the connection between religious beliefs and commitment to global warming and environmental protection in the United States.
Evangelicals Skeptical about Global Warming
Barna says that most “Born Again Evangelicals” are very skeptical about global warming and that viewpoint mirrors a general lack of enthusiasm for investing in environmental priorities. When it comes to recycling some product or material in a typical month, evangelical engagement is average.
Non-evangelical born agains put more emphasis on environmental protection than any other faith segment, yet their recycling is below average. They are not particularly resonant to the issue of global warming, though they assign climate change much more significance than do evangelicals.
Adults who are part of a faith other than Christianity, as well as atheists and agnostics are more active in recycling than are other Christian segments. Interestingly, a greater percentage of non-Christians perceive global warming to be important than say they believe environmental protection is “absolutely necessary.”
Notional Christians, the largest faith segment in America, are “average” all around. They perceive climate change and environmental investment as equally important and their recycling is better than born again Christians but not as advanced as non-Christians.
Why?
This raises significant questions doesn’t it. What about being “Evangelical” leads to a reluctance to do something about protecting the environment?
“Born again Christians” are defined as people who said they have made a personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important in their life today and who also indicated they believe that when they die they will go to Heaven because they had confessed their sins and had accepted Jesus Christ as their savior. Respondents are not asked to describe themselves as “born again.”
When Barna talks about “Evangelicals” he means those who meet the “born again criteria” (described above) plus seven other conditions. Those include saying their faith is very important in their life today; believing they have a personal responsibility to share their religious beliefs about Christ with non-Christians; believing that Satan exists; believing that eternal salvation is possible only through grace, not works; believing that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life on earth; asserting that the Bible is accurate in all that it teaches; and describing God as the all-knowing, all-powerful, perfect deity who created the universe and still rules it today. Being classified as an evangelical is not dependent upon church attendance or the denominational affiliation of the church attended. Respondents were not asked to describe themselves as “evangelical.”
A number of these beliefs could lead a person to renege on responsibility for the environment.
1. Belief in “eternal salvation through grace, not works” can place a believer in double jeopardy. The focus on eternal salvation can lead to a downgrading of the “here and now”. The focus on grace means that Jesus is the one who did the most important work - getting me into heaven. Anything we do is really about preparing ourselves and others for life after death.
2. Describing God as the all-powerful can lead to the feeling that God is in charge of everything, including controlling the weather. Why should we do anything when God is already heating up the earth?
Maybe the “Evangelical” concept that Barna is perpetuating is part of the problem. What he’s describing is an American sub-culture that goes together with being Republican, economically downscale, churched and living in the Mid West.
See the full report here at the Barna Group.
Tags: Environment, Evangelical, George Barna, Theology
